Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Social influence: Part 2 - Coggle Diagram
Social influence: Part 2
-
-
Minority influence
Requires individuals to reject majority beliefs and be converted to the views of the minority - the minority attempts to change views through informational social influence and internalisation
Behaviour 1: Consistency - The minority needs to demonstrate they are confident in their view - if they repeat the same message over time (diachronic consistency) the argument seems more powerful
Behaviour 2: Commitment - If the minority are willing to suffer for their views but still hold them, the majority will take them more seriously - this is known as the augmentation principle
Behaviour 3: Flexibility - need to appear to accept valid counter arguments and slightly compramise
Minority influence (consistency) - Moscovici - Aim: To observe how minorities can influence majorities.
Procedure: A lab experiment - Pptc's were in a group with 2 confederates (the minority) and four pptc's (the majority) - Everyone was shown 36 blue slides, each with a different shade
of blue - They were each asked to say whether the slide was blue or
green - Confederates deliberately said they were green on two-thirds of
the trials, thus producing a consistent minority view - The number of times that the real participants reported that the
slide was green was observed - A control group was also used consisting of participants only – no
confederates..
Findings: When confederates were consistent in their results 8% of the pptc's said the slide was green - when confederates were inconsistent 1% of the pptc's said the slide was green - consistency is crucial for minority to influence majority
Evaluation: :no_entry: Methlodology lacks mundane realism - lacks ecological validity because the extent to which findings can be generalised is limited :check: Lab experiment - high control of variables - likely to be replicable
Minority Influence (flexibility) Nemeth (1986) - Used groups pf 3 pptc's and 1 confederate in 2 conditions - in the first, the confederate (minority) would show inflexibility by arguing for a low level of compensation for a victim of an imaginary ski lift accident and not changing from that level - in the second the confederate showed flexibility by raising his offer slightly - in this flexible condition the majority were much more likely to lower their compensation level
Evaluation: :no_entry: Artificial stimuli of the ski lift (pptc's know its not real and the money is a fake scenario) -lacks external validity
2 types of consistency: Diachronic consistency - Group remains consistent over time - they do not change their views overtime
Synchronic consistency - Group is consistent between all members of the group - everyone in the group has the same views and therefore supports one another
Minorities converting the majorities view is normally a slow process - as it starts to speed up this is called the snowball effect (the minority view improves to acceptability)
-
Evaluation: :check: Many minorities groups have influenced the majority (gay rights movement) - have been consistent and in some cases have suffered - real life application :check: Supporting evidence - Moscivici and Nemeth
-