Size Versus Intensity of Majority and Minority Consensus to a Persuasive Message: From the Source of Influence to Its Recipients
This study examines the effects of the evaluation of the majority or minority consensus attributed to a message on the influence the latter can exert, in a between subjects factorial design 2 (consensus status: 'majority' vs 'minority') × 3 (orientation of the consensus evaluatio...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Ubiquity Press
2019-04-01
|
| Series: | International Review of Social Psychology |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.rips-irsp.com/articles/40 |
| _version_ | 1811213803340169216 |
|---|---|
| author | Stamos Papastamou Gerasimos Prodromitis |
| author_facet | Stamos Papastamou Gerasimos Prodromitis |
| author_sort | Stamos Papastamou |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | This study examines the effects of the evaluation of the majority or minority consensus attributed to a message on the influence the latter can exert, in a between subjects factorial design 2 (consensus status: 'majority' vs 'minority') × 3 (orientation of the consensus evaluation: 'non-evaluation, size evaluation, intensity evaluation'). Its innovative aspect consists in its explicit focus on participants’ evaluation of the intensity and size of the support allegedly attributed to the message of the source. The main results show that with regard to direct influence: a) in a non-evaluation condition, the majority consensus tends to be more influential than the minority consensus, whereas in the intensity evaluation condition, the minority consensus is the most influential; b) the impact of minority consensus increases when its intensity is evaluated compared to the non-evaluation condition. Regarding the indirect influence: a) the non-evaluation of the majority consensus favors its impact compared to that obtained by the minority consensus, but b) the evaluation conditions make this difference fade away, by decreasing the influence of majority consensus while increasing that of minority consensus. We discuss the significance and the limitations of these results, which seem to put aside the barriers usually encountered by the sources of influence (diminished direct influence for the minority and restricted indirect influence for the majority). |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-12T05:52:20Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-f109c478f6324930b8ca05dc8edce6a5 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2397-8570 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-12T05:52:20Z |
| publishDate | 2019-04-01 |
| publisher | Ubiquity Press |
| record_format | Article |
| series | International Review of Social Psychology |
| spelling | doaj.art-f109c478f6324930b8ca05dc8edce6a52022-12-22T03:45:17ZengUbiquity PressInternational Review of Social Psychology2397-85702019-04-0132110.5334/irsp.4076Size Versus Intensity of Majority and Minority Consensus to a Persuasive Message: From the Source of Influence to Its RecipientsStamos Papastamou0Gerasimos Prodromitis1Panteion University of Social and Political Sciences, Department of Psychology, AthensPanteion University of Social and Political Sciences, Department of Psychology, AthensThis study examines the effects of the evaluation of the majority or minority consensus attributed to a message on the influence the latter can exert, in a between subjects factorial design 2 (consensus status: 'majority' vs 'minority') × 3 (orientation of the consensus evaluation: 'non-evaluation, size evaluation, intensity evaluation'). Its innovative aspect consists in its explicit focus on participants’ evaluation of the intensity and size of the support allegedly attributed to the message of the source. The main results show that with regard to direct influence: a) in a non-evaluation condition, the majority consensus tends to be more influential than the minority consensus, whereas in the intensity evaluation condition, the minority consensus is the most influential; b) the impact of minority consensus increases when its intensity is evaluated compared to the non-evaluation condition. Regarding the indirect influence: a) the non-evaluation of the majority consensus favors its impact compared to that obtained by the minority consensus, but b) the evaluation conditions make this difference fade away, by decreasing the influence of majority consensus while increasing that of minority consensus. We discuss the significance and the limitations of these results, which seem to put aside the barriers usually encountered by the sources of influence (diminished direct influence for the minority and restricted indirect influence for the majority).https://www.rips-irsp.com/articles/40consensussocial supportsocial influencerecipientsmajorityminority |
| spellingShingle | Stamos Papastamou Gerasimos Prodromitis Size Versus Intensity of Majority and Minority Consensus to a Persuasive Message: From the Source of Influence to Its Recipients International Review of Social Psychology consensus social support social influence recipients majority minority |
| title | Size Versus Intensity of Majority and Minority Consensus to a Persuasive Message: From the Source of Influence to Its Recipients |
| title_full | Size Versus Intensity of Majority and Minority Consensus to a Persuasive Message: From the Source of Influence to Its Recipients |
| title_fullStr | Size Versus Intensity of Majority and Minority Consensus to a Persuasive Message: From the Source of Influence to Its Recipients |
| title_full_unstemmed | Size Versus Intensity of Majority and Minority Consensus to a Persuasive Message: From the Source of Influence to Its Recipients |
| title_short | Size Versus Intensity of Majority and Minority Consensus to a Persuasive Message: From the Source of Influence to Its Recipients |
| title_sort | size versus intensity of majority and minority consensus to a persuasive message from the source of influence to its recipients |
| topic | consensus social support social influence recipients majority minority |
| url | https://www.rips-irsp.com/articles/40 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT stamospapastamou sizeversusintensityofmajorityandminorityconsensustoapersuasivemessagefromthesourceofinfluencetoitsrecipients AT gerasimosprodromitis sizeversusintensityofmajorityandminorityconsensustoapersuasivemessagefromthesourceofinfluencetoitsrecipients |