Expressing deviant opinions: Believing you are in the majority helps

Miller, Dale T.; Morrison, Kimberly Rios

doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2009.04.008

Cited by 43 publications

(57 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is possible, however, that the central deviants were seen by the participants to be different to the rest of the group because of their higher level of group prototypicality (e.g. Miller & Morrison, ) and therefore would have had less of an effect on group morale regardless of whether they expressed deviance. Follow‐up research should investigate further the processes underlying the ability of central deviants to reduce the negative consequences associated with deviance in order to determine more clearly the best position for deviant members to hold in the group.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deviance in group decision making: Group‐member centrality alleviates negative consequences for the group

Rijnbout

McKimmie

2012

Euro J Social Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research on the effects of deviance during group decision making has shown that although it can lead to increased innovation and creativity within the group, group members often dislike the deviant member and rate group morale as lower because of dissent during the decision‐making process. The current study (N = 101) uses an information processing approach to examine the effect of deviance on decision outcomes as well as investigate how the perceived position of group members can influence whether they are given leeway to voice dissent. Results found that deviance can improve group decision making without incurring social costs when a deviant group member occupies a central position within the group. These findings are novel within the field of deviance research yet are consistent with research on group criticism and idiosyncrasy credit and therefore have significant implications for literature on the effect of group deviance and the application of deviance techniques within organisational and educational settings. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deviance in group decision making: Group‐member centrality alleviates negative consequences for the group

Rijnbout

McKimmie

2012

Euro J Social Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…. 10 = 91˜100%; Miller & Morrison, 2009). They then completed similar measures for the standardized-testing issue.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In turn, these media reports can polarize group norms, which strengthen peoples' positions on contested issues (Price, 1989). As people become more certain about their positions (Matthes, Morrison, & Schemer, 2010) and believe that their positions are shared (Miller & Morrison, 2009), they are more willing to publicly express their opinions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Self-Categorization Explanation for Opinion Consensus Perceptions

Zhang

Reid

2013

Hum Commun Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The public expression of opinions (and related communicative activities) hinges upon the perception of opinion consensus. Current explanations for opinion consensus perceptions typically focus on egocentric and other biases, rather than functional cognitions. Using selfcategorization theory we showed that opinion consensus perceptions flow from cognitions regarding the fit between issues and group prototypes. Strong normative fit enhanced perceptions of ingroup opinion consensus (Experiments 1 and 2), and consensus perceptions varied as a function of comparison outgroups (Experiment 3), ingroup prototype salience (Experiment 4), and levels of identity threat (Experiment 5). Self-categorization theory has the potential to integrate a variety of cognitive and motivational processes to provide a comprehensive explanation for opinion consensus perceptions.

show abstract

“…This helps to understand why people remain silent. Miller and Morrison (2009) found that the more the individual believes that his/her opinion differs from that of the majority, the greater the chance that he/she will remain silent. However, as he/she migrates to the perceived norm and feels comfortable, he/she is more likely to express his opinion publicly.…”

Section: Antecedents Of Pluralistic Ignorancementioning

confidence: 99%

Pluralistic ignorance: Conceptual framework, antecedents and consequences

Mendes¹,

López-Valeiras

Lunkes³

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The aim of this paper is to present, in an integrated manner, the knowledge acquired about pluralistic ignorance in the fields of social psychology, sociology and business.Particularly, to identify the factors that work as antecedents of pluralistic ignorance, as well as its consequences, in various research contexts. Design/methodology:This integrative study on pluralistic ignorance was conducted with the Proknow-C method, which allows the construction of knowledge through a structured process of search and identification of a bibliographic portfolio. The systemic analysis resulted in a model with seven social comparison errors that can be seen as antecedents of ignorance and a framework with its consequences, divided into three categories: people's attitude, people's behavior and organizational capabilities.-781-Intangible Capital -https://doi.org/10.3926/ic.1063 Research limitations/implications:As with every research review, identification and review of the literature depend on the authors' world view. One of the difficulties in researching pluralistic ignorance is that it is studied in different areas of knowledge and from different perspectives.Originality/value: The knowledge acquired throughout more than eight decades of research on pluralistic ignorance is fragmented into different perspectives. However, what was shown by the systemic analysis of the literature is that studies are more often geared toward psychosocial issues and it is still not very well known how the causes and consequences of pluralistic ignorance interact with the management processes in the organizational environment. This review presents a model for guiding the process of formation of pluralistic ignorance and a guiding framework for future research, as far as its consequences are concerned.

show abstract

Expressing deviant opinions: Believing you are in the majority helps

Cited by 43 publications

References 26 publications

Deviance in group decision making: Group‐member centrality alleviates negative consequences for the group

Deviance in group decision making: Group‐member centrality alleviates negative consequences for the group

A Self-Categorization Explanation for Opinion Consensus Perceptions

Pluralistic ignorance: Conceptual framework, antecedents and consequences

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About