Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Conformity: Definitions, Types, and Evolutionary Grounding

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Evolutionary Perspectives on Social Psychology

Part of the book series: Evolutionary Psychology ((EVOLPSYCH))

Abstract

Conformity research in social psychology spans a century, but researchers have only adopted an evolutionary perspective in the past 25 years. This change has been driven by gene-culture coevolutionary models and research on nonhuman animals. In this chapter, we outline why there is a credible basis for an evolutionary explanation for widespread behavioral conformity in humans. However, we caution that not all conformity in humans is the same because conforming in a perceptual judgment task in the laboratory (as per the Asch paradigm) is not equivalent to being an unwitting participant in a behavioral field study. Moreover, conformity has not been consistently defined across research disciplines, which hampers a valid assessment of its evolutionary origins. Theoretical models within social psychology and the study of gene-culture coevolution are valuable tools in the quest for evolutionary explanations of conformist behavior; they have utilized gained insights while inspiring simulations and empirical tests. We propose the idea of incorporating individuals’ habit adherence into the models to advance the study of conformity. Conformity is a powerful force in human decision making and is best understood from an evolutionary perspective.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 189.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 249.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Asch proposed that conformity leveled off at a group size of three in perceptual judgment experiments.

  2. 2.

    Lumsden and Wilson (1981) used these findings when constructing their trend-watcher curve.

References

  • Allport, F. H. (1924). Social psychology. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allport, F. H. (1934). The j-curve hypothesis of conforming behavior. Journal of Social Psychology, 5, 141–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aoki, K., & Feldman, M. W. (2013). Evolution of learning strategies in temporally and spatially variable environments: A review of theory. Theoretical Population Biology, 90, 64–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aronson, E., & O’Leary, M. (1983). The relative effectiveness of models and prompts on energy conservation. Journal of Environmental Systems, 12, 219–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asch, S. E. (1951). Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of judgment. In H. Guetzkow (Ed.), Groups, leadership and men (pp. 117–190). Pittsburgh: Carnegie Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Asch, S. E. (1956). Studies of independence and conformity: A minority of one against a unanimous majority. Psychological Monographs, 70, 1–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bargh, J. A., & Chartrand, T. L. (1999). The unbearable automaticity of being. American Psychologist, 54, 462–479.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bond, R. (2005). Group size and conformity. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 8, 331–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bond, R., & Smith, P. B. (1996). Culture and conformity: A meta-analysis of studies using Asch’s (1952b, 1956) line judgment task. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 111–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonnie, K. E., Horner, V., Whiten, A., & de Waal, F. B. M. (2007). Spread of arbitrary conventions among chimpanzees: A controlled experiment. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 274, 367–372.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, R. (1988). Is the repeated prisoner’s dilemma game a good model of reciprocal altruism? Ethology and Sociobiology , 9, 211–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (1985). Culture and the evolutionary process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, R., & Richerson, P. J. (1991). Culture and cooperation. In R. A. Hinde & J. Groebel (Eds.), Cooperation and prosocial behavior (pp. 27–48). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M. (2003). The evolution of desire: Strategies of human mating (2nd ed.). New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, A. (2002). A mind of her own: The evolutionary psychology of women. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, J. D., & Fairey, P. J. (1989). Informational and normative routes to conformity: The effect of faction size as a function of norm extremity and attention to the stimulus. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 457–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cavalli-Sforza, L. L., & Feldman, M. W. (1981). Cultural transmission and evolution: A quantitative approach. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chartrand, T. L., & Bargh, J. A. (1999). The chameleon effect: The perception—b ehavior link and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 893–910.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cialdini, R. B., & Goldstein, N. J. (2004). Social influence: Conformity and compliance. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 591–621.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Claidière, N., & Whiten, A. (2012). Integrating the study of conformity and culture in humans and nonhuman animals. Psychological Bulletin, 138, 126–145.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Claidière, N., Bowler, M., & Whiten, A. (2012). Evidence for weak or linear conformity but not for hyper-conformity in an everyday social learning context. PLoS One, 7, e30970.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Coultas, J. C. (2004). When in Rome… An evolutionary perspective on conformity. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 7, 317–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coultas, J. C., & Eriksson, K. (May, 2014). Milgram revisited: Imitative behaviour is influenced by both the size and entitativity of the stimulus group. Paper presented at the Annual British Psychological Society, Birmingham.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crutchfield, R. S. (1955). Conformity and character. American Psychologist, 10, 191–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darley, J. M. (1966). Fear and social comparison as determinants of conformity behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4, 73–78.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • David, B., & Turner, J. C. (2001). Majority and minority influence: a single process self-categorisation analysis. In C. K. W. De Dreu & N. K. de Vries (Eds.), Group consensus and minority influence: Implications for innovation (pp. 91–121). Malden: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Day, R. L., MacDonald, T., Brown, C., Laland, K. N., & Reader, S. M. (2001). Interactions between shoal size and conformity in guppy social foraging. Animal Behaviour, 62, 917–925.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. B. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 629–636.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dindo, M., Whiten, A., & de Waal, F. B. M. (2009). In-group conformity sustains different foraging traditions in capuchin monkeys ( Cebus apella). PloS One, 4, e7858.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eagly A. H., & Chaiken S. (1993). The psychology of attitudes. Fort Worth: Harcourt Brace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Efferson, C., Lalive, R., Richerson, P. J., McElreath, R., & Lubell, M. (2008). Conformists and mavericks: The empirics of frequency-dependent cultural transmission. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29, 56–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eriksson, K., & Coultas, J. C. (2009). Are people really conformist-biased? An empirical test and a new mathematical model. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology, 7, 5–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eriksson, K., Enquist, M., & Ghirlanda, S. (2007). Critical points in current theory of conformist social learning. Journal of Evolutionary Psychology, 5, 67–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Festinger, L. (1950). Informal social communication. Psychological Review, 57, 271–282.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galef, B. G. (2012). Social learning and traditions in animals: Evidence, definitions, and relationship to human culture. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews-Cognitive Science, 3, 581–592.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galef, B. G., & Whiskin, E. E. (2008). ‘Conformity’ in Norway rats? Animal Behaviour, 75, 2035–2039.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gallup, A. C., Hale, J. J., Sumpter, D. J. T., Garnier, S., Kacelnik, A., Krebs, J. R., & Couzin, I. D. (2012). Visual attention and the acquisition of information in human crowds. PNAS, 109, 7245–7250.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gerard, H. B., Wilhelmy, R. A., & Connolley, E. S. (1968). Conformity and group size. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 79–82.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, N. J., Cialdini, R. B., & Griskevicius, V. (2008). A room with a viewpoint: Using social norms to motivate environmental conservation in hotels. Journal of Consumer Research, 35, 472–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griskevicius, V., Goldstein, N. J., Mortensen, C. R., Cialdini, R. B., & Kenrick, D. T. (2006). Going along versus going alone: When fundamental motives facilitate strategic (non)conformity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 281–294.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Haddock, G., & Maio, G. R. (2008). Attitudes: Content, structure and function. In M. Hewstone, W. Stroebe, & K. Jonas (Eds.), Introduction to social psychology: A European perspective (4th ed.). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haun, D. B. M., & Tomasello, M. (2011). Conformity to peer pressure in preschool children. Child Development, 82, 1759–1767.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Haun, D. B. M., Rekers, Y., & Tomasello, M. (2012). Majority-biased transmission in chimpanzees and human children, but not orangutans. Current Biology, 22, 727–731.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Haun, D. B. M., van Leeuwen, E. J. C., & Edelson, M. G. (2013). Majority influence in children and other animals. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 3, 61–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Henrich, J., & Boyd, R. (1998). The evolution of conformist transmission and the emergence of between-group differences. Evolution and Human Behavior, 19, 215–241.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinde, R. (1982). Ethology: Its nature and relations with other sciences. Glasgow: Fontana Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopper, L. M., Schapiro, S. J., Lambeth, S. P., & Brosnan, S. F. (2011). Chimpanzees’ socially maintained food preferences indicate both conservatism and conformity. Animal Behaviour, 81, 1195–1202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoppitt, W., & Laland, K. N. (2013). Social learning: An introduction to mechanisms, methods, and models. Oxfordshire: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, R. C., & Campbell, D. T. (1961). The perpetuation of an arbitrary tradition through several generations of a laboratory culture. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 12, 649–658.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jenness, A. (1932). The role of discussion in changing opinion regarding a matter of fact. Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 27, 279–296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jolles, J. W., de Visser, L., & van den Bos, R. (2011). Male Wistar rats show individual differences in an animal model of conformity. Animal Cognition, 14, 769–773.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kameda, T., & Nakanishi, D. (2002). Cost-benefit analysis of social/cultural learning in a nonstationary uncertain environment—An evolutionary simulation and an experiment with human subjects. Evolution and Human Behavior, 23, 373–393.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kelman, H. C. (1961). Processes of opinion change. Public Opinion Quarterly, 25, 57–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendal, R. L., Coolen, I., & Laland, K. N. (2004). The role of conformity in foraging when personal and social information conflict. Behavioral Ecology, 15, 269–277.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kendal, R. L., Coolen, I., & Laland, K. N. (2009). Adaptive trade-offs in the use of social and personal information. In R. Dukas & J. Ratcliffe (Eds.), Cognitive ecology II (pp. 249–271). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kiesler, C., & Kiesler, S. B. (1969). Conformity. Reading: Addison Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • King, A. J., & Cowlishaw, G. (2007). When to use social information: the advantage of large group size in individual decision making. Biology Letters, 3, 137–139.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Knowles, E., & Bassett, R. (1976). Groups and crowds as social entities: Effects of activity, size and member similarity on nonmembers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 34, 837–845.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krützen, M., Willems, E. P., & van Schaik, C. P. (2011). Culture and geographic variation in orangutan behavior. Current Biology, 21, 1808–1812.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Laland, K. N. (2004). Social learning strategies. Learning & Behavior, 32, 4–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latané, B. (1981). The psychology of social impact. American Psychologist, 36, 343–356.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latané, B., & Wolf, S. (1981). The social impact of majorities and minorities. Psychological Review, 88, 438–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lumsden, C. J., & Wilson, E. O. (1981). Genes, mind and culture: The coevolutionary process. London: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luncz, L., & Boesch, C. (2013). Tradition over trend: Neighboring chimpanzee communities maintain differences in cultural behavior despite frequent immigration of adult females. American Journal of Primatology, 76, 649–657.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacCoun, R. J. (2012). The burden of social proof: Shared thresholds and social influence. Psychological Review, 119, 345–372.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mann, L. (1969). Social psychology. London: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mann, L. (1977). The effect of stimulus queues on queue-joining behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 6, 437–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McElreath, R., Lubell, M., Richerson, P. J., Waring, T. M., Baum, W., Edsten, E., et al. (2005). Applying evolutionary models to the laboratory study of social learning. Evolution and Human Behavior, 26, 483–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mesoudi, A. (2009). How cultural evolutionary theory can inform social psychology and vice versa. Psychological Review, 116, 929–952.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Milgram, S. (1970). The experience of living in cities. Science, 167, 1461–1468.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Milgram, S., Bickman, L., & Berkowitz, L. (1969). Note on the drawing power of crowds of different sizes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 13, 79–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, C., & Coultas, J. C. (March, 2010). Strangers in a strange land: Social norms, situational variables and the conformist bias. Paper presented at the 5th European Human Behaviour and Evolution Association Conference, University of Wroclaw, Poland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, T. J. H., & Laland, K. (2012). The biological bases of conformity. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 6, 87.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, T. J. H., Rendell, L., Ehn, W., Hoppitt, W., & Laland, K. (2011). The evolutionary basis of human social learning. Proceedings of the Royal Society B-Biological Sciences, 279, 653–662.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Moscovici, S., Lage, E., & Naffrechoux, M. (1969). Influence of consistent minority on the responses of a majority in a color perception task. Sociometry, 32, 365–379.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Mullen, B., Copper, C., & Driskell, J. E. (1990). Jaywalking as a function of model behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16, 320–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nemeth, C., Wachtler, C., & Endicott, J. (1977). Increasing the size of the minority: Some losses and some gains. European Journal of Social Psychology, 7, 15–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Newcomb, T. M. (1943). Personality and social change. New York: Dryden Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newcomb, T. M., Koenig, K. E., Flacks, R., & Warwick, D. P. (1967). Persistence and change: Bennington College and its students after twenty five years. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman, J. & McCauley, C. (1977). Eye contact with strangers in city, suburb and small town. Environment and Behavior, 9, 547–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nisbett, R. E., & Wilson, T. D., (1977). Telling more than we can know: Verbal reports on mental processes. Psychological Review, 84, 231–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nowak, A., Szamrej, J., & Latané, B. (1990). From private attitude to public opinion. Psychological Review, 97, 362–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perry, S. (2009). Conformism in the food processing techniques of white-faced capuchin monkeys (Cebus capucinus). Animal Cognition, 12, 705–716.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pike, T. W., & Laland, K. N. (2010). Conformist learning in nine-spined sticklebacks’ foraging decisions. Biology Letters, 6, 466–468.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Richerson, P. J., & Boyd, R. (2005). Not by genes alone: How culture transformed human evolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherif, M. (1935). A study of some social factors in perception. Archives of Psychology, 27, 187.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherif, M. (1936). The psychology of social norms. Oxford: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (1990). A mechanism for social selection and successful altruism. Science, 250, 1665–1668.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stang, D. J. (1976). Group size effects on conformity. Journal of Social Psychology, 98, 175–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strimling, P., Enquist, M., & Eriksson, K. (2009). Repeated learning makes cultural evolution unique. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106, 13870–13874.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In W. G. Austin & S. Worchel (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey: Brooks/Cole.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanford, S., & Penrod, S. (1984). Social influence model: A formal integration of research on majority and minority influence processes. Psychological Bulletin, 95, 189–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence. Belmont: Wadsworth.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. C., Hogg, M. A., Oakes, P. J., Reicher, S. D., & Wetherell, M. S. (1987). Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • van de Waal, E., Borgeaud, C., & Whiten, A. (2013). Potent social learning and conformity shape a wild primate’s foraging decisions. Science, 340, 483–485.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • van Leeuwen, E. J. C., & Haun, D. B. M. (2013). Conformity in primates: Fad or fact? Evolution and Human Behavior, 34, 1–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Leeuwen, E. J. C., & Haun, D. B. M. (2014). Conformity without majority? The case for demarcating social from majority influences. Animal Behaviour, 96, 187–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Leeuwen, E. J. C., Cronin, K. A., Schütte, S., Call, J. & Haun, D. B. M. (2013). Chimpanzees flexibly adjust their behaviour in order to maximize payoffs, not to conform to majorities. PloS One, 8(11), e80945. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0080945.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • White, G. M. (1975). Contextual determinants of opinion judgments: Field experimental probes of judgmental relativity boundary conditions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 1047–1054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whiten, A., Horner, V., & de Waal, F. B. M. (2005). Conformity to cultural norms of tool use in chimpanzees. Nature, 437(7059), 737–740.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, S., & Latané, B. (1983). Majority and minority influences on restaurant preferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 282–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for the study of Cultural Evolution, Stockholm University, 106 91, Stockholm, Sweden

    Julie C. Coultas Ph.D.

  2. Department of Psychology, University of Sussex, BN1 9QH, Falmer, UK

    Julie C. Coultas Ph.D.

  3. Department of Developmental Psychology, University of Jena, Am Steiger 3/1, 07743, Jena, Germany

    Edwin J. C. van Leeuwen Ph.D.

Authors
  1. Julie C. Coultas Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Edwin J. C. van Leeuwen Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julie C. Coultas Ph.D. .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, USA

    Virgil Zeigler-Hill

  2. Department of Psychology, Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, USA

    Lisa L. M. Welling

  3. Department of Psychology, Oakland University, Rochester, Michigan, USA

    Todd K. Shackelford

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Coultas, J., van Leeuwen, E. (2015). Conformity: Definitions, Types, and Evolutionary Grounding. In: Zeigler-Hill, V., Welling, L., Shackelford, T. (eds) Evolutionary Perspectives on Social Psychology. Evolutionary Psychology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12697-5_15

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation