Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Social structure and the effects of conformity

  • Published:
Synthese Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Conformity is an often criticized feature of human belief formation. Although generally regarded as a negative influence on reliability, it has not been widely studied. This paper attempts to determine the epistemic effects of conformity by analyzing a mathematical model of this behavior. In addition to investigating the effect of conformity on the reliability of individuals and groups, this paper attempts to determine the optimal structure for conformity. That is, supposing that conformity is inevitable, what is the best way for conformity effects to occur? The paper finds that in some contexts conformity effects are reliability inducing and, more surprisingly even when it is counterproductive, not all methods for reducing its effect are helpful. These conclusions contribute to a larger discussion in social epistemology regarding the effect of social behavior on individual reliability.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Agur Z. (1987) Resilience and variability in pathogens and hosts. IMA Journal of Mathematics Applied in Medicine and Biology 4: 295–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Agur Z., Fraenkel A., Klein S. (1988) The number of fixed points of the majority rule. Discrete Mathematics 70: 295–302

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asch S.E. (1955) Opinions and social pressure. Scientific American 193(5): 31–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asch, S. (1956). Studies of independence and submission to group pressure: I. A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs, 70(9).

  • Banerjee A.V. (1992) A simple model of herd behavior. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 107(3): 797–817

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron R.S., Vandello J.A., Brunsman B. (1996) The forgotten variable in conformity research: Impact of task importance on social influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 71(5): 915–927

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Yashar R., Paroush J. (2000) A nonasymptotic condorcet jury theorem. Social Choice and Welfare 17: 189–199

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bikhchandani S., Hirshleifer D., Welch I. (1992) A theory of fads, fashion, custom, and cultural change as informational cascades. Journal of Political Economy 100(5): 992–1026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brock, W. A., & Durlauf, S. N. (2002). A formal model of theory choice in science. In P. Mirowski & E.-M. Sent (Eds.), Science bought and sold: Essays in the economics of science (Chap. 11, pp. 341–361). University of Chicago Press.

  • Clifford P., Sudbury A. (1973) A model for spatial conflict. Biometrika 60(3): 581–588

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeMarzo P.M., Vayanos D., Zwiebel J. (2003) Persuasion bias, social influence, and uni-dimensional opinions. Quarterly Journal of Economics 118(3): 909–968

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durrett R., Steif J.E. (1993) Fixation results for threshold voter systems. The Annals of Probability 21(1): 232–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flocchini, P., Lodi, E., Luccio, F., Pagli, L., & Santoro, N. (1998). Irreversible dynamos in tori. In Euro-Par98 parallel processing, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (p. 1). Springer.

  • Goldman A. (1999) Knowledge in a social world. Clarendon Press, Oxford

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Goles E., Olivos J. (1980) Periodic behavior of generalized threshold functions. Discrete Mathematics 30: 187–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granville A. (1991) On a paper of Agur, Fraenkel and Klein. Discrete Mathematics 94: 147–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hassin Y., Peleg D. (2001) Distributed probabilistic polling and applications to proportionate agreement. Information and Computation 171: 248–268

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hegselmann, R., & Krause, U. (2002). Opinion dynamics and bounded confidence models, analysis, and simulation. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 5(3).

  • Hegselmann, R., & Krause, U. (2006). Truth and the cognitive division of labor: First steps toward computer aided social epistemology. Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, 9(3).

  • Holley R.A., Liggett T.M. (1975) Ergodic theorems for weakly interacting infinite systems and the voter model. The Annals of Probability 3(4): 643–663

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitcher P. (1990) The division of cognitive labor. The Journal of Philosophy 87(1): 5–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitcher P. (1993) The advancement of science. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitcher P. (2002) Social psychology and the theory of science. In: Stich S., Siegal M.(eds) The cognitive basis of science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Královic, R. (2001). On majority voting games in trees. In SOFSEM 2001: Theory and Practice of Informatics: 28th Conference on Current Trends in Theory and Practice of Informatics Piestany, Slovak Republic, November 24–December 1, 2001, p. 282.

  • Latané B., Nowak A. (1997) Self-organizing social systems: Necessary and sufficient conditions for the emergence of clustering consolidation, and continuing diversity. Progress in Communication Sciences 13: 43–74

    Google Scholar 

  • Moran G. (1994a) Parametrization for stationary patterns of the r-majority operators on 0-1 sequences. Discrete Mathematics 132: 175–195

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moran G. (1994b) The r-majority vote action on 0-1 sequences. Discrete Mathematics 132: 145–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moran G. (1995) On the period-two-property of the majority operator in infinite graphs. Transactions of the American Mathematical Society 5(347): 1649–1667

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mustafa N.H., Pekev A. (2004) Listen to your neighbors: How (not) to reach a consensus. SAIM Journal of Discrete Mathematics 17(4): 634–660

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nakata, T., Imahayashi, H., & Yamashita, M. (1999). Probabilistic local majority voting for the agreement problem on finite graphs. In E. A. T. Asano (Ed.), COCOON ’99 LNCS 1627 (pp. 330–338).

  • Nakata T., Imahayashi H., Yamashita M. (2000) A probabilistic local majority polling game on weighted directed graphs with an application to the distributed agreement problem. Networks 35(4): 266–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peleg D. (1998) Size bound for dynamic monopolies. Discrete Applied Mathematics 86: 263–273

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peleg D. (2002) Local majorities, coalitions and monopolies in graphs: A review. Theoretical Computer Science 282: 231–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poljak S., Sura M. (1983) On periodical behaviour in societies with symmetric influences. Combinatorica 3(1): 119–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarkar H. (2007) Group Rationality in Scientific Research. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Steif J.E. (1994) The threshold voter automaton at a critical point. The Annals of Probability 22(3): 1121–1139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strevens M. (2003) The role of the priority rule in science. Journal of Philosophy 100(2): 55–79

    Google Scholar 

  • Strevens M. (2006) The role of the matthew effect in science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 37: 159–170

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weisberg, M., Muldoon, R. (forthcoming). Epistemic landscapes and the division of cognitive labor. Philosophy of Science.

  • Welch I. (1992) Sequential sales, learning, and cascades. The Journal of Finance 47(2): 695–732

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zollman K.J. (2007a) The communication structure of epistemic communities. Philosophy of Science 74(5): 574–587

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zollman, K.J. (2007b). The epistemic benefit of transient diversity. Manuscript.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburg, PA, USA

    Kevin James Spears Zollman

Authors
  1. Kevin James Spears Zollman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kevin James Spears Zollman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zollman, K.J.S. Social structure and the effects of conformity. Synthese 172, 317–340 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-008-9393-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-008-9393-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation