Encyclopedia of Sociology

COMPLIANCE AND CONFORMITY

group members were strangers who meant little to
one another. Yet they exerted substantial influ-
ence over one another simply by being in the same
situation together. Because of the dramatic way it
highlights the conflict inherent in conformity be-
tween individuals and groups, Asch’s experimen-
tal design has become the paradigm for studying
conformity.

NORMATIVE AND INFORMATION

INFLUENCE

Sherif’s and Asch’s striking results stimulated an
explosion of research to explain how conformity
occurs (see Kiesler and Kiesler 1976, Cialdini and
Trost 1998 for reviews). It is now clear that two
analytically distinct influence processes are involved.
Either or both can produce conformity in a given
situation. Morton Deutsch and Harold Gerard
(1955) labelled these informational influence and
normative influence.

In informational influence, the group defines
perceptual reality for the individual. Sherif’s ex-
periment is a good illustration of this. The best
explanation derives from Leon Festinger’s (1954)
social comparison theory. According to the theo-
ry, people form judgments about ambiguous events
by comparing their perceptions with those of simi-
lar others and constructing shared, socially validat-
ed definitions of the ‘‘reality’’ of the event. These
consensual definitions constitute the social reality
of the situation (Festinger 1950). Because people
want the support of others to assure them of the
validity of their beliefs, disagreeing with the ma-
jority is uncomfortable. People in such situations
doubt their own judgment. They change to agree
with the majority because they assume that the
majority view is more likely to be accurate.

As this indicates, conformity as a result of
informational influence is not unwilling compli-
ance with the demands of others. Rather, the
individual adopts the group standard as a matter
of private belief as well as public behavior. Infor-
mational influence is especially powerful in regard
to social beliefs, opinions, and situations since
these are inherently ambiguous and socially
constructed.

Normative influence occurs when people go
along with the group majority in order to gain

rewards or avoid unpleasant costs. Thus it is nor-

mative influence that is behind compliance. Peo-

ple depend on others for many valued outcomes,

such as inclusion in social relationships, a sense of

shared identity, and social approval. Because of

this dependency, even strangers have some power

to reward and punish one another. Asch’s results

are a good example. Although a few of Asch’s

participants actually doubted their judgment (in-

formational influence), most conformed in order

to avoid the implicit rejection of being the odd

person out. Studies show that fears of rejection for

nonconformity are not unfounded (see Levine

1980 for a review). While nonconformists are

sometimes admired, they are rarely liked. Further-

more, they are subject to intense persuasive pres-

sure and criticism from the majority.

FACTORS THAT INCREASE CONFORMITY

Anything that increases vulnerability to informa-

tional and normative influence increases conformi-

ty. Although there may be personality traits that

incline people to conform, the evidence for this is

conflicting (Crowne and Marlowe 1969; Moscovici

1985). Situational factors seem to be the most

important determinants of conformity. Research

indicates that conformity is increased by a) the

ambiguity or difficulty of the task, b) the relative

unimportance of the issue to the person, c) the

necessity of making a public rather than private

response, d) the similarity of group members, e)

high interdependence among the group mem-

bers, f) the attractiveness and cohesiveness of the

group, and g) the unanimity of the majority (see

Kiesler and Kiesler 1976; Cialdini and Trost 1998

for reviews).

When a task or situation is ambiguous or

difficult, it is not easy to tell what the best response

to it would be. As a result, much as in Sherif’s

experiments, group members rely heavily on each

other’s opinions to decide what is best, increasing

their susceptibility to informational influence.

When decision-making groups in government or

business face complex, difficult decisions where

the right choice is uncertain, informational influ-

ence increases the members’ tendency to agree

and can affect their critical analysis of the situation

(Janis 1972). Tastes and beliefs about matters,

such as clothing style or music, about which there

are no objectively right choices are subject to