Systematic and heuristic processing of majority and minority-endorsed messages: The effects of varying outcome relevance and levels of orientation on attitude and message processing

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

Volumn 33, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 43-56

  Martin, Robin ^a,d   Hewstone, Miles ^b   Martin, Pearl Y ^c  

^a ASTON UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF QUEENSLAND   (Australia)

^d ASTON UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Attitude change; Cognitive and motivational tasks; Majority influence; Message elaboration; Minority influence; Social influence

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTITUDE; COGNITION; CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY; ETHNOLOGY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN RELATION; MALE; MINORITY GROUP; MOTIVATION; PERIODICITY; PILOT STUDY; QUESTIONNAIRE;

ADULT; ATTITUDE; COGNITION; CULTURE; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS; MALE; MINORITY GROUPS; MOTIVATION; PERIODICITY; PILOT PROJECTS; QUESTIONNAIRES;

EID: 33845588743     PISSN: 01461672     EISSN: 15527433     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0146167206294251     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. 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.
2. 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.
3. Bohner, G., Frank, S., & Erb, H. P. (1998). Heuristic processing of distinctiveness information in minority and majority influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 855-860.
4. Bohner, G., Moskowitz, G., & Chaiken, S. (1995). The interplay of heuristic and systematic processing of social information. European Review of Social Psychology, 6, 33-68.
5. Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671-684.
6. Crano, W. D., & Alvaro, E. M. (1998). The context/comparison model of social influence: Mechanisms, structure, and linkages that underlie indirect attitude change. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 8, pp. 175-202). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
7. Crano, W. D., & Chen, X. (1998). The leniency contract and persistence of majority and minority influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1437-1450.
8. David, B., & Turner, J. C. (2001). Majority and minority influence: A single process self-categorization analysis. In C. K. W. De Dreu & N. K. De Vries (Eds.), Group consensus and innovation (pp. 91-121). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
9. De Dreu, C. K. W., & De Vries, N. K. (1993). Numerical support, information processing and attitude change. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 647-663.
10. De Dreu, C. K. W., & De Vries, N. K. (1996). Differential processing and attitude change following majority and minority arguments. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 77-90.
11. De Dreu, C. K. W., De Vries, N. K., Gordijn, E., & Schuurman, M. (1999). Convergent and divergent processing of majority and minority arguments: Effects on focal and related attitudes. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 329-348.
12. De Vries, N. K., De Dreu, C. K. W., Gordijn, E., & Schuurman, M. (1996). Majority and minority influence: A dual interpretation. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 7, pp. 145-172). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
13. Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
14. Erb, H. P., Bohner, G., Schmälzle, K., & Rank, S. (1998). Beyond conflict and discrepancy: Cognitive bias in minority and majority influence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24, 620-633.
15. Fleming, M. A., Petty, R. E., & White, P. H. (2005). Stigmatized targets and evaluation: Prejudice as a determinant of attribute scrutiny and polarization. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 496-507.
16. Gardikiotis, A., Martin, R., & Hewstone, M. (2005). Group consensus in social influence: Type of consensus information as a moderator of majority and minority influence. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 1163-1174.
17. Heesacker, M., Petty, R., & Cacioppo, J. (1983). Field dependence and attitude change: Source credibility can alter persuasion by affecting message-relevant thinking. Journal of Personality, 51, 653-666.
18. Kerr, N. (2002). When is a minority a minority? Active vs. passive minority advocacy and social influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 471-484.
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. Maass, A., & Clark, R. D., III (1983). Internalization versus compliance: Differential processes underlying minority influence and conformity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 13, 197-215.
21. Mackie, D. M. (1987). Systematic and nonsystematic processing of majority and minority persuasive communications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 41-52.
22. Martin, P. Y., & Martin, R. (2006). The effects of caffeine consumption on direct and indirect majority and minority influence. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 1961-1979.
23. Martin, R., Gardikiotis, A., & Hewstone, M. (2002). Levels of consensus and majority and minority influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 645-665.
24. Martin, R., & Hewstone, M. (2001a). Conformity and independence in groups: Majorities and minorities. In M. A. Hogg & R. S. Tindale (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology: Vol.1. Group processes (pp. 209-234). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
25. Martin, R., & Hewstone, M. (2001b). Determinants and consequences of cognitive processes in majority and minority influence. In J. Forgas & K. Williams (Eds.), Social influence: Direct and indirect processes (pp. 315-330). Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
26. Martin, R., & Hewstone, M. (2003a). Majority versus minority influence: When, not whether, source status instigates heuristic or systematic processing. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 313-330.
27. Martin, R., & Hewstone, M. (2003b). Social influence processes of control and change: Conformity, obedience to authority, and innovation. In M. A. Hogg & J. Cooper (Eds.), Sage handbook of social psychology (pp. 347-366). London: Sage Ltd.
28. Martin, R., Hewstone, M., & Martin, P. Y. (2003). Resistance to persuasive messages as a function of majority and minority source status. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 585-593.
29. 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.
30. Mugny, G. (1982). The power of minorities. London: Academic Press.
31. Mugny, G., Butera, F., Sanchez-Mazas, M., & Pérez, J. A. (1995). Judgments in conflict: The conflict elaboration theory of social influence. In B. Boothe, R. Hirsig, A. Helminger, B. Meier, & R. Volkart (Eds.), Perception-evaluation-interpretation (pp. 160-168). Göttingen: Hogrefe and Huber.
32. Mugny, G., & Pérez, J. (1991). The social psychology of minority influence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
33. Muller, D., Judd, C. M., & Yzerbyt, V. T. (2005). When moderation is mediated and mediation is moderated. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 852-863.
34. Nemeth, C. (1986). Differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psychological Review, 93, 23-32.
35. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer-Verlag.
36. Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., Strathman, A., & Priester, J. R. (2005). To think or not to think? Exploring two routes to persuasion. In T. C. Brock & M. C. Green (Eds.), Persuasion: Psychological insights and perspectives (2nd ed., pp. 81-116). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
37. Petty, R. E., Fleming, M. A., & White, P. H. (1999). Stigmatized sources and persuasion: Prejudice as a determinant of argument scrutiny. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 19-34.
38. Petty, R. E., & Wegner, D. T. (1998). Attitude change: Multiple roles for persuasion variables. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., pp. 323-390). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
39. Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., Kuglanski, A. W., & Sleeth-Keppler, D. (2004). Relevance override: On the reduced impact of "cues" under high motivation conditions of persuasion studies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 251-264.
40. Sobel, M. E. (1982). Asymptotic intervals for indirect effects in structural equations models. In S. Leinhart (Ed.), Sociological methodology (pp. 290-312). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
41. Tormala, Z. L., & Petty, R. E. (2002). What doesn't kill me makes me stronger: The effects of resisting persuasion on attitude certainty. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1298-1313.
42. 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.
43. White, P. H., & Harkins, S. G. (1994). Race of source effects in the Elaboration Likelihood Model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 790-807.
44. 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.
45. Wood, W., Pool, G. J., Leck, K., & Purvis, D. (1996). Self-definition, defensive processing, and influence: The normative impact of majority and minority groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 1181-1193.