Majority-minority influence: identifying argumentative patterns and predicting argument-outcome links

In this paper, the authors investigate the argument activities of majority and minority faction in small group decision‐making situations. We begin by identifying patterns of argument that characterize majority and minority communication in 34 discussions and then test several subgroup‐outcome and argument‐outcome links. Results indicate that winning and losing subgroups argue differently (as do minority and majority subgroups overall) and that consistency in argument is a strong predictor of subgroup success. Both theoretical and practical implications for subgroup influence in group decision making accrue from these findings.