Majority-Minority Influence: Identifying Argumentative Patterns and Predicting Argument-Outcome Links

In this paper, the authors investigate the argument activities of majority and minority factions in small group decision-making situations. We begin by identifying patterns of argument that characterize majority and minority communication in 34 discussions and then test several subgroup-outcome and argument-outcome links. Results indicate that winning and losing subgroups argue differently (as do minority and majority subgroups overall) and that consistency in argument is a strong predictor of subgroup success. Both theoretical and practical implications for subgroup influence in group decision making accrue from these findings.