首页> 外文期刊>Social influence >Motives for social Influence after social change: Are new majorities power hungry?
【24h】

Motives for social Influence after social change: Are new majorities power hungry?

机译:社会变革的动机社会变革后的影响力:新的多数派是否渴望饥饿?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Although much research has investigated different motives for accepting social influence, few studies have examined motives for exerting social influence to achieve the majority position. Among several possible motives for exerting influence, the present research examined the instrumentality motive: seeking majority agreement so that one has more control over group outcomes. Participants attempted to influence five confederates to agree with his or her positions in a mock political campaign. Feedback from the confederates and experimenter manipulated each participant's faction size (majority vs minority), faction stability (stable vs reversed positions), and the power of the majority faction. Analyses confirmed that instrumental motives for seeking majority agreement were predicted by the interaction of these three variables. When groups underwent a reversal in factional size, powerful new majorities reported stronger instrumental motivation than powerless new minorities. These differences did not occur for stable majorities versus stable minorities, or when power was not associated with the majority position. The different motivations of new majorities and new minorities may make such groups ripe for conflict after social change.
机译:尽管有很多研究调查了接受社会影响的不同动机,但很少有研究探讨了发挥社会影响以取得多数地位的动机。在施加影响的几种可能动机中,本研究研究了工具动机:寻求多数同意,以便人们对小组结果有更多的控制权。参与者试图影响五个同盟,以同意他或她在模拟政治运动中的立场。来自同盟和实验者的反馈操纵了每个参与者的派系规模(多数vs少数派),派系稳定性(稳定与颠倒位置)以及多数派的力量。分析证实,寻求多数同意的工具动机是由这三个变量的相互作用预测的。当团体的派系规模发生逆转时,强大的新多数派比没有权力的新少数派报告了更强大的工具动机。对于稳定的多数派与稳定的少数派,或者当权力与多数席位无关时,不会出现这些差异。新的少数群体和新的少数群体的动机不同,可能使这些群体在社会变革后为冲突而成熟。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号