Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Conformity Bias: A Fact or an Experimental Artifact?

Psychological Studies volume 59, pages 223–230 (2014)Cite this article

Abstract

Upon exploring social psychology’s treatment of the term social influence, a skew towards conformity is noted. This skew points to the tendency of amplifying the effect of conformity and minimizing any other form of social influence and has been termed ‘conformity bias’. This review explores the concept of conformity and tries to examine what conformity entails and how it has been understood (and often misunderstood). It is observed that conformity is not a unitary concept and has various facets to it. Besides identifying key disciplinary features such as methodology and ideology that may be possible causes of this skew, implications of this bias are discussed. Failure to identify and move beyond conformity bias may lead to failure in recognizing real social issues. Therefore, it becomes imperative that researchers be wary of this bias and take steps to consciously overcome it.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant access to the full article PDF.

USD 39.95

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

References

  • Abu-Rabia-Queder, S. (2008). Politics of conformity: Power for creating change. Ethnology, 47, 209–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, V. L. (1965). Situational factors in conformity. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 133–175). New York: Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aronson, E. (1998, Winter). Aronson declares social psychology crisis over. Society for Personality and Social Psychology Dialogue, p. 2.

  • Asch, S. (1951). Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of judgements. In H. S. Guetzkow (Ed.), Groups, leadership, and man: Research in human relations (pp. 177-190). Pittsburgh, PA: Carnegie Press.

  • 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 

  • Asch, S. E. (1990). Comments on D. T. Campbell’s chapter. The legacy of Solomon Asch: Essays in cognition and social psychology, 53–55.

  • Baker, W. J. (1992). Positivism versus people: What should psychology be about? In C. W. Tolman (Ed.), Positivism in psychology: Historical and contemporary problems (pp. 9–16). New York: Spring-Verlag.

    Chapter  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(1), 111.

  • Breen, L. & Darlaston-Jones, D. (2008). Moving beyond the enduring dominance of positivism in psychological research: An Australian perspective. Paper presented at the 43rd Australian Psychological Society Annual Conference.

  • Campbell, D. T. (1990). Asch’s moral epistemology for socially shared knowledge. In I. Rock (Ed.), The legacy of Solomon Asch: Essays in cognition and social psychology (pp. 39–52). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cialdini, R. B., Trost, M. R., et al. (1998). Social influence: Social norms, conformity and compliance. In D. T. Gilbert & S. T. Fiske (Eds.), The handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 151–192). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clinard, M. B. (1963). Sociology of deviant behaviour. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

  • Cooley, C. H. (1909). Social Organization: A study of the Larger Mind. New York: Schocken.

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diriw¨achter, R. (2003). What really matters: Keeping the whole. Istanbul: Paper presented at the 10th Biennial Conference of International Society of Theoretical Psychology.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doise, W. (1986). Levels of explanation in social psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fiske, S. T., & Leyens, J. P. (1997). Let social psychology be faddish, or at least heterogeneous. In McGarty & A. Haslam (Eds.), The message of social psychology: Perspectives on mind in society. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friend, R., Rafferty, Y., & Bramel, D. (1990). A puzzling misinterpretation of the Asch conformity study. European Journal of Social Psychology, 20, 29–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gergen, K. J. (1982). Toward transformation in social knowledge. New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Gergen, K. (1985). The social constructionist movement in modern psychology. American Psychologist, 40, 266–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gergen, K. (1997). Social psychology as social construction: The emerging vision. In McGarty & A. Haslam (Eds.), The message of social psychology: Perspectives on mind in society. Oxford: Blackwell.

    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(2), 281.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Haney, C., Banks, C., & Zimbardo, P. (1973). A study of prisoners and guards in a simulated prison. Naval research review 9, 1–17. [Reprited in E. Aronson (Ed.), Readings about the social animal (3rd ed., pp. 52–67). San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.]

  • Harris, P. R. (1985). Asch’s data and the ‘Asch effect’: A critical note. British Journal of Social Psychology, 24, 229–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, B. (1997). Repoliticizing the history of psychology. In D. Fox & I. Prilleltensky (Eds.), Critical psychology: An introductory handbook. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haslam, S. A., & Reicher, S. D. (2012). Contesting the “nature” of conformity: What Milgram and Zimbardo’s studies really show. PLoS Biology, 10(11), e1001426.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Hewstone, M. (1997). Three lessons from social psychology: Multiple levels of analysis, methodological pluralism, and statistical sophistication. In C. McGarty & A. Haslam (Eds.), The message of social psychology (pp. 166–181). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodges, B. H., & Geyer, A. (2006). A nonconformist account of the Asch experiments: Values, pragmatics, and moral dilemmas. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 2–19.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Horkheimer, M. (1992). Traditional and critical theory. In D. Ingram & J. Simon-Ingram (Eds.), Critical theory: The essential readings (pp. 239–254). New York: Paragon House.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hornsey, M. J., Majkut, L., Terry, D. J., & McKimmie, B. M. (2003). On being loud and proud: Non-conformity and counter-conformity to group norms. British Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 319–335.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jahoda, M. (1959). Conformity and independence: A psychological analysis. Human Relations, 12, 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H., & Markus, H. R. (1999). Deviance or uniqueness, harmony or conformity: A cultural analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 785–800.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McGarty, C., & Haslam, S. A. (Eds.). (1997). The message of social psychology: Perspectives on mind in society (pp. 37–53). Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67, 371–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Milgram, S. (1974). The experience of living in cities. Crowding and Behaviour, 167, 41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moscovici, S. (2001). Social representations: Explorations in social psychology. New York: NYC Press.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pepitone, A. (1981). Lessons from the history of social psychology. American Psychologist, 36(9), 972.

  • Pepitone, A. (1997). Nonmaterial beliefs: Theory and research in cultural social psychology. In C. McGarty & A. Haslam (Eds.), The message of social psychology. Oxford: Blackwell.

  • Reicher, S. D. & Haslam, S. A. (2006). Rethinking the psycgology of tyranny: The BBC prison study. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45(1), 1–40.

  • Sanford, E. C. (1903). Psychology and physics. Psychological Review, 10, 105–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarason, S. B. (1981). Psychology misdirected. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulman, G. I. (1967). Asch conformity studies: Conformity to the experimenter and/or to the group? Sociometry, 30, 26–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Semin, G. R. (1997). The relevance of language to social psychology. In C. McGarty & S. A. Haslam (Eds.), The message of social psychology. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherif, M. (1936). The psychology of social norms. New York: Harper and Brothers. Harper Torch book edition, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stam, H. J. (2006). Reclaiming the social in social psychology. Theory and Psychology, 16, 587–595.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stricker, L. J., Messick, S., & Jackson, D. N. (1970). Conformity, anti conformity, and independence: Their dimensionality and generality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 16, 494–507.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stroebe, W., & Insko, C. A. (1989). Stereotype, prejudice, and discrimination: Changing conceptions in theory and research. In D. Bar-Tal, C. F. Graumann, A. W. Kruglanski, & W. Stroebe (Eds.), Stereotyping and prejudice: Changing conceptions (pp. 3–34). New York: Springer.

  • Stryker, S. (1997). In the beginning there is society: Lessons from a sociological social psychology. In C. McGarty & S. A. Haslam (Eds.), The message of social psychology: Perspectives on mind in society (pp. 315–327). Cambridge: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suedfeld, P. (1997). The social psychology of “Invictus”: Conceptual and methodological approaches to the study of indomitability. In C. McGarty & A. Haslam (Eds.), The message of social psychology. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuffin, K. (2005). Understanding critical social psychology. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J. C. (1991). Social influence. Thomson Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.

  • Valsiner, J. (2006). Dangerous curves in knowledge construction within psychology: fragmentation of methodology. Theory and Psychology, 16(5), 597–612.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, E. L., & Heyns, R. W. (1962). An anatomy for conformity. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willis, R. H. (1963). Two dimensions of conformity-nonconformity. Sociometry, 26, 499–513.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Willis, R. H. (1965). Conformity, independence, and anti conformity. Human Relations, 18, 373–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I wish to thank Dr. Arvind K. Mishra, ZHCES, JNU for his suggestions and guidance in preparing this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi, India

    Divya Padalia

Authors
  1. Divya Padalia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Divya Padalia.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Padalia, D. Conformity Bias: A Fact or an Experimental Artifact?. Psychol Stud 59, 223–230 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12646-014-0272-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12646-014-0272-8

Keywords

search

Navigation