Context-dependent Online Social Influence

Effect of Majority and Minority Comments on Posters and Lurkers

Bibliographic Data

ID12169694
AuthorsYoung June Sah (0000-0003-3901-148X, Sogang University, Mapo-gu, South Korea, corresponding author), Wei Peng (0000-0002-2229-4682, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA)
Year2022
Volume41
Issue4
Pages1316-1335
Publication date2022-03-01
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueSocial Science Computer Review (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0894-4393 • E-ISSN: 1552-8286
PublisherSAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.1177/08944393211070527
OpenAlexW4214644328
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited64

While participatory websites provide users with two distinctive contexts, such as posting opinions and lurking, not many studies examine how such contexts affect the ways in which users are influenced by peer opinions. In a 2 (context: posting vs. lurking) X 3 (peer-opinion composition: balanced, lopsided, or unanimous) between-subjects experiment, participants ( N = 334) revealed their opinions in a public poll or in an anonymous survey. After reading a unanimous opinion in the comments, both posting and lurking groups agreed with the unanimous opinion to a greater extent than reading the balanced opinion. After reading opposing opinions of the numerical majority and the numerical minority of peer groups, posters leaned toward the majority opinion, and lurkers toward the minority opinion. Additional analyses revealed that different mechanisms governed the effects. The moderating effect of group identification and need for cognition implies that normative influence and informational influence underlies the majority effect and minority effect, respectively

Affect (linguistics · Citizen journalism · Context (archaeology · Normative · Political science · Politics · Public opinion · Reading (process · Digital Marketing and Social Media · History · Law · Psychology · Social and Intergroup Psychology · Social Media and Politics · Social Psychology

Tools

Open DOI