Influencing those who influence us: The role of expertise in the emergence of minority influence

Clarkson, Joshua J.; Dugan, Riley; Crolic, Cammy; Rahinel, Ryan

doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2020.103976

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 50 publications

(60 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Their impact might be less visible at first, changing just the ingroup members' opinions, although it might also affect their behavior in the long term (see Bolderdijk & Jans, 2021). This might be especially relevant when the new norm becomes a trending norm endorsed by the high identifiers; that is, a norm in which the number of ingroup members engaging in a behavior increases (see Mortensen et al, 2017), and when ingroup members are interested in new and innovative norms (see Clarkson et al, 2020). In sum, a minority of high identifiers might become highly influential within the group, changing the norms accepted previously.…”

Section: The Legitimacy Ingroup Norm and High Identifiers' Deviationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dealing with (Legitimized) Inequality: The Role of Ingroup Support to Resist Social Disadvantage

Jiménez-Moya

Rodríguez‐Bailón²,

Spears³

et al. 2022

Psykhe (Santiago)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Socially disadvantaged groups have to deal with diverse negative circumstances. We can expect that high status groups often legitimate and justify these disadvantages. However, when the low status group itself shares this perspective, it is more threatening: How do disadvantaged groups deal with social injustice when the ingroup itself frames it as deserved and legitimate? Previous studies have shown that under this circumstance, those individuals who highly identify with the ingroup reject the legitimacy norm and challenge their views instead by perceiving them as able to overcome and contest the disadvantage by collective means. In this work, we study the effect of a boundary condition, specifically the reliability of the norm of legitimacy. In one experimental study (n = 73), we expect high identifiers to contest the ingroup—as they frame their own disadvantage as legitimate—only if the reliability of the ingroup norm is weak, namely when a small (vs. large) ingroup sample supports it, as the chances to gather support amongst other ingroup members are better. However, when a large ingroup sample endorses the norm, high identifiers will accept this view, as the chances for success are low. We confirmed these hypotheses hinting that although high identifiers are expected to preserve ingroup interests, they might only do that when they can rely on ingroup support. This implies that, even though minorities are crucial to lead social change, the majority ingroup support is necessary in order to approach real changes.

show abstract

Section: The Legitimacy Ingroup Norm and High Identifiers' Deviationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dealing with (Legitimized) Inequality: The Role of Ingroup Support to Resist Social Disadvantage

Jiménez-Moya

Rodríguez‐Bailón²,

Spears³

et al. 2022

Psykhe (Santiago)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Minority social influence and moral decision-making in human–AI interaction: The effects of identity and specialization cues

Yan-ru

Kim

Mou

2022

New Media & Society

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In group decision-making, the behavior of each member is sensitive to the social influence of other majority members. Research on majority influence has shown that multiple non-human agents with anthropomorphic cues can exert normative pressure on a lone human decision-maker. However, how individuals perceive and respond to minority influence exerted by a lone machine is rarely discussed. Hence, a between-subjects experiment was conducted to examine how different minority identity (human vs artificial intelligence [AI]) and specialization (specialist vs generalist) cues influence individuals’ perceptions and behavior in response to moral dilemmas in a joint human–AI group. The results confirmed the significant role of specialization cues in predicting in-group identification, source credibility, and conversion behavior. In addition, the participants perceived the human minority as more credible than the AI minority, which prompted conversion behavior when the minority was labeled as a specialist rather than as a generalist.

show abstract

Influencing those who influence us: The role of expertise in the emergence of minority influence

Cited by 2 publications

References 50 publications

Dealing with (Legitimized) Inequality: The Role of Ingroup Support to Resist Social Disadvantage

Dealing with (Legitimized) Inequality: The Role of Ingroup Support to Resist Social Disadvantage

Minority social influence and moral decision-making in human–AI interaction: The effects of identity and specialization cues

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About