1. by:
Ramos, Balio, Delivios & Dy-Rastas

2. • Influence (Introduction/Definition)
• Majority Influence: The Power of the Many
-Influence in the Asch Situation
-Predicting Majority Influence
• Minority Influence: The Power of the Few
-Conversion Theory of Minority Influence
-Predicting Minority Influence
•Consistency and Influence
•Idiosyncrasy Credits
•Diligence of Dissenters
•Decision Rules and Dissent
-Dynamic Social Impact Theory
• Sources of Group Influence
-Informational Influence
-Normative Influence
-Interpersonal Influence
• Application: Understanding Juries
-Jury Dynamics
- Improving Juries
-How effective are juries?

3.  Much of the influence flows from the group to
the individual.
 When the majority of the group’s members
champion a particular view, they may pressure the
few dissenting group members to change for the
sake of the group’s unity.
 However, social influence also flows from the
individual to the group.
 If the group is to meet new challenges and
improve over time, it must recognize and accept
ideas that conflict with the status quo.

4.  Muzafer Sherif – verified that group members modify
their judgments so that they can match those of others
in their groups.
 Theodore Newcomb – in his 1943 study of
Bennington students, showed that members of a group
will gradually take as their own the group’s position on
political and social issues.
 Solomon Asch – most clearly demonstrated the
power of the many to influence the few.

5.  Results of Asch’s Study of Conformity
MEASURE
RESULT (%)
How many members made at
least one error?
76.4
How many times did the average
member conform?
36.8
How many group members
never conformed?
24.0
How many group members
conformed 10 times or more?
11.0
How many individuals made at
least one error when tested
alone?
5.0

6. ALL AGAINST ONE
 Individuals who face the
majority alone, without a
single ally, bear 100% of
the groups’ pressure.
 Gaining a partner,
however, helps one
withstand the pressure
to conform only as long
as the partner remains
supportive.

7.  If the partner reverts back to the majority
position, then subjects do as well.
 The larger the size of the minority coalition, the
smaller the majority’s coalition.
 A partner makes a very embarrassing situation less so.
 Most participants probably realized that if they
dissented, they would make an odd impression on
others.

8.  CONFORMITY ACROSS PEOPLE
 CONFORMITY ACROSS THE SEXES
 CONFORMITY ACROSS CONTEXTS
 CONFORMITY ACROSS THE INTERNET

9.  Cruthfield’s studies of individuals making decisions as
a group but connected only electronically anticipated
the use of computer – based networks to facilitate
group interaction.
 SOCIAL IDENTITY MODEL OF
DEINDIVIDUALIZATION (SIDE)

10. Conversion Theory of Minority Influence
 influence through validation process
“MINORITIES tend to produce profound
and lasting changes in attitudes and
perceptions that generalize to new
settings over time…”

11.  Consistency and Influence
-A consistent minority is an influential one
 Idiosyncrasy Credits
-Positive impressions of a person held by
others, whether defined in the narrower terms
of a small face-to-face group or a larger
social entity (Edwin Hollander,1971)
 Diligence of Dissenters
-Lies on minorities argumentation
 Decision Rules and Dissent

12. 1. Consolidation
2. Clustering
3. Correlation
4. Continuing diversity

13.  Informational Influence
 Group members use responses of others in the group as
reference points and informational resources
 Ciandini’s Principle of Social Proof
 People assume that a behavior is the correct one when they
see others performing it
SOCIAL COMPARISON
- assumes that group members as active information
processors, evaluate the accuracy of their beliefs and gauge the
quality of their personal attributes by comparing themselves to
others.
DUAL PROCESS APPROACHES
1. Direct Processes – systematic (thoughtful analysis, elaboration
of issues)
2. Indirect Processes – heuristic (do not acquire very much mental
effort)

14.  NORMATIVE INFLUENCE
-Causes members to feel, think, and act in ways that
are consistent with the group’s norms
-Generates conformity in a range of everyday situations
Dissonance Theory
- focused on how people respond when they hold two
inconsistent cognitions

INTERPERSONAL INFLUENCE
- verbal and nonverbal tactics (e.g. complaining,
demanding..)
- Stanley Schachter

15.  Jury Dynamics
 the jury situation is designed to foster careful decision
making and tolerance for all viewpoints, but at its core, jury is
a GROUP
 Jury’s final decisions also depends on SOCIAL INFLUENCE
 Chicago Jury Project (1950s)

one of the first attempts to study systematically how juries carry out
their responsibilities
 Juries Approach to Deliberations
 Verdict-driven

Reaching a decision before deliberation
 Evidence- driven
 Resists making final decision until all available evidences are
reviewed

16.  Minority Influences in Juries
 Minorities are NOT POWERLESS
 They can convince MAJORITY to change (1 trial out of
every 10)
 “hung jury”
 Status and Influence
 Jurors with high status are more dominant and influencial
 High status members also tend to participate more
frequently
 Women and racial minorities joined infrequently in
discussions than men
 Well-educated also prevailed

17.  Jury Effectiveness
 Jurors take their role very seriously
 They do well when compared with judges’ decision
 They are hardly unbiased, rational weighers of evidence
 Jury Size
 Group structure
 Representativeness
 Majority Influence
 Unanimity
 Procedural Innovations
 Voir Dire- “to speak truly”