Duality of Conformity in Modern Society: Mechanisms,

Manifestations, and Challenges

Baolun Zhang

WLSA Shanghai Academy, 200120, Shanghai, China

Keywords: Conformity, Social Influence, Perceptual Judgment, Behavioral Imitationt, Opinion Alignment.

Abstract: Conformity, a profoundly rooted psychological tendency, has been subject to wide investigation across a

variety of disciplines, including philosophy, psychology, economics, and evolution. The paper looks at how

conformity manifests and the mechanisms through which conformity operates - in terms of perceptual judg-

ment, behavioral aspects, and opinion/attitude. A literature review therefore serves as the study design, from

landmark pieces of research by Asch, Sherif, and Milgram among others. The research looks at the evolution-

ary history of conformity, its philosophical foundations, and even the economy driving forces for its display.

The results indicate that conformity has ambivalent characters; it promotes community welfare and stability

but suppresses individuality, critical thinking, and moral integrity. The philosophers pointed out the conflict

between what the society expects and personal autonomy. The insights from social psychology basically

demonstrated how the normative and informational influence works in the shaping of the human behavior.

1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Defining Conformity

Conformity is the tendency for people to fit in with

their group. This behavior is often deeply rooted in

the fundamental psyche of humans (and many other

animal species) and is considered subconscious. In

recent decades, there has been a burgeoning interest

regarding the origins of conformity through the lenses

of psychology, evolution, philosophy, and

economics, among others. This section of the paper

will explore the rudimentary causes of conformity

behavior through these four perspectives, narrowing

the scope to humans specifically. Upon reviewing the

experiments of previous social psychologists, most

notably Asch (1951) and Goldstein (2008),

conformity can be classified into three types:

conformity in perceptual judgment, behavioral

conformity, and opinion and attitude.

1.2 Conformity in Perceptual

Judgement

Asch's study, which tested conformity in a case with

explicit right and wrong answers, was highly

indicative of the powerful impacts of conformity on

modifying individual perception and judgment. In

this famous experiment, participants were asked to

match the length of a line with one of the three

unequal lines on another piece of paper. The error rate

in the control group was negligibly small, as Asch

reports. Unbeknown to the participants, however, all

the other "participants" were confederates of the

experiment who had communicated beforehand to

make uniformly erroneous judgments at designated

points during the study. In this case, the actual

participant, the only focal point of each experiment,

is faced with the dilemma: On one hand, he perceives

through his very own senses and arrives at the correct

answer; On the other hand, the arbitrary vast majority

of people around him confronts him with the

unanimous, erroneous answer. The participant is

expected to announce his answer in public, after the

confederates who presented their judgment. The

results were shocking: whereas less than 1% of the

control group would make mistakes in this task, a

staggering 36.8% of 138 participants "yielded to the

majority." The implications of this experiment extend

beyond the scope of laboratories. The results

illuminate the complex nature of conformity, where

individuals start to doubt their perceptions. Asch

concluded that individuals experience an intense urge

to fit in with societal conventions and gain

recognition and social acceptance.

The study conducted by Sherif can offer

complementary insight into conformity in perceptual

266

Zhang, B.

Duality of Conformity in Modern Society: Mechanisms, Manifestations, and Challenges.

DOI: 10.5220/0013982400004912

Paper published under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Innovative Education and Social Development (IESD 2025), pages 266-270

ISBN: 978-989-758-779-5

judgment. His discovery, the autokinetic effect,

further corroborates Asch's conclusions. In a dark

room, participants were asked to judge the movement

of a light source, when in fact, that point of light was

stationary. Ultimately, he observed that the

participant's estimations were highly misled by that of

the confederates, the latter of which intentionally

overestimated the motion every time. This

experiment demonstrates how under ambiguous

scenarios where the right and wrong answers are not

distinguishable, group norms created by the majority

can persist for a prolonged period, even after the

removal of the initial stimuli. Both studies stress the

human tendency for individuals to seek

belongingness by fitting in with the general group

opinion, driven by the need for social cohesion and

the evasion of conflict.

1.3 Behavioral Conformity

Behavioral conformity is an unconscious or

automatic imitation of acts done within the group.

Unlike perceptual conformity, it mostly takes place

without conscious deliberation. One such important

research has been that of Milgram et al. (1969), where

confederates stood gazing upward at a building in

New York. The passersby, ignorant of the set-up,

were observed to behave similarly, with larger

stimulus groups increasing proportions of imitators.

Here one sees, perhaps, man's innate propensity

for affiliate behavior, which Chartrand and Bargh

(1999) describe as the "chameleon effect" for

individuals unthinkingly Mimicking others so they

might connect. Coultas (2004) broadened this

argument, demonstrating that characteristics like

group size and social context have a major influence on

behavior. For instance, in computer laboratory studies,

participants were likely to behave like the new ones,

like putting keyboard covers on monitors, when the

number of groups exceeded a threshold of 3.

1.4 Conformity in Opinion and Attitude

Adoption of an opinion or a particular attitude is

conformity when an individual thinks as others do.

Their views, in most cases, have been influenced by

either normative or informational pressures. It is,

however, not perceptual, or behavioral but deliberate

and requires deeper cognitive and emotional

engagement.

For example, a study conducted by Newcomb

(1943) in Bennington College revealed that students

who formerly held conservative perspectives

developed liberal attitudes after a few years as they

were exposed to their professors' influence, who were

in line with the new social group norms they had

joined. Interestingly, such attitudes, persisted for

decades, indicating how long conformity could hold

concerning belief systems. Crutchfield's (1955)

laboratory study yielded somewhat similar results,

except that opinions on statements were changed by

participants to conform to a unanimous majority, but

personal preferences e.g., artistic judgments were

more resistant to influence.

2 ORIGINS OF CONFORMITY

2.1 Psychological and Evolutionary

Explanation for Conformity

Academics have reached a consensus that conformity

is motivated by the material benefits that it brings. In

a study conducted on Chimpanzees (Hopper et al.,

2011), these gregarious animals were observed to

conform to the food preferences of the majority in

their group, even when it seemed irrational. The

researchers concluded that this seemingly

unreasonable imitation is prompted by an

evolutionary mechanism. This mechanism of

conforming to a perceived behavior within a group

arose at one point in the development of most

primates (including humans). Conformism offers an

opportunity for individuals to acquire the potential

benefits of a perceived behavior without having to

gather the same experience through costly trials and

errors. In this experiment with chimpanzees, the

imitators perceived, unconsciously, a fair chance of

gaining an advantage of survival, despite not being

able to fully comprehend the rationality of that

behavior (Henrich and Boyd, 1998).

This conformist behavior is even more

prominent in humans. Infants as young as 12 to 17

days of age have been empirically observed to display

signs of conformity and active mimicry (Meltzoff and

Keith, 1977). With all other variables controlled, the

subject infants displayed statistically significant

tendencies to mimic the expressions of the

experimenters. Assuming that the subjects were

incapable of mature judgment regarding the social

connections and interaction etiquettes that society has

set, they reasonably concluded that the neonates were

mimicking the adult sign signal behaviors not to gain

any perceived benefits, but instead out of the pure

drive to conform to the group of experimenters. Many

theories in social psychology pertain to this

mechanism of conformity Groupthink.

Duality of Conformity in Modern Society: Mechanisms, Manifestations, and Challenges

267

2.2 Philosophical Inquiry on

Conformity

Conformity, when viewed from a philosophical point

of view, becomes interplay. Society and individuals

have a cohesive binding yet also create autonomy for

an individual. Friedrich Nietzsche, for example,

denounced conformity as a suppression by which no

individual is complete; it warned against the "herd

instinct" that stifles creativity and keeps an individual

from growing. He condemns the calamity of

conformity, praising the highest loveliness of

individuality. On the other hand, some philosophical

thought admits the conformity requirement for social

fitness. For instance, one could say that a social

contract, as expounded by philosophers like Jean-

Jacques Rousseau, necessitated some conformity to

the collective norms so that the whole could be

stabilized as a society. However, it again raises

ethical issues concerning the balance between social

obligations against individual freedoms. Socrates is

an archetype of individualism confronting oppressive

social conformity. His Life and philosophy give

accent on the need to challenge societal norms and the

value of appreciating one's thoughts. The argument

on individuality vs. conformity continues today,

especially with dissonant voices that have continued

to be suppressed in society. Thus, elongation

continues by which conformity is either accepted or

resisted in terms of morality and personal

authenticity.

2.3 Economic Incentives of Conformity

Humans may conform to economic structures to meet

or deviate from certain norms in their behavior to

realize or lose financial rewards or punishments.

Evidence shows that a negative social evaluation

form of punishment motivates conformity, while a

positive social evaluation can create antipathy. In

organizational settings, compliance programs may

also be provided with financial incentives for

compliance with the norms and rules. For instance,

performance evaluations can measure and reward

behavior that supports compliance. Such measures

can intentionally motivate executives and employees

to practice and advocate compliant behaviors: the

corporation shows its commitment to its compliance

programs and culture. However, the relationship

between financial incentives and compliance is not as

straightforward. Some research has indicated that

financial rewards might deprive individuals of the

beliefs that motivate norm conformity, and could

thereby lessen intrinsic motivation. The

understanding of economic incentives against

conformity would also explain how such financial

impulses could be operative in shaping social action,

thus writing a need for careful design of incentive

structures to ensure that they elicit the right behaviors

without side effects.

3 MANIFESTATION OF

CONFORMITY

3.1 Informational and Normative

Social Influence

To listen to the influence of other people and not to

the support of their own beliefs, individuals are

extremely likely to succumb to social influence. In

most instances, the results of the judgment one gets in

such breaking are taken as an independent and above

application to indicate how the group's view leads the

person to interpret an event as accurate when it

repeatedly delivers some kind of disagreement with

self-belief. That's all it does with an individual that

facilitates this influence. The mentions are indeed

normative. In that, the so-called individual's

dependence could only be due to having been found

wanting by the former such a beneficial form of

association and restraining him from disapproval, and

approval however in applying to group standards.

Niche, normative, or influence that results from

consensus may limit one from defining oneself

through conformity to accept peer approval or, even,

contemplate non-involvement with peer disavowal

and privately a different attitude. Normative social

influence is thus the negative consequence not

willingly but by circumstances. If these two

influences at socialization were imagined or named,

then it could be called, according to specific social

summarizations into patterns, the self-formation of

behavior by the group to which it has ratified itself.

Thus, every collective normative and informational

effect might play a significant part in individuals

presenting and integrating themselves within their

groups as well as in setting and keeping up social

standards.

3.2 Conformity in Politics

Conformity is the major influence on individual

political behavior and social norms. Conformity is

demonstrated in the political arena through party

discipline, one's social self-alignment with a group,

and the perpetuation of what is accepted as dominant

IESD 2025 - International Conference on Innovative Education and Social Development

268

ideologies. Conformity then manifests through social

identity mechanisms, through which individuals align

their political beliefs with the perceived norms of the

group. This alignment generates the required social

cohesion but may also necessitate the contraction of

personal opinions to avoid social ostracization. Some

studies show that individuals can even suppress their

true political opinions temporarily to conform with

others during discussions, referring to them as

"political chameleons." Political conformity has

complex implications. It can facilitate organized

political action and offer stabilization within political

parties, but on the other extreme, it may also lead to

intellectual stagnation and perpetuating dominant

ideologies. Thus, there is a suppression of critical

discourse and innovation. Hence, the understanding

of how to balance the necessary degree of conformity

for functionality alongside retaining individual

critical thought becomes important for a healthy

democratic process. In a nutshell, while conformity is

viewed as vital for the existence of political

institutions and for group cohesion, certainly, it must

be kept in view that it can stifle individuality and

critical voices. Creating an environment where

diversity of thought is from the start valued will

refrain from the negative side effects of political

conformity and foster a more inclusive, dynamic

political landscape.

4 THE CONTRADICTION OF

CONFORMITY

4.1 Conformity vs. Moral Integrity

Conformity states a certain alignment of behavior or

beliefs, to some extent, making one part of a group

and not sometimes making it compatible with one's

moral principles. The tension between the conflict

between the desire to belong and the commitment to

one's moral ethic is a preoccupation within social

psychology. Statistical measurements show that

social conformity takes away personal moral

judgments. People are sometimes prepared to act or

hold opinions on a particular issue only because of

group endorsement, irrespective of whether it

coincides with the person's morals. Such individuals

exist in a physical space or on cyber platforms, but

invariably, group dynamics shape moral character

judgments. The dynamic can mean a lot. At its most

extreme, it can induce people to act unethically in

terms of discrimination or corruption, for example

when they feel that what they are doing is endorsed

by their group. Strong individual moral integrity may,

however, allow people to withstand conformist

pressure and thus create room for ethical behavior

even in the opposite sense group-wise.

4.2 Social Media's Role

In the same way, social media environments have

reshaped how conformity and morality behave. The

effects of new fast-transmitted information and

neighborhood formation on the social influence

process are manifest in the individual's decision-

making processes. Research has concluded that

social media can accelerate the pace of

communication, conformity, and the application of

norms, including moral norms. A good example is a

movement such as #MeToo, which used social media

to spread messages faster and to galvanize collective

action. Such an environment also becomes a breeding

ground for behaviors that a person might engage in

without inhibition, but which he would try to avoid in

face-to-face situations, such as cyberbullying or

spreading misinformation. On top of that, the echo

chamber effect has it that users receive information

that relates closely with their already held ideologies;

and thus, tends to strengthen the group norms, falling

together with increased pressure towards conformity.

Failure to get diverse exposure to different ideas may

hamper critical thinking and moral reasoning.

5 CONCLUSION

In the paper, conformity has been studied not only

from an entry point but also from its root and

mechanisms of expression. Most importantly, these

have been classified as perceptual judgment,

behavioral imitation, and opinion alignment. Thus, it

shows how an individual changes their beliefs, views,

and actions so as to fit in with other people. Basic

experiments are among others by Ash, Sherif, and

Milgram, showing the deep effects of the group on the

individual choice. Evolutionarily, conformity has

represented the adaptive knapsack, giving its survival

benefit, avoiding the dangers of autonomous trial-

and-error learning. Last but not least, philosophical

discussions show the clash between social

requirement and individual freedom, along with

economic analysis of how these forces approximate

upward compliance by financial incentives and

organizational structures. Besides, the work mentions

how social media plays intertwined roles in

catalyzing collective action and in sustaining echo

Duality of Conformity in Modern Society: Mechanisms, Manifestations, and Challenges

269

chambers, thus demonstrating this dynamic interplay

of conformity with technological platforms.

This study depends rather much on secondary

sources and historical tests, which may not really

reflect the present changes within society by

globalization, connectivity, and the changing pattern

of cultural activities. Not only this, but much of the

research reviewed is conducted in controlled

laboratories, again a limitation on their external

validity. Most dimensions, such as cultural

differences of conformity, are not well researched, as

the main emphasis is on western models. Conformity,

in addition, is poorly examined in intersectionality by

gender, race, and socioeconomic status, which may

serve to mediate the strength and direction of

conformity.

The multidisciplinary perspectives must include

neuroscience, cultural anthropology, and digital

sociology to the future studies to holistically be

approached understanding of conformity across

contexts. Proposals for research across time have to

feature longitudinal studies. Effects of the role of

intersectionality in conformity would add a more

nuanced understanding of how specific identities

impact conformist inclinations. Research on

emerging technological phenomena such as artificial

intelligence and virtual reality in their effect on social

conformity would inform our view of new trends in

digital influence. Finally, incentives to reconcile the

advantages of conforming while maintaining

individuality and ethical integrity may lay the

groundwork for solutions to foster healthier social

and organizational environments.

REFERENCES

Asch, S.E. 1951. Effects of group pressure upon the modi-

fication and distortion of judgment. Groups, leadership

and men, Pittsburgh: Carnegie Press.

Chartrand, T.L. and Bargh, J.A. 1999. The chameleon ef-

fect: The perception–behavior link and social interac-

tion. Journal of personality and social psychology 76:

893.

Coultas, J.C. 2004. When in Rome... an evolutionary per-

spective on conformity. Group Processes & Intergroup

Relations 7: 317–331.

Crutchfield, R.S. 1955. Conformity and character. Ameri-

can psychologist 10: 191.

Henrich, J. and Boyd, R. 1998. The evolution of conformist

transmission and the emergence of between-group dif-

ferences. Evolution and human behavior 19: 215–241.

Hopper, L.M., Schapiro, S.J., Lambeth, S.P. and Brosnan,

S.F. 2011. Chimpanzees’ socially maintained food pref-

erences indicate both conservatism and conformity. An-

imal Behaviour 81: 1195–1202.

Meltzoff, A.N. and Keith, M.M. 1977. Imitation of facial

and manual gestures by human neonates. Science 198:

75–78.

Milgram, S., Bickman, L. and Berkowitz, L. 1969. Note on

the drawing power of crowds of different size. Journal

of personality and social psychology 13: 79.

Newcomb, T.M. 1943. Personality and social change; atti-

tude formation in a student community. San Diego:

Dryden Press.

IESD 2025 - International Conference on Innovative Education and Social Development

270