Transcript 1 Moscovici & Minority Influence

Implications for social change.
Research into social influence
“Discuss how findings from social
influence research might have
implications for changes in society”
Minority Influence
• So far we have seen how a powerful majority
can influence a minority….but what about the
other way around?
• Research has shown that minorities can be
influential provided they adopt the appropriate
style of behaviour.
• If people simply went along with the majority
all the time and minority views never prevailed,
there would be no change, no innovation
To know how Moscovici
investigated minority influence.
To evaluate Moscovici’s research.
Practice exam questions.
Moscovici argued that history shows that it is
not majorities that have the most powerful
influence – minorities can be powerful social
influencers.
These minorities tend to be initially low in
status, ‘weirdos’/troublemakers but this
doesn’t stop them influencing the majority
Who is this?
Nelson Mandela
Who is this?
Rosa Parks
Who is this?
Suffragettes
Who is this?
Martin Luther King
Minority Influence
• Small minority groups may be
dismissed initially however under
some circumstance and over a period
of time these small groups or even
individuals can eventually become very
influential
Minority Influence
• Active, organised and consistent
minorities can create conflict and
uncertainty within the majority.
• This can lead to an internalisation of
the minority’s beliefs as members of
the majority convert to their opinions –
but this takes more time than
majority influence.
• Minority influence = internalisation of
minority view by the majority.
Moscovici et al. (1969)
• 32 groups of 6 women were tested.
4 real ppts and 2 confederates.
Moscovici et al. (1969)
• Ppts were told the study was about
colour perception.
• They were shown 36 blue coloured
slides and were asked to state the
colour of the slide out loud.
Moscovici et al. (1969)
•
•
•
1st part of the experiment the 2 confederates
said all 36 of the slides were green.
2nd part of the experiment said green 24 times
and blue 12 times – therefore inconsistent.
There was also a control group with 6 real ppts
and no confederates.
Moscovici et al. (1969)
•
•
•
The ppts agreed with the minority
(confederates) in 8.42% of the
trials.
32% of ppts gave the same answer
as the minority at least once.
When the minority (confederates)
were inconsistent in the 2nd part
of the experiment conformity with
the minority reduced to 1.25%.
Moscovici et al. (1969)
Moscovici et al. (1969)
•
Different variation:
–
–
–
Ppts allowed to write down
their responses, therefore
making them private rather
than public.
There was even more
agreement with the
confederates.
Suggesting people might be
reluctant to be associated
with a deviant minority.
Supporting research:
Wood et al. (1994) meta-analysis of 97 studies.
Perception of consistency made the minority more
influential.
Majority group members often reluctant to join
deviant minority position because did not want to
be thought of as deviant.
More likely to privately than publically admit being
influenced.
Behavioural styles of influential
minorities:
• Moscovici (1985) identified behavioural styles
which minorities must possess if they are to
exert social influence on majorities:
• Consistency - must be consistent in their
opposition to the majority. Consistency is
recognized as ‘resolution, certainty, clarity of
definition and coherence’
• Not dogmatic – they must not appear
dogmatic by rigidly reiterating the same
arguments. They need to demonstrate a
degree of flexibility
Moscovici’s Conversion Theory
What is Moscovici’s conversion
theory?
Conflict is created when you
come across the attitudes of
the minority if those attitudes
are different to your own.
Moscovici’s Conversion Theory
What is Moscovici’s conversion
theory?
People want to reduce this
conflict and will therefore
consider and evaluate the
attitude carefully against the
majority attitude
Moscovici’s Conversion Theory
What is Moscovici’s conversion
theory?
This is more likely to happen
in cases of minority influence
than in cases of majority
influence because focus is
not on wanting to be like to
minority (as it is with maj.
Infl.) but is instead on the
content of the attitude or
beliefs
Why do people yield to a
minority?
• Consistency – two types
Intra-individual – where a person
maintains a consistent position
over time
Inter-individual – where there is
agreement among members of
the minority group
The snowball effect
The snowball effect (Van Avermaet, 1996)
describes one way in which minorities convert
majorities.
Members of the majority slowly move
towards the minority, and as the minority
grows in size it gradually picks up momentum
so that more and more majority members
convert to the minority opinion.
Eventually the minority grows into a snowball
so large that it becomes the majority.
In-groups and out-groups
In-group is a term used to describe people like
us, and an out-group consists of people that do
not share the same characteristics as us.
Hogg & Vaughan (1998) argue that we are most
likely to be influenced by members of our ingroup than we are by members of an out-group.
An example might be the British government of
the early 1900s who, as it consisted
predominately of upper class male MPs, was more
likely to listen to the message being put forward
by Suffragette women if the Suffragettes were
also upper class.
Behavioural styles of influential
minorities:
• Hogg and Vaughan claim the minority will be
more influential if:
• Acting from principle (not out of selfinterest)
• Have made sacrifices in order to maintain
their position
• Similar to the majority in terms of class, age
and gender
• Advocate views that are consistent with
current social trends
Social cryptoamnesia
• When social change occurs in a society, the
attitude or opinion becomes an integral part of
the society’s culture, and the source of the
minority influence that led to it is generally
forgotten. Very few women who vote in the UK
consciously thank the Suffragettes for the fact
that they can vote, rather women voting is now a
normal and expected part of society. This
forgetting of the source of social change is
called social cryptoamnesia (Perez et al, 1995).
Why do people yield to a minority?
• The dissociation model – Mugny and Perez (1991) and Perez
et al (1995) propose that minority groups influence majority
groups through a process called social cryptoamnesia, meaning
that minority ideas are assimilated into the majority viewpoint
without those in the majority remembering where the ideas
came from.
• In other words, the content and the source become dissociated.
• According to this model, minority ideas are so strongly
associated with their source that to adopt the message risks
assuming the negative identity of the source.
• If, on the other hand, the ideas can be dissociated from their
source, the majority can resist overt identification with an outgroup while still drawing inspiration from their ideas.
• This may be why the conversion effect, generated by minority
groups, is often delayed.
Minority influence for social
change
• Nemeth: minority influence lies in its
ability to stimulate thought so that,
over time, people may be converted,
for good or ill, to new ways of
thinking and behaving.
Practice Exam Questions
1. What is meant by the term minority
influence? (2 marks)
2. Outline the findings of a study that
has investigated minority influence (3
marks)
3. Describe the conclusions of one
study of minority influence (3 marks)
4. Give one criticism of one study of
minority influence (3 marks)