The Majority/Minority Effect on Product Judgment: Moderation of Involvement and Source Relevance

多數／少數效果對產品判斷的影響：涉入與資訊來源相關性的干擾效果

10.6226/NTURM2013.NOV.R10001

簡怡雯(Yi-Wen Chien)；蕭中強(Chung-Chiang Hsiao)；邱玉葉(Yu-Yeh Chiu)

多數／少數效果 ； 來源相關性 ； 涉入 ； majority/minority effect ； source relevance ； involvement

臺大管理論叢

23卷2期（2013 / 06 / 01）

233 - 261

英文

本文探討多數／少數效果對產品態度的影響，是否會受到涉入程度以及訊息相關性的干擾。我們認為在不同涉入程度之下，多數／少數訊息來源對產品態度的影響能扮演不同角色。在低涉入之下，多數／少數訊息來源被視為一種週邊線索，可以直接影響產品態度；在中涉入之下，多數／少數訊息來源會影響消費者處理產品訊息的程度；在高涉入之下，當多數／少數訊息來源與判斷產品的品質相關時，就會被視為是核心論點之一，並會偏誤對所有核心論點的處理。本文為首先提出整合架構，解釋多數／少數效果在低中高三種涉入程度下以不同機制影響產品判斷的研究。

This study investigates the majority/minority effects on product attitudes with involvement and source relevance as moderators. We posit that the majority/minority source can play different roles affecting product judgments at different involvement levels. It can serve as a peripheral cue directly influencing product attitudes under low involvement; it can alter the processing amount under moderate involvement; finally, it can serve as a central argument and bias processing if it is perceived as relevant to judging the true quality of the target product under high involvement. The current study is the first to provide an integrated framework to explain the different mechanisms by which the majority/minority may influence product judgments under three involvement levels (low, moderate, and high).

1. Areni, C. C.,Ferrell, M. E.,Wilcox, J. B.(2000).The persuasive impact of reported group opinions on individuals low vs. high in need for cognition: Rationalization vs. biased elaboration.Psychology and Marketing,17(10),855-875.
2. Asch, S. E.(1956).Studies of independence and conformity: A minority of one against a unanimous majority.Psychological Monographs: General and Applied,70(9),1-70.
3. Axsom, D.,Yates, S.,Chaiken, S.(1987).Audience response as a heuristic cue in persuasion.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,53(1),30-40.
4. Baker, S. M.,Petty, R. E.(1994).Majority and minority influence: Source-position imbalance as a determinant of message scrutiny.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,67(1),5-19.
5. Biswas, A.,Sherrell, D. L.(1993).The influence of product knowledge and brand name on internal price standards and confidence.Psychology and Marketing,10(1),31-46.
6. Biswas, D.,Biswas, A.,Das, N.(2006).The different effects of celebrity and expert endorsement on consumer risk perceptions: The role of consumer knowledge, perceived congruency, and product technology orientation.Journal of Advertising,35(2),17-31.
7. Bone, P. F.(1995).Word-of-mouth effects on short-term and long-term product judgments.Journal of Business Research,32(3),213-223.
8. Chaiken, S.(1980).Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,39(5),752-756.
9. Chaiken, S.(Ed.),Trope, Y.(Ed.)(1999).Dual process theories in social psychology.New York, NY:Guilford Press.
10. Chaiken, S.,Maheswaran, D.(1994).Heuristic processing can bias systematic processing: Effects of source credibility, argument ambiguity, and task importance on attitude judgment.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,66(3),460-473.
11. Clark, R. D.,Maass, A.(1990).The effects of majority size on minority influence.European Journal of Social Psychology,20(2),99-117.
12. Crano, W. D.,Chen, X.(1998).The leniency contract and persistence of majority and minority influence.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,74(6),1437-1450.
13. Darke, P. R.,Chaiken, S.,Bohner, G.,Einwiller, S.,Erb, H.,Hazlewood, J. D.(1998).Accuracy motivation, consensus information, and the law of large numbers: Effects on attitude judgment in the absence of argumentation.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,24(11),1205-1215.
14. Erb, H. P.,Bohner, G.,Schmälzle, K.,Rank, S.(1998).Beyond conflict and discrepancy: Cognitive bias in minority and majority influence.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,24(6),620-633.
15. Gardikiotis, A.,Martin, R.,Hewstone, M.(2005).Group consensus in social influence: Type of consensus information as a moderator of majority and minority influence.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,31(9),1163-1174.
16. Gilbert, D. T.(Ed.),Fiske, S. T.(Ed.),Lindzey, G.(Ed.)(1998).Handbook of social psychology.New York, NY:McGraw-Hill.
17. Goldsmith, R. E.,Lafferty, B. A.,Newell, S. J.(2000).The impact of corporate credibility and celebrity credibility on consumer reaction to advertisements and brands.Journal of Advertising,29(3),43-54.
18. Huneke, M. E.,Cole, C.,Levin, I. P.(2004).How varying levels of knowledge and motivation affect search and confidence during consideration and choice.Marketing Letters,15(2/3),67-79.
19. Kerr, N. L.(2002).When is a minority a minority? Active vs. passive minority advocacy and social influence.European Journal of Social Psychology,32(4),471-483.
20. Kulviwat, S.,Bruner II, G. C.,Al-Shuridah, O.(2009).The role of social influence on adoption of high tech innovations: The moderating effect of public/private consumption.Journal of Business Research,62(7),706-712.
21. Lafferty, B. A.,Goldsmith, R. E.(1999).Corporate credibility's role in consumers' attitudes and purchase intentions when a high versus low credibility endorser is used in the ad.Journal of Business Research,44(2),109-116.
22. Latane, B.,Wolf, S.(1981).The social impact of majorities and minorities.Psychological Review,88(5),438-453.
23. Lindsey, G.(Ed.),Aronson, E.(Ed.)(1985).The handbook of social psychology.New York, NY:Random House.
24. Maass, A.,Clark, R. D.(1983).Internalization versus compliance: Differential processes underlying minority influence and conformity.European Journal of Social Psychology,13(3),197-215.
25. Mackie, D. M.(1987).Systematic and nonsystematic processing of majority and minority persuasive communications.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,53(1),41-52.
26. Maheswaran, D.,Chaiken, S.(1991).Promoting systematic processing in low-motivation settings: Effect of incongruent information on processing and judgment.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,61(1),13-25.
27. Martin, R.,Gardikiotis, A.,Hewstone, M.(2002).Levels of consensus and majority and minority influence.European Journal of Social Psychology,32(5),645-665.
28. Martin, R.,Hewstone, M.(2003).Majority versus minority influence: When, not whether, source status instigates heuristic or systematic processing.European Journal of Social Psychology,33(3),313-330.
29. Martin, R.,Hewstone, M.,Martin, P. Y.(2008).Majority versus minority influence: The role of message processing in determining resistance to counter-persuasion.European Journal of Social Psychology,38(1),16-34.
30. Martin, R.,Hewstone, M.,Martin, P. Y.(2007).Systematic and heuristic processing of majority and minority endorsed messages: The effects of varying levels of orientation and outcome relevance on attitude and message processing.Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,33(1),43-56.
31. Merluzzi, T. V.(Ed.),Glass, C. R.(Ed.),Genest, M.(Ed.)(1981).Cognitive assessment.New York, NY:Guilford Press.
32. Miniard, P. W.,Bhatla, S.,Lord, K. R.,Dickson, P. R.,Unnava, H. R.(1991).Picture-bases persuasion processes and the moderating role of involvement.Journal of Consumer Research,18(1),92-107.
33. Moscovici, S.(1980).Toward a theory of conversion behavior.Advances in experimental social psychology,13,209-239.
34. Moscovici, S.(1976).Social influence and social change.London, UK:Academic Press.
35. Moscovici, S.,Lage, E.,Naffrechoux, M.(1969).Influence of a consistent minority on the responses of a majority in a color perception task.Sociometry,32(4),365-380.
36. Nemeth, C. J.(1986).Differential contributions of majority and minority influence.Psychological Review,93(1),23-32.
37. Petty, R. E.,Cacioppo, J. T.(1986).The Elaboration Likelihood Model of persuasion.Advances in experimental social psychology,19,123-205.
38. Petty, R. E.,Cacioppo, J. T.(1984).Source factors and the Elaboration Likelihood Model of persuasion.Advances in Consumer Research,11(1),668-672.
39. Petty, R. E.,Cacioppo, J. T.,Schumann, D. W.(1983).Central and peripheral routes to advertising effectiveness: The moderating role of involvement.Journal of Consumer Research,10(2),135-146.
40. Petty, R. E.,Fleming, M. A.,White, P. M.(1999).Stigmatized sources and persuasion: Prejudice as a determinant of argument scrutiny.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,76(1),19-34.
41. Petty, R. E.,Schumann, D. W.,Richman, S. A.,Strathman, A. J.(1993).Positive mood and persuasion: Different roles for affect under high and low elaboration conditions.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,64(1),5-20.
42. Shavitt, S.,Swan, S.,Lowrey, T. M.,Wänke, M.(1994).The interaction of endorser attractiveness and involvement in persuasion depends on the goal that guides message processing.Journal of Consumer Psychology,3(2),137-162.
43. Till, B. D.,Busler, M.(2000).The match-up hypothesis: Physical attractiveness, expertise, and the role of fit on brand attitude, purchase intent and brand beliefs.Journal of Advertising,29(3),1-13.
44. Trost, M. R.,Maass, A.,Kenrick, D. T.(1992).Minority influence: Personal relevance biases cognitive processes and reverses private acceptance.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,28(3),234-254.
45. Trusov, M.,Bucklin, R. E.,Pauwels, K.(2009).Effects of word-of-mouth versus traditional marketing: Findings from an internet social networking site.Journal of Marketing,73(5),90-102.
46. White, P. H.,Harkins, S. G.(1994).Race of source effects in the elaboration likelihood.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,67(5),790-807.