Abstract
Dynamic Social Impact Theory (DSIT) predicts consolidation and clustering at the group level, as individuals engage in mutual social influence processes. The current study expanded the paradigm proposed by Latané & L’Herrou (1996) to examine whether the predictions of DSIT holds under a more naturalistic condition. Unlike Latané & L’Herrou’s study, no instruction was given to facilitate or promote compliance. Once a week for five weeks, participants communicated with others through a computer network on two topics of moral dilemmas. Results partly confirmed the effect of the social influence process at the individual level. At the group level, clustering of opinions was observed without consolidation. These results were discussed with implication to theoretical studies on DSIT using computer simulations.
