Outline and evaluate the role of social influence processes in social change
If an individual is exposed to a persuasive argument under certain conditions, it is possible for them
to alter their own views in order to match the views of the minority. Moscovici referred to this
process as a ‘conversion’, a necessary factor in order for social change to occur.
One part of the process is to draw attention to the issue. The minority is able to bring about social
change by drawing the majority’s attention to the issue in question. If the views contrast with the
views of the majority, it generates a conflict, one of which the majority are driven to reduce. For
example, the suffragettes used educational militant tactics in order to draw attention to the issue
that men possessed the right to vote yet women did not.
Creating a cognitive conflict is also part if the social process. The minority may create a conflict
between the current views of the majority and the contradicting views of the minority. While this
may not necessarily result in a member of the majority leaning towards the minority view, it
encourages the majority to consider the issue more deeply and so generates more attention. For
example, the suffragettes created a conflict by suggesting the controversial notion that women
should be allowed to vote, going against social norms of the time.
Consistency of the minority position is also a key factor in social change. Research into minority
influence has elaborated that the minority are particularly influential when they remain consistent in
their views over time and within the minority group. For example, the suffragettes were consistent in
their argument, expressing their views over several years though political lobbying and protests.
Another factor in social change is the augmentation principle. This refers to the notion that if a
minority communicate the aspect that they are willing to suffer in order to express their beliefs, they
are then seen as more committed. In turn, they are taken more seriously and so their views are
considered more deeply by the majority. For example, the suffragettes were often willing to risk
imprisonment and even death in order to communicate their views. As a result, people began to take
them more seriously and so their influence become more powerful.
The snowball effect is also a part of the social process to bring about social change. Initially, minority
influence has a relatively small influence. However, this soon begins to grow increasingly more
powerful, spreading widely through the majority and so more people consider the issues being
promoted. This occurs until it reaches a ‘tipping point’, at which point it results in a wide-scale social
change. For example, universal suffrage, giving all adult citizens the right to vote, was eventually
accepted by the majority of the population in the UK.
Historical records often oppose the view that minorities, e.g. the suffragettes, are able to bring about
social change. Because humans possess a strong tendency to conform and remain with the majority
position, groups are more likely to uphold the majority view and maintain social norms rather than
engage in social change. Therefore, the influence of a minority is more latent than direct and so
creates the potential for change rather than bringing about actual social change.
The potential for minority influence to influence to prompt social change is somewhat limited as the
minority is often perceived as being ‘deviant’ in the eyes of the majority. And so, members of the
majority may avoid associating themselves with the majority in order to prevent themselves also
being seen as deviant. The views of the minority would then have very little impact as the focus of
the majority would be where the views originated from (i.e. the deviant minority) rather than the
views themselves. In the effort to bring about social change, the minority are faced with both the
challenge of avoiding being seen as deviant and making the people directly embrace their views.
If an individual is exposed to a persuasive argument under certain conditions, it is possible for them
to alter their own views in order to match the views of the minority. Moscovici referred to this
process as a ‘conversion’, a necessary factor in order for social change to occur.
One part of the process is to draw attention to the issue. The minority is able to bring about social
change by drawing the majority’s attention to the issue in question. If the views contrast with the
views of the majority, it generates a conflict, one of which the majority are driven to reduce. For
example, the suffragettes used educational militant tactics in order to draw attention to the issue
that men possessed the right to vote yet women did not.
Creating a cognitive conflict is also part if the social process. The minority may create a conflict
between the current views of the majority and the contradicting views of the minority. While this
may not necessarily result in a member of the majority leaning towards the minority view, it
encourages the majority to consider the issue more deeply and so generates more attention. For
example, the suffragettes created a conflict by suggesting the controversial notion that women
should be allowed to vote, going against social norms of the time.
Consistency of the minority position is also a key factor in social change. Research into minority
influence has elaborated that the minority are particularly influential when they remain consistent in
their views over time and within the minority group. For example, the suffragettes were consistent in
their argument, expressing their views over several years though political lobbying and protests.
Another factor in social change is the augmentation principle. This refers to the notion that if a
minority communicate the aspect that they are willing to suffer in order to express their beliefs, they
are then seen as more committed. In turn, they are taken more seriously and so their views are
considered more deeply by the majority. For example, the suffragettes were often willing to risk
imprisonment and even death in order to communicate their views. As a result, people began to take
them more seriously and so their influence become more powerful.
The snowball effect is also a part of the social process to bring about social change. Initially, minority
influence has a relatively small influence. However, this soon begins to grow increasingly more
powerful, spreading widely through the majority and so more people consider the issues being
promoted. This occurs until it reaches a ‘tipping point’, at which point it results in a wide-scale social
change. For example, universal suffrage, giving all adult citizens the right to vote, was eventually
accepted by the majority of the population in the UK.
Historical records often oppose the view that minorities, e.g. the suffragettes, are able to bring about
social change. Because humans possess a strong tendency to conform and remain with the majority
position, groups are more likely to uphold the majority view and maintain social norms rather than
engage in social change. Therefore, the influence of a minority is more latent than direct and so
creates the potential for change rather than bringing about actual social change.
The potential for minority influence to influence to prompt social change is somewhat limited as the
minority is often perceived as being ‘deviant’ in the eyes of the majority. And so, members of the
majority may avoid associating themselves with the majority in order to prevent themselves also
being seen as deviant. The views of the minority would then have very little impact as the focus of
the majority would be where the views originated from (i.e. the deviant minority) rather than the
views themselves. In the effort to bring about social change, the minority are faced with both the
challenge of avoiding being seen as deviant and making the people directly embrace their views.
