Discuss research into minority influence, refer to factors that will determine how successful
the small group of students will be (16/16)
Research into minority influence has shown that consistency, commitment, and flexibility
are needed to make the majority question their own beliefs on a topic, which leads to
cognitive conflict, and eventually a snowball effect as the minority belief becomes that of
the majority.
Consistency (both diachronic-across time, and synchronic-within the minority) must be
shown to give the majority tome to question their beliefs and show a clear alternative. The
student’s consistency in. their campaign – for a paper free school, that remain the same for
the whole 6 months, for example with no inner arguments of what that means, giving a
clearer campaign.
Commitment is often shown by personal sacrifice (the augmentation principle) which shows
the majority that the minority aren’t acting out of self interest, and instead shows how
passionate they are about the cause. The group of students could demonstrate this by going
paper free at home as well as at schools or doing protests in their own time.
Finally, as unbending consistency can be seen as unbending, a certain degree of flexibility
and compromise is needed to display the minority’s ability to listen and adapt and makes
them seem more reasonable. The small group of students could hold a meeting to hear the
queries of their fellow students, and possibly adapt their ask, or compromise, for example
still using textbooks.
Moscivici et al provides the main research into minority influence, with the blue/green study
on female American undergrads. They found that if a confederate (in the minority)
consistently called an obviously blue slide, green, 8.42% of the participants would conform
to this answer. However, if the confederate was inconsistent, only calling the blue slide
green in some of the trials, this dropped to 1.25% ( a control group without any
confederates had only 0.25% of ‘green slide’). This demonstrates that consistency of
response is a key factor into minority influence.
Unfortunately, as with all research there are some limitations, namely a biased sample of
young female Americans. Other researchers have suggested that women are more
conformist than men, therefore there is a beta bias in attempting to generalise moscivici’s
research to the population as a whole. Furthermore, it was both trivial ( not found in real
world situations) and has no consequences- where aspects of minority influence, such as a
jury in a court, often lacks serious consequences. The lack of mundane realism limits the
ecological validity of Moscivici’s research and so must be considered as limited.
An alternative factor has also been suggested by some psychologists, of identification. They
argue that the majority must identify with the minority in some way for them to have an
influence, as the majority will be more likely to listen to their points of view and opinions.
This is supported by Mass et al’s research which found that a minority group of
heterosexuals were more able to convince a majority group of heterosexuals on gay rights
than if the minority was homosexual, as the majority could identify with them. Therefore
there may be a 4th factor affecting minority influence, and the students may need to
consider how they can identify with the majority. They may have more success because they
are the same age as their peers, for example.
the small group of students will be (16/16)
Research into minority influence has shown that consistency, commitment, and flexibility
are needed to make the majority question their own beliefs on a topic, which leads to
cognitive conflict, and eventually a snowball effect as the minority belief becomes that of
the majority.
Consistency (both diachronic-across time, and synchronic-within the minority) must be
shown to give the majority tome to question their beliefs and show a clear alternative. The
student’s consistency in. their campaign – for a paper free school, that remain the same for
the whole 6 months, for example with no inner arguments of what that means, giving a
clearer campaign.
Commitment is often shown by personal sacrifice (the augmentation principle) which shows
the majority that the minority aren’t acting out of self interest, and instead shows how
passionate they are about the cause. The group of students could demonstrate this by going
paper free at home as well as at schools or doing protests in their own time.
Finally, as unbending consistency can be seen as unbending, a certain degree of flexibility
and compromise is needed to display the minority’s ability to listen and adapt and makes
them seem more reasonable. The small group of students could hold a meeting to hear the
queries of their fellow students, and possibly adapt their ask, or compromise, for example
still using textbooks.
Moscivici et al provides the main research into minority influence, with the blue/green study
on female American undergrads. They found that if a confederate (in the minority)
consistently called an obviously blue slide, green, 8.42% of the participants would conform
to this answer. However, if the confederate was inconsistent, only calling the blue slide
green in some of the trials, this dropped to 1.25% ( a control group without any
confederates had only 0.25% of ‘green slide’). This demonstrates that consistency of
response is a key factor into minority influence.
Unfortunately, as with all research there are some limitations, namely a biased sample of
young female Americans. Other researchers have suggested that women are more
conformist than men, therefore there is a beta bias in attempting to generalise moscivici’s
research to the population as a whole. Furthermore, it was both trivial ( not found in real
world situations) and has no consequences- where aspects of minority influence, such as a
jury in a court, often lacks serious consequences. The lack of mundane realism limits the
ecological validity of Moscivici’s research and so must be considered as limited.
An alternative factor has also been suggested by some psychologists, of identification. They
argue that the majority must identify with the minority in some way for them to have an
influence, as the majority will be more likely to listen to their points of view and opinions.
This is supported by Mass et al’s research which found that a minority group of
heterosexuals were more able to convince a majority group of heterosexuals on gay rights
than if the minority was homosexual, as the majority could identify with them. Therefore
there may be a 4th factor affecting minority influence, and the students may need to
consider how they can identify with the majority. They may have more success because they
are the same age as their peers, for example.
