Minority influence

Minority influence (Latin minor " the Minor " ) describes the social influence of a minority to the majority. In politics, the arts and sciences minority influence can bring about progress and innovations.

Numerical and Social Minorities

Minorities can be made between numerical and social minorities.

Numerical minorities belong to the same social category as the majority, but hold a different opinion than this. Politicians ( migration, health policy, for example ) have a different opinion regarding certain issues than the majority of their colleagues, for example, provide a numerical minority dar.

Social minorities have a different opinion than the majority and belong to a different social category than this. Social minorities, for example, homosexuals or religious minorities.

The influence of numerical minorities is stronger than the influence of social minorities. This has been demonstrated in several studies.

Behavioral styles

If the minority her, which differs from the majority 's position consistently and without exception, this causes the majority is uncertain and is willing to give up their position. The influence of the minority is not limited to adjusting behavior, but it also affects deferred judgment processes and thus leads to true freedom of expression and opinion changes. ( Herkner, W. 1996, p 463 ) The latent effect is stronger than the effect shown in behavior. A latent effect is in this context the fact that the majority of members to adapt the minority influence unconsciously their opinion towards the minority opinion. Moscovici, location and Naffrechoux (1969 ) confirm these hypotheses with a color experiment and related follow-up. ( Herkner, W. 1996, p 463 ). The subjects were shown in groups of blue slides; in the groups in which a minority stated consistently that the slide is green ( even though it was clearly blue), named one of the subjects the color of the slides as green.

In a similar experiment by Moscovici and location (1976 ), in which there were three different experimental conditions, it became clear that a consistent difference to the majority opinion of an individual has as little impact on the majority as an inconsistent minority and that a consistent minority exactly has as much impact as an inconsistent majority. A change of opinion on latent level was achieved only when the majority met on a consistent minority. The members of the consistent minority were experienced as judgmental safer, but not competent. ( Herkner, W. 1996, p 465 )

However, a consistent minority can also repel because it conveys a sense of rigidity. In a color experiment by Nemeth, Swedlung and Kanki (1974), " ready to compromise " reached minorities ( in the experiment, there was a consistent approach to the judgment of the majority ) have a greater impact as a " stubborn " consistent minority.

One can distinguish between behavioral style and negotiation style. The style of behavior may be consistent or inconsistent. When consistent behavioral style one takes as opposed to inconsistent behavior style invariably an opinion. The negotiation style can be flexible or rigid. A rigid negotiating style is marked by insisting on an extreme position without concessions. A flexible negotiation style is willing to compromise and moderate than a rigid negotiating style. Not always, but often a consistent, flexible minority was more influential than a consistent - rigid. Rigidity can not effect change in a directly addressed opinion, but to influence related settings. ( Herkner, W. 1996, p 466 )

At high group cohesion ( the whole group ), the influence of minorities on the majority of members greater than at low group cohesion. A high group cohesion is the fact that the members of a group to assess each other positively.

Conversion theory

Moscovici's conversion theory tries to explain why a majority causes only a superficial behavioral adaptation and a minority causes a real change of attitude. According to this theory, the majority opinion raises an interpersonal comparison processes leading to social conflict, which leads to a superficial behavioral adaptation. This is being done without deeper reflection on the substantive issue. The minority opinion would lead to a cognitive conflict that triggers a validation process. This means that you think about it, what position is the right group and developed arguments and counter- arguments regarding the opinion of the minority against each weighs. The stronger the cognitive conflict, the more likely is a change of attitude towards the minority opinion.

For conversion theory standing in contradiction findings

Findings Mackie (1987 ) contradict Moscovici's conversion theory. The conversion theory is that just minority influence triggers a thorough information processing. The results of Mackie show that especially majority opinions are thoroughly processed. In their study, they operationalized variables such as conflict strength and quality of the arguments. The majority is of the opinion that applies most likely a positive identification dar. This leads to a fundamental information processing of the majority opinion. If the same opinion of a minority comes, she finds little attention. Conditions for a thorough information processing are that the recipient has the necessary ability and motivation to process information and the quality of the arguments is large.

Theory Mullens

This theory focuses on differences in the behavior and experience of majority and minority members. The ratio of the size of the sub- group ( minority or majority ), which one does not belong to the group as a whole (Other - Total Ratio ) is the key factor for the expression of self- attention and behavior control in minority and majority members. The theory is that the self-awareness and control of their own behavior of members of minorities increases, the greater the majority compared to the minority. The self-awareness and control of their own behavior by majority members decreases, the smaller the minority compared to the majority. Moreover, it was demonstrated that the willingness to socially desirable behaviors such as conformity and altruism increases in minority population, the smaller the minority relative to the majority and that the willingness to socially undesirable behavior such as laziness and aggressiveness with majority members, the greater the majority in compared to the minority.

Two examples:

Does a minority, consisting for example of five persons, a majority consisting of fifteen persons in the minority members of a higher self-awareness, a more controlled own behavior and a greater willingness to socially desirable behavior is observed, as if the majority of only ten people would be.

Does a majority, for example, consists of twelve persons, to a minority, consisting of four persons, with the majority of members of a lower self- attention, a unkontrollierteres own behavior and a greater willingness to socially undesirable behavior is observed than when the minority of seven people would be.