Differential effects of majority and minority influence on argumentation strategies

Social Influence

Volumn 4, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 33-45

  Tomasetto, Carlo ^a   Mucchi Faina, Angelica ^b   Alparone, Francesca Romana ^c   Pagliaro, Stefano ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA   (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PERUGIA   (Italy)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CHIETI   (Italy)

Author keywords

Argumentation; Confirmatory bias; Social influence

Indexed keywords

EID: 57049119696     PISSN: 15534510     EISSN: 15534529     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15534510802257510     Document Type: Article

References (63)

1. Baron, J. (1988) Thinking and deciding, Cambridge University Press, New York
2. Butera, F. and Mugny, G. (1992) Influence minoritaire et falsification [Minority influence and falsification]. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale, 5, pp. 115-132.
3. Butera, F., Mugny, G., Legrenzi, P. and Perez, J. A. (1996) Majority and minority influence, task representation, and inductive reasoning. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, pp. 123-136.
4. Crano, W. D. and Chen, X. (1998) The leniency contract and persistence of majority and minority influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, pp. 1437-1450.
5. Crano, W. D. and Prislin, R. (2006) Attitudes and persuasion. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, pp. 345-374.
6. De Dreu, C. K. W. and De Vries, N. K. (1993) Numerical support, information processing and attitude change. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23, pp. 647-663.
7. De Dreu, C. K. W. and De Vries, N. K. (1996) Differential processing and attitude change following majority and minority arguments. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, pp. 77-90.
8. Ennis, R. H. (1993) Critical thinking assessment. Theory into Practice, 32, pp. 179-186.
9. Erb, H-P. and Bohner, G. (2001) Mere consensus effects in minority and majority influence. Group consensus and minority influence: Implications for innovation, pp. 40-59. Blackwell, Oxford, UK
10. Erb, H-P., Bohner, G., Rank, S. and Einwiller, S. (2002) Processing minority and majority communications: The role of conflict with prior attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, pp. 1172-1182.
11. Felton, M. and Kuhn, D. (2001) The development of argumentative discourse skills. Discourse Processes, 32, pp. 135-153.
12. Ferretti, R. P., MacArthur, C. A. and Dowdy, N. S. (2000) The effects of an elaborated goal on the persuasive writing of students with learning disabilities and their normally achieving peers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, pp. 694-702.
13. Fisher, P., Jonas, E., Frey, D. and Schulz-Hardt, S. (2005) Selective exposure to information: The impact of information limits. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35, pp. 469-492.
14. Hidi, S., Berndorff, D. and Ainley, M. (2002) Children's argument writing, interest and self-efficacy: An intervention. Learning and Instruction, 12, pp. 429-446.
15. Huguet, P., Mugny, G. and Perez, J. A. (1991) Influence sociale et processes de decentration [Social influence and decentering processes]. Bulletin de Psychologie, 45, pp. 155-163.
16. Kahneman, D. (2003) A perspective on judgment and choice. Mapping bounded rationality. American Psychologist, 58, pp. 697-720.
17. Kenworthy, J. B., Hewstone, M., Levine, J. M., Martin, R. and Willis, H. (2008) The phenomenology of minority-majority status: Effects on innovation in argument generation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, pp. 624-636.
18. Kerr, N. L. (2002) When is a minority a minority? Active versus passive minority advocacy and social influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32, pp. 471-483.
19. Klaczynski, P. (2000) Motivated scientific reasoning biases, epistemological beliefs, and theory polarization: A two-process approach to adolescent cognition. Child Development, 71, pp. 1347-1366.
20. Knudson, R. (1992) Analysis of argumentative writing at two grade levels. Journal of Educational Research, 85, pp. 169-179.
21. Kuhn, D. (1991) The skills of argument, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
22. Kuhn, D., Shaw, V. and Felton, M. (1997) Effects of dyadic interaction on argumentive reasoning. Cognition and Instruction, 15, pp. 287-315.
23. Kuhn, D. and Udell, W. (2003) The development of argument skills. Child Development, 74, pp. 1245-1260.
24. Kuhn, D. and Udell, W. (2007) Coordinating own and other perspectives in argument. Thinking & Reasoning, 13, pp. 90-104.
25. Legrenzi, P., Butera, F., Mugny, G. and Perez, J. A. (1991) Majority and minority influence in inductive reasoning: A preliminary study. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21, pp. 359-363.
26. Legrenzi, P., Girotto, V. and Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1993) Focusing in reasoning and decision making. Cognition, 49, pp. 37-66.
27. Leyens, J. P., Dardenne, B., Yzerbyt, V., Scaillet, N. and Snyder, M. (1999) Confirmation and disconfirmation: Their social advantages. European review of social psychology, 10, pp. 199-230. Wiley, Chichester, UK
28. Mackie, D. M. (1987) Systematic and nonsystematic processing of majority and minority persuasive communications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, pp. 41-52.
29. Mackie, D. M. and Hunter, S. B. (1999) Majority and minority influence: The interactions of social identity and social cognition mediators. Social identity and social cognition, pp. 332-353. Blackwell, Oxford, UK
30. Maggi, J., Butera, F., Legrenzi, P. and Mugny, G. (1998) Relevance of information and social influence in the pseudodiagnosticity bias. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 57, pp. 188-199.
31. Martin, R. and Hewstone, M. (2003) Social-influence processes of control and change: Conformity, obedience to authority, and innovation. The Sage handbook of social psychology, pp. 347-366. Sage, London
32. Martin, R. and Hewstone, M. (2003) Majority and minority influence: When, not whether, source status instigates heuristic or systematic processing. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, pp. 313-330.
33. Martin, R., Hewstone, M. and Martin, P. Y. (2007) 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, 33, pp. 43-56.
34. Mason, L. and Scirica, F. (2006) Prediction of students' argumentation skills about controversial topics by epistemological understanding. Learning and Instruction, 16, pp. 492-509.
35. Means, M. L. and Voss, J. F. (1996) Who reason well? Two studies of informal reasoning among children of different grade, ability, and knowledge levels. Cognition and Instruction, 14, pp. 139-178.
36. Meyers, R. A., Brashers, D. E. and Hanner, J. (2000) Majority-minority influence: Identifying argumentative patterns and predicting argument-outcome links. Journal of Communication, 50, pp. 3-30.
37. Mosconi, G. (1990) Discorso e pensiero [Discourse and thinking], Il Mulino, Bologna
38. Moscovici, S. (1980) Toward a theory of conversion behavior. In L. Berkowitz, (Ed.). Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 13, pp. 209-239.
39. Mucchi-Faina, A. and Cicoletti, G. (2006) Divergence vs. ambivalence: Effects of personal relevance on minority influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36, pp. 91-104.
40. Mucchi-Faina, A. and Pagliaro, S. (2008) Minority influence: The effects of ambivalence towards the source. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, pp. 612-623.
41. Mucchi-Faina, A., Maass, A. and Volpato, C. (1991) Social influence: The case of originality. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21, pp. 183-197.
42. Mugny, G., Butera, F., Sanchez-Mazas, M. and Perez, J. A. (1995) Judgments in conflict: The conflict elaboration theory of social influence. Perception, evaluation, interpretation, pp. 160-168. Huber, Berne
43. Nemeth, C. J. (1986) Differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psychological Review, 93, pp. 23-32.
44. Nemeth, C. J. and Rogers, J. (1996) Dissent and the search for information. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, pp. 67-76.
45. Nemeth, C. J. and Wachtler, J. (1983) Creative problem solving as a result of majority versus minority influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 13, pp. 45-55.
46. Nussbaum, M. E. and Kardash, C. A. (2005) The effects of goal instructions and text on the generation of counterarguments during writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 97, pp. 157-169.
47. Page-Voth, V. and Graham, S. (1999) Effects of goal setting and strategy use on the writing performance and self-efficacy of students with writing and learning problems. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, pp. 230-240.
48. Perkins, D. N., Farady, M. and Bushey, B. (1991) Everyday reasoning and the roots of intelligence. Informal reasoning and education, pp. 83-105. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc, Hillsdale, NJ
49. Petty, R. E., Cacioppo, J. T. and Goldman, R. (1981) Personal involvement as a determinant of argument-based persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41, pp. 847-855.
50. Piolat, A., Roussey, J. Y. and Gombert, A. (1999) Developmental cues of argumentative writing. Foundations of argumentative text processing, pp. 117-135. Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam
51. Pontecorvo, C. and Girardet, H. (1993) Arguing and reasoning in understanding historical topics. Cognition and Instruction, 11, pp. 365-395.
52. Popper, K. R. (1962) Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge, Basic Books, New York
53. Sandoval, W. A. and Millwood, K. A. (2005) The quality of students' use of evidence in written scientific explanations. Cognition and Instruction, 23, pp. 23-55.
54. Shuper, P. A. and Sorrentino, R. M. (2004) Minority versus majority influence and uncertainty orientation: Processing persuasive messages on the basis of situational expectancies. The Journal of Social Psychology, 144, pp. 127-147.
55. Trost, M. R. and Kenrick, D. T. (1994) Ego involvement in the minority influence paradigm: The double-edged sword of minority advocacy. Minority influence, pp. 149-161. Nelson-Hall, Chicago
56. Toulmin, S. E. (1958) The uses of argument, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK
57. van Eemeren, F. H. (2003) A glance behind the scenes: The state of the art in the study of argumentation. Studies in Communication Sciences, 3, pp. 1-23.
58. van Eemeren, F. H., Grootendorst, R., Jackson, S. and Jacobs, S. (1996) Argumentation. Discourse studies: A multidisciplinary introduction: Vol. I. Discourse as structure and process, pp. 208-229. Sage Publications, London
59. Walton, D. N. (1985) Arguer's position: A pragmatic study of ad hominem attacks, criticism, refutation, and fallacy, Greenwood, Westport, CT/ London
60. Wason, P. C. (1960) On the failure to eliminate hypotheses in a conceptual task. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12, pp. 255-274.
61. Wood, W. (2000) Attitude change: Persuasion and social influence. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, pp. 539-570.
62. Wood, W., Lundgren, S., Ouellette, J. A., Busceme, S. and Blackstone, T. (1994) Minority influence: A meta-analytic review of social influence processes. Psychological Bulletin, 115, pp. 323-345.
63. Zuckerman, M., Knee, C. R., Hodgins, H. S. and Miyake, K. (1995) Hypothesis confirmation: The joint effect of positive test strategy and acquiescence response set. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, pp. 52-60.