Minority dissent, attitude change, and group performance

The Science of Social Influence: Advances and Future Progress

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 247-270

  De Dreu, Carsten K W ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF AMSTERDAM   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84919543432     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (101)

1. Aldag, R., & Fuller, S. R. (1993). Beyond fiasco: A reappraisal of the groupthink phenomenon and a new model of group decision processes. Psychological Bulletin, 113, 535-552.
2. Alvaro, E. M., & Crano, W. D. (1997). Indirect minority influence: Evidence for leniency in source evaluation and counter argumentation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 949-964.
3. Amabile, T M., Conti, R., Coon, H., Lazenby, J., & Herron, M. (1996). Assessing the work environment for creativity. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1154-1184.
4. Anderson, N., De Dreu, C. K. W, & Nijstad, B. A. (2004). The routinization of innovation research: A constructively critical review of the state-of-the-science. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 25, 147-174.
5. Asch, S. E. (1956). Studies of independence and conformity: A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 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. Baron, R. S., Kerr, N., & Miller, N. (1993). Group process, group decision, group action. London: Open University Press.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. Brewer, M. B. (1988). A dual process model of impression formation. In R. S. Wyer, Jr., & T K. Srull (Eds.), Advances in social cognition (Vol. 1, pp. 1-36). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
11. Brodbeck, F C., Kerschreiter, R., Mojzisch, A., Frey, D., & Schulz-Hardt, S. (2002). The dissemination of critical unshared information in decision-making groups: The effect of pre-discussion dissent. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 35-56.
12. 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: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
13. Chaiken, S. & Trope, Y. (Eds.). (1999). Dual-process theories in social psychology. New York: Guilford Press.
14. Choi, H.-S., & Levine, J. M. (2004). Minority influence in work teams: The impact of newcomers. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 273-280.
15. Cialdini, R. B. & Trost, M. R. (1998). Social influence: Social norms, conformity and compliance. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske, & G. Lindzey (Eds), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 2), pp. 151-192. New York: McGraw-Hill.
16. Clark, R. D. III, & Maass, A. (1988). Social categorization in minority influence: The case of homosexuality. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 347-364.
17. Crano, W. D. (2001). Social influence, social identity, and ingroup leniency. In C. K. W. De Dreu & N. K. De Vries (Eds.), Group consensus and minority influence: Implications for innovation (pp. 122-143). Oxford: Blackwell.
18. 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.
19. 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.
20. Crano, W D., & Cooper, R. E. (1973). Examination of Newcomb's extension of structural balance theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 27, 344-353.
21. Davis, J. H. (1973). Group decision and social interaction: A theory of social decision schemes. Psychological Review, 80, 97-125.
22. De Dreu, C. K. W (2002). Team innovation and effectiveness: The importance of minority dissent and reflexivity. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 11, 285-298.
23. De Dreu, C. K. W., & De Vries, N. K. (1993). Numerical support, information processing and attitude change. European Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 647-662.
24. 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.
25. De Dreu, C. K. W, & De Vries, N. K. (1997). Minority dissent in organizations. In C. K. W. De Dreu and E. Van de Vliert (Eds.), Using conflict in organizations (pp. 72-86). London: Sage.
26. De Dreu, C. K. W, & De Vries, N. K. (Eds.). (2001). Group consensus and minority influence. Oxford: Blackwell.
27. De Dreu, C. K. W, De Vries, N. K., Franssen, H., & Altink, W (1999). Minority dissent in organizations: Factors influencing willingness to dissent. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 2451-2466.
28. De Dreu, C. K. W., De Vries, N. K., Gordijn, E., & Schuurman, M. K. (1999). Convergent and divergent processing of majority and minority arguments: Effects on focal and related attitudes. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 329-348.
29. De Dreu, C. K. W., & Van Kleef, G. A. (2004). The influence of power on the information search, impression formation, and demands in negotiation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 40, 303-319.
30. De Dreu, C. K. W., & West, M. A. (2001). Minority dissent and team innovation: The importance of participation in decision making. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86, 1191-1201.
31. Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influence upon individual judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 629-636.
32. De Vries, N. K., de Dreu, C. K. W, Gordijn, E., & Schuurman, M. (1996). Majority and minority influence: A dual role interpretation. In W Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (Vol. 7, pp. 145-172). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
33. Dooley, R. S., & Fryxell, G. E. (1999). Attaining decision quality and commitment from dissent: The moderating effects of loyalty and competence in strategic decision-making teams. Academy of Management Journal, 42, 389-402.
34. Eagly, A. H., & Chaiken, S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
35. Erb, H.-P., & Bohner, G. (2001). Mere consensus effects in minority and majority influence. In C. K. W De Dreu & N. K. De Vries (Eds.), Group consensus and minority influence: Implications for innovation (pp. 40-59). Oxford: Blackwell.
36. 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.
37. Gordijn, E., De Vries, N. K., & De Dreu, C. K. W. (2002). Minority influence on focal and related attitudes: Change in size, attributions, and information processing. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1315-1326.
38. Gruenfeld, D. H., Thomas-Hunt, M. C., & Kim, P. H. (1998). Cognitive flexibility, communication strategy, and integrative complexity in groups: Public versus private reactions to majority and minority status. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 202-226.
39. Hackman, J. R., & Morris, C. G. (1975). Group task, group interaction process and group performance effectiveness: A review and proposed integration. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 8, pp. 45-99). New York: Academic Press.
40. Hoffman, L., & Maier, N. (1961). Quality and acceptance of problem solutions by members of homogeneous and heterogeneous groups. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 62, 401-407.
41. Janis, I. L. (1972). Victims of groupthink: A psychological study of foreign-policy decisions andfiascoes. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin.
42. Janis, I. L., & Mann, F. (1977). Decision making. New York: Free Press.
43. Kanter, R. M. (1988). When a thousand flowers bloom: Structural, collective, and social conditions for innovation in organizations. In B. Staw & L. L. Cummings (Eds.), Research in organizational, behavior (Vol. 10, pp. 169-211). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
44. Kerr, N. L. (2001). Is it what one says or how one says it? Style vs. substance from an SDS perspective. In C. K. W De Dreu & N. K. De Vries (Eds.), Group consensus and minority influence: Implications for innovation (pp. 201-228). Oxford: Blackwell.
45. Kerr, N. L., MacCoun, R. J., Hansen, C. H., & Hymes, J. A. (1987). Gaining and losing social support: Momentum in decision-making groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 23, 119-145.
46. 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.
47. Kruglanski, A. W, Thompson, E. P., & Spiegel, S. (1999). Separate or equal? Bimodal notions of persuasion and a single-process "unimodel". In S. Chaiken & Y. Trope (Eds.), Dual-process theories in social psychology (pp. 293-313). New York: Guilford Press.
48. Kruglanski, A. W, & Webster, D. M. (1996). Motivated closing of the mind: "Seizing" and "freezing". Psychological Review, 103, 263-283.
49. Latané, B., & Wolf, S. (1981). The social impact of majorities and minorities. Psychological Review, 88, 438-453.
50. Laughlin, P. R. (1980). Social combination processes of cooperative problem-solving groups on verbal intellective tasks. In M. L. Fishbein (Ed.), Progress in social psychology (Vol. 1). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
51. Laughlin, P. R., & Ellis, A. L. (1986). Demonstrability and social combination processes on mathematical intellective tasks. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 177-189.
52. LePine, J., & Van Dyne, L. (1998). Predicting voice behavior in work groups. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 853-868.
53. Levine, J. M., & Kaarbo, J. (2001). Minority influence in political decision-making groups. In C. K. W De Dreu & N. K. De Vries (Eds.), Group consensus and minority influence: Implications for innovation (pp. 229-257). Oxford: Blackwell.
54. Lorge, I., & Solomon, H. (1955). Two models of group behavior in the solution of eureka-type problems. Psychometrika, 20, 139-148.
55. Maass, A., & Clark, R. D. III (1984). Hidden impact of minorities: Fifteen years of minority influence research. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 428-450.
56. Mackie, D. M. (1987). Systematic and nonsystematic processing of majority and minority persuasive communications. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 41-52.
57. McLeod, P., Baron, R. S., Marti, M. W., & Yoon, K. (1997). The eyes have it: Minority influence in face-to-face and computer-mediated group discussions. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82, 706-718.
58. Martin, R. (1995). Majority and minority influence using the afterimage paradigm: A replication with an unambiguous blue slide. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 373-381.
59. Martin, R. (1998). Majority and minority influence using the afterimage paradigm: A series of attempted replications. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 34, 1-26.
60. Martin, R., & Hewstone, M. (1999). Minority influence and optimal problem solving. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 825-832.
61. Martin, R., & Hewstone, M. (2001). Afterthoughts on afterimages: A review of the afterimage paradigm in majority and minority influence research. In C. K. W De Dreu & N. K. De Vries (Eds.), Group consensus and minority influence: Implications for innovation (pp. 15-39). Oxford: Blackwell.
62. Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 371-378.
63. 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.
64. Moscovici, S. (1985). Social influence and conformity. In G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (3rd ed., pp. 347-412). New York: Random House.
65. Moscovici, S., & Personnaz, B. (1980). Studies in social influence: V Minority influence and conversion behavior in a perceptual task. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16, 270-282.
66. Moscovici, S., & Personnaz, B. (1991). Studies in social influence: VI. Is Lenin orange or red? Imagery and social influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21, 101-118.
67. Mugny, G. (1982). The power of minorities. London: Academic Press.
68. Mugny, G., Kaiser, C., Papastamou, S., & Perez, J. A. (1984). Intergroup relations, identification and social influence. British Journal of Social Psychology, 23, 317-322.
69. Nemeth, C. (1986). Differential contributions of majority and minority influence. Psychological Review, 93, 23-32.
70. Nemeth, C., & Chiles, C. (1988). Modelling courage: the role of dissent in fostering independence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 275-280.
71. Nemeth, C., & Kwan, J. (1987). Minority influence, divergent thinking and detection of correct solutions. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 17, 786-797.
72. Nemeth, C. J., & Staw, B. M. (1989). The tradeoffs of social control and innovation in groups and organizations. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 22, pp. 175-210).
73. Nemeth, C. J., & Wachtler, J. (1983). Creative problem solving as a result of majority vs minority influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 13, 45-55.
74. Pérez, J. A., & Mugny, G. (1987). Paradoxical effects of categorization in minority influence: When being an out-group is an advantage. European Journal of Social Psychology, 17, 157-169.
75. Peterson, R. S., Owens, P. D., Tetlock, P. E., Fan, E. T., & Martorana, P. (1998). Group dynamics in top management teams: Groupthink, vigilance, and alternative models of organizational failure and success. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 73, 272-305.
76. Petty, R. E., & Cacioppo, J. (1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 123-205). New York: Academic Press.
77. Pratkanis, A. R., Greenwald, A. G., Leippe, M. R., & Baumgardner, M. H. (1988). In search of reliable persuasion effects: III. The sleeper effect is dead: Long live the sleeper effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 203-218.
78. Scholten, L., Van Knippenberg, D., Nijstad, B. A., & De Dreu, C. K. W (in press). Motivated information processing and group decision making: Effects of process accountability and information dissemination. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, in press.
79. Schweiger, D. M., Sandberg, W. R., & Ragan, J. W (1986). Group approaches for improving strategic decision making: A comparative analysis of dialectical inquiry, devil's advocacy, and consensus. Academy of Management Journal, 29, 51-71.
80. Schweiger, D., Sandberg, W., & Rechner, P. (1989). Experimental effects of dialectical inquiry, devil's advocacy, and other consensus approaches to strategic decision making. Academy of Management Journal, 32, 745-772.
81. Schwenk, C. R. (1990). Effects of devil's advocacy and dialectical inquiry on decision making: A meta-analysis. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 47, 161-176.
82. Scott, R. K. (1995). Creative employees: A challenge to managers. Journal of Creative Behavior, 29, 64-71.
83. Smith, E. R., & DeCoster, J. (2000). Dual process models in social and cognitive psychology: Conceptual integration and links to underlying memory systems. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 108-131.
84. Smith, C. M., Tindale, R., & Dugoni, B. L. (1996). Minority and majority influence in freely interacting groups: Qualitative versus quantitative differences. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 137-150.
85. Sorrentino, R. M., King, G., & Leo, G. (1980). The influence of the minority on perception: A note on a possible alternative explanation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16, 293-301.
86. Stasser, G. & Stewart, D. D. (1992). Discovery of hidden profiles by decision-making groups: Solving a problem versus making a judgment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 426-434.
87. Stasser, G., & Titus, W. (1985). Pooling of unshared information in group decision making: Biased information sampling during discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 1467-1478.
88. Stasser, G., & Titus, W (1987). Effects of information load and percentage of shared information on the dissemination of unshared information during group discussion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 81-93.
89. Steiner, I. (1972). Group process and productivity. New York: Academic Press.
90. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. T (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & 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. Turner, M. E., & Pratkanis, A. R. (1997). Mitigating groupthink by stimulating constructive conflict. In C. K. W De Dreu & E. Van de Vliert (Eds.), Using conflict in organizations (pp. 53-71). London: Sage.
93. Van Dyne, L., & Saaverda, R. (1996). A naturalistic minority influence experiment: Effects on divergent thinking, conflict, and originality in work-groups. British Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 151-168.
94. Volpato, C., Maass, A., Mucchi-Faina, A., & Vitti, E. (1990). Minority influence and social categorization. European Journal of Social Psychology, 20, 119-132.
95. West, M. A. (1996). Reflexivity and work group effectiveness: A conceptual integration. In M. A. West (Ed.), Handbook of work group psychology (pp. 555-579). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
96. West, M. A. & Farr, J. L. (1990). Innovation at work. In M. A. West and J. L. Farr (Eds.), Innovation and creativity at work: Psychological and organizational strategies (pp. 3-13). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
97. Williams, K. Y., & O'Reilly, C. A. III (1998). Demography and diversity in organizations: A review of 40 years of research. Research in Organizational. Behavior, 20, 77-140.
98. Winquist, J. R., & Larson, J. R., Jr. (1998). Information pooling: When it impacts group decision making. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 371-377.
99. Wittenbaum, G. M., & Stasser, G. (1996) Management of information in small groups. In J. L. Nye & A. M. Brower (Eds.), What's social about social cognition? Research on socially shared cognition in small groups (pp. 3-28). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
100. 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.
101. Woodman, R. W, Sawyer, J. E., & Griffin, R. W (1993). Toward a theory of organizational creativity. Academy of Management Review, 18, 293-321.