Social influence and persuasion: Recent theoretical developments and integrative attempts

Social Communication

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 191-221

  Erb, Hans Peter ^a   Bohner, Gerd ^b  

^a CHEMNITZ UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Germany)

^b BIELEFELD UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 40749133717     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203837702     Document Type: Chapter

References (96)

1. Allen, V. L., & Wilder, D. A. (1980). Impact of group consensus and social support on stimulus meaning: Mediation of conformity by cognitive restructuring. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 1116–1124.
2. Allport, G. W. (1935). Attitudes. In C. Murchison (Ed.), Handbook of social psychology (pp. 798–844). Worcester, MA: Clark University Press.
3. Alvaro, E. M., & Crano, W. D. (1997). Indirect minority influence: Evidence for leniency in source evaluation and counterargumentation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 949–964.
4. Anderson, J. R., & Bower, G. H. (1973). Human associative memory. Washington, DC: Winston.
5. Asch, S. E. (1956). Studies of independence and conformity: I. A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs, 70, 1–70.
6. 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.
7. Bohner, G., Dykema-Engblade, A., Tindale, R. S., & Meisenhelder, H. (2006). Persuasion by majorities and minorities: Integrating conversion theory and objective consensus explanations. Unpublished manuscript, University of Bielefeld.
8. Bohner, G., Einwiller, S., Erb, H.-P., & Siebler, F. (2003). When small means comfortable: Relations between product attributes in two-sided advertising. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 13, 454–463.
9. Bohner, G., Frank, E., & Erb, H.-P. (1998). Heuristic processing of distinctiveness information in minority and majority influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 855–860.
10. Bohner, G., Moskowitz, G. B., & Chaiken, S. (1995). The interplay of heuristic and systematic processing of social information. European Review of Social Psychology, 6, 33–68.
11. Bohner, G., Ruder, M., & Erb, H.-P. (2002). When expertise backfires: Contrast and assimilation effects in persuasion. British Journal of Social Psychology, 41, 495–519.
12. Bohner, G., & Wänke, M. (2002). Attitudes and attitude change. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
13. Bond, R., & Smith, P. B. (1996). Culture and conformity: A meta-analysis of studies using Asch’s (1952, 1956) line-judging task. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 73–77.
14. Brock, T. C., & Brannon, L. A. (1992). Liberalization of commodity theory. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 13, 135–144.
15. Brewer, M. B. (1991). The social self: On being the same and different at the same time. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 475–482.
16. Cacioppo, J. T., & Petty, R. E. (1982). The need for cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 116–131.
17. Chaiken, S. (1987). The heuristic model of persuasion. In M. P. Zanna, J. M. Olson, & C. P. Herman (Eds.), Social influence: The Ontario Symposium (Vol. 5, pp. 3–39). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
18. Chaiken, S., Duckworth, K. L., & Darke, P. (1999). When parsimony fails… Psychological Inquiry, 10, 118–123.
19. Chaiken, S., Giner-Sorolla, R., & Chen, S. (1996). Beyond accuracy: Defense and impression motives in heuristic and systematic 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.
20. Chaiken, S., Liberman, A., & Eagly, A. H. (1989). Heuristic and systematic processing within and beyond the persuasion context. In J. S. Uleman & J. A. Bargh (Eds.), Unintended thought (pp. 212–252). New York: Guilford.
21. Chaiken, S., & Maheswaran, D. (1994). Heuristic processing can bias systematic processing: Effects of source credibility, argument ambiguity, and task importance on attitude judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 460–473.
22. Chen, S., & Chaiken, S. (1999). The heuristic-systematic model in its broader context. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psychology (pp. 73–96). New York: Guilford.
23. Cialdini, R. B. (1994). Influence: Science and practice (3rd ed.), New York: Harper Collins.
24. Cialdini, R. B. (2004). Social influence: Compliance and conformity. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591–621.
25. Crano, W. (2001). Social influence, social identity, and ingroup leniency. In N. K. De Vries & C. K. W. De Dreu (Eds.), Group consensus and minority influence: Implications for innovation (pp. 122–143). Oxford: Blackwell.
26. 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.
27. 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 minority influence: Implications for innovation (pp. 91–121). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
28. Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational influences upon individual judgement. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 629–636.
29. De Vries, N. K., De Dreu, C. K. W., Gordijn, E., & Schuurman, M. (1996). Majority and minority influence: A dual role interpretation. European Review of Social Psychology, 7, 145–172.
30. Ditto, P. H., & Jemmott, J. B. III (1989). From rarity to evaluative extremity: Effects of prevalence information on evaluations of positive and negative characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 16–26.
31. Dunning, D. (1999). A newer look: Motivated social cognition and the schematic representation of social concepts. Psychological Inquiry, 10, 1–11.
32. Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
33. Erb, H.-P., Bioy, A., & Hilton, D. J. (2002). Choice preferences without inferences: Subconscious priming of risk attitudes. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 15, 251–262.
34. Erb, H.-P., & Bohner, G. (2001). Mere consensus effects in minority and majority influence. In N. K. De Vries & C. K. W. De Dreu (Eds.) Group consensus and minority influence: Implications for innovation (pp. 40–59). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
35. Erb, H.-P., & Bohner, G. (in press). Consensus as the key: Towards parsimony in explaining minority and majority influence. In R. Martin & M. Hewstone (Eds.), Minority influence and innovation: Antecedents, processes, and consequences. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
36. Erb, H.-P., Bohner, G., Hilton, D. J., Krings, L., & Büscher, M. (under review). Conditions of minority influence: The risk-loving option. University of Bonn.
37. Erb, H.-P., Bohner, G., Rank, S., & Einwiller, S. (2002). Processing minority and majority communications: The role of conflict with prior attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1172–1182.
38. 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.
39. Erb, H.-P., Kruglanski, A. W., Chun, W. Y., Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., & Spiegel, S. (2003). Searching for commonalities in human judgment: The Parametric unimodel and its dual-model alternatives. European Review of Social Psychology, 14, 1–47.
40. Erb, H.-P., Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., Spiegel, S., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2005). Biased Processing of Persuasive Information: On the Functional Equivalence of Cues and Message Arguments. Manuscript submitted for publication. University of Bonn.
41. Festinger, L. (1950). Informal social communication. Psychological Review, 57, 271–282.
42. Greenwald, A. G., Banaji, M. R., Rudman, L. A., Farnham, S. D., Nosek, B. A., & Mellott, D. S. (2002). A unified theory of implicit attitudes, stereotypes, self-esteem, and self-concept. Psychological Review, 109, 3–25.
43. Hardin, C. D., & Higgins E. T. (1996). Shared reality: How social verification makes the subjective objective. In R. M. Sorentio & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of motivation and cognition (Vol. 3, pp. 28–84). New York: Guilford.
44. Hovland, C. I., Janis, I. L., & Kelley, H. H. (1953). Communication and persuasion: Psychological studies of opinion change. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
45. Imhoff, R., & Erb, H.-P. (under review). What makes minorities attractive: The case of deindividuation. University of Bonn.
46. Jarvis, W. B. G., & Petty, R. E. (1996). The need to evaluate. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 172–194.
47. Jones, E. E., & Gerard, H. B. (1967). Foundations of Social Psychology. New York: Wiley.
48. Kelley, H. H. (1967). Attribution theory in social psychology. In D. Devine (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (pp. 192–238). Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
49. Kruglanski, A. W. (1989). Lay epistemics and human knowledge: Cognitive and motivational bases. New York: Plenum Press.
50. Kruglanski, A. W. (1990). Lay epistemic theory in social cognitive psychology. (Target article for peer commentary). Psychological Inquiry, 1, 181–197.
51. Kruglanski, A. W. (1999). Motivation, cognition, and reality: Three memos for the next generation of research. Psychological Inquiry, 10, 54–58.
52. Kruglanski, A. W., Dechesne, M., Erb, H.-P., Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., & Chun, W. Y. (in press). Modes, systems and the sirens of specificity: The issue in gist. Psychological Inquiry.
53. Kruglanski, A. W., Erb, H.-P., Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., & Chun, W. Y. (in press). On parametric continuities in the world of binary eitherors. Psychological Inquiry.
54. 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: Wiley.
55. Kruglanski, A. W., & Thompson, E. P. (1999). Persuasion by a single route: A view from the unimodel. Psychological Inquiry, 10, 83–109.
56. Kruglanski, A. W., & Webster, D. M. (1996). Motivated closing of the mind: “Seizing” and “freezing”. Psychological Review, 103, 263–283.
57. Kunda, Z. (1990). The case of motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108, 480–498.
58. Kunda, Z., & Sinclair, L. (1999). Motivated reasoning with stereotypes: Activation, application, and inhibition. Psychological Inquiry, 10, 12–22.
59. Latané, B., & Nowak, A. (1994). Attitudes as catastrophes: From dimensions to categories with increasing involvement. In R. R. Vallacher & A. Nowak (Eds.), Dynamical systems in social psychology (pp. 219–249). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
60. Latané, B., & Wolf, S. (1981). The social impact of majorities and minorities. Psychological Review, 88, 438–453.
61. Maass, A., & Clark, R. D. (1984). Hidden impact of minorities: Fifteen years of minority influence research. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 428–450.
62. Mackie, D. M. (1987). Systematic and nonsystematic processing of majority and minority persuasive communications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 41–52.
63. Mackie, D. M., & Hunter, S. B. (1999). Majority and minority influence: The interactions of social identity and social cognition mediators. In D. Abrams & M. A. Hogg (Eds.), Social identity and social cognition (pp. 332–353). Oxford: Blackwell.
64. 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.
65. Martin, R., & Hewstone, M. (2001). 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: Blackwell.
66. Moscovici, S. (1980). Toward a theory of conversion behavior. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 6, pp. 149–202). San Diego: Academic Press.
67. 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.
68. Moskowitz, G. B. (1996). The mediational effects of attributions and information processing in minority social influence. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 47–66.
69. Moskowitz, G. B., & Chaiken, S. (2001). Mediators of minority social influence: Cognitive processing mechanisms revealed through a persuasion paradigm. In N. de Vries & C. de Dreu (Eds.), Group innovation. Fundamental and applied perspectives (pp. 60–90). Oxford, Blackwell.
70. Nemeth, C. (1986). Differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psychological Review, 93, 23–32.
71. Nowak, A., Szamrej, J., & Latané, B. (1990). From private attitude to public opinion: A dynamic theory of social impact. Psychological Review, 97, 362–376.
72. Paicheler, G. (1977). Norms and attitude change: II. Polarization and styles of behavior. European Journal of Social Psychology, 6, 405–427.
73. Peterson, R. S., & Nemeth, C. (1996). Focus versus flexibility: majority and minority influence can both improve performance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 14–23.
74. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986a). Communication and persuasion: Central and peripheral routes to attitude change. New York: Springer.
75. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. T. (1986b). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 123–205). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
76. Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T., & Goldman, R. (1981). Personal involvement as a predictor of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, 847–855.
77. Petty, R. E., Ostrom, T. M., & Brock, T. C. (1981). Historical foundations of the cognitive response approach to attitudes and persuasion. In R. E. Petty, T. M. Ostrom, & T. C. Brock (Eds.), Cognitive responses in persuasion (pp. 5–29). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
78. Petty, R. E., & Wegener, D. T. (1999). The elaboration likelihood model: Current status and controversies. In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual process theories in social psychology (pp. 41–72). New York: Guilford.
79. Petty, R. E., Wheeler, S. C., & Bizer, G. Y. (1999). Is there one persuasion process or more? Lumping versus splitting in attitude change theories. Psychological Inquiry, 10, 156–163.
80. Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., Erb, H.-P., Spiegel, S., & Kruglanski, A. W. (2005). Informational length and order of presentation as determinants of persuasion. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 458–469.
81. Pierro, A., Mannetti, L., Kruglanski, 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.
82. Pool, G. J., Wood, W., & Leck, L. (1998). The self-esteem motive in social influence: Agreement with. valued minorities and disagreement with derogated minorities. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 967–975.
83. Prislin, R., & Wood, W. (2005). Social Influence: The role of social consensus in attitudes and attitude change. In D. Albarracín, B. T. Johnson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.), The handbook of attitudes and attitude change (pp. 671–706). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
84. Sherif, M. (1935). A study of some social factors in perception. Archieves of Psychology, 27, 1–60.
85. Simon, B., & Hamilton, D. L. (1994). Self-stereotyping and social context: The effects of relative in-group size and in-group status. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66, 699–711.
86. Snyder, C. R., & Fromkin, H. L. (1980). Uniqueness, the human persuit of difference. New York: Plenum Press.
87. Spears, R., Postmes, T., Lea, M., & Watt, S. E. (2001). A SIDE view of Social Influence. In J. P. Forgas & K. D. Williams (Eds.), Social influence: Direct and indirect processes. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
88. Tajfel, H. (1981). Human groups and social categories: Studies in social psychology. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
89. Tajfel, H., & Turner J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.). The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey: Brooks/Cole.
90. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of inter-group behavior. In S. Worchel & L. W. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of Intergroup Relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.
91. Tanford, S., & Penrod, S. (1984). Social influence model: A formal integration of research on majority and minority influence processes. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 189–225.
92. Tetlock, P. E. (1985). Accountability: A social check on the fundamental attribution error. Social Psychology Quarterly, 48, 227–236.
93. Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
94. Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
95. 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.
96. Zimbardo, P. G. (1969). The human choice: Individuation, reason, and order versus deindividuation, impulse, and chaos. In W. J. Arnold, & D. Levine (eds.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (Vol. 17, pp. 237–307). Lincoln, NA: University of Nebraska Press.