Loudest Voice = Majority Opinion
New research reveals even if only one member of a group repeats their opinion, it is more likely to be seen by others as representative of the whole group.
A group of us are sat around shooting the breeze, talking about this that and everything else besides. Like all British people we always end up with a bit of weather-related chat when the conversation flags. And sure enough, before long, James is complaining about the unseasonably cool and wet weather that we're having at the moment.
"It just flies in the face of all that 'global warming' crapola, right?" says James.
Now, like the others I know a little bad weather in the short-term doesn't disprove a long-term trend. But, for whatever reason, I don't say anything and neither does anyone else.
He goes on: "Doesn't it just make you wonder what's really going on with all these environmental groups telling us we're ruining the planet and all the rest?"
The power of repetition
This is starting to get me going a little - I actually think humans are ruining the environment and causing global warming. Again, though, I'm lazy and only mumble a few words in disagreement. I half think James is just trying to wind us up to get the conversation going. Still, I let it go.
There's no more talk on the subject until much later when I'm with one of the group on his own. We start on about global warming and the environment again. It soon becomes clear that he's been swayed by what James said earlier.
"Well no one really said anything against James and I just thought everyone agreed," he explains. "I thought you guys were all up to date with this sort of thing being scientific types?"
I explained to him that James' opinions probably bore no relation to what the rest of us thought - it's just we hadn't expressed our own opinions. I don't think he believed me, which was annoying. It seemed the simple act of one person expressing their opinion loudly and clearly in a group setting had convinced him we all felt the same way. Unfortunately, knowing that group, I saw nothing could be further from the truth.
Our strange brains
A study published recently in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology examined exactly this situation to test how people judge the distribution of opinion.
The study, carried out by Kimberlee Weaver and colleagues, found we can tell that three different people expressing the same opinion better represents the group than one person expressing the same opinion three times - but not by much.
In fact, if one person in a group repeats the same opinion three times, it has 90% of the effect of three different people in that group expressing the same opinion. When you think about it, that is strange. Indeed, I'm not sure I'd even believe it if I hadn't already read many other psychology studies that point to the illogical and unreasonable ways our minds sometimes work.
Where does this effect come from? The authors argue it comes down to memory. Because repetition increases the accessibility of an opinion, we assume it has a high prevalence. In everyday life we are likely to hear the same opinion many times in different places. We then put all these together to judge the general mood of a group. When one person repeats their opinion, we simply over apply the rule.
Familiarity doesn't breed contempt
The theme of this research is something that has been known and used by advertisers and influencers for decades. Familiarity doesn't breed contempt at all, it breeds attraction. Making your voice heard is the only way to let others know what you think. Otherwise they will think you agree with the loudest person.
Similarly, and more worryingly, when an opinion is repeatedly broadcast at us by the same organisation - think of a particular media conglomerate or an advertiser - we're likely to come to believe it represents the general opinion. That's despite the fact it is analogous to the same person repeating themselves over and over again.
So, next time James spouts off, I'll make a point of speaking up. And make sure I repeat myself. Several times.
Reference
Weaver, K., Garcia, S.M., Schwarz, N., & Miller, D.T. (2007) Inferring the popularity of an opinion from its familiarity: A repetitive voice can sound like a chorus. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(5), 821-833.
Join 18051 readers
- No related posts.
So is this why so many people believe in global warming?
Hehe, no, there is evidence for that, but take for instance how the effect of C0² is blamed for much of all that global warming, while in fact, it is just a single factor. It's teh one that gets most often mentioned, though :)
Why is everyone picking on the "right wing" press ? My impression is that I am being deluged by half baked, selectively presented or just downright misleading information from the media on "global warming", the supposed benefits of a healthy diet and a whole panolply of Politically Correct propaganda on a more or less hourly basis. Most of which is sponsored by some minority group claiming to represent popular opinion when they do no such thing. The Heathrow protestors are a good example, compare their numbers to the number of people using the airport and see who the real minority is.
I'm intersted in the idea that some people have that it's somehow possible to have "unbiased" news - there is no such thing, even if you choose to present all sides of every argument, you can never cover every subject, and the act of selecting what is and is not covered is probably the biggest bias of all.
One of the best broadcast voices I've ever heard belongs to Jeremy Jacobs in the UK.
I don't think it is as simple as it is made out to be in this article. The weight a given opinion carries depends on who promulgates it, their relative status in a group and the issue discussed. I have been privy to many discussions where I have been the loudest, most repetitive voice; but not being one of the dominant members, my opinion did not carry the day. Also the level of conviction conveyed is also an important element. Someone who expresses a flawed or disturbing opinion but impassioned nonetheless, will be given more consideration than a dispassionate and cooly coherent disquisition.
In Russian it is called "overwhelming minority" - a good expression, isn't it?
And...a Russian kids' rhyme in my clumsy translation:
"Doggy barks very loud,
Doggy knows very well -
Whoever is barking the loudest,
Will always be right".
It is even strange, how often psychological research just confirms facts known to ordinary people for millenia.
Very interesting.
Let's not forget that this is about NOT voicing an opinion that is in opposition to what is stated, and that OTHERS then assume that everyone in the group (who collectively did not voice an opposition) is/are therefore in agreement with what was stated.
It's not about influencing someone who has a strong counter-opinion (such as the author), but about the perception of the person who does NOT have a strong opposing opinion.
My guess is that it could be useful for influencing those who are on the fence about something (that is emotionally charged????) or for reinforcing any like-minded bias, even one that may not yet be strong.
I like it, though, and can see that if used ethically and thoughtfully, could be much more effective in influencing others than the attempts at "preaching" that some people seem prone towards.
Give me your money.
Give me your money.
Give me your money.
I was originally not intending to reply to Matt Munro's garbage, but after seeing the blog post I thought that maybe I should. So here goes:
"Why is everyone picking on the `right wing' press ? My impression is that I am being deluged by half baked, selectively presented or just downright misleading information from the media on `global warming', the supposed benefits of a healthy diet [...]"
Well, your "impression" sucks rocks then. Via Nisbet, a recent study has found that 90% of literature disputing global warming (`it doesn't exist', or it exists but we should Do Nothing) comes from conservative think-tanks, and conversely 90% of conservative think-tanks who tackle the global warming issue are disputing it.
And what do you have against a healthy diet?
"Most of which is sponsored by some minority group claiming to represent popular opinion when they do no such thing."
Which, in the case of global warming, will explain why climate inactivists keep comparing themselves to Galileo. Um wait a minute...
Anyway, I keep hearing about this supposed "Vast Worldwide Leftist Global Warmist Conspiracy" so many times, that I decided to investigate into this supposed "conspiracy". And guess what, I found that there's not just one conspiracy theory, but an entire family tree of conspiracy theories, all quite incompatible -- and incomprehensible.
If anyone still has doubts that global warming "skepticism" is full of dumb, just check out the diagram of conspiracy theories and see for yourself.
(And don't even try to claim `we skeptics never promote conspiracy theories'. With the prominent inactivists blaring out so many conspiracy theories with their virtual megaphones, it's a lost cause to even try to deny it.)
-- bi, International Journal of Inactivism
@Anonymous: That was hilarious. That was hilar...nevermind. You get the gist.
This is a scary part of human nature. Living through the last 8 years I saw a this priniciple in action and despite having a graduate psychology degree, I was floored by how effective it was.
This is very important to make people aware of...an important post because of that. Thanks.
It's great to know that my exuberant, animated voice is actually working. I have been complimented in my career as being very persuasive and thought it had to do with having a great debating spirit and actually, I thought the content of my agreement was the winner! I know now know that repeating myself over and over in different words until I felt I had said my piece is what was working in my favor. And, get this...I am not perceived as obnoxious (well, not that often). I speak loudly, confidently, but always make eye contact with everyone in a group, touch people's sleeve whiles speaking and smile a lot, even when saying something that is perceived as negative. Its good to know that this repetitive wrangling definitely works. This was a great article! This was a great article! This was a great article!
I read this article and decided to just repeat everything three times. Then everything I say will be absolute genius. Ha...tried this with my kids and it doesn't work!
that's how or ex prime minister always got of so easily by lying he simply always just repeated his opinions. In fact very obviously by directly repeating the important sentences at least ones. Even tough i always disliked him and therefor most of the time didn't believe him now i know he surely was lying most of the time. well his name is Davíð Oddson