Originality of word associations as a function of majority vs. minority influence.

The thesis of this paper is that influence processes can stimulate or inhibit originality on the part of individuals. In particular, we hypothesized that exposure to persistent minority views causes subjects to reexamine the issue and to engage in more divergent and original thought. Subjects exposed to persistent majority views should concentrate on the position proposed, converge thinking and be less original. Testing the originality aspect of these propositions, subjects were exposed to either a majority or minority judgment that "blue" stimuli were "green." Subsequent to this manipulation, subjects gave associations to the words "blue" and "green." Findings indicate that subjects in the minority condition gave more associations overall and that these associations were more original, i.e., less statistically frequent, than subjects in the majority condition or the control. There is additional evidence that, after the first association, subjects in the majority condition are even less original than control subjects. Their associations are more conventional, i.e., statistically frequent. Results are discussed in the context of influence processes and creativity as well as the differential impact of majority vs. minority influence.