Israeli Psychologists Explain How Extreme Views Seem Like Majority Opinion
Translated & summarized from NEWSru Israel by baba
Psychologists at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem have discovered that extreme opinions can appear to represent the majority due to a phenomenon called "pluralistic ignorance." Their research, published in PNAS Nexus, shows that people often anchor their perception of group norms to the most vocal subgroup. Studies involving Israeli Haredi individuals and global gender stereotype data confirmed that the views of a small, active minority can disproportionately influence perceived majority opinion, even among moderates.
The story in 6 lines · by baba
- Israeli psychologists found that a small, active subgroup can create the perception of majority opinion.
- The phenomenon, "pluralistic ignorance," involves misjudging group views and mistaking minority opinions for the majority.
- The "anchoring and adjustment" model suggests people anchor judgments to salient information, like extreme views.
- A study of 550 Israeli Haredi individuals showed conservative subgroup views anchored perceptions of the majority.
- Global data on gender stereotypes revealed similar anchoring effects from active advocacy groups.
- The prominence of certain voices, not random chance, shapes the perception of group norms.
Psychologists from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem have found that the perception of majority opinion is often shaped by a small but highly active subgroup. This phenomenon, known as "pluralistic ignorance," occurs when individuals misjudge their group's actual views, mistaking the opinions of a few for those of the many. The researchers, publishing in PNAS Nexus, investigated the underlying mechanisms of this effect.
Their work builds on the "anchoring and adjustment" model, suggesting that in uncertain situations, people anchor their judgments to salient information, like a strong statement, and then adjust it based on their own beliefs. However, these adjustments are often insufficient. The study proposes that when assessing group norms, the most visible and ideologically focused subgroup acts as the anchor, with an individual's own opinion only partially modifying the perception.
The first experiment involved 550 Israeli Haredi individuals who were asked about their personal agreement with statements on army service, modesty, rabbinical authority, and personal autonomy, as well as their perception of the Haredi community's views on these matters. The findings indicated that perceptions of the group norm across all four areas were best explained by the model anchored to the most conservative subgroup, which represented only about a quarter of the sample. Both moderate and modernist respondents anchored their estimates to the conservatives' views rather than their own.
A second study analyzed data from over 21,000 respondents in 57 countries concerning gender stereotypes. For some traits, the anchor was the position of the most active proponents of gender equality, such as those participating in demonstrations and signing petitions. For other traits, opinions tended toward the middle of the scale, suggesting that when no subgroup provides a clear signal, individuals may adopt a neutral stance.
The researchers emphasize that these misperceptions of norms are not random but are structured by which voices are most prominent within a group. This helps explain why extreme positions can appear to be widely accepted, even when the majority holds more moderate views.