1980
DOI: 10.1016/0022-1031(80)90071-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Majority influence, minority influence and conversion behavior: A replication

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
38
0
2

Year Published

1981
1981
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
8
1
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 58 publications
(43 citation statements)
references
References 5 publications
2
38
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Here the naive subjects do tend to conform and give more 'green' responses in phase 3 when the source is present than in the absence of the source in phase 4 (McNemar test x2=4.17, p<0.05). On the whole, these results are comparable to those obtained in other experiments (Moscovici and Personnaz, 1980;Doms and Van Avermaet, 1980)' where the manifest influence is rather marginal.…”
Section: Manifest Influencesupporting
confidence: 93%
“…Here the naive subjects do tend to conform and give more 'green' responses in phase 3 when the source is present than in the absence of the source in phase 4 (McNemar test x2=4.17, p<0.05). On the whole, these results are comparable to those obtained in other experiments (Moscovici and Personnaz, 1980;Doms and Van Avermaet, 1980)' where the manifest influence is rather marginal.…”
Section: Manifest Influencesupporting
confidence: 93%
“…Indeed two experiments of Doms and Van Avermaet (1980) using the same procedure demonstrated the indirect effect of the minority but also demonstrated an identical effect, even somewhat stronger, of the majority. The authors interpreted this double effect in terms of Upmeyer's (1971) theory according to which subjects presented with contradictory information perform better in a subsequent discrimination task.…”
Section: Direct and Indirect Influencementioning
confidence: 87%
“…These results suggest that minority influence is able to produce a genuine change in perception. However, the results are controversial, and other studies failed to replicate these findings (e.g., Doms & Van Avermaet, 1980;Martin, 1998;Sorrentino, King, & Leo, 1980). In summary, mounting evidence from social psychology suggests that perceptual decision making is influenced by other people's decisions.…”
Section: Neural Correlates Of Social Influence On Decision Making In mentioning
confidence: 93%