Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (6)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gardikiotis, A.
Right arrow Articles by Hewstone, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gardikiotis, A.
Right arrow Articles by Hewstone, M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 31, No. 9, 1163-1174 (2005)
DOI: 10.1177/0146167205277807
© 2005 Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

Group Consensus in Social Influence: Type of Consensus Information as a Moderator of Majority and Minority Influence

Antonis Gardikiotis

University of Macedonia, Greece, agardiki{at}uom.gr

Robin Martin

University of Queensland, Australia

Miles Hewstone

University of Oxford, United Kingdom

Three experiments investigated the effect of consensus information on majority and minority influence. Experiment 1 examined the effect of consensus expressed by descriptive adjectives (large vs. small) on social influence. A large source resulted in more influence than a small source, irrespective of source status (majority vs. minority). Experiment 2 showed that large sources affected attitudes heuristically, whereas only a small minority instigated systematic processing of the message. Experiment 3 manipulated the type of consensus information, either in terms of descriptive adjectives (large, small) or percentages (82%, 18%, 52%, 48%). When consensus was expressed in terms of descriptive adjectives, the findings of Experiments 1 and 2 were replicated (large sources were more influential than small sources), but when consensus was expressed in terms of percentages, the majority was more influential than the minority, irrespective of group consensus.

Key Words: minority influence • group consensus


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
Z. L. Tormala, V. L. DeSensi, and R. E. Petty
Resisting Persuasion by Illegitimate Means: A Metacognitive Perspective on Minority Influence
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, March 1, 2007; 33(3): 354 - 367.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Pers Soc Psychol BullHome page
R. Martin, M. Hewstone, and P. Y. Martin
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
Pers Soc Psychol Bull, January 1, 2007; 33(1): 43 - 56.
[Abstract] [PDF]