9. Minority Influence

• 1. Minority Influence

  Reverse = minority influence majority.

  • Rejects ‘norm’.
  • Can lead to internalisation.
• 1a. Minority Influence

  Consistency

  • Causes effectiveness, increase interest, rethink of views.
  • Synchronic and Diachronic Consistency.
• 1b. Minority Influence

  Commitment

  • Extreme activities = attention.
  • Augmentation Principle.
• 1c. Minority Influence

  Flexibility

  • Nemeth (1986), consistency not enough for minority influence; if seen as inflexible, change unlikely.
  • 3 participants + 1 confederate had decide amount of compensation to give victim of ski lift accident.
  • Confederate not change low amount; majority stuck together bc of inflexibility.
  • Balance consistency + flexibility.
• 1d. Minority Influence

  Process of Change

  • All three factors make majority think about minority topic.
  • Converted; switch from minority to majority.
  • More this happens, faster rate of conversion (‘snowball effect’).
  • When minority becomes majority = social change.
• 2. Minority Influence

  Moscovici (1969) - Minority Influence

  • Each group had 2 confederates.
  • 36 slides, diff shades of blue.
  • 1st part of study; confederates said green (consistency).
  • 2nd part; said green 24 times, blue 12 times (inconsistent).
• 2a. Minority Influence

  Moscovici (1969)

  • Control group; no confederates.
  • 0.25% control group answered green.
  • 1.25% experiment group answered green when confederates inconsistent.
  • 8.42% experiment group, green when confederates consistent.
  • Minorities can influence majority but more so when consistent.
• Minority Influence (Evaluation)

  Strength:

  P - importance of consistency.

  E - Moscovici’s (1969) study shows consistent minority opinion greater effect on changing majority.

  E - Wood et al. (1994), found consistent minorities most influential (across 100 studies).

  L - consistency minimum requirement for influence.
• Minority Influence (Evaluation)

  Strength:

  P - change in majority’s position involves deeper processing of minority view.

  E - Martin et al. (2003), presented view; one group, minority agreed w/ view; other group, majority agreed.

  E - less willing change opinion if heard minority.

  L - minority message deeply processed, supporting how minority influence works.
• Minority Influence (Evaluation)

  Limitation:

  P - studies, clear distinction between majority/minority; real-life it’s more complex.

  E - e.g. majorities usually have more power/status + minorities face hostility.

  E - these features usually left out of minority influence research.

  L - findings like Martin’s (2003) lack real-life application.
• Minority Influence (Evaluation)

  Limitation:

  P - studies tasks artificial.

  E - e.g. Moscovici’s (1969), research unrealistic to how minorities attempt change majorities IRL.

  E - in real cases, like political campaigns, outcome more important.

  L - findings of minority influence lack external validity.