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.     

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.     

Media representations of majority and minority groups

This research series replicated and extended earlier findings of Gardikiotis, Martin, and Hewstone ( 2004 ), who examined via content analysis UK media representations of numeric majority and minority groups. Using news articles from North and South Dakota, where majority/minority population characteristics mirror those of the UK in terms of number and power, Study 1 replicated the patterns of results found in Gardikiotis et al. Study 2, in which articles from California newspapers were analyzed, yielded findings contrary to Gardikiotis et al. and our Dakota analyses: Minority headlines were more frequent in California, and majority articles were longer than minority articles. Consistent with UK and Dakotas findings, majority headlines in California were associated with politics and identity adjectives, whereas minority headlines were linked to social issues and ethnicity‐based adjectives. Arguably, these differences occurred because in California, unlike the UK and the Dakotas, Whites are not simultaneously the social power and the numeric majority. Variations in power and number associated with majority and minority status were discussed in explaining differences across contexts, and in signaling possible shortcomings in the conceptualization and methods used to investigate minority and majority influence. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A Puzzle About Free Speech, Legitimacy, and Countermajoritarian Constraints

This paper argues that there is a tension between two central features of Dworkin’s partnership conception of democracy. The conception holds, on the one hand, that it is a necessary condition of the legitimacy of the decisions of a political majority that every member of the political community has a very robust right to publicly criticize those decisions. A plausible interpretation of this argument is that free political speech constitutes a normatively privileged vehicle for political minorities to become majorities, and therefore in the absence of freedom of speech minorities could not be rightfully compelled to comply with majority decisions. On the other hand, the partnership conception holds that properly exercised constraints on majority rule do not incur any moral costs. The no-moral-costs thesis is argued for on the basis that nothing of significance is lost when individuals’ influence on political decisions is diminished. However, the legitimacy argument for free speech assumes the significance of individual political influence, which the no-moral-costs thesis denies. Hence the tension.     

By whose standard? The affective implications of ethnic minorities' comparisons to ethnic minority and majority referents

In a 'diary' study, we examined the frequency and affective implications of 34 ethnic minority students' comparisons to other ethnic minorities or to members of a high-status ethnic majority (i.e., European-Americans). Participants made more frequent comparisons to ethnic majority than ethnic minority referents, although neither type of comparison tended to be perceived in terms of group membership (see also Smith & Leach, 2004). Comparisons to ethnic majority referents did not alter participants' positive affect even where they suggested poor future prospects in status-relevant domains. In contrast, comparisons to fellow ethnic minorities led to increased positive affect when they suggested a future prospect of improvement. We discuss the conceptual and practical implications of social comparison in the context of group status.     

Ethnic Minority‐Majority Asymmetry in National Attitudes around the World: A Multilevel Analysis

Using data from the International Social Survey Programme, this research investigated asymmetric attitudes of ethnic minorities and majorities towards their country and explored the impact of human development, ethnic diversity, and social inequality as country‐level moderators of national attitudes. In line with the general hypothesis of ethnic asymmetry, we found that ethnic, linguistic, and religious majorities were more identified with the nation and more strongly endorsed nationalist ideology than minorities (H1, 33 countries). Multilevel analyses revealed that this pattern of asymmetry was moderated by country‐level characteristics: the difference between minorities and majorities was greatest in ethnically diverse countries and in egalitarian, low inequality contexts. We also observed a larger positive correlation between ethnic subgroup identification and both national identification and nationalism for majorities than for minorities (H2, 20 countries). A stronger overall relationship between ethnic and national identification was observed in countries with a low level of human development. The greatest minority‐majority differences in the relationship between ethnic identification and national attitudes were found in egalitarian countries with a strong welfare state tradition.     

The phenomenology of minority–majority status: Effects on innovation in argument generation

In three experiments, we manipulated participants' perceived numerical status and compared the originality and creativity of arguments generated by members of numerical minorities and majorities. Independent judges, blind to experimental conditions, rated participants' written arguments. In Studies 1 and 2, we found that participants assigned to a numerical minority generated more original arguments when advocating their own position than did numerical majorities. In Study 3, an equal‐factions control group was included in the design, and all participants were instructed to argue for a counter‐attitudinal position. Those in the numerical minority generated more creative arguments than those in both the majority and equal‐factions conditions, but not stronger arguments. We propose cognitive and social processes that may underlie our obtained effects and discuss implications for minority influence research. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The relationship between acculturation preferences and prejudice: Longitudinal evidence from majority and minority groups in three European countries

A longitudinal field survey tested the reciprocal effects of acculturation preferences and prejudice among ethnic minorities and majorities. Data were collected at two points in time from 512 members of ethnic minorities and 1143 majority members in Germany, Belgium and England. Path analyses yielded not only the lagged effects of prejudice on acculturation preferences but also the reverse for both majority and minority members. The mutual longitudinal effects between prejudice and desire for culture maintenance were negative, and the mutual effects between prejudice and desire for culture adoption were positive for majority members. The reverse was the case for minority participants. Moreover, the two acculturation dimensions interacted in their effect on prejudice for majority participants but not for minority participants. The effect of desire for culture adoption on prejudice was moderated by perceived intergroup similarity. Theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Minority (dis)advantage in population games

We identify a novel ‘cultural red king effect’ that, in many cases, results in stable arrangements which are to the detriment of minority groups. In particular, we show inequalities disadvantaging minority groups can naturally arise under an adaptive process when minority and majority members must routinely determine how to divide resources amongst themselves. We contend that these results show how inequalities disadvantaging minorities can likely arise by dint of their relative size and need not be a result of either explicit nor implicit prejudices, nor due to intrinsic differences between minority and majority members.

     

The role of social categorization and perceived source credibility in minority influence

This study was conducted in order to compare the influence of ingroup and outgroup minorities and to assess the role of perceived source credibility in minority influence. The subjects were exposed to the simultaneous majority/minority influence paradigm. Ingroup minorities were more influential than outgroup minorities. Subjects moved toward the minority position in private and toward the majority position in public when the minority was represented by members of the ingroup. On private responses subjects were not affected by outgroup minorities who argued for abortion, and they became more positive toward abortion when outgroup minorities opposed abortion. Final &, ingroup minorities were perceived as more credible than outgroup minorities and greater credibility of minority source was associated with greater attitude change toward the minority position. The superior influence of ingroup minorities held when controlling for source credibility. Overall, the results were highly supportive of social identity theory.     

Group size,group status and trait valence as determinants of intergroup bias: Stereotyping in Finland and Sweden

The effects of group size, group status and trait valence (positive or negative stereotypes of in‐ and outgroup) on intergroup bias was studied in nation‐wide probability samples of majority and minority groups in Finland and Sweden, (N = 2479). Ethnolinguistic vitality was used as a proxy for status. It is argued that the specific history of real‐life intergroup relations has to be duly acknowledged when predicting main and interactive effects on intergroup bias in natural contexts. Supporting the predictions made, numerical group size showed a stable main effect; members of numerical minorities showed more bias than members of numerical majorities, regardless of trait valence. While status had no main effect, there was a significant interaction between status and size as well as between status and trait valence: intergroup bias was highest in the high status minority, and low status groups showed less bias than high status groups on negatively valenced traits. In fact, minority members showed the reverse of PNAE. In addition, majority members favoured the outgroup on negatively valenced traits, but favoured their ingroup on positively valenced traits. Different explanations for these results are discussed. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Developmental changes in application of the majority rule in group decisions

This study examined age-related changes in the child's application of the principle of majority rule in group decisions. Following a problem posed by Moessinger (1981), we enquired whether children routinely apply the majority rule when the majority consists of a shifting (variable) set of members across decisions, and alternate between majority and minority when the majority and minority is fixed, i.e. consists of the same individuals each time. In Geneva, Moessinger found that 8-year-olds failed to discriminate between fixed and shifting majorities, while most 13-year-olds (75 per cent) did so. An altered replication was conducted in Australia modifying Moessinger's procedure to control for extraneous variables such as ‘set’ and the need for variety in choice. It was found that on the task 7 per cent of 8-year-olds, 20 per cent of 10-year-olds, 32 per cent of 12-year-olds, and 39 per cent of 14-year-olds discriminated on a behavioural criterion between fixed and shifting majorities. Ten per cent of 8-year-olds, 40 per cent of 10-year-olds, 52 per cent of 12-year-olds, and 55 per cent of 14-year-olds made the discrimination on Moessinger's cognitive ‘reason’ criterion. The results show that development of the conceptual distinction between fixed and shifting majorities is gradual and continuous.     

Internalization versus compliance: Differential processes underlying minority influence and conformity

Two experiments investigated whether minority influence and conformity operate by the same or by different processes. It was predicted that subjects who were simultaneously exposed to a majority and a minority opinion would move towards the minority in private but towards the majority in public. The results of Experiment 1 supported this hypothesis. Experiment 2 investigated three hypotheses predicting that (1) the above interaction would be replicated, (2) minorities would trigger more arguments and counter-arguments, and (3) cognitive activity would mediate internalization but not compliance. Hypotheses 1 and 3 were supported. The second hypothesis was not supported. However, minorities were found to trigger more arguments and fewer counter-arguments than majorities. The results were interpreted as supporting the dual process model.     

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.     

Commitment of Cultural Minorities in Organizations: Effects of Leadership and Pressure to Conform

Purpose  

In this study, we investigated the commitment of cultural minorities and majorities in organizations. We examined how contextual factors, such as pressure to conform and leadership styles, affect the commitment of minority and majority members.     

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.     

想象接触对大学生内隐态度和外显态度的影响

本研究旨在探讨想象接触对不同民族群体内隐态度和外显态度的影响。实验1和实验2分别随机选取不同先前接触经验的汉族大学生和维吾尔族大学生进行想象接触,采用“单类内隐联想测验(SC-IAT)”和外显态度量表评估不同条件下的内隐态度和外显态度。结果表明：想象接触显著提高了不同群体对外群体的内隐态度,对外显态度影响不显著;而先前接触经验对不同群体的内隐态度影响不显著,对外显态度影响显著。研究还发现,即使是已经发生过面对面接触的个体,也可以通过想象接触来提高对外群体的内隐态度,进一步拓展了想象接触在整个群际接触体系中地位和作用。     

New approaches to the ‘crucial’ test of the causation and selection hypotheses in a Northern Irish sample

This paper examines the relationship between minority/majority status and psychological adjustment, as measured by the GHQ‐12. Rather than using religious labels in Northern Ireland to define minority/majority status, the authors hypothesized that such status is more contingent upon the local area context. Using a purer operationalization of minority/majority status, the authors found no evidence of an ‘ethnic density effect’. Implications for the questionable validity of the ‘crucial test’ of the selection and causation hypotheses are discussed. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Majority and Minority Influence

The study of minority influence has advanced considerably since the late 1960s when Moscovici's pioneering efforts brought the minority's role in the process of persuasion and social influence to the forefront. Moscovici's (1980) insight that the underlying processes of majority and minority influence are quite different has been supported, but the steady pace of research has uncovered various unanticipated findings not easily explained by his conversion theory. In this review, we track recent developments and debates in the field, and consider some major explanatory models of minority influence and their differential postulates regarding cognitive processing and attitude change. We pay particular attention to Crano's (2001 ) leniency contract model, which details the specific conditions under which majorities and minorities impart influence. Finally, we advance some novel postulates regarding the persuasive impact of out-group minorities.