Abstract
Studies of social influence in large groups show that leaders are crucial in infecting followers with new ideas and that it requires time. This reflects social impact models based on Nowak, Szamrej, and Latané’s dynamic theory (1990), which are still being presented, modified and developed in the literature. However, recent mass events, e.g., the Arab Spring, 15-M Movement, protests in the Gezi Park in Turkey, Polish democratic movements (KOD, AkcjaDemokracja), do not seem to fit the aforementioned models: changes happened rapidly and without the presence of opinion leaders. In a series of simulation studies, we propose that global communication (Internet, mobiles, social media) is responsible for the difference between the theoretical model and recent mass events. Our results indicate that global communication dramatically decreases the role of leaders, increases the speed of spreading new ideas in the population, increases the influence of followers on the speed of social transformation, and that leaders who use the Internet can change their attitudes as quickly and as often as followers do.
Highlights
Up to this point in history, the paradigm of social changes has resembled a game of chess, the goal of which was to enforce relevant ideas ushered by prominent figures (Nowak, Lewenstein, & Szamrej, 1993; Nowak & Vallacher, 1998)
In a series of simulation studies, we propose that global communication (Internet, mobiles, social media) is responsible for the difference between the theoretical model and recent mass events
Our results indicate that global communication dramatically decreases the role of leaders, increases the speed of spreading new ideas in the population, increases the influence of followers on the speed of social transformation, and that leaders who use the Internet can change their attitudes as quickly and as often as followers do
Summary
Up to this point in history, the paradigm of social changes has resembled a game of chess, the goal of which was to enforce relevant ideas ushered by prominent figures (Nowak, Lewenstein, & Szamrej, 1993; Nowak & Vallacher, 1998). And importantly, contrary to the assumptions mentioned above, the most recent grand changes, e.g., in Northern Africa (the Arab Spring), USA and Europe (15-M Movement), or Poland (AntyNC+, AntiActa, stopacta, KOD, AkcjaDemokracja / Obywatele Decydują democratic movements), revealed a completely different way of forming a social movement Those changes took place without participation of the leaders (or they remain unknown during the change). It’s like a game of chess, where the prize is the enforcement of a relevant idea and crucial instruments used in achieving victory are strong figures Might be missing in Nowak and Latané’s model that could explain contemporary changes?
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
