Part 9: Role of social influence processes in social change

• Social change: Occurs when a society as a whole adopts new beliefs/ways of behaving that often starts with small group called minority influence, where the rate of conversion is higher than the number of the previous widely accepted norm. Those who are refuse to be influenced by the new idea will eventually be forced to comply by the majority. Examples include when government brings in new law to reduce drink driving or smoking in public, or when pressure group changes attitudes and behaviour such as encouraging people to recycle.
• Minority influence is the main cause of social change. The minority group manages to persuade the majority to adopt their point of view by being consistent, committed and flexible. However, the minority must have an internal locus of control to resist compliance, while also being able to disobey authority to drive their point into the limelight...
• ...Importance of these three components were demonstrated by Moscovici. E.g. Shift in attitudes towards race and sexuality. Used to be the norm, but after influences from minority groups, it eventually became accepted as the new norm, those who continue to be against it are pressured to hide it/change.
• Social change through minority influence: 1) Drawing attention to an issue - Differing views creates conflict that minorities are motivated to reduce e.g. suffragettes used educational, political tactics for bringing change to women's rights...
• ...2) Cognitive conflict - Created between what majority currently believes and the position held by minority, this doesn't necessarily result in a move towards minority, but does mean that majority think more deeply about issues being challenged e.g. Suffragettes created conflict between existing status quo (only men can vote) and position advocated (votes for women)...
• ...3) Consistency of position - Established minorities tend to be more influential when express arguments consistently (over time and with each other) e.g. suffragettes consistent in views, regardless of attitudes around them...
• ...4) Argumentation principal - If minority appears to be willing to suffer for views, they're seen as committed and so taken seriously e.g. Suffragettes willing to risk imprisonment or even death. 5) Snowball effect - Initially minority has relatively small effect but then spreads widely and then reaches widescale social change e.g. universal suffrage, women voting accepted by majority in UK.
• Social change through majority influence (conformity): Research consistently demonstrates that behavioural choices are often related to group norms, they are the subject of normative influence. Social norms approach holds that people alter behaviour to fit norm. Behaviour thus, is based on perceived norm rather than actual norm. The gap between here is referred to as a 'misconception' and correcting this is the basis for an approach to social change known as social change interventions.
• Social norms interventions: Typically start by identifying widespread misperception relating to specified risky behaviour within target population. E.g. adults generally misperceive the amount of alcohol consumed by peers thus justify own drinking behaviour. Perception correction strategies can be used to communicate the actual norm with the hope that recipients will moderate own behaviour to line with peers.
• Evaluation: (-)Very gradual - Role played by minority influence may be limited since rarely bring about social change quickly e.g. suffragetts. Due to strong tendency for human beings to confirm to majority position, people more likely to maintain status quo rather than engage in social change. Suggests, minority influence is frequently more latent than direct (creates potential for change rather than actual social change).
• (-)Social norms approach (change caused by conformity) not always effective - DeJong et al (2009) tested effectiveness of social norms marketing campaigns to reduce alcohol use among students across 14 different college sites. Despite receiving normative information that corrected misconceptions of subjective drinking norms, those in social norm condition did not report lower self-reported alcohol use due to campaign. Suggests that not all social norm interventions are able to produce social change.
• (-)Social change, as argued by Nemeth (1986) is a slow process and produced fragile effects - Argues that majority are not exposed to main issue at hand (which, if addressed, would cause a change in norms which would appear to be too drastic) and so this main issue is not resolved. The process takes a long time, meaning that the effects (social change) are also delayed. Thus, suggests that social change through minority influence cannot be relied upon to bring about long-standing changes in society.
• (-)Social change is not always as simple as portrayed above, with many being quite settled in their views and unwilling to change - Bashir (2013) suggests that these social barriers are largely due to the stereotypes which many have. For example, despite the obvious perks to recycling, many are still unwilling to admit that they recycle in fear of being labelled. Suggests that minority influence and social influence are not always completely effective as they cannot tackle these kinds of issues.
• (-)Mackie (1987) suggests that the role of minority influence is very limited because we are more likely to change our own views if the majority view is different to our own. This is because we often take comfort knowing that so many other people also share our view that when they don’t, we become unsettled and are forced to deeply process this change.
• (+)Minority influence and particularly role of consistency is supported by Moscovici - Found that when confederates consistently gave wrong answer, participants conformed in 8.42% of trials. However, when they were inconsistent, participants conformity to wrong answer dropped to 1.25%. Strength of consistency as majority more likely to conform when minority is consistent.
• (+)Breaking unanimity of majority can influence social change - In one of Asch's variations, found that when introduced an ally who gave correct answer (resisted majority) caused conformity levels to drop 33% - 5.5%. Demonstrates that when alternative view is put forward conformity to majority viewpoint decreases and social change is thus more likely.
• (+)Theory that independent role models can lead to social change - In one of Milgram's variations found that role models who do not obey authority then obedience decreases. When placed participant with two confederates who refused to shock learner only 10% of participants carried on to the full 450v. Demonstrates that role models can encourage others to defy authority which could lead to social change.
• (+)Nolen et al (2008) displayed messages encouraging less energy usage. The other group (control) were asked to save energy but made no reference to other's behaviour. Nolan found significant decline in energy usage in first group. Thus, suggests normative social influence can be a factor in effecting social change.
• Economic Implications of psychological research: Minority influence, Moscovici - Managers in workplace could adopt approach in attempting to persuade employees of a change to company strategy. Productivity may increase so more work done in less time and saving money. Social change, NSI - Successful public education can reduce numbers of people who smoke for example. This would be economically sound (better spent) as reduce money spent by NHS and spent on campaigns as reducing unwanted behaviour.