Scientific Definition
A consistent minority can shift the majority's views over time.
Plain-English Definition
A consistent minority can shift the majority's views over time.
Feynman Explanation
One person saying the same thing long enough can change the room.
Core Principle
A consistent minority can shift the majority's views over time.
Mechanisms
Pending editorial review.
A consistent minority can shift the majority's views over time.
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
Dissent is valuable even when it loses the vote.
Inputs (Triggers)
Pending editorial review.
Outputs (Behaviors)
Pending editorial review.
Behavioral Signature
One person saying the same thing long enough can change the room.
Examples
- A lone voice for data privacy gradually reshapes company policy.
- Dissent is valuable even when it loses the vote.
Pending editorial review.
Famous Experiments
Pending editorial review.
Design Principles
- Protect minority voices and reward consistency, not just conformity.
Measurement Approaches
Pending editorial review.
Evidence
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
The Perverse Incentive Lens™
How this behavior is exploited — and how to redesign around it.
- Protect minority voices and reward consistency, not just conformity.
Pending editorial review.
Pending editorial review.
Interactive Mini Network
Click any neighbor to re-center the graph and follow the threads of connection.
Knowledge Graph Neighbors
Auto-linked to the rest of the Human Behavior Taxonomy by family, domain, dimension, and shared keywords.
Hard tactics use pressure and authority; soft tactics use rapport, reasoning, and inspiration.
Persuasion power is a function of perceived expertise × perceived trustworthiness.
A small group can dominate when the majority is silent or divided.
A group decides on a course of action that nobody actually wants, because everyone assumes others prefer it.
Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
We attribute our own actions to situations but others' actions to their character.
We favor people who are similar to us or who like us.
Sacrificing for others without expecting a personal reward.
Masking the sponsors of a message to make it appear grassroots.
Disagreement grows more extreme as the parties think more about the issue.
Systematic errors in explaining the causes of behavior — yours or others'.
We accept vague, general statements as personally meaningful.