3 ms·
I think it matters WHO the 10% are. Its been shown in various experiments that a significant percentage of the people go along with the group even when the gro
by stretchwithme 15y ago
I think it matters WHO the 10% are.
Its been shown in various experiments that a significant percentage of the people go along with the group even when the group is obviously wrong. I think it was at least 60%.
So that leaves 40% or less that are capable of adopting something new. You'd have to get half of them to sway the followers. That's 20% or less, which 10% certainly is.
But if your 10% are in some kind of subculture and most are followers, they aren't going to be influencers of the larger society.
If the 10% are all in the media and politics, I think the change is likelier.
It also depends on the nature of the change. A change that requires significant inconvenience will be harder than deciding Pluto is no longer a planet.
- lhnz 15y agoThis all sounds very likely to me. But is there a source for this information?
- stretchwithme 15y agoThere's the Asch conformity experiments, where people went along with the group with no overt pressure and with nothing at stake: http://psychology.about.com/od/classicpsychologystudies/p/conformity.htm The Milgram experiments on obedience to authority are also relevant. 65% of subjects went along with what amounted to torture of another person: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment While these experiments weren't about the spread of ideas, conformity and obedience are certainly at work for the vast majority that simply repeat what they hear. You can have a perfectly sound, logical case, even with physical evidence and many will not trust their own judgement if its contradicted by an authority. But it sort of has to work this way. There have to be followers if there are to be leaders and leaders are necessary if groups are to compete with each other, which was the case even before modern humans showed up.