Levels of consensus and majority and minority influence

Three experiments are reported which examine the effects of consensus information on majority and minority influence. In all experiments two levels of consensus difference were examined; large (82% versus 18%) and small (52% versus 48%). Experiment 1 showed that a majority source had more influence than a minority source, irrespective of consensus level. Experiment 2 examined the cause of this effect by presenting only the source label (‘majority’ versus ‘minority’), only the consensus information (percentages) or both. The superior influence of the majority was again found when either (a) both source label and consensus information were given (replicating Experiment 1) and (b) only consensus information was given, but not when (c) only the source label was given. The results showed majority influence was due to the consensus information indicating more than 50% of the population supported that position. Experiment 3 also manipulated message quality (strong versus weak arguments) to identify whether systematic processing had occurred. Message quality only had an impact with the minority of 18%. These studies show that consensus information has different effects for majority and minority influence. For majority influence, having over 50% support is sufficient to cause compliance while for a minority there are advantages to being numerically small, in terms of leading to detailed processing of its message. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Paradoxical effects of categorization in minority influence: When being an outgroup is an advantage

In a 2 × 2 factorial design, 165 high school girls gave their opinions about abortion (direct influence) and about contraception (indirect ifluence) after reading a message advocating abortion said to have been written by either an ingroup (same sex) or an outgroup (opposite sex) minority and explicitly opposed by the majority opinion of either the ingroup or the outgroup. Results show that there is less direct influence when the ingroup majority is opposed to the minority, and more direct influence when the process of identification is less involved. Indirect influence appears in an intergroup context where categorization of majority and minority into different groups is superimposed on their ideological dissent, which has the effect of allowing recognition of the minority's distinctiveness and validity over and above the discrimination that appears at the direct influence level. In discussing the results, a theoretical integration of social comparison and validation processes is proposed as a step towards explaining the diversity of minority influence phenomena.     

Ingroup and outgroup minorities: Differential impact upon public and private responses

The experiment which is presented in this paper was designed to overcome some of the problems associated with previous research investigating the effects of social categorization and minority influence. Sixty-eight fourteen-year-old British Secondary School pupils indicated their attitudes towards a 'grant for pupils' before and after reading a text which advocated a minority position. The text was attributed as being the work of either pupils from their own school (ingroup minority) or from a school they discriminated against (outgroup minority). Responses were either made in ‘public’ (by telling subjects that other pupils would see their responses) or in ‘private’ (by subjects putting their responses into a ‘ballot box’). The results showed that on public responses ingroup minorities had more influence than outgroup minorities while there was no difference on private responses. Also, greater change occurred when responses were made in private than in public. These results are compatible with the intergroup analysis of minority influence.     

Studies in social influence VI: Is Lenin orange or red? Imagery and social influence

Two experiments dealing with the effects of a majority or a minority source influence, solely on the recognition of a portrait, let us study the generalization of the influence to a portrait symbolically linked to a colour. According to the theory of conversion, the bringing into play of the validation process of the stimulus when the source is a minority should allow such a generalization cognitive association. When the source is a majority, a social comparison process should lead to compliance about the portrait, without any cognitive investigation of the whole stimulus. In the first experiment, four slides were shown successively using material similar to Luchins' (1945) and progressively drawing the portrait of Lenin, with a red-orange background for each phase. The dependant variables are: (1) the drawing, (2) the colour of the background, (3) the after-image. On the two last slides for which the answer ‘Lenin’ is given by the source, changes towards red (and the complementary colour green), in the absence of the source under the minority influence, and changes towards orange under majority influence in the absence of the source are registered. Moreoever, the most significant changes of the colour judgment are due to the subjects who refuse to answer ‘Lenin’ during the interaction. In the second experiment, only the fourth slide, on which Lenin's portrait completely appears is shown. The subjects submitted to majority influence answer ‘Lenin’ more than the control group does, only in the presence of the source and change their judgment on the colour of the after-image towards the complementary of orange in the absence of the source. When the source is a minority a sinificant effect towards the red and its complementary colour is shown.     

Chimpanzees prioritise social information over pre-existing behaviours in a group context but not in dyads

How animal communities arrive at homogeneous behavioural preferences is a central question for studies of cultural evolution. Here, we investigated whether chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) would relinquish a pre-existing behaviour to adopt an alternative demonstrated by an overwhelming majority of group mates; in other words, whether chimpanzees behave in a conformist manner. In each of five groups of chimpanzees (N?=?37), one individual was trained on one method of opening a two-action puzzle box to obtain food, while the remaining individuals learned the alternative method. Over 5 h of open access to the apparatus in a group context, it was found that 4/5 ‘minority’ individuals explored the majority method and three of these used this new method in the majority of trials. Those that switched did so after observing only a small subset of their group, thereby not matching conventional definitions of conformity. In a further ‘Dyad’ condition, six pairs of chimpanzees were trained on alternative methods and then given access to the task together. Only one of these individuals ever switched method. The number of observations that individuals in the minority and Dyad individuals made of their untrained method was not found to influence whether or not they themselves switched to use it. In a final ‘Asocial’ condition, individuals (N?=?10) did not receive social information and did not deviate from their first-learned method. We argue that these results demonstrate an important influence of social context upon prioritisation of social information over pre-existing methods, which can result in group homogeneity of behaviour.     

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.     

Heuristic processing of distinctiveness information in minority and majority influence

The role of distinctiveness information in majority and minority influence was studied. Students read a message containing strong or weak arguments advocated by a minority or majority source. The communicator's minority (majority) status was said to be either distinctive to the target topic or nondistinctive across topics. Major dependent variables were attitude judgments and cognitive responses. Across conditions, messages were processed systematically, and a majority communicator tended to be more persuasive than a minority communicator. Most importantly, high distinctiveness led to greater influence than low distinctiveness, and this effect was independent of argument strength and minority versus majority status. Theoretical and applied implications of these findings are discussed. © 1998 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Group socialization and prejudice: the social transmission of intergroup attitudes and beliefs

In order to examine the social transmission of prejudice in the military, attitudes and beliefs of Francophone (minority) and Anglophone (majority) prospective military officers toward their own and other groups were assessed at the beginning and at the end of a four‐year officer‐training program. Consistent with social dominance theory and system justification theory, majority group members become significantly more negative toward outgroups (e.g. Francophones, civilians and immigrants) and more likely to internalize beliefs that legitimize the economic gap between Francophones and Anglophones in Canada. Moreover, as predicted on the basis of self‐categorization theory, the results show that identification with the category ‘Canadian Forces Officers’ assessed at the midpoint in the program, moderates the change in intergroup attitudes and beliefs. Finally, minority group members did not internalize negative stereotypes of their own group. These results provide important evidence for the role of group socialization in the explanation of intergroup attitudes and beliefs and suggest that social identification is a key factor in group socialization, consistent with self‐categorization theory. Copyright © 2000 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Contrary effects of group cohesiveness in minority influence: Intergroup categorization of the source and levels of influence

The roles of group cohesiveness and intergroup categorization of the source in minority influence were studied in a 2 (high versus low cohesiveness) × 2 (ingroup versus outgroup source) × 3 (phases) factorial design. Six subjects forming a group were confronted with a confederate defending a minority position in a perceptual task. The results indicated a manifest influence effect (slide colour), accompanied by a latent polarization (afterimage) in the high cohesrveness/outgroup source condition, and a latent unfluence effect in the low cohesiveness/ingroup source condition.     

Indirect majority and minority influence: An exploratory study

In a 2 × 2 design, 85 subjects were asked to estimate the size of angles (direct influence) that were either 90 or 85°, after being confronted with incorrect judgements of a majority (88 per cent) or a minority (12 per cent) of people estimating the angles at 50°. Additionally, pre- and post-test measures were used to establish indirect influence on subjects' judgements pertaining to acute angles (i.e. on the estimation of the length of lines constituting the angles, and on the imaginary weight of figures represented by these angles). Overall, little direct influence is observed. This may partly be due to the introduction of a denial of the credibility of the source in all conditions. In fact, some evidence of direct influence is only found in the majority–85° angles condition. An instance of indirect influence (on the estimation of length of lines) appeared as the result of a majority stance when the angles in the experimental phase were 90°. When these angles were 85°, indirect minority influence (on the estimation of weight of figures) was observed. These effects had been predicted on the basis of the hypothesis stating that indirect majority influence would be possible when subjects expected consensus on the correct response (in the 90° angles condition), without being able to reach consensus at the manifest level (because of the denial and the restriction imposed by the clear shape of 90° angles). Indirect minority influence was hypothesized to be stronger in a situation that allows for diverse responses (i.e. for 85° angles).     

Compliance,conversion and the Asch paradigm

120 subjects took part in an Asch type experiment, using a material which was suitable for the measurement of indirect influence. The subjects were given the consistent incorrect response of a source which was either a majority (the response given by 88 per cent of a parent population of college students) or a minority (12 per cent). Part of the subjects were told that the experiment was investigating perceptual illusions and an example of such illusions was given. An authority condition was also introduced: the experimenter himself gave the incorrect response. A control condition did not involve any influence or illusion. The results show that direct influence increases when there is a stronger symbolic social pressure. They also show that an indirect influence may be induced by a numerical majority (provided that the subjects believe that there is an illusion) as well as a numerical minority (provided that an illusion does not invalidate its response). These results underline how important it is to control the exact significance of experimental situations that are supposed to represent the psychological conditions of majority or minority influence.     

Examining differences in minority versus majority preschoolers on social categorization and perceived intergroup distance

We examined the differences between majority and minority children (i.e., group membership) on racial categorization and perceived cultural distance, among 4‐ to 6‐year‐old children, in low diversified schools. We used a spontaneous social categorization task using pictures of children from three different racial groups broadly represented in France (Europeans, Black‐, and North‐Africans), and an evaluation of the perceived cultural distance between participants' in‐group and the racial group represented in the picture, adapted to children and based on three factors (language, eating habits, and music). Results revealed an effect of age on racial categorization: the older the children, the more successful they are in this task. They showed a significant effect of the racial group represented in the photos on perceived cultural distance: members of minority groups (i.e., Black‐ and North‐Africans) were evaluated as more different compared to those of the majority group on each of the factors. Finally, we got an interaction between participants' in‐group and the racial group represented in the pictures, for the language factor: members of the majority group perceived as more different photographs representing minorities peers than those representing majority peers, while participants belonging to minority groups perceived no differences between photographs, according to the racial criteria.     

Minimal majorities and minorities

This study is one of a series of experiments designed to examine how sociostructural factors such as group numbers, power and status affect intergroup behaviour. Using a variant of Tajfel's ‘minimal group’ paradigm the present study investigated the intergroup behaviour of college students categorized as numerical minority, majority or ‘equal’ group members. The effects of salient (S) versus non-salient (S?) group categorizations were also examined. These manipulations yielded a 3 × 2 design matrix consisting of majority/equal/minority × salient (S)/non-salient (S?) group conditions. Unlike most previous studies using this paradigm, subjects' responses on Tajfel's point distribution matrices were supplemented with subjects' report of their own and outgroup's point distribution strategies. As expected, minimal group results were replicated in the ‘equal’ group (S?) condition such that mere categorization into ingroup/outgroup was sufficient to foster intergroup discrimination. However salient (S) equal group members were more fair than discriminatory in their responses. Minorities (S/S?) were generally less fair than equal groups, showed high levels of absolute ingroup favouritism (S?) while simultaneously attempting to establish positive distinctiveness from majorities. Though majorities were generally fair (S/S?), they also appeared to be more concerned than minorities about maintaining positive differentials between themselves and minorities. Although, majority (S/S?) and equal group (S?) members accurately reported their actual distribution strategies, minorities (S/S?) and equal (S) group members were not as accurate in their self reports. Overall the present results are consistent with hypotheses derived from Social Identity Theory. But the results also show that sociostructural variables such as group numbers can have an important impact on intergroup behaviours.     

Psychologization and processes of minority and majority influence

Minority influence, although possible, is relatively difficult for an active minority to achieve. One of the obstactes encountered by a minority in the diffusion of an innovation is psychologization which consists in the establishment of a link between the ideological positions defended by the source of influence and psychological characteristics which are specific to that source. The experiment presented here seeks to show that psychologization constitutes an ideological barrier only to minority influence while this mode of interpretation of the source does not reduce the influence of a majority. The results obtained seem to confirm this hypothesis, above all when subjects possess opinions relatively close to those of the influence source. When on the other hand subjects have opinions that are relatively distant from those defended by the source, the explicit induction of psychologization does not seem to affect the degree of influence. It was also found that in the absence of such induction, ‘distant’ subjects would ‘spontaneously’ psychologize a minority source, in particular attributing its arguments to psychological imbalance.     

The representation of social issues in public discourse and newspaper language: a comment on Gardikiotis,Martin and Hewstone's (2004) study

Gardikiotis, Martin and Hewstone ( 2004 ) investigated the representation of majority versus minority headlines in five British newspapers over a period of five years. They found majority headlines to be twice as frequent as minority headlines. However, they identified headlines with the search words ‘majority’ and ‘minority’ only in the singular form. We argue that in the public discourse the minority, but not the majority is likely to be represented in the plural. Replicating their study with the search words in both singular and plural forms, the strong difference they reported disappeared and minority headlines proved to be just as frequent as majority headlines. However, whereas majority is used almost exclusively in the singular, minority is used almost as frequently in both the singular and plural forms. These findings suggest a more complex social representation in real‐life contexts on the minority pole of the minority‐majority dimension compared to the majority pole. Implications of this asymmetric relationship are discussed in terms of communication theory, social representations theory, and experimental research on minority‐majority groups (in particular in‐group homogeneity). Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Studies on latent influence by the spectrometer method I: The impact of psychologization in the case of conversion by a minority or a majority

The effects of psychologization on the conversion phenomenon were studied for cases where influence was exerted either by a minority or by a majority. In a 2×2×3 ANOVA design (minority source versus majority source, personality versus aesthetics, phases) 48 subjects are faced with a confederate who represents either 18.2 per cent or 81.8 per cent of a population and consistently responds green when an objectively blue slide is shown. Colour perception is said to be associated with either aesthetic or personality factors. The prediction is in this last case that psychologization of the majority induces conversion of the subjects, while psychologization of the minority stands in the way of this latent influence. Influence is measured by four response levels for each trial of the three phases (pre-influence, post-influence in the presence or in the absence of the influence source). Manifest influence is measured in terms of the Subjects' Judgements and by the way in which they adjust their stimulus colour perception, as determined with the help of a spectrometer. The latent influence is reflected by the subjects' judgements about the colour of the afterimage upon presentation of the stimulus, as measured on a nine-point scale and with the help of spectral adjustments of this afterimage. The subjects having been influenced without being aware of their conversion shows up in the shifts toward green or the complementary colour of green. Results indicate a cross-over for the effect of indirect influence. Under the personality condition, psychologization has the anticipated effect. The majority is the only one to produce a conversion. The attenuating effect of minority influence again manrfests itserf (Mugny and Papastamou, 1980). Under the aesthetic condition, non-psychologization also induces latent and perceptive shifts, but they go in the opposite direction and coincide closely with other results (Moscovici and Personnaz, 1980; Personnaz, 1981). In this condition, only the minority exerts an influence on all three levels.     

Crossed categorization effects on the formation of illusory correlations

This study investigates how stereotypes are formed and whether stereotype formation is reduced by the prevalence of multiple categorizations. Illusory correlations between the desirability of behaviours and two dimensions of social categorization, both containing a majority and a minority category, were assessed in single categorization and crossed categorization conditions. In the single categorization conditions, the usual illusory correlation in favour of the majority category was obtained. In the crossed condition, the combination of the two majority categories was positively discriminated from the remaining three combinations, while no differences were found among the latter. A source‐monitoring analysis of assignment frequencies replicated earlier findings that illusory correlations are due to an evaluative guessing bias, rather than to enhanced memory for individual instances of behaviour. The results show inconsistencies with a distinctiveness‐based and a social categorization account of illusory correlations, but they can be explained in terms of information loss. Copyright © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The effects of differential ascribed category membership and norms on minority influence

Investigated how either perceived competency or self-interest-and Zeitgeist affect minority influence, or: how Moscovici's theory does apply to actual social minorities. The self-interest notion predicts that ‘single’ minorities (deviating only in terms of beliefs) are more influential than ‘double’ minorities (deviating also in category membership) while the competency notion predicts the reverse. Further, either minority is expected to be influential only when the Zeitgeist is in favour of the minority position. In a 2 (pro/anti Zeitgeist) × 3 (single/double minority/control) factorial design, 120 conservative male American undergraduates discussed in groups of six-including two either male (single minority) or female (double minority) consistently liberal con federates-one of two issues: abortion (pro-) or death penalty (anti- Zeitgeist). The results support the self-interest notion: double minorities are perceived as having a stronger self-interest and exerted less influence than single minorities. The Zeitgeist hypothesis is confirmed, too. The underlying attributional processes and the ecological validity of previous studies are discussed.     

Hesitation in communication: Does minority status delay responses?

Past studies indicated that people in a minority (vs. majority) position are slower to express their public/political opinion, and the larger the difference between the size of the two positions, the slower the response. Bassili termed this the minority‐slowness effect (MSE). In the current study, two experiments were conducted to demonstrate that MSE extends to people's understanding of utterances and explored the cognitive basis for this. Participants were asked to judge if an utterance is a ‘direct’ or an ‘indirect’ expression. The results show that participants in the minority (vs. majority) took longer to respond, and the larger the difference between the size of majority and minority, the longer the response latency (Study 1a). Furthermore, participants were aware of their own minority position (Study 1b). In Study 2, when participants were deprived of cognitive resources, MSE disappeared, presumably because participants lack the cognitive resources required to conform to utterance interpretation as favoured by the majority.