Indirect minority influence: Evidence for leniency in source evaluation and counterargumentation.

Abstract

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.