In-group minorities instigate indirect change because of their distinctiveness, the unexpectedness of their position, and their common identity with their targets. Preliminary study (N = 408) uncovered links among a set of attitudes and revealed participants were unaware of the relationship between some attitudes despite significant correlation and proximity in multidimensional space. Study I (N = 222) advocated a ban of homosexual soldiers attributed to majority, in-group, or out-group minority sources. No direct influence was evident. When credited to an in-group minority, the message influenced attitudes toward gun control, which were linked to the focal beliefs. Relative to other sources, the in-group minority was more positively evaluated, and its message less strongly counterargued (both p <.05). Study 2 (N = 78) reversed direct and indirect attitude objects and replicated these results. Study 3 (N = 66) examined majority influence and revealed direct, but not indirect, majority influence when participants' membership group was threatened.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alvaro et al. (1997) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: