Conformity to Group Norms

Definition
Conformity to Group Norms refers to the herd mentality. Human beings naturally flock
together and like to think with the group.

Our reliance on acceptance in social circles forces us to make choices, take actions, agree or say
something may be contrary to our personal beliefs, for fear of social rejection.

The first scientific experiment recording Conformity to Group Norms was conducted in 1936 by
Muzafer Sherif (one of the founders of psychology). It was called The Autokinetic Experiment.

A group of text subjects were placed in a darkened room and told to stare at a small dot of light
situated 15 feet away.

Afterwards, the subjects were asked to estimate of how many times the dot of light had moved.
In reality, the dot didnt move at all, but there is a visual illusion known as the "autokinetc
effect" in which a small stationery point of light can give the appearance of movement to the
human eye. The amount the dot may appear to move can vary from person to person.

Participants were asked individually how many times they thought the spot of light had moved.
In this case, every participant had a different perception to offer. Then the participants were
placed in the same room and asked the same question jointly. It was found that the subjects
jointly agreed on an estimate and conformed to it, even to the point of recanting their original
answer.

The result showed how people gravitate towards agreeing with the majority, and opinions are
shared amongst social groups.

Further experiments identifying the Theory of Conformism were conducted in the 1950s by
American Gestalt psychologist Solomon Asch.

123 male participants were put into groups of 7-9. In each group, all of the participants knew the
nature of experiment, except one individual (the Subject).

All participants were shown a card with a line on it. They were then shown another card with 3
lines on it, each line was labeled a, b, and c.

The task was to identify which line, a, b or c matched the line shown in the first card.
The task was first conducted twice, during which each group supplied the correct answer. This
allowed the Subject to become comfortable with the task and the group.

Then on the third task, the rest of the group deliberately started giving incorrect answers. The
purpose of the experiment was to see how often the Subject disagreed with the rest of the group.
The result of the test showed that a surprising percentage of subjects conformed and went with
the answers of the group, even when they knew the answer was wrong.

Further variation in the testing found that so long as the Subject had an ally to back him up, he
was able to retain the veracity of his opinion. However, as soon as he was isolated, he became
more willing to yield to the opinions of the group.

Some of more yielding subjects admitted later that they knew they were correct, but didn't
want to differ from the rest of the group or spoil the results. The most astonishing result is
those that believed that the majority were in fact correct and that their own perceptions "must be
wrong", or they actually started to see the line lengths just as the majority claimed to see them!

These kinds of experiments help explain how mass-thinking such as that witnessed in Germany
during Hitlers reign was able to develop, and how entire nations can support atrocities that the
rest of the world cannot understand.

Of course, Hitlers ability to manipulate mass opinion in Germany wasnt simply achieved
according group-think. Politicians commonly use a range of persuasive linguistic techniques to
convince people that their view of the world is the right view many of which youll find in this
product.

Use in Marketing:
Knowing that humans naturally gravitate towards the opinion shared by the majority, marketers
pepper their copy with testimonials from as many people as possible, as well as citing case
studies and success stories. The idea is the more people they can show support their product, the
more likely another person is to agree with the claims.

Everyone else says so, so it must be true.

However, before you start thinking that group norm is a magic pill for success, be warned:

It can take many positive testimonials to convince someone to buy, and only a few negative
comments to convince them not to. Think about Amazon product reviews you may see 10
reviews attached to a product; 7 are positive and 3 are negative. Even though the majority of
reviewers liked the product, those 3 will still cause most people to hesitate, and in fact they are
more likely to zone in on the negative comments first.
This means the pressure is on companies to produce high quality products and services, to avoid
any negative press.

Some less scrupulous people may deliberately post negative reviews about a competitor's
product to deliberately sabotage sales, while others may drum up fake positive reviews about
their product or company. The way to recognize bogus reviews or testimonials is to actually
examine what the reviewer is saying: If they are simply saying that a product is rubbish but do
not provide concrete evidence for backing up their claim, it is not a worthy review.
Similarly, if someone is gushing that the product is the best thing since sliced bread, but dont
actually give concrete evidence to back up their claim, again it is not a good review.

The best kind of review or testimonial is one that identifies specific results.

For example:

By applying the 3 core methods outlined in Product Wonder by John Brown, I was able to cut
my business expenses by 50%. The result is I am now able to hire that person to help me run my
business, that Ive been hoping for, for the last 2 years. I can now move on to expanding the
business instead of just slogging away in it. [name, website, etc]
"Social Proof" is the term Cialdini uses to refer to Conformity to Group Norms. This video
shows how sellers on half.com use it as a persuasive tool: