Minority influence research has focused on the processes through which minority influence can occur (i.e., deep processing) but neglected to test whether minorities actually solicit these processes (i.e., prepare stronger messages). The present research addresses this fundamental gap. We propose that people (i) intuitively grasp the need for the minority to be more prepared than a majority, and (ii) act accordingly. A pilot and five studies ( N = 1584) tested these hypotheses using a debate paradigm. Studies 1–4 demonstrated that participants are generally aware of the asymmetry between majorities and minorities (defined by their representation in the general population rather than numbers involved in the interaction; Study 2). This awareness applied both when participants judged the behavior of others (Studies 1–3) and when personally involved in a debate situation, either imagined (Study 3) or anticipated as real (Study 4). The asymmetrical need to prepare is also manifested in preparatory behavior. Participants reported having prepared more when they expected to defend the minority position (Study 4) and objectively prepared more in a controlled laboratory setting (Study 5). Further, preparatory behavior was partially mediated by awareness of the greater need to prepare (Study 4). We discuss implications for minority influence, persuasion, and collective action research. • Five experimental studies examine how minorities and majorities prepare for a debate. • Majorities are perceived as relying more on ad hominem strategies than minorities. • Minorities are aware they need greater preparation to effectively persuade others. • As a consequence, minorities prepare more to persuade compared to majorities.
Quiamzade et al. (Wed,) studied this question.