Silent minority: argument, information sharing, and polarization of minority opinion through a structuration theory lens

In a test of how information mentioned in a group discussion affects post-discussion attitude polarization, participants stated their opinion about Donald Trump and read nine pieces of information about him that either reflected positively (three pieces) or negatively (six pieces) on his character. The participants then participated in an online chat in which the majority had a negative opinion of Trump. The online chat involved confederate group members who either discussed only new, unshared information the participant had not read before discussion or shared information the participant had just read. The experiment reported herein tested persuasive arguments theory (PAT) against structuration theory by comparing how group discussion of either shared or novel, unshared information affects attitude polarization. The data failed to support PAT’s premise that unshared arguments are more persuasive than shared arguments and contribute to polarization. Only minority members in the shared chat condition exhibited attitude polarization.