סמינר בשיווק

While consumers are often influenced by experts, consumers themselves can be experts—and, in such instances, it is important to understand who influences their decisions. That is, to whom do experts turn to for guidance in their own decisions? In response, the present research proposes the rather paradoxical hypothesis that, while novices are more influenced by majority endorsements, experts are more influenced by minority endorsements. This hypothesis is based on the premise that novices are motivated to base their evaluations on the convention, whereas experts are motivated to base their evaluations on the innovation. These motives are important, as we propose majority endorsements reflect what is normative, prototypical, and conventional, whereas minority endorsements reflect what is counter-normative, novel, and innovative. In support of this argument, four experiments demonstrate that: (i) experts and novices are differentially influenced by minority and majority endorsements, (ii) this effect is driven by a heightened diagnosticity of the endorsement, and (iii) this diagnosticity is rooted in different inferences conveyed by minority and the majority endorsements (innovation versus convention, respectively). This research, then, offers novel insight into the role of social influence in impacting the decisions of experts and, consequently, the role of expertise in the emergence of minority influence.