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 22301 readers
I should definitely try this around in everyday conversation and see if it makes any difference on what people recall after a meeting or discussion.
Thanks for the interesting (as always) post!
FA
You're welcome Francisco.
It's why Fox News viewers are the least knowledgeable about current events. They repeat Bush's lies ad nauseum, and it sticks. Add that Fox News gets the highest viewership of the cable news networks, and you know why things are going so wrong with America now.
I'm not sure I follow your argument, anonymous.
Anyway, an interesting article. I've always been fascinated by how body language of the speaker has an effect on how well people retain ideas and opinions.
Fox news viewers are the most knowledgeable and current on world news.
Fox news viewers are the most knowledgeable and current on world news.
Fox news viewers are the most knowledgeable and current on world news.
CNN, ABC, CBS and MSNBC viewers are biased.
CNN, ABC, CBS and MSNBC viewers are biased.
CNN, ABC, CBS and MSNBC viewers are biased.
Or the infamous
"If it doesn't fit, you must acquit", "If it doesn't fit, you must acquit",
...
How many times was that repeated?
Fox News is... horribly... wrong. And biased. And lying. horribly.. bad.
They should be forced to display a warning: "This show contains fantasy, lies and propaganda. However, we try to dumb you down in an enjoyable way."
Interesting article. Thanks.
PS: I only know Fox from a few internet videos.
"i only know fox from a few internet videos"
you make some pretty vast and general conclusions with little or no support
you even admit to your ignorance of fox news' programming.
i have no problem, nor should anyone else, with your opinion.
But if youre going to make a conclusion, with no premises or evidential or even allegorical support. Then your opinion has no credence.
Wow, so the "Tyranny of the Majority" can really be from a small vocal group. Oh, how we have misnamed things.
Since this effect is related to the availability heuristic, I wonder if crazy (and thus memorable) opinions experience similar biases. If an opinion is crazy enough to be easily remembered do people think it is more popular than it really is?
On a somewhat related note, there could be other effects at work in the news media:
http://www.thadguy.com/comic/on-liberty/156/
This squeaky wheel phenom also supports "Pluralistic ignorance". As described by researchers Hubert O’Gorman and Stephen Garry in Public Opinion Quarterly in 1976: “moral principles with relatively little popular support may exert considerable influence because they are mistakenly thought to represent the views of the majority, while normative imperatives actually favored by the majority may carry less weight because they are erroneously attributed to a minority.”
Clearly this realization has been put to good use:
From http://rantingsbymm.blogspot.com/
In a typical example in March, NBC’s Andrea Mitchell reported that most Americans wanted to pardon Scooter Libby, saying that the polling “indicates that most people think, in fact, that he should be pardoned, Scooter Libby should be pardoned.” In fact, polls showed that only 18 percent then favored a pardon.
Sorry, I should blog this myself ...
Head On! Apply directly to the forehead!
Head On! Apply directly to the forehead!
Head On! Apply directly to the forehead!
Intriguing article. It really helps to have partisans in the comments section demostrating it's validity with the "Faux News Sux" mantra.
Let it go, people. You're brainwashing each other. Get some fresh air.
John, yes the authors of this article mention 'pluralistic ignorance' in their introduction. Bit pejorative for me though!
Everyone, thanks for your comments. I'm interested to see that in both the comments here and those emerging elsewhere, it's the political/media angle that is being picked up on. In particular people are quick to blame the media's repetition of certain messages. But remember that the best way of combating this is to speak up. If you don't agree speak up and exactly the effect described in this article will also work for your point of view.
And before anyone tells me they, as individuals, don't have the power or reach of Fox, CNN, ABC, CBS and MSNBC, remember that all of us here have access to the internet...
I don't think its a good idea to continously repeat yourself to make people believe what you say. That gets annoying, if you want people to pay attention to your message, your best chance is to make what you're saying worth paying attention to.
Although the idea that as a group not voicing your opinion while someone else does can lead to you being perceived as in agreement, the conclusion that repetativeness is useful in meetings etc, would be conteracted by the annoyance people would feel at being told things twice or more,and being treated like children.
Sam, yeah, you're saying it will depend how you repeat something - I'd guess that's going to make a difference. It's a good point for future research.