Beyond conflict and discrepancy: Cognitive bias in minority and majority influence

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

Volumn 24, Issue 6, 1998, Pages 620-633

  Erb, Hans Peter ^a   Bohner, Gerd ^a   Schmälzle, Knut ^a   Rank, Susanne ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0032219994     PISSN: 01461672     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0146167298246006     Document Type: Article

References (53)

1. Asch, S. E. (1956). Studies of independence and conformity: A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs, 70(9), 1-70 (whole No. 416).
2. Axsom, D., Yates, S. M., & Chaiken, S. (1987). Audience response as a heuristic cue in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 30-40.
3. Baker, S. M., & Petty, R. E. (1994). Majority and minority influence: Source-position imbalance as a determinant of message scrutiny. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 5-19.
4. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182.
5. Bohner, G., Chaiken, S., & Hunyadi, P. (1994). The role of mood and message ambiguity in the interplay of heuristic and systematic processing. European Journal of Social Psychology, 24, 207-221.
6. Bohner, G., Moskowitz, G., & Chaiken, S. (1995). The interplay of heuristic and systematic processing of social information. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 33-68). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
7. Chaiken, S., Giner-Sorolla, R., & Chen, S. (1996). Defense and impression motives in heuristic and systematic information processing. In P. M. Gollwitzer & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), The psychology of action: Linking cognition and motivation to behavior (pp. 553-578). New York: Guilford.
8. Chaiken, S., Liberman, A., & Eagly, A. H. (1989). Heuristic and systematic information processing within and beyond the persuasion context In J. S. Uleman & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), Unintended thought (pp. 212-252). New York: Guilford.
9. Chaiken, S., & Maheswaran, D. (1994). Heuristic processing can bias systematic processing: Effects of source credibility, argument ambiguity, and task importance on attitude judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 460-473.
10. Chaiken, S., & Stangor, C. (1987). Attitudes and attitude change. Annual Review of Psychology, 38, 575-630.
11. Cook, T. D. (1969). Competence, counterarguing, and attitude change. Journal of Personality, 37, 342-358.
12. Crano, W. D., & Hannula-Bral, K. A. (1994). Context/categorization model of social influence: Minority and majority influence in the formation of a novel response norm. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 30, 247-276.
13. De Dreu, C., & De Vries, N. (1993). Numerical support, information processing and attitude change. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 647-662.
14. Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
15. Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117-140.
16. Fiske, S. T., & Taylor, S. E. (1991). Social cognition. New York: McGraw-Hill.
17. Greenwald, A. G. (1968). Cognitive learning, cognitive response to persuasion, and attitude change. In A. Greenwald, T. Brock, & T. Ostrom (Eds.), Psychological foundations of attitudes (pp. 148-170). New York: Academic Press.
18. Houston, D. A., & Fazio, R. H. (1989). Biased processing as a function of attitude accessibility: Making objective judgments subjectively. Social Cognition, 7, 51-66.
19. Kruglanski, A. W., & Mackie, D. M. (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). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
20. Levine, J. M. (1989). Reaction to opinion deviance in small groups. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.), Psychology of group influence (2nd ed., pp. 187-231). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
21. Maass, A., & Clark, R. D., III. (1984). Hidden impact of minorities: Fifteen years of minority influence research. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 428-450.
22. Mackie, D. M. (1987). Systematic and nonsystematic processing of majority and minority persuasive communications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 41-52.
23. Macrae, C. N., Milne, A. B., & Bodenhausen, G. V. (1994). Stereotypes as energy saving devices: A peek inside the toolbox. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 37-47.
24. Maheswaran, D., & Chaiken, S. (1991). Promoting systematic processing in low motivation settings: The effect of incongruent information on processing and judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 13-25.
25. Markus, H., & Zajonc, R. B. (1985). The cognitive perspective in social psychology. In G. Linzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (3rd ed., Vol. 1, pp. 137-230). New York: Random House.
26. McGuire, W. J. (1985). Attitudes and attitude change. In G. Linzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (3rd ed., Vol. 2, pp. 233-346). New York: Random House.
27. Moscovici, S. (1980). Toward a theory of conversion behavior. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 13, pp. 209-239). New York: Academic Press.
28. Moscovici, S., & Lage, E. (1976). Studies in social influence. III: Majority vs. minority influence in a group. European Journal of Social Psychology, 6, 149-174.
29. Moscovici, S., Lage, E., & Naffrechoux, M. (1969). Influence of a consistent minority on the responses of a majority in a color perception task. Sociometry, 32, 365-379.
30. Moskowitz, G. B., & Chaiken, S. (1995). Extending the attribution analysis of persuasion to minority influence: The case of multiple plausible causes. Unpublished manuscript, New York University.
31. Mugny, G. (1982). The power of minorities. London: Academic Press.
32. Mugny, G., & Papastamou, S. (1980). When rigidity does not fail: individualization and psychologization resistances to the diffusion of minority innovations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 10, 43-62.
33. Mugny, G., & Pérez, J. A. (1991). The social psychology of minority influence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
34. Nemeth, C. (1986). Differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psychological Review, 93, 23-32.
35. Nemeth, C., & Kwan, J. (1985). Originality of word associations as a function of majority vs. minority influence. Social Psychology Quarterly, 48, 277-282.
36. Nemeth, C., & Kwan, J. L. (1987). Minority influence: Divergent thinking and detection of correct solutions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 17, 788-799.
37. Nemeth, C., Mayseless, O., Sherman, J., & Brown, Y. (1990). Exposure to dissent and recall of information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 429-437.
38. Nemeth, C., Mosier, K., & Chiles, C. (1992). When convergent thought improves perfomance: Majority versus minority influence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 18, 139-144.
39. Nemeth, C., & Wachtler, J. (1973). Consistency and modification of judgement. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 9, 65-79.
40. Nemeth, C., & Wachtler, J. (1983). Creative problem solving as a result of majority vs. minority influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 13, 45-55.
41. Nisbett, R., & Ross, L. (1980). Human inference: Strategies and shortcomings in social judgment. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
42. Peterson, R. S., & Nemeth, C. J. (1996). Focus versus flexibility: Majority and minority influence can both improve performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 14-23.
43. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1981). Issue involvement as a moderator of the effects on attitude of advertising content and context. Advances in Consumer Research, 8, 20-24.
44. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1984). The effects of involvement on responses to argument quantity and quality: Central and peripheral routes to persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 69-81.
45. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer.
46. Rank, S., Bohner, G., Erb, H.-P., & Einwiller, S. (1997). The compatibility hypothesis: A multiple-motive approach to majority and minority persuasion. Unpublished manuscript, University of Mannheim.
47. Ross, L., Greene, D., & House, P. (1977). The "false consensus effect": An ego-centric bias in social perception and attribution processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 13, 279-301.
48. Sherif, M. (1958). Group influences upon the formation of norms and attitudes. In E. E. Maccoby, T. M. Newcomb, & E. L. Hartley (Eds.), Readings in social psychology (pp. 219-232). New York: Henry Holt.
49. Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (1977). Behavioral decision theory. In M. R. Rosenzweig & L. W. Porter (Eds.), Annual review of psychology (Vol. 28, pp. 1-39). Palo Alto, CA: Annual Reviews.
50. Trost, M. R., Maass, A., & Kenrick, D. T. (1992). Minority influence: Personal relevance biases cognitive processes and reverses private acceptance. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 234-254.
51. Volpato, C., Maass, A., Mucchi-Faina, A., & Vitti, E. (1990). Minority influence and social categorization. European Journal of Social Psychology, 20, 119-132.
52. Watts, W. A., & Holt, L. E. (1979). Persistence of opinion change induced under conditions of forewarning and distraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 778-789.
53. Wood, W., Lundgren, S., Ouellette, J. A., Busceme, S., & Blackstone, T. (1994). Minority influence: A meta-analytic review of social influence processes. Psychological Bulletin, 115, 323-345.