Artificial Intelligence and Law

, Volume 20, Issue 4, pp 359–381 | Cite as

Cognitive dynamics of norm compliance. From norm adoption to flexible automated conformity



In this paper, an integrated, cognitive view of different mechanisms, reasons and pathways to norm compliance is presented. After a short introduction, theories of norm compliance are reviewed, and found to group in four main typologies: the rational choice model of norm compliance; theories based on conditional preferences to conformity, theories of thoughtless conformity, and theories of norm internalization. In the third section of the paper, the normative architecture EMIL-A is presented. Previous work discussed the epistemic module of this normative architecture, allowing for the generation of normative beliefs being formed. The fourth and fifth sections present the pragmatic modules of EMIL-A, i.e. norm adoption—leading to normative goals—and norm compliance—leading to their execution. Not only are several alternative reasons for norm adoption shown, but also several pathways to norm compliance are identified. Finally, a summary and ideas for future works conclude the paper.


Norm compliance Norm internalization Agent-based modelling Cognitive modelling 


  1. Andrighetto G, Conte R (forthcoming) Norms’ Dynamics as a Complex Loop. In: Conte R, Andrighetto G, Campennì M (eds) Minding Norms. Oxford Series on Cognitive Models and Architectures, Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrighetto G, Castelfranchi C (forthcoming) Norm compliance: the prescriptive power of normative actions. Paradigmi.Google Scholar
  3. Andrighetto G, Villatoro D (2011) Beyond the carrot and stick approach to enforcement: an agent-based model. In: Kokinov B, Karmiloff-Smith A, Nersessian NJ (eds) European conference on cognitive science. New Bulgarian University Press, SofiaGoogle Scholar
  4. Andrighetto G, Campennì M, Conte R, Paolucci M (2007) On the immergence of norms: a normative agent architecture. In: Trajkovski GP, Collins SG (eds) Emergent agents and socialities: social and organizational aspects of intelligence, Papers from the AAAI Fall Symposium, Technical Report FS-07-04. Menlo Park, CA: The AAAI PressGoogle Scholar
  5. Andrighetto G, Campennì M, Cecconi F, Conte R (2010a) The complex loop of norm emergence: a simulation model. In: Deguchi H et al (eds) Simulating interacting agents and social phenomena. Agent-Based Social Systems, Springer, pp 19–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Andrighetto G, Villatoro D, Conte R (2010b) Norm internalization in artificial societies. AI Commun 23:325–339MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. Aronfreed JM (1968) Conduct and conscience. The socialization of internalized control over behavior. Academic Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Axelrod R (1986) An evolutionary approach to norms. Am Politi Sci Rev 80(4):1095–1111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Basso A, Mondada F, Castelfranchi C (1993) Reactive goal activation in intelligent autonomous agent architecture. In Proceedings of AIA’93—First International Round-Table on “Abstract Intelligent Agent”, ENEA, Roma, January 25–27Google Scholar
  10. Becker GS (1968) Crime and punishment: an economic approach. J Politi Econ 76(2):169–217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bicchieri C (2006) The grammar of society. The nature and dynamics of social norms. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  12. Bicchieri C, Chavez A (2010) Behaving as expected: public information and fairness norms. J Behav Decis Mak 23(2):161–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bicchieri C, Xiao E (2009) Do the right thing: but only if others do so. J Behav Decis Mak 22:191–208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Campennì M, Andrighetto G, Cecconi F, Conte R (2009) Normal = normative? The role of intelligent agents in norm innovation. Mind Soc 8:153–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Castelfranchi C, Miceli M, Cesta A (1992) Dependence relations among autonomous agents. In: Werner E, Demazeau Y (eds) Decentralized A. I. 3. Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, pp 215–227Google Scholar
  16. Cialdini RB, Reno RR, Kallgren CA (1990) A focus theory of normative conduct: recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places. J Pers Soc Psychol 58(6):1015–1026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cohen PR, Levesque HJ (1990) Persistence, intention, and commitment. In: Cohen PR, Morgan J, Pollack MA (eds) Intentions in communication. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 33–71Google Scholar
  18. Coleman J (1989) The rational choice approach to legal rules. Chic Kent Law Rev 65:177–191Google Scholar
  19. Coleman J (1990) Foundations of social theory. Belknap, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  20. Conte R (1998) L’Obbedienza intelligente Laterza, BariGoogle Scholar
  21. Conte R (2009) Rational, goal governed agents. In: Meyers RA (ed) Springer encyclopaedia of complexity and system science. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  22. Conte R, Castelfranchi C (1995) Cognitive and social action. UCL Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  23. Conte R, Castelfranchi C (1999) From conventions to prescriptions. Towards an integrated view of norms. Artif Intell Law 7:119–125Google Scholar
  24. Conte R, Castelfranchi C (2006) The mental path of norms. Ratio Juris 19(4):501–517CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Conte R, Paolucci M (2002) Reputation in artificial societies. Social beliefs for social order. Kluwer, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  26. Conte R, Sichman JS (1995) DEPNET: how to benefit from social dependence. J Math Sociol 20(2–3):161–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Conte R, Sichman JS (2002) Dependence graphs: dependence within and between groups. Comput Math Organ Theory 8(2):87–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Conte R, Andrighetto G, Campennì M (eds) (forthcoming) Minding Norms. Oxford Series on Cognitive Models and Architectures, Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar
  29. Deci EL, Ryan RM (1985) Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behaviour. Plenum Publishing Co, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Deci EL, Ryan RM (1987) The support of autonomy and the control of behaviour. J Pers Soc Psychol 53:1024–1037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Deci EL, Nezlek J, Sheinman L (1981) Characteristics of the rewarder and intrinsic motivation of the rewardee. J Pers Soc Psychol 40:1–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Deci EL, Eghrari H, Patrick BC, Leone D (1994) Facilitating internalization: the self-determination theory perspective. J Pers 62:119–142CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Durkheim E (1950) The rules of sociological method. The Free Press, Princeton-New YorkGoogle Scholar
  34. Epstein JM (2007) Generative social science. Studies in agent-based computational modeling. Princeton University Press, Princeton-New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. Faillo M, Grieco D, Zarri L (2010) Legitimate Punishment, Feedback, and the Enforcement of Cooperation. Working Paper 16/2010. Department of Economics University of VeronaGoogle Scholar
  36. Festinger L (1957) A theory of cognitive dissonance. Row Peterson, EvanstonGoogle Scholar
  37. Gintis H (2003) The hitchhiker’s guide to altruism: gene-culture coevolution and the internalization of norms. J Theor Biol 220(4):407–418MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Gintis H, Bowles S, Boyd RT, Fehr E (eds) (2005) Moral sentiments and material interests: the foundations of cooperation in economic life. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  39. Grossman D (1995) On killing: the psychological cost of learning to kill in war and society. Little, Brown and Company, BostonGoogle Scholar
  40. Haidt J (2003) Elevation and the positive psychology of morality. In: Keyes CLM, Haidt J (eds) Flourishing: positive psychology and the life well-lived. American Psychological Association, Washington DC, pp 275–289CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Harmon-Jones E, Mills J (eds) (1999) Cognitive dissonance: progress on a pivotal theory in social psychology. American Psychological Association, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  42. Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: an analysis of decisions under risk. Econometrica 47(2):263–291MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Lewis D (1969) Convention. A philosophical study. Harvard University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  44. Lotzmann U, Möhring M, Troitzsch KG (2012) Simulating the emergence of norms in different scenarios. Artif Intell Law. doi: 10.1007/s10506-012-9130-y
  45. Miceli M, Castelfranchi C (1989) A cognitive approach to values. J Theory Soc Behav 19(2):169–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Miceli M, de Rosis F, Poggi I (2006) Emotional and non-emotional persuasion. Appl Artif Intell Int J 20(10):849–879CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Miller GA, Galanter E, Pribram KH (1960) Plans and the structure of behaviour. Henry Holt, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Pittman TS, Emery L, Boggiano AK (1982) Intrinsic and extrinsic motivational orientations: reward-induced changes in preference for complexity. J Pers Soc Psychol 42:789–797CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Reykowski J (1982) Development of prosocial motivation: a dialectic process. In: Eisenberg N (ed) The development of prosocial behaviour. New York Academic Press, New York, pp 377–394Google Scholar
  50. Ryan RM (1982) Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: an extension of cognitive evaluation theory. J Pers Soc Psychol 43:450–461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Schwartz SH (1977) Normative influences on altruism. In: Berkowitz L (ed) Advances in experimental social psychology, vol 10. Academic Press, New York, pp 221–279Google Scholar
  52. Schwartz SH, Howard JA (1981) A normative decision-making model of altruism. In: Rushton JP, Sorrentino RM (eds) Altruism and helping behaviour. Lawerence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, pp 89–211Google Scholar
  53. Scott J (1971) Internalization of norms: a sociological theory of moral commitment. Prentice-Hall, Englewoods CliffsGoogle Scholar
  54. Tangney JP, Stuewig J, Mashek DJ (2007) Moral emotions and moral behavior. Ann Rev Psychol 58:345–372CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Ullmann-Margalit E (1977) The emergence of norms. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  56. Villatoro D, Andrighetto G, Conte R, Sabater-Mir J (2011) Dynamic sanctioning for robust and cost efficient norm compliance. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pp 414–419Google Scholar
  57. Walster E, Walster GW, Bershcheid E (1978) Equity: theory and research. Allyn and Bacon, Inc., BostonGoogle Scholar
  58. Widegren O (1998) The new environmental paradigm and personal norms. Environ Behav 30(1):75–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Xiao E, Houser D (2011) Punish in public. J Public Econ 95:1006–1017CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Cognitive Sciences and TechnologiesCNRRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations