Minority influence: The effects of social status of an inclusive versus exclusive group

An experiment investigated the effects of source status (high versus low) and source's attitude towards the target (Inclusive versus éxclusive) on minority influence. It was predicted that an inclusive minority in the high-status source condition would primarily have a direct impact (compliance), while in the low-status source condition it would have little direct or indirect influence but would stimulate autonomous cognitive work (divergence) Moreover, exclusive minorities, irrespective of status, would have a mainly indirect impact (conversion) Results appear to confirm the hypotheses with two significant qualifications: First, minority status interacts with subjects' initial attitude, furthering or hindering indirect influence; second, an exclusive minority encourages the production of externally-generated thoughts, albeit only in low-status source condition. The study also provided some information on the relationship between indirect influence and divergence, and between the quantity and the quality of cognitive production.     

Minority influence: the role of ambivalence toward the source

According to literature on social influence, a minority source may indirectly influence group members by fostering ambivalent reactions. Two studies were carried out in order to provide empirical support for this theoretical assumption. In Study 1 participants (n = 133), were exposed to a counter‐attitudinal minority message and ambivalence was manipulated by facilitating the accessibility of either ambivalent (positive and negative) or univalent (positive or negative) thoughts toward the source. We predicted and found more indirect influence in ambivalent condition than in univalent conditions. No effect of ambivalence on direct influence was found. In Study 2 (n = 127), ambivalence was measured and two possible antecedents of ambivalence, consistency of the minority and personal relevance of the topic for participants, were taken into account. Findings suggest that ambivalence mediates the effects of the two factors on indirect influence. In sum, these studies provide evidence of the importance of ambivalence in minority influence context, an early assumption that was still lacking in strong empirical support. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The Effects of Caffeine Consumption on Direct and Indirect Majority and Minority Influence

A study is reported that examines the effect of caffeine consumption on majority and minority influence. In a double blind procedure, 72 participants consumed an orange drink, which either contained caffeine (3.5mg per kilogram of body weight) or did not (placebo). After a 40-minute delay, participants read a counter-attitudinal message (antivoluntary euthanasia) endorsed by either a numerical majority or minority. Both direct (message issue, i.e., voluntary euthanasia) and indirect (message issue-related, i.e., abortion) change was assessed by attitude scales completed before and after exposure to the message. In the placebo condition, the findings replicated the predictions of Moscovici's (1980) conversion theory; namely, majorities leading to compliance (direct influence) and minorities leading to conversion (indirect influence). When participants had consumed caffeine, majorities not only led to more direct influence than in the placebo condition but also to indirect influence. Minorities, by contrast, had no impact on either level of influence. The results suggest that moderate levels of caffeine increase systematic processing of the message but the consequences of this vary for each source. When the source is a majority there was increased indirect influence while for a minority there was decreased indirect influence. The results show the need to understand how contextual factors can affect social influence processes.     

Social disadvantage and the self-regulatory function of justice beliefs

Five studies support the hypothesis that beliefs in societal fairness offer a self-regulatory benefit for members of socially disadvantaged groups. Specifically, members of disadvantaged groups are more likely than members of advantaged groups to calibrate their pursuit of long-term goals to their beliefs about societal fairness. In Study 1, low socioeconomic status (SES) undergraduate students who believed more strongly in societal fairness showed greater intentions to persist in the face of poor performance on a midterm examination. In Study 2, low SES participants who believed more strongly in fairness reported more willingness to invest time and effort to achieve desirable career outcomes. In Study 3, ethnic minority participants exposed to a manipulation suggesting that fairness conditions in their country were improving reported more willingness to invest resources in pursuit of long-term goals, relative to ethnic minority participants in a control condition. Study 4 replicated Study 3 using an implicit priming procedure, demonstrating that perceptions of the personal relevance of societal fairness mediate these effects. Across these 4 studies, no link between fairness beliefs and self-regulation emerged for members of advantaged (high SES, ethnic majority) groups. Study 5 contributed evidence from the World Values Survey and a representative sample (Inglehart, Basa?ez, Diez-Medrano, Halman, & Luijkx, 2004). Respondents reported more motivation to work hard to the extent that they believed that rewards were distributed fairly; this effect emerged more strongly for members of lower SES groups than for members of higher SES groups, as indicated by both self-identified social class and ethnicity.     

When motivation backfires: Optimal levels of motivation as a function of cognitive capacity in information relevance perception and social judgment

Motivation and cognitive capacity are central variables in major models of social judgment and persuasion. However, the exact nature of their interplay in judgment processes has remained ambiguous. The present paper reports on two experimental studies tackling this issue. In Study 1 we demonstrated a cross-over pattern of means for the interaction effect of motivation and cognitive capacity on judgment, with high motivation being beneficial under high cognitive capacity but detrimental under low cognitive capacity. This effect was explained by the participants’ subjective perception of information relevance. In Study 2, the role of information relevance was further investigated, showing that for highly motivated participants, judgment was differently affected by information with low versus high relevance when cognitive capacity was high but not when it was low. In the discussion, we elaborate on these effects, advocating a more dynamic perspective on (social) judgment, acknowledging the conditional (opposite) effects of motivation, in function of cognitive capacity.     

Source consistency, distinctiveness, and consensus: the three dimensions of the Kelley ANOVA model in persuasion

Based on a conceptual analysis and existing research, the authors propose that the three source dimensions specified in the ANOVA model play similar roles in persuasion as other source characteristics (e.g., expertise). Two studies test assumptions derived from this approach regarding the effects of different combinations of consistency and consensus (Study 1) and distinctiveness and consensus (Study 2). Combinations resulting in contradictory (vs. similar) inferences regarding message validity should affect judgmental confidence and, consequently, affect message scrutiny. Study 1 shows that, as predicted, high consistency/low consensus and low consistency/high consensus (incongruent combinations) lead to higher desired confidence and more extensive message elaboration than high consistency/high consensus and low consistency/low consensus (congruent combinations). Similarly, Study 2 reveals heightened message scrutiny given incongruent (vs. congruent) combinations of distinctiveness and consensus. Results are discussed with respect to majority/minority influence processes and multiple source characteristics.     

Compensatory nonconformity: Self-uncertainty and low implicit self-esteem increase adoption and expression of minority opinions

The present studies tested whether people, particularly those who are most vulnerable to self-threats as indicated by low implicit self-esteem, adopt and express minority opinions to compensate for self-uncertainty. In Studies 1 through 3, low implicit self-esteem participants who were made to feel uncertain about themselves as individuals (versus uncertain about a self-irrelevant issue in Study 1, certain about themselves in Study 2, or uncertain about their group memberships in Study 3) expressed more disagreement with others' opinions. Additionally, Study 3 demonstrated that this effect is specific to minority opinions and does not emerge on majority opinions. In Study 4, the relation between self-uncertainty and disagreement with others' opinions was strongest among participants with both low implicit and high explicit self-esteem, who respond to self-threats in particularly defensive ways.     

Group identification and historical memory

Differences in ingroup identification can influence the accessibility of historical memories. In Study 1, the authors examined individual differences in identity; in Study 2 they experimentally manipulated identity. In Study 1, high identifiers recalled fewer incidents of ingroup violence and hatred than did low identifiers. High and low identifiers did not differ in their recall of ingroup suffering. In Study 2, participants in the high-identity condition recalled fewer incidents of violence and hatred by members of their group than did those in the low-identity condition but a similar number of good deeds. Control participants recalled more positive than negative group actions; this bias was exaggerated in the high-identity condition and eliminated in the low-identity condition. The authors interpret the results as indicating the effects of social identity on individual-level memory processes, especially schema-consistent recall. They evaluate other explanations of the bias, including collective censorship of negative histories.     

Assimilation and contrast in persuasion: the effects of source credibility in multiple message situations

The present research explores a contextual perspective on persuasion in multiple message situations. It is proposed that when people receive persuasive messages, the effects of those messages are influenced by other messages to which people recently have been exposed. In two experiments, participants received a target persuasive message from a moderately credible source. Immediately before this message, participants received another message, on a different topic, from a source with high or low credibility. In Experiment 1, participants' attitudes toward the target issue were more favorable after they had first been exposed to a different message from a low rather than high credibility source (contrast). In Experiment 2, this effect only emerged when a priming manipulation gave participants a dissimilarity mindset. When participants were primed with a similarity mindset, their attitudes toward the target issue were more favorable following a different message from a high rather than low credibility source (assimilation).     

Majority versus minority influence and prediction of behavioral intentions and behavior

Two experiments examined the effects of majority and minority influence on attitude-consistent behavioral intentions. In the first experiment, when attitudes were changed via minority influence there was a greater likelihood to engage in an attitude-consistent behavioral intention than when attitudes were changed via majority influence. This suggests that minority influence leads to stronger attitudes (based on systematic processing) that are more predictive of behavioral intentions, while attitude change via majority influence is due to compliance through non-systematic processing. Further support for this interpretation comes from the finding that the amount of message-congruent elaboration mediated behavioral intention. When there was no attitude change, there was no impact on behavioral intention to engage in an attitude-consistent behavior. Experiment 2 explored the role of personal relevance of the topic and also included a real behavioral measure. When the topic was of low personal relevance, the same pattern was found as Experiment 1. When the topic was of high personal relevance, thus increasing the motivation to engage in systematic processing, attitudes changed by both a majority and minority source increased behavioral intention and actual behavior. The results are consistent with the view that both majorities and minorities can lead to different processes and consequences under different situations.     

Minority dissent and team innovation: the importance of participation in decision making.

This study integrates research on minority dissent and individual creativity, as well as team diversity and the quality of group decision making, with research on team participation in decision making. From these lines of research, it was proposed that minority dissent would predict innovation in teams but only when teams have high levels of participation in decision making. This hypothesis was tested in 2 studies, 1 involving a homogeneous sample of self-managed teams and 1 involving a heterogeneous sample of cross-functional teams. Study 1 suggested that a newly developed scale to measure minority dissent has discriminant validity. Both Study 1 and Study 2 showed more innovations under high rather than low levels of minority dissent but only when there was a high degree of participation in team decision making. It is concluded that minority dissent stimulates creativity and divergent thought, which, through participation, manifest as innovation.     

Spaced Out in Cyberspace? Evaluations of Computer‐Based Information1

This study draws on cognitive elaboration theory to examine when and why people evaluate computer‐based information more favorably than information from a less automated source. Half of participants received information from a computer, while half received the identical information from a less automated source. Moreover, participants were induced to be more vs. less involved in the information‐acquisition process. As predicted, participants in the low‐involvement condition evaluated the information more favorably when it came from a computer than from a less automated source. This difference was eliminated in the high‐involvement condition. Further supporting our reasoning, the interaction effect between information source and level of involvement was more pronounced for participants low, rather than high, in need for cognition.     

Behavioural style and group cohesiveness as sources of minority influence

Behavioural style and group cohesiveness were tested as sources of minority influence under conditions in which rejection of the minority from the group was possible and under conditions in which it was not. Female subjects (N = 120) were led to believe that they were interacting as a group and that they held a majority position on a relevant issue. The influence agent, ostensibly one of the group members, advocated a minority position throughout their interaction. Three variables were manipulated: group cohesiveness (high or low), behavioural style of the deviate (high or low consistency) and opportunity for rejection of the deviate from the group (possible or not possible). It was predicted that the deviate would be more influential under high cohesive than under low cohesive conditions and that she would be most influential when she was highly consistent and there was no opportunity to reject her. Although both hypotheses were confirmed, unexpected minority influence effects were also found.     

Représentations sociales et influence sociale

Since content and structure of social representations are determined through communication, their link with the study of social influence should be of relevance. Three research programs are presented. In the tradition of social influence studies, the first one demonstrates that a majority source induces manifest influence on a social representation, whereas influence induced by a minority is latent. Considering an expert source, the second one confirms that high status sources may induce only superficial influence, showing that such dynamics are due to identity stakes. The third one examines the reciprocal influence that social representations may exert on the social influence processes themselves.     

Chinese are more loss averse than British

This research investigates how culture might influence loss aversion. Chinese were expected to be more loss averse than British because of cultural differences in regulatory focus. Study 1 reveals that compared with British participants, Chinese participants were less likely to give up gifts they had received in exchange for new gifts. In Study 2, Chinese and British participants imagined buying a computer which either had a high specification and a high price tag (high reference), or a basic specification and a low price tag (low reference). Participants were informed that the (reference) computer was unavailable, and they had to choose between two available computers, which were both cheaper and less powerful than the high reference computer, and more expensive and more powerful than the low reference computer. The results reveal that the difference in price tag between the two available computers had a bigger impact on Chinese buying decisions than on British buying decisions when it was viewed as a loss. Furthermore, both promotion focus and prevention focus mediated the influence of culture on buying decisions in the low reference condition. No cross‐cultural difference was found in the high reference condition.     

Creative problem solving as a result of majority vs minority influence

A comparison of influence processes exerted by a majority versus a minority is made, both theoretically and empirically. In this study, comparing the two processes in the same experimental setting, it was hypothesized that subjects would ‘follow’ the majority more than the minority, that is, they would be more influenced to adopt the exact same position. However, it was predicted that subjects exposed to the minority would be stimulated to find new solutions to the problem, solutions that were not offered by the minority but that the subjects would not have found by themselves. Further, these solutions would tend to be correct rather than incorrect. Results support these predictions.     

Resisting persuasion by illegitimate means: a metacognitive perspective on minority influence

The present research tests a new metacognitive perspective on resistance in minority influence situations. It is proposed that when people initially resist persuasive messages from sources in the numerical minority, they can lose attitude certainty if they perceive that they have based their attitudes on the source's minority status and also believe this is an illegitimate basis for resistance. In three studies, participants were presented with a message from a minority source. In Study 1, participants became less certain of their attitudes after resisting this message. In Study 2, this effect only emerged when participants were led to believe they had based their attitudes on the source's minority status and this was an illegitimate thing to do. In Study 3, this effect was shown to have implications for persuasion in response to a second message. The implications of these findings for classic minority influence effects are discussed.     

The Impact of Positive and Negative Affect and Issue Framing on Issue Interpretation and Risk Taking

Two studies examined the influence of transient affective states and issue framing onissue interpretationandrisk takingwithin the context of strategic decision making. In Study 1, participants in whom transient positive or negative affective states were induced by reading a short story showed systematic differences in issue interpretation and risk taking in a strategic decision making context. Compared to negative mood participants, those in a positive mood were more likely to interpret the strategic issue as an opportunity and displayed lower levels of risk taking. Study 2 replicated and extended these results by crossing affective states with threat and opportunity frames. Results showed that framing an issue (as a threat or an opportunity) had a stronger impact on issue interpretation among negative affect participants than among positive affect participants. Affective states also moderated the impact of issue framing on risk taking: the effect of framing on risk-taking was stronger under negative rather than positive affect. These results are interpreted via information-processing and motivational effects of affect on a decision maker.     

Socially motivated projection: Need to belong increases perceived opinion consensus on important issues

In three studies, we tested whether the need to belong would motivate people to perceive consensus for their opinions on important social issues. In Study 1, a nationally representative telephone survey, participants with a high dispositional need to belong perceived greater consensus for their opinions on immigrant naturalization than did those with a low need to belong. However, this relationship was strongest among participants who reported that the issue was personally important to them. In Study 2, participants primed with rejection‐related (versus acceptance‐related) words, and who reported high levels of issue importance, demonstrated greater false consensus for their opinions on a proposed alcohol tax increase. In Study 3, participants who received random feedback that they held a common (versus uncommon) opinion had a lower subsequent need to belong when the issue was important to them, suggesting that consensus perceptions can in fact mitigate belongingness needs. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.