Charlan Nemeth argued in 1986 that exposing people to a majority point of view causes them to focus exclusively on that view (convergent thought). Exposure to a minority viewpoint stimulates people to consider an issue from multiple perspectives (divergent thought) -to go beyond what is given by either the majority or the minority. This study supports and extends that cognitive processing hypothesis by demonstrating that (a) minority influence encourages understanding an issue from multiple perspectives and encourages flexible, or integrative, thinking among those perspectives, (b) majority influence can aid performance tasks requiring convergence on one dimension of a two-dimensional task (i.e., the Stroop task), and (c) majority influence can teach multiple perspectives on a problem one at a time but does not encourage flexible thinking among those perspectives. The convergent nature of majority-influenced thought interferes with the ability to use both of the dimensions simultaneously.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Asch, S. E. (1955). Opinions and social pressure. Scientific American, 193, 31-35.
2.
Chaiken, S. (1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 752-766.
3.
Chaiken, S. (1988). The heuristic model of persuasion. In M. P. Zanna, J. M. Olson, & C. P. Herman (Eds.), Social influence: The Ontario Symposium (Vol. 5). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4.
Chaiken, S., & Stangor, C. (1987). Attitude and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology, 38, 575-630.
5.
De Dreu, C. K. W., & De Vries, N. K. (1993). Numerical support, information processing and attitude change. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 647-662.
6.
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117-140.
7.
Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: John Wiley.
8.
Janis, I. (1982). Groupthink: Psychological studies of policy decisions and fiascoes (2nd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
9.
Kahneman, D., & Henik, A. (1981). Perceptual organization and attention. In M. Kubovy & J. R. Pomerantz (Eds.), Perceptual organization. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10.
Kelley, H. H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. In D. Levine (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (Vol. 15, pp. 192-240). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
11.
Keppel, G., & Zedeck, S. (1989). Data analysis for research designs. New York: W. H. Freeman.
12.
Krech, D., Crutchfield, R. S., & Ballachey, E. L. (1962). Individual in society. New York: McGraw-Hill.
13.
Kruglanski, A., & Mackie, D. (1990). Majority and minority influence: A judgmental process analysis. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 229-261). London: Wiley.
14.
Latane, B., & Nida, S. (1980). Social impact theory and group influence: A social engineering perspective. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.), Psychology of group influence. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
15.
Latane, B., & Wolf, S. (1981). The social impact of majorities and minorities. Psychological Review, 88, 439-453.
16.
Levine, J. M., & Moreland, R. L. (1985). Innovation and socialization in small groups. In S. Moscovici, G. Mugny, & E. Van Avermaet (Eds.), Perspectives on minority influence (pp. 143-169). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
17.
Maass, A., & Clark, R. D. III. (1983). Internalization vs. compliance: Differential processes underlying minority influence and conformity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 13, 45-55.
18.
Maass, A., & Clark, R. D. III. (1984). Hidden impact of minorities: Fifteen years of minority influence. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 428-450.
19.
Maass, A., West, S. G., & Cialdini, R. B. (1987). Minority influence and conversion. In C. Hendrick (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology (Vol. 8, pp. 55-79). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
20.
Mackie, D. M. (1987). Systematic and nonsystematic processing of majority and minority persuasive communications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 41-52.
21.
MacLeod, C. M. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 162-203.
22.
McGrath, J. E. (1984). Groups: Interaction and performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
23.
Milgram, S. (1974). Obedience to authority. New York: Harper & Row.
24.
Moscovici, S. (1980). Toward a theory of conversion behavior. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 13, pp. 209-239). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
25.
Moscovici, S. (1985). Social influence and conformity. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 347-412). New York: Random House.
26.
Moscovici, S., Mugny, G., & Van Avermaet, E. (1985). Perspectives on minority influence. New York: Cambridge University Press.
27.
Mucchi-Faina, A., Maass, A., & Volpato, C. (1989). Social influence: The case of originality. Unpublished manuscript, University of Perugia, Italy.
28.
Mugny, G. (1982). The power of minorities. Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
29.
Mugny, G., & Papastamou, S. (1976). Pour une nouvelle approache de l'influence minoritaire: Les determinants psychosociaux des strategies d'influence minoritaires. [Towards a new approach on minority influence: The psycho-social determinants of minority strategies.]Bulletin Psychologie, 30, 573-579.
30.
Nemeth, C. J. (1976, August). A comparison between conformrity and minority influence. Paper presented at the International Congress of Psychology, Paris.
31.
Nemeth, C. J. (1986). Differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psychological Review, 93, 1-10.
32.
Nemeth, C. J., & Kwan, J. (1985). Originality of word associations as a function of majority and minority influence. Social Psychology Quarterly, 48, 277-282.
33.
Nemeth, C. J., & Kwan, J. (1987). Minority influence, divergent thinking and detection of correct solutions. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 17, 788-799.
34.
Nemeth, C. J., Mayseless, O., Sherman, J., & Brown, Y. (1990). Exposure to dissent and recall of information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 429-437.
35.
Nemeth, C. J., Mosier, K., & Chiles, C. (1992). When convergent thought improves performance: Majority versus minority influence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 139-144.
36.
Nemeth, C. J., & Wachtler, J. (1974). Creating the perceptions of consistency and confidence: A necessary condition for minority influence. Sociometry, 37, 529-540.
37.
Nemeth, C. J., & Wachtler, J. (1983). Creative problem solving as a result of majority and minority influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 13, 45-55.
38.
Perez, J., & Mugny, G. (1986). Induction experimentale d'une influence minoritaire indirecte. [Experimental induction of indirect minority influence.]Cahiers de Psychologie Sociale, 32, 15-24.
39.
Personnaz, B. (1981). Study in social influence using the spectrometer method: Dynamics of the phenomena of conversion and covertness in perceptual responses. European Journal of Social Psychology, 11, 431-438.
40.
Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz, Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 123-205). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
41.
Ross, L., Greene, D., & House, P. (1977). The false consensus effect An egocentric bias in social perception. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 279-301.
42.
Stasser, G., Stella, N., Hanna, C., & Colella, A. (1984). The majority effect in jury deliberations: Number of supporters versus number of supporting arguments. Law and Society Review, 8, 115-127.
43.
Tanford, S., & Penrod, S. (1984). Social influence model: A formal integration of research on majority and minority influence. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 189-225.
44.
Tetlock, P. E., Peterson, R. S., & Berry, J. M. (1993). Flattering and unflattering portraits of integratively simple and complex managers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 500-511.
45.
Tetiock, P. E., & Suedfeld, P. (1989). Integrative complexity coding of verbal behavior. In C. Antaki (Ed.), Lay explanation. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
46.
Trost, M. R., Maass, A., & Kenrick, D. (1992). Minority influence: Ego involvement alters cognitive processes and reverses private acceptance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 234-254.
