MinorityMinority InfluenceInfluence

Creativity and ConversionCreativity and Conversion

September 26, 2006September 26, 2006

The Power of the MajorityThe Power of the Majority

Moscovici reversed the Asch experiment and Moscovici reversed the Asch experiment and found that minorities can also have influence.found that minorities can also have influence.When faced with a consistent minority, 10% of When faced with a consistent minority, 10% of

subjects reported seeing what the minority saw.subjects reported seeing what the minority saw.

Major QuestionMajor Question: Is majority influence more : Is majority influence more “powerful” than minority influence?“powerful” than minority influence?

Questions of PowerQuestions of Power

When thinking about this issue people tended When thinking about this issue people tended to focus on the following questions:to focus on the following questions:When a minority is faced with majority pressure…When a minority is faced with majority pressure…Who wins?Who wins?Who is more likely to conform?Who is more likely to conform?How many people will conform to a unanimous How many people will conform to a unanimous

majority as opposed to a consistent minority?majority as opposed to a consistent minority?From this perspective the majority is From this perspective the majority is always always

more powerful.more powerful.

Differentiating Majority from Minority Differentiating Majority from Minority InfluenceInfluence

Two major theories suggesting that minority Two major theories suggesting that minority influence is different and not necessarily influence is different and not necessarily “weaker” than majority influence.“weaker” than majority influence.

(1)(1) Moscovici’s theory of compliance vs. Moscovici’s theory of compliance vs. conversion.conversion.

(2)(2) Nemeth’s theory of convergent-divergent Nemeth’s theory of convergent-divergent thinking.thinking.Both theories go beyond “who wins” to Both theories go beyond “who wins” to consider how people think.consider how people think.

A Theory of ConversionA Theory of Conversion

Obeying versus believingObeying versus believingWhen people conform to group pressure:When people conform to group pressure:

Is attitude change always genuine? Recall the Asch Is attitude change always genuine? Recall the Asch studies.studies.

How can we know if people really changed How can we know if people really changed their mind?their mind?Can we just ask them or is it more complicated?Can we just ask them or is it more complicated?These problems led Moscovici to distinguish These problems led Moscovici to distinguish

between between compliancecompliance and and conversionconversion..

Toward A Theory of ConversionToward A Theory of Conversion

Moscovici developed his theory by making a Moscovici developed his theory by making a series of assumptions:series of assumptions:(1). Majorities and minorities both exert (1). Majorities and minorities both exert

influence. influence.(2). All attempts at influence create a conflict.(2). All attempts at influence create a conflict.(3). Both the majority and the minority can (3). Both the majority and the minority can

create this conflict.create this conflict.(4). People resolve this conflict by taking the (4). People resolve this conflict by taking the

path of least resistance (which differs depending path of least resistance (which differs depending on whether the source is a majority or minority).on whether the source is a majority or minority).

Path to compliancePath to compliance

In response to majority (Moscovici p. 216):In response to majority (Moscovici p. 216):“…“…the best way to lessen this tension is to the best way to lessen this tension is to change one’s response in the public realm; change one’s response in the public realm; modifying them in the private realm would modifying them in the private realm would amount to losing one’s self determination.”amount to losing one’s self determination.”

All things being equal, it is easier to go along All things being equal, it is easier to go along with the majority and so we do so even if we with the majority and so we do so even if we privately disagree.privately disagree.

Path To ConversionPath To Conversion

If a person decides the minority view is correct:If a person decides the minority view is correct:“…“…the only path for resolving the conflict lies in the only path for resolving the conflict lies in the private sphere, since it is very difficult to make the private sphere, since it is very difficult to make direct concession or to change judgments in the direct concession or to change judgments in the public sphere.”public sphere.”

People may convert to the minority view but often People may convert to the minority view but often not publicly.not publicly.

If a person moves from the majority to minority If a person moves from the majority to minority then you can generally assume that such movement then you can generally assume that such movement is genuine.is genuine.

SummarySummary

Minority influence more often occurs in Minority influence more often occurs in private but not in public.private but not in public.

Moscovici calls private influence “latent”Moscovici calls private influence “latent”

In contrast,In contrast,Majority influence more often occurs in public but Majority influence more often occurs in public but

not in private.not in private.

Conclusion: Minority influence is not Conclusion: Minority influence is not necessarily “weak” just different.necessarily “weak” just different.

Empirical EvidenceEmpirical Evidence

Prediction: People will go along with the Prediction: People will go along with the majority in majority in publicpublic, but they may be influenced , but they may be influenced by the minority at a by the minority at a private/latentprivate/latent level. level.

Method: Subjects looked at blue slidesMethod: Subjects looked at blue slidesFaced with majorityFaced with majority: Confederate said slides were : Confederate said slides were

green and experimenter said that most people green and experimenter said that most people would would agreeagree..

Faced with minorityFaced with minority: Confederate said slides were : Confederate said slides were green and experimenter said that most people green and experimenter said that most people would would disagreedisagree..

Afterimage Example

Afterimage PhenomenonAfterimage Phenomenon

Afterimage examples: View a flash of light, Afterimage examples: View a flash of light, headlights from an approaching car, briefly headlights from an approaching car, briefly look at the sun.look at the sun.

KEY POINTKEY POINT::Each color has a complimentary afterimage.Each color has a complimentary afterimage.ExampleExample: If you stare at blue and then stare at : If you stare at blue and then stare at

a white screen it will look yellow-orange.a white screen it will look yellow-orange.

Method (cont)Method (cont)

Write down: (1) The color of the slideWrite down: (1) The color of the slide (2) The color of the afterimage(2) The color of the afterimage

Afterimage: Blue = yellow-orange afterimageAfterimage: Blue = yellow-orange afterimage Green = red-purple after Green = red-purple after

image.image.

ExampleExample: The slide was BLUE and the after : The slide was BLUE and the after image was yellow-orange. image was yellow-orange.

ResultsResults

Only 5% of the subjects said the slide was Only 5% of the subjects said the slide was green when it was actually blue. green when it was actually blue.

Very little PUBLIC conformity was observed.Very little PUBLIC conformity was observed.

Subjects reported seeing the after-image Subjects reported seeing the after-image associated with green when they were exposed associated with green when they were exposed to a to a minorityminority saying the slide was green. saying the slide was green.

Example: Slide was blue, and after image was Example: Slide was blue, and after image was red-purple (colors associated with green not red-purple (colors associated with green not blue) blue)

Direct versus Indirect InfluenceDirect versus Indirect Influence

Experiment demonstrated that people were Experiment demonstrated that people were influenced at a private, subconscious level and influenced at a private, subconscious level and not at a public, overt level.not at a public, overt level.

Social influence is more pervasive than a Social influence is more pervasive than a simple dichotomy between conforming and simple dichotomy between conforming and yielding.yielding.

Influence can also be indirect (e.g. Over time, Influence can also be indirect (e.g. Over time, on peripheral issues).on peripheral issues).

Further Evidence that Minority Influence Further Evidence that Minority Influence is Different from Majority Influenceis Different from Majority Influence

Nemeth (1986) argues that majority and Nemeth (1986) argues that majority and minority influence can also be distinguished minority influence can also be distinguished by the way they make people think.by the way they make people think.

Nemeth also focused on another outcome that Nemeth also focused on another outcome that is unrelated to who eventually “wins.”is unrelated to who eventually “wins.”

Focus in this theory on Focus in this theory on convergentconvergent versus versus divergentdivergent thinking. thinking.

Convergent versus Divergent ThinkingConvergent versus Divergent Thinking

Divergent thinking: Thinking that moves Divergent thinking: Thinking that moves outward from a problem in many possible outward from a problem in many possible directions.directions.Example: BrainstormingExample: Brainstorming

Convergent thinking: Thinking that proceeds Convergent thinking: Thinking that proceeds toward one single answer.toward one single answer.Example: An arithmetic problem.Example: An arithmetic problem.

Divergent Thinking: IllustrationDivergent Thinking: Illustration

QuestionQuestion: List all the uses for a brick.: List all the uses for a brick. Convergent ThinkingConvergent Thinking: Use the brick to build a bridge, : Use the brick to build a bridge,

to build a house, to build a barbeque, to build a castle to build a house, to build a barbeque, to build a castle in the sky.in the sky. All ideas involve using the brick to build something All ideas involve using the brick to build something

therefore they are all conceptually similar to one another.therefore they are all conceptually similar to one another.

Divergent ThinkingDivergent Thinking: Use the brick to kill someone, to : Use the brick to kill someone, to prop open a door, as a topic of conversation, to cast a prop open a door, as a topic of conversation, to cast a shadow.shadow. Each idea is conceptually different from the last.Each idea is conceptually different from the last.

Dissent Stimulates Divergent ThinkingDissent Stimulates Divergent Thinking

OPTIMAL OPTIMAL AROUSALAROUSAL(1). People experience less arousal when exposed to a minority— (1). People experience less arousal when exposed to a minority—

enough to be motivated but not enough to panic.enough to be motivated but not enough to panic.INCREASED INCREASED CURIOSITYCURIOSITY

(2). When faced with a consistent minority people are (2). When faced with a consistent minority people are motivated to understand their position (How can motivated to understand their position (How can they be so wrong yet so confident?) and in doing they be so wrong yet so confident?) and in doing so, they see an issue from many different so, they see an issue from many different

perspectives. They can’t be right, so I will look for perspectives. They can’t be right, so I will look for alternatives.alternatives.INCREASED INCREASED CONFLICTCONFLICT

(3). Minority opinions are not adopted quickly and the (3). Minority opinions are not adopted quickly and the conflict that ensues will force people to think more conflict that ensues will force people to think more carefully about an issue. carefully about an issue.

Empirical EvidenceEmpirical Evidence

LABORATORY EVIDENCE:LABORATORY EVIDENCE: See Nemeth (1986) for experimental evidence in support of See Nemeth (1986) for experimental evidence in support of

the theory.the theory. Important question of generalizability. Do lab results hold in Important question of generalizability. Do lab results hold in

the real world?the real world?FIELD EVIDENCEFIELD EVIDENCE Study of majority/minority influence in the Supreme Court.Study of majority/minority influence in the Supreme Court. Some theorists argue that open mindedness depends on Some theorists argue that open mindedness depends on ideologyideology. Liberals believed to be more open minded than . Liberals believed to be more open minded than conservatives.conservatives.

Question: Does majority versus minority status matter more Question: Does majority versus minority status matter more than ideology in predicting open mindedness?than ideology in predicting open mindedness?

Minority Influence on the Supreme CourtMinority Influence on the Supreme Court

Studies of political decision making showed that Studies of political decision making showed that conservatives interpret policies in less complex ways conservatives interpret policies in less complex ways than do liberals.than do liberals.

Integrative ComplexityIntegrative Complexity: Viewing an issue in black : Viewing an issue in black and white versus shades of gray. One right answer and white versus shades of gray. One right answer versus many possible right answers (one the one versus many possible right answers (one the one hand, on the other hand).hand, on the other hand).

ProblemProblem: Political ideology was systematically : Political ideology was systematically confounded with status such that conservatives in confounded with status such that conservatives in these studies were also more often in the minority.these studies were also more often in the minority.

Result: Ideology Does Not MatterResult: Ideology Does Not Matter

Content analysis of all supreme court decisions (and Content analysis of all supreme court decisions (and dissenting opinions) from 1953-1990.dissenting opinions) from 1953-1990.

RESULTSRESULTS(1). Dissenting opinions were simple (1). Dissenting opinions were simple

(an indicator of convergent thinking).(an indicator of convergent thinking).(2). Majority opinions were complex (2). Majority opinions were complex (an indicator of divergent thinking).(an indicator of divergent thinking).(3). Once majority/minority status was accounted for (3). Once majority/minority status was accounted for ideology did not have any effectideology did not have any effect. .

Implications of the TheoryImplications of the Theory

Minorities are Minorities are notnot the ones thinking in a the ones thinking in a creative way, instead they are stimulating the creative way, instead they are stimulating the majority to think in a more creative way.majority to think in a more creative way.

Minority dissent Minority dissent even when wrongeven when wrong is of value is of value because it makes a group more creative.because it makes a group more creative.Contrast with “Value in Diversity” hypothesis. Contrast with “Value in Diversity” hypothesis.

Minority viewpoints are not of value because of Minority viewpoints are not of value because of the content of what they have to say but rather the content of what they have to say but rather because of the productive conflict that occurs because of the productive conflict that occurs when you engage them in a debate.when you engage them in a debate.

Practical ApplicationsPractical Applications

Theory has been applied to at least 2 important areas in Theory has been applied to at least 2 important areas in organizations.organizations.

GROUP CREATIVITY:GROUP CREATIVITY: Groups who think divergently are able to generate more novel Groups who think divergently are able to generate more novel

and original ideas and ultimately come up with more creative and original ideas and ultimately come up with more creative solutions. A foundation for understanding innovation.solutions. A foundation for understanding innovation.

GROUP DECISION MAKINGGROUP DECISION MAKING Decision making groups often “rush” toward a premature Decision making groups often “rush” toward a premature

agreement without considering all the available alternatives. agreement without considering all the available alternatives. Therefore, minority influence can improve the quality of Therefore, minority influence can improve the quality of group decision making by leading a group to consider more group decision making by leading a group to consider more alternatives prior to making a decision.alternatives prior to making a decision.

Cloning Dissent: Devil’s AdvocateCloning Dissent: Devil’s Advocate

Clearly organizations should encourage Clearly organizations should encourage dissent, but there are also disadvantages (e.g. dissent, but there are also disadvantages (e.g. cohesion, morale).cohesion, morale).

Can an organization encourage dissent without Can an organization encourage dissent without experiencing any drawbacks? experiencing any drawbacks? (Nemeth, et al, 2001)(Nemeth, et al, 2001)

Devil’s AdvocateDevil’s Advocate: Dissent can be role-played : Dissent can be role-played by asking one person to disagree with a by asking one person to disagree with a proposal.proposal.

Devil’s Advocate ExperimentDevil’s Advocate Experiment

Subjects asked to make a decision about Subjects asked to make a decision about rewarding money in a personal injury case.rewarding money in a personal injury case.

CaseCase: Washing machine repairman who was : Washing machine repairman who was injured on the job. His lost wages and medical injured on the job. His lost wages and medical bills were paid, but he was suing his employer bills were paid, but he was suing his employer for pain and suffering. for pain and suffering.

Award: (1) $1-$75K (2) $75K to 150K up to Award: (1) $1-$75K (2) $75K to 150K up to (8) more than $525K. (8) more than $525K.

Most people would award either (1) or (2).Most people would award either (1) or (2).

ProcedureProcedure

One member of the group was asked to:One member of the group was asked to:Devil’s AdvocateDevil’s Advocate

Play the role of devil’s advocate by taking a Play the role of devil’s advocate by taking a position contrary to the group’s decision. The position contrary to the group’s decision. The entire group knew the person was instructed to entire group knew the person was instructed to take this role.take this role.Authentic DissentAuthentic Dissent

One person was asked to take a position of high One person was asked to take a position of high compensation to the victim without the group compensation to the victim without the group knowing of these instructions.knowing of these instructions.

ResultsResults

Authentic Dissent: Authentic Dissent: People generated more People generated more originaloriginal arguments in favor of arguments in favor of their position that went beyond the information given their position that went beyond the information given and anticipated more and anticipated more counter-argumentscounter-arguments..

Devil’s Advocate:Devil’s Advocate:People generated more arguments in favor of their People generated more arguments in favor of their own position without taking into account other own position without taking into account other perspectives on the issue.perspectives on the issue.

Bottom LineBottom Line: The Devil’s Advocate can actually : The Devil’s Advocate can actually make things worse! make things worse!

RecapitulateRecapitulate

Dissent stimulates the group to think Dissent stimulates the group to think divergently, to be more creative, to make divergently, to be more creative, to make better decisions.better decisions.

These effects are independent of the group’s These effects are independent of the group’s political ideology.political ideology.

Authentic dissent cannot easily be “cloned” Authentic dissent cannot easily be “cloned” using techniques such as the Devil’s Advocate.using techniques such as the Devil’s Advocate.