Preliminary report on Social psychology work related to internet group interaction
Edmond Wollmann
measure the effects of Losing and Gaining Majority Position. This is a
very abbreviated reference to a paper that will be published in a major
social psychological journal soon. This research closely paralells my
perceptions of the effects of group changes either integravely or
disintegratively by changes in agreement/disagreement parameters.
This project is expanding, and will move into a more intense phase in
the fall of 2000. I thought it might be of interest to some of the more
serious professionals I have interacted with over the years on usenet
and who have communicated with me via email regarding these issues.
Data and results will be published at a later date.
Abstract
Two studies examined the effects of stable, partially changed, and
completely changed majority and minority positions within a group on
perception and evaluation of the group. It was hypothesized that loss
of majority position (majority-to-minority change) would have stronger
effects than gain of majority position (minority-to-majority change).
The hypothesized asymmetrical effect was demonstrated in that loss of
majority position decreased perception of group-self similarity, group
attraction, and expectations for positive interactions with the group
whereas a corresponding gain of position did not increase them.
Thus immediately following changes, the group is especially fragile
because disintegrative forces created by the loss of majority position
are stronger than integrative forces created by the gain of majority
position.
From Majority to Minority and Vice Versa: The Asymmetrical Effects of
Losing and Gaining Majority Position Within a Group
There is nothing more constant in social life than change. As
influence exerted in the process of social interaction changes
opinions, norms, and values, it also transforms majorities into
minorities, powerful to powerless, high to low status, and vice versa
(Breakwell & Lyons,1996). Antecedents of change have been well
documented as illustrated by extensive literature on persuasion (e.g.,
Eagly & Chaiken,1993), minority influence (e.g.,
Wood, Lundgren, Ouellette, Busceme, & Blackstone,1994), conformity
(e.g., Cialdini & Trost,1998), and group development (e.g., Levine &
Moreland,1998). Consequences of change, however, have been studied less
extensively as if social psychology implicitly subscribed to the old
adage plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose. In this article, we
theorize and provide empirical evidence for the opposite. Specifically,
we propose that change in majority/minority positions within a group is
more than a mechanical reversal of parties holding differing positions;
rather, change creates internal factions and weakens unifying forces
within the group.
With few exceptions focusing on implicit theories (Ross,1989) and
subjective assessment of personal change (Schwartz, Wanke, &
less,1994), previous research has focused almost exclusively on
reactions to changes in an individual's support for a group
norm or for another individual's position on a controversial issue. It
has been shown that individuals who convert toward a group norm are
liked (Schachter,1951 ) whereas those who deviate From the norm are
disliked, especially if they defect toward the minority position
(Kiesler and Pallak,1975). These in-group defectors ("black sheep") are
judged more harshly than the corresponding out-group deviates (Marques,
Yzerbyt, & Leyens,1988).General disliking for deviates in comparison to
conformers (see Levine,1989 for a review) may,
however, be alleviated when deviates moderate their opposition (Dutton
1973; Sigall,1970).
Reactions to changes in another person's support for one's
position appear dependent on whether one is in the majority or minority
within a group. Levine, Sroka, and Snyder (1977) found that individuals
in the majority were very sensitive to changes in a target
member's support for their opinions. As the target's opposition to
their opinions increased, so did their disliking for the target and
their shifts toward the target's position. In contrast, participants in
the minority condition were less sensitive to changes in the target's
support for their position (see also Clark,1990; Kerr, MacCoun, Hansen,
& Hymes,1987).
These findings suggest that people might be more sensitive to loss
than to gain of social support. Increased sensitivity to loss, however,
was observed within the conformity/deviance (e.g., Schacther,1951) or
group decision-making (e.g., Levine et al., 1977) frameworks that did
not effectively alter majority/minority positions within a group.
As a result, typical reactions examined in previous studies were those
toward changing individual(s) or relevant issues, and not toward the
entire group. Although not unrelated, changes that alter
majority/minority positions differ from an individual member's sliding
away from or toward the group norm. The former change is more profound
in that it redefines social reality within the group. Consequently, it
should affect not only reactions toward the changing member, but more
importantly, reactions toward the entire group within which one's
majority/minority position changes. The present research focused on
changes in position and their effects on reactions toward the group.
Specifically, we examined how changes in social support that
effectively altered an individual's position from majority to minority,
or from minority to majority within a group affected reactions toward
the group within which the change occurred.
Overview
At the beginning of a study that purportedly examined opinion
communication, individual participants in 4-person groups received
support from 2 out of 3 confederates to be placed in an initial
majority position, or were opposed by all 3 confederates to be placed
in an initial minority position. During the course of opinion exchange,
confederates either maintained their initial positions, thereby
creating a consistent (no change) majority (minority) position for
individual participants, or one or two confederates changed their
opinions, thereby creating partial change and complete change of
initial position for individual participants, respectively. At the end
of the opinion communication, participants rated group-self similarity,
group attractiveness, attitudes, and strength of attitudes toward the
communication issue.
Method
Participants and Design. Of the 181 undergraduate students who
participated in the study in partial fulfillment of a course
requirement, 90 were females and 91 were males; 86 were Whites (non-
Hispanics), 38 Hispanics, 34 Asian Americans, 7 African Americans, and
13 were of other racial/ethnic backgrounds. Participants were randomly
assigned to one of the six experimental conditions of the 2 (initial
position: majority vs. minority) x 3 (change: none vs. partial vs.
complete) design.
General Discussion
Our two studies provide strong support for the hypothesis that
reactions to changes in majority position within a group are
asymmetrical. Reactions to a loss of the majority position are intense
and pervasive. Dramatic decreases in perceptions of similarity with the
group and in group attraction, lowered expectations for positive, and
increased expectations for negative interactions with the group all
indicate that losing the majority position triggers disengagement from
the group. In contrast, gaining the majority position does not appear to
alter initial negative reactions toward the group. Becoming the
majority, however, seems to decrease tolerance for dissenting opinions
and increase the importance of a position-defining issue. In short,
changes in majority/minority positions create stronger centrifugal than
centripetal forces within a group as new minorities quickly develop
resentment and new majorities are slow to overcome it. Apparently,
disintegrative processes within a group are much easier to trigger than
integrative processes, making the group fragile and vulnerable to
threats immediately after undergoing structural changes.
--
Edmond H. Wollmann P.M.A.F.A.
© 2000 Altair Publications, SAN 299-5603
http://home.earthlink.net/~arcturian1/
SDSU http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/~wollmann/
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Nikki
humour. Methinks you're a Cancerian or Scorpio. Lighten up. :)
Edmond Wollmann <edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:8eb61l$pna$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
Edmond H. Wollmann
>
> You have a seriously complex mind and a good, though vicious sense of
> humour. Methinks you're a Cancerian or Scorpio. Lighten up. :)
I would be glad to, but any psychologist knows, that if you bind a
person and beat them for 4 years, they will have a difficult time
"lightening up" once the beating has ceased. It make take some
reassurances before the reflexes and defenses go down. Until then, the
abuser cannot cry if they get whooped a couple of times for their
perpetration of the act.
You can view my chart here;
http://astroconsulting.com/FAQs/edmond.htm
Astrological Consulting http://www.astroconsulting.com/
Artworks http://www.astroconsulting.com/personal/
http://www.astroconsulting.com/FAQs/tableof.htm
anonym™
Edmond Heinz Wollmann, convicted in San Diego on 6/28/98 of a
misdemeanor (PC 555- Unlawful Entry), fined, and placed on probation,
sued for Unlawful Detainer and evicted in 3/96, past violator of Federal
and State game laws for abusing wildlife, and remorseless confessed
killer of another human being, and remarkably cowardly yellow bellied
pussy who didn't show up for lunch at PF Chang's even though it was only
five minutes from his place and after he claimed he would meet us there
with a police escort wrote:
>
> Nikki wrote:
> >
> > You have a seriously complex mind and a good, though vicious sense of
> > humour. Methinks you're a Cancerian or Scorpio. Lighten up. :)
>
> I would be glad to, but any psychologist knows, that if you bind a
> person and beat them for 4 years, they will have a difficult time
> "lightening up" once the beating has ceased.
What beating? You said you weren't affected. Now you're beaten? Kewl!
> It make take some
> reassurances before the reflexes and defenses go down.
What reflexes? What defenses?
You said you weren't affected!
Oh, you were LYING! Okay!
> Until then, the
> abuser cannot cry if they get whooped a couple of times for their
> perpetration of the act.
So then why do you cry when whooped, perpetrator?
WHOOP!
--
"I am permanently off usenet as of 7/29/99" - Ed Wollmann, pathological liar
Spamster_<"uce"@ftc.göv>
"Edmond H. Wollmann" wrote:
> Nikki wrote:
> >
> > You have a seriously complex mind and a good, though vicious sense of
> > humour. Methinks you're a Cancerian or Scorpio. Lighten up. :)
>
> I would be glad to, but any psychologist knows, that if you bind a
> person and beat them for 4 years, they will have a difficult time
> "lightening up" once the beating has ceased. It make take some
> reassurances before the reflexes and defenses go down. Until then, the
> abuser cannot cry if they get whooped a couple of times for their
> perpetration of the act.
>
You've been getting whooped?
anonym™
Spamster, uce wrote:
>
> "Edmond H. Wollmann" wrote:
>
> > Nikki wrote:
> > >
> > > You have a seriously complex mind and a good, though vicious sense of
> > > humour. Methinks you're a Cancerian or Scorpio. Lighten up. :)
> >
> > I would be glad to, but any psychologist knows, that if you bind a
> > person and beat them for 4 years, they will have a difficult time
> > "lightening up" once the beating has ceased. It make take some
> > reassurances before the reflexes and defenses go down. Until then, the
> > abuser cannot cry if they get whooped a couple of times for their
> > perpetration of the act.
> >
>
> You've been getting whooped?
That's what we do to perpetrators.
a
Edmond Wollmann <edmond_...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>Of the 181 undergraduate students who
>participated in the study in partial fulfillment of a course
>requirement, 90 were females and 91 were males; 86 were Whites (non-
>Hispanics), 38 Hispanics, 34 Asian Americans, 7 African Americans, and
>13 were of other racial/ethnic backgrounds.
And one was a panty-headed freeloading kook!
Hey, wait a second.
181 participants right?
90 females plus 91 males comes to 181. Okay.
86 Whites
38 Hispanics
34 Asian Americans
7 African Americans
13 other racial/ethnic backgrounds
---
178 Total
So what were the other three? Pleiadian aliens?
--
Favorite Edmond Wollmann moments: www.shore.net/~a/wollmann/faves.html
Widdershins
>
>
>"Edmond H. Wollmann" wrote:
>
>> Nikki wrote:
>> >
>> > You have a seriously complex mind and a good, though vicious sense of
>> > humour. Methinks you're a Cancerian or Scorpio. Lighten up. :)
>>
>> I would be glad to, but any psychologist knows, that if you bind a
>> person and beat them for 4 years, they will have a difficult time
>> "lightening up" once the beating has ceased. It make take some
>> reassurances before the reflexes and defenses go down. Until then, the
>> abuser cannot cry if they get whooped a couple of times for their
>> perpetration of the act.
>>
>
>You've been getting whooped?
>
Oh, yeah. Big time. Scot Doty took him to school, baby.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Widdy
Avital Pilpel
> > 86 Whites
> > 38 Hispanics
> > 34 Asian Americans
> > 7 African Americans
> > 13 other racial/ethnic backgrounds
> >---
> >178 Total
> >
> >So what were the other three? Pleiadian aliens?
>
> Nah, Edmo accidentally signed up three of his sock-puppets.
Reminds me of a headline I once read concerning a census somewhere:
"32,453 of the residents are male, 31,564 female. Nine indiciduals could
not be identified as either."
Avital Pilpel
Teh Te of Poopei
wrote:
If I eber go backe to collige an studee sociall psycholergee agane, I
will habe to rite a scholarlee werk entitleed, "Teh Sociall
Psycholergee of Soc Puppits" by Poopie Pants
Loev,
Poopie Pants
ICEKNIFE
Avital Pilpel wrote in message ...
<words>
hey...
what is a Pilpel?
Florence Accord-Te Vrede
Florence Accord-Te Vrede
I Plural
el...@no.spam
> I have been working in a research project for 3 years designed to
>measure the effects of Losing and Gaining Majority Position.
Sure you have. <yawn>
el...@no.spam
Edmond H. Wollmann <arctu...@netscape.net> wrote:
>but any psychologist knows,
Are you now claiming to be a psychologist?