Asymmetrical social influence in freely interacting groups: A test of three models.

Using freely interacting mock juries, this study tested the predictions of 3 different models of social influence: social impact theory, the other-total ratio, and the social influence model. All 3 models use faction size as the basis for their predictions. On the basis of the predeliberation verdict preferences of 879 female students, groups were composed using all possible nonunanimous verdict compositions (e.g., 5 members for 1 for not guilty, etc.) for 3-, 4-, 5-, and 6-person groups. Each group deliberated and reached a group verdict for an attempted murder case, and postdeliberation verdict and probability-of-guilt judgments were obtained from the individual group members. The results showed that faction size affected the relative amount of both majority and minority influence. However, faction size effects differed substantially depending on the verdict supported by the particular faction. Thus, the predictions of even the most accurate model could presumably be improved by modifications allowing for additional interpersonal factors. Social influence has played a central role in social psychology ever since its beginnings as an area of study (Allen, 1965; Moscovici, 1985). Much of the early work focused almost exclusively on majority influence or conformity (e.g., Asch, 1956; Festinger, 1954;Sherif, 1936). The results of this early research using communication-restricted environments clearly indicated how majorities can influence the opinions and behaviors of minorities. However, more recent research under somewhat similar conditions has demonstrated that minorities can influence majorities (Maass & Clark, 1984; Moscovici, 1976; Nemeth, 1986). The work on majority influence has tended to focus on social comparison processes (Festinger, 1954) and the greater magnitude of both informational and normative pressure that can be brought to bear by a majority, as compared to a minority (Deutsch & Gerard, 1955). Larger subgroups of people both contain more information and have a greater ability to apply negative sanctions to those who deviate from normatively cor