The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Originality of Word Associations as a Function of Majority vs. Minority Influence
Abstract
The thesis of this paper is that influence processes can stimulate or inhibit originality on the part of individuals. In particular, we hypothesized that exposure to persistent minority views causes subjects to reexamine the issue and to engage in more divergent and original thought. Subjects exposed to persistent majority views should concentrate on the position proposed, converge thinking and be less original. Testing the originality aspect of these propositions, subjects were exposed to either a majority or minority judgment that blue stimuli were green. Subsequent to this manipulation, subjects gave associations to the words blue and green. Findings indicate that subjects in the minority condition gave more associations overall and that these associations were more original, i.e., less statistically frequent, than subjects in the majority condition or the control. There is additional evidence that, after the first association, subjects in the majority condition are even less original than control subjects. Their associations are more conventional, i.e., statistically frequent. Results are discussed in the context of influence processes and creativity as well as the differential impact of majority vs. minority influence.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Studies of independence and conformity: I. A minority of one against a unanimous majority
Asch, S. E. (1956) · Psychological Monographs: General and Applied · doi:10.1037/h0093718 · Cited by 4,267
The disposition toward originality
Barron, F. (1955) · The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/h0048073 · Cited by 623
Cited by
What Differences Make a Difference?: The Promise and Reality of Diverse Teams in Organizations
Mannix, E., & Neale, M. A. (2005) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1111/j.1529-1006.2005.00022.x · Cited by 1,276
Differential contributions of majority and minority influence.
Nemeth, C. J. (1986) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037//0033-295x.93.1.23 · Cited by 1,254
Self-citationPower reduces the press of the situation: Implications for creativity, conformity, and dissonance.
Galinsky, A. D., Magee, J. C., Gruenfeld, D. H., Whitson, J. A., & Liljenquist, K. A. (2008) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0012633 · Cited by 893
Motivated Information Processing in Group Judgment and Decision Making
De Dreu, C. K. W., Nijstad, B. A., & van Knippenberg, D. (2008) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1177/1088868307304092 · Cited by 754
Chaiken, S., & Stangor, C. (1987) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.38.020187.003043 · Cited by 518
Metadata
- Authors
- Nemeth, C. J., & Kwan, J. L.
- Venue
- Social Psychology Quarterly
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 1985-09
- Volume
- 48
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 277
- ISSN
- 0190-2725 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2012859884
- Cited by
- 162
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 6.97
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Originality of Word Associations as a Function of Majority vs. Minority Influence. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/3033688
- The paper
- Nemeth, C. J., & Kwan, J. L. (1985). Originality of Word Associations as a Function of Majority vs. Minority Influence. Social Psychology Quarterly. https://doi.org/10.2307/3033688
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.