When Convergent Thought Improves Performance: Majority Versus Minority Influence

Recent research by Nemeth has suggested that minorities stimulate divergent thought (i.e., consideration of an issue from multiple perspectives) whereas majorities stimulate convergent thought (i.e., a focus on the issue from the perspective of that majority). Results have favored exposure to minority views because, in general divergent thought is conducive to improved performance. The proposition that majorities stimulate convergent thought from their perspective was tested, and it was demonstrated that in some situations majority views improve rather than hinder performance, by means of a task on which convergent thought enhances performance-the Stroop test Shown names of colors printed in inks of other colors, subjects have difficulty ignoring the printed color name. If, as hypothesized, majorities induce convergent thought, then majorities focusing on the color of ink should aid performance. Majorities focusing on the name of the color should hinder performance. Under exposure to minorities focusing on ink and minorities focusing on name, performance should not differ and should fall in between performance in the two majority conditions. The findings offer support for these hypotheses.

[1]  Steven D. Penrod,et al.  Social Influence Model: A formal integration of research on majority and minority influence processes. , 1984 .

[2]  G. S. Klein,et al.  SEMANTIC POWER MEASURED THROUGH THE INTERFERENCE OF WORDS WITH COLOR-NAMING. , 1964, The American journal of psychology.

[3]  Shelly Chaiken,et al.  Attitudes and Attitude Change , 1987 .

[4]  B. Latané,et al.  The Social Impact of Majorities and Minorities. , 1981 .

[5]  S. Fiske,et al.  The Handbook of Social Psychology , 1935 .

[6]  J. McGrath.  Groups: Interaction and Performance , 1984 .

[7]  Anne Maass,et al.  Internalization versus compliance: Differential processes underlying minority influence and conformity , 1983 .

[8]  Anne Maass,et al.  Hidden impact of minorities: Fifteen years of minority influence research. , 1984 .

[9]  C. Nemeth,et al.  Creative problem solving as a result of majority vs minority influence , 1983 .

[10]  Mark R. Lepper,et al.  Perseverance in self-perception and social perception: biased attributional processes in the debriefing paradigm. , 1975, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[11]  C. Nemeth.  Differential contributions of majority and minority influence , 1986 .

[12]  Carol Sherrard,et al.  The power of minorities , 1982 .

[13]  D. Mackie,et al.  Majority and Minority Influence: A Judgmental Process Analysis , 1990 .

[14]  C. Nemeth,et al.  Originality of word associations as a function of majority vs. minority influence. , 1985 .

[15]  Jeffrey W. Sherman,et al.  Exposure to dissent and recall of information. , 1990 .

[16]  J. Stroop.  Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. , 1992 .

[17]  C. Nemeth,et al.  Minority Influence, Divergent Thinking and Detection of Correct Solutions , 1987 .

[18]  G. Keppel.  Data analysis for research designs , 1990 .

[19]  D. Kahneman,et al.  Tests of the automaticity of reading: dilution of Stroop effects by color-irrelevant stimuli. , 1983, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.