Compare and contrast the effect of minority and majority influence on juror decision making (15 marks)

In comparison, minority influence is when one or two people affect the juror’s decision. This could be because of the factors such as age, gender, occupation, status and occupational background. Minority influence is usually based on informational influence, providing the majority with new ideas and information which leads them to re-examine their views. Minority influence involves self acceptance in order to convert the majority by convincing them that the majority views are right.

Moscovici identified four main factors which is important to have an influence over a majority. These are behavioural style, style of thinking, flexibility and identification. In his experiment in (1969), he re-run the Asch’s experiment but only this time in reversed. He got groups of 6 participants with four naïve participants and two stooges. It was a colour perception test with three conditions; first with stooges declaring all slides green, second where two thirds  of the slides where declared  green and the third one with a completely inconsistent  choices. He found that 32 percent conformed only in the first condition. Moscovici believes that it is the consistency of the minority is persuasive. Consistency creates an impression of certainty and confidence. Its uncompromising attitude induces everyone else to take it seriously.

Moreover, Nemeth and Wachtler (1983) applied Moscovici’s study in mock juries. She wanted to see the influence of perceived autonomy and consistency on minority. She asked a group of 5 students to decide on compensation of a victim after hearing the details of their injury. They decided on compensation individually with one juror as a stooge, who would stick to the lowest sum of $3000 compared to a typical compensation of $20 000. The mock jury was then put together in a room with rectangular table and 5 seats. In the experimental condition the confederate chose the seat at the head of the table and everyone else was told to sit at the sides and as a control the experimenter told everyone where to sit. The confederate had more influence in the first condition, persuading the other mock jurors to agree on compensation lower than their earlier decision. This was because the confederate chose his own seat, making him seem autonomous and confident. This supports the findings of Moscovici’s study about minority influence is stronger if minority are consistent to their opinion.

However, due to confidentiality and ethical issues all studies about jurors are based on mock trials which lack ecological validity, therefore it cannot be generalised. Also, because it’s a laboratory experiment, where they try as much as possible to make the atmosphere as close to a real court room, demand characteristics should be considered as it can make the findings unreliable. Nemeth’s study has the advantage of being specific to a jury decision making. Even though, it’s only a mock jury and no actual money is being awarded to an actual victim, which reduces the mundane realism. Nevertheless, it’s more realistic than Moscovici’s study about the colour of spots. In a real jury rooms the jurors typically sit in a long table, her study raises the question whether this seating arrangement might give too much influence to one juror. I think that seating arrangement doesn’t necessarily have direct influence on the jurors. It will have to depend on how big the numbers of jurors are, if it was a long table then the one seating in the head of table might not necessarily affect the jurors seating at the other end of the table. However, I agree that if the minority is consistent with their choices and decision it can impact on the other juror’s decision.

In conclusion, majority influence would have more effect on jurors decision making because there are a larger number of people who have the same opinion, therefore you’d more likely to internalise your views to their views. Minority influence works if the minority can provide information which backs up their opinion and if the other people defect to the minority opinion.