The term “herd mentality” simply means you are a part of a larger group in terms of your opinions and actions. If we stop and think about it, we’re all a part of a herd in one way or another. Some of us are Republicans, some are Democrats, some are punks, some are religious. The list goes on.

The concept of herd mentality is anything but new. Yet, very few of us stop to consider why we conform to a group. Or why we obey authority. Or how these roles affect our behaviors.

Social influence has strong implications on an individual’s opinions and behaviors. As psychologists currently research, it likely influences our mental health as well. Maybe our stresses are coming from our perceived authority? Maybe our ill behavior is demanded by a particular social group?

By understanding herd mentality and our role within it, we may develop a better comprehension of ourselves as individuals.

The Acceptance of Social Influence

Have you ever stopped to ask why you accept social influences without a second thought? We encounter these influences constantly. Yet, most of the time we don’t question it.

For example, when you’re hired for a new job, most will do whatever it takes to please your supervisor. Or if you make a new group of friends, there’s a chance you’ll adopt (or play along with) their opinions and perspectives.

Though reasons can be found for every situation in which we conform, it begs the question: why do we conform to the herd in the first place?

Confirmation

Psychologists have observed the role of acceptance is vital to most people. Beyond the group itself, humans are conditioned to seek confirmation for their beliefs and actions. Simply put, we want to feel good about ourselves and our decisions. ¹

So, we hop on a bandwagon and participate in behaviors that complete our identity. For example, sports fans are bound to wear the same clothing as the teams they support. Or, in a group of friends, they may wear similar clothing for the sake of feeling as though they belong.

Cooperation

Our desire for acceptance comes with the fact that we crave to share similar ideas and experience situations. In other words, we want to cooperate with people to achieve a shared goal. ²

Such thinking goes beyond us. In many groups, cooperation is key to success. For example, let’s take a charity group located in a small community whose goal is to improve their environment. One way they may do this is by picking up litter along a highway.

An individual cannot accomplish this goal alone. Or, at least, it’d be much more difficult. Therefore, a herd mentality is necessary to achieve something from a larger picture.

Collective Thought

Still, even though cooperation can have a lot of positive effects, it’s not without its negatives. One of the biggest downsides is it almost forces people into collective thought (sometimes referred to as “group-think”).

Collective thought is when everyone involved develops a select set of convictions and actions. Most of the time, to further pursue their goals.

When an opposing group or individual comes along with different views, it’s often met with criticism. As such, people who participate in group thought are more likely to struggle with critical thinking.

Of course, a critical thinker is necessary to guide a group’s thoughts. Without one, a group can lose affluence. ³

Still, one person’s decisions should determine a group’s. Critical thinking allows us to identify and evaluate our values and behaviors. Through this, we can change when conditions require us to and grow as individuals.

Unity

One of the greatest accomplishments of herd mentality is it allows a society to flourish. And it does so without the risk of negative actions being taken by individuals.

This can be acutely observed in laws and regulations. Broader laws, such as the prohibition of violence and theft, protect everyone within a community. Such laws also allow us to continue pursuing society with less risk of danger.

Still, for these laws to work, a herd mentality must be enacted. We all must agree to these laws and regulations as normal and, as individuals, act accordingly.

Why Do We Conform?

When looking at aspects of herd mentality, we can pull apart a lot of positive aspects of this way of thinking. However, psychologists aren’t always interested in the positives. In fact, most research seeks out how herd mentality can be disadvantageous.

We’ve already discussed how herd mentality leads to a lack of critical thinking. As a result, an individual is susceptible to conforming to a tapered set of views and behaviors. Such tapering often discourages the individual from developing innovative ideas. It also scares people from questioning and debating the group’s beliefs.

Behaviors such as these are often associated with cults where the authority of the group has manipulation over the individual’s beliefs and actions. However, these disadvantages can play out on a nationwide scale.

The Nazi Party of World War II’s Germany is a prime example. It’s often forgotten that Adolf Hitler practically started from nothing – herding together only a selection of people and conforming them to his fascist beliefs. With enough time, Hitler took this herd mentality to an unprecedented scale.

Of course, it can’t be overlooked that many Germans simply conformed to Hitler’s beliefs. But why would they do so even if they internally questioned the authenticity of such beliefs?

There are two reasons each of us conforms to beliefs, no matter how radical they may appear in context:

• Informative Social Influence – To conduct ourselves based on an informed point of view.

• Normative Social Influence – To relate to the convictions and conduct of a social group.

Hitler may be an extreme example of how social influence plays a role in our lives. But this isn’t about the extremity of one leader’s actions. It’s about the nature of human thinking within a social construct.

What is Informative Social Influence?

Information is one of the most powerful tools of social influence. We each seek out information constantly and often question whether our knowledge of a particular subject is accurate.

For example, an actor might play a role outside his comfort zone. To better understand this role, he will naturally have to do some research. Though this research is helpful, it doesn’t offer him acceptance. So, he turns to others, offers them a quick tidbit of the role, and hopes to garner acceptance of his knowledge.

No matter what the spectators tell the actor, they will offer him their knowledge in one way or another. If the actor still lacks confidence in his own knowledge, he’s more inclined to accept theirs, regardless of whether or not the information is accurate.

This is how informative social influences work and it plays a major role in our perspective outlook. Social psychologist Muzafer Sherif knew this and wanted to demonstrate it.

Through a 1935 experiment using the autokinetic effect, he had participants isolated in a darkened room where a single motionless light was projected onto a wall. According to the autokinetic effect, if a person doesn’t have another object to allow them to judge the light’s position, it will appear as though it’s moving. ⁴

One group of Sherif’s participants were asked how much they saw the light move. Their reports came back claiming the light had moved in widely varying distances and was completely based upon each participant’s perspectives.

A second group was asked the same question about the light’s movement, except this time they gave their answers in front of other group members. Sherif discovered that though each participant would mention an initial varying distance, the majority reported that the light’s range became smaller over time.

Sherif observed that most of his participants were unsure of the light’s movement and sought out available information from others. In turn, the answers from other members became their opinion and there was a noticeable conformity among this group of participants.

What is Normative Social Influence?

Normative social influence is a bit more direct and easier to pick up in terms of social influence. Simply put, it’s when a person wants to “fit in” among his colleagues.

Normative social influence is primarily determined by the belief that a person wants to maintain their position within a group. This means a person will create their values and opinions based on the group to be liked and respected. This person will also alter their attitudes and conduct to become more equal to that group. ⁵

This behavior can be looked at in several different ways. For a group of friends, it may appear through fashion trends. For a religious group, it may appear through rituals and traditions. For popularity’s sake, a person may participate in activities they aren’t interested in.

Conformity in Public and Private

A person may conform to a group even when they disagree with the opinions of that group. Still, over time, this person’s opinion will likely change to better match the group’s needs. With that, they adopt a set of behaviors to continue their allegiance.

These behaviors can appear in two different ways: ⁶

• Public Conformity – Making sure one’s behaviors are equal to the expectations of those within a group while, in private, holding a different perspective. For example, a high school student may claim he likes rap music when among his peers. But at home, he much prefers to listen to rock.

• Private Conformity – When one finds their opinions changing no longer for the sake of the group, but rather because they genuinely feel a difference. For example, a student who pretends to like rap music may eventually become fond of it. His opinions have changed in his private life and he’s produced private conformity.

With everything we’ve discussed so far, the real question remains, why do people conform in this manner? What is their motivation?

Solomon Asch’s Findings

Solomon Asch was a 20th-century Polish psychologist hailed as one of the most-cited researchers on conformity. In the 1950s, Asch conducted several experiments to understand the conditions that lead a person to conform. ⁷

At Swarthmore College, Asch conducted an experiment where he showed participants a printed line that was a specific length. Following that was a series of additional lines of fluctuating lengths. One of these lines was the same length as the initial while the other two were much different.

Asch then asked his participants to tell him which line they thought was the same length as the first. And he asked this in a group setting. This left the participants in a tricky situation. Many had come up with the line they had felt was identical to the first. However, many of their answers were contradicted when other group members spoke out.

It came down to a crucial decision: follow the herd or report back with their private opinion. By using an experimental design, Asch ensured participants didn’t succumb to informative influence. He did this by making the matching line lengths completely obvious.

Still, even through this palpable clarity, participants were more likely to conform to group norms. Even when they knew the answer was wrong!

Asch’s study revealed that people who doubt their own knowledge are more likely to fall in line with the majority. Many would rather participate in public conformity.

The Three Types of Conformity

According to Herbert C. Kelmen, a Social Ethics professor at Harvard University, there are three types of conformity: ⁸

Identification

Identification is similar to public conformity. A person will individually identify with a group and adopt their opinion and behaviors. The purpose of this identification will vary depending on the person. For example, some may simply seek to gain a favor while others are looking for social acceptance.

However, though one identifies with the group, they don’t embody the group’s standards. Again, we can use the example of the high school student who tells his peers he likes rap music when, in private, he prefers rock.

Internalization

Internalization takes shape when a group member (often a new member) adopts views and opinions from the group’s influence. Not only will this person publicly advocate their group’s opinion, but they’ll claim them as their own beliefs.

This is most notably seen within religious groups when a spiritual leader (i.e. a priest) proclaims an opinion that their followers adopt. However, this can also be seen in politics and cults.

Compliance

Compliance is probably the most obvious sign of conformity. This is when an individual or entire group complies with a particular set of instructions produced by another. Compliance doesn’t require private conformity as an individual or multiple group members may doubt their instructions.

Compliance is most notably seen when authority figures play a role within a group. An easy example is when a person sees red and blue headlights behind their car, they’re likely to comply and pull over as they view a police officer with authority.

Still, the same can be said about a teacher requesting something from a student or a father requesting something from his child. As long as the receiving end looks towards the instructor with authority, they’re met with compliance.

The Obedience of the Individual

One of the most public forms of conformity is obedience. This is when a person alters their behavior to obey another. Most of the time, this “another” appears in the form of authority. ⁹

Obedience does not involve private opinion. A person can still have different beliefs than the authority, but follow through with the desired behavior.

We often see obedience appear in hierarchical relations. For example, a child is expected to obey their parents, or a soldier is expected to take commands from their superior officer.

More often than not, people obey primarily out of fear of consequences. The child is afraid of being grounded whereas the soldier fears being prosecuted.

The Power of Obedience

In many regards, obedience can be a fundamental way to keep order within a society. Yet, at the same time, it can also be used to promote chaos.

There is no better example than Nazi Adolf Eichmann’s testimony during the Nuremberg trials. In question as to why he willingly participated in war crimes that led to the Holocaust, he responded that he was simply following orders of higher-ranking officers.

This struck the curiosity of Stanley Milgram, an American psychologist. Milgram wanted to know how an individual could obey orders even when such actions led to such enormity.

To observe this psychological mystery, he conducted a study where participants were asked to play the role of a teacher. Each teacher was given a set of controls that allowed them to administer electric shocks to the learner. Teachers were told to punish the learner only when they gave an incorrect answer. They also could adjust the level of shock they gave. ¹⁰

While not every teacher administered shock when a student didn’t know the right answer, others were intrigued by the authority it gave them. What Milgram concluded was participants all obeyed the teachers to avoid being shocked. However, each participant’s obedience varied depending on several factors.

The first was how much they perceived the teacher as an authority figure. One with less authoritative qualities (i.e. confidence, decisiveness, and persuasiveness) was less likely to gain obedience.

Secondly, there were situational factors. For instance, there were varying levels of morality between participants. It was also discovered that the environment a participant found themselves in also influenced their conduct.

Milgram’s Agency Theory

In 1974, Milgram offered what he termed “Agency Theory” to explain tendencies an individual feels when obeying authority. This theory claims that an individual is most likely in one of the following two states at any given moment: ¹¹

• Agentic State – When an individual perceives someone else to be in a position of authority, they’ll obey that person’s orders. In many regards, the individual acts as an “agent” on behalf of the authority figure. If the individual eventually perceives their behaviors as a mistake, they’ll blame the authority rather than themselves.

• Autonomous State – An individual who feels their behavior is a product developed by their beliefs and responsibilities. If this individual makes a mistake, they tend to feel guilt and regret for their actions.

It’s important to note that these two states are interchangeable. For example, if a person feels the authority figure will take full responsibility for a mistake, they can quickly switch from an autonomous state to an agentic state. Milgram considered this an “agentic shift.”

What Makes Us Conform?

There are several reasons why we conform. These include:

• The Size of the Majority – Most psychologists have concluded that conformity is more likely to happen when the size of the majority increases.

• Cultural Influences – Many cultures will have different influences on conformity. This is primarily based on whether the society believes in individualism or collectivism. For example, in places such as the United States or the United Kingdom, where individualism is valued, there’s less conformity.

• The Difficulty of a Task – If a person finds a task too daunting to complete on their own, they are more likely to conform to a group that will help.

• Unanimity – Within conformity, there is usually a voice of reason. If every group member agrees to an opinion, then they will conform. However, if just one person disagrees, there’s a chance other members will start to conduct themselves more independently.

These aren’t the only factors that play a role in conformity. Several traits – such as personality, persuasiveness, and overall goal – also influence conformity.

References

¹ Weir, K. (2020, January 14). The pain of social rejection. Monitor on Psychology, 43(4). Available from: https://www.apa.org/monitor/2012/04/rejection

² Boyd R, Richerson PJ. Culture and the evolution of human cooperation. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2009 Nov 12;364(1533):3281-8. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2009.0134. PMID: 19805434; PMCID: PMC2781880.

³ Pillar PR. The danger of groupthink [Internet]. The Center for the National Interest; 2013. Available from: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/paul-pillar/the-danger-groupthink-8161

⁴ Autokinetic effect and Social Norms. Networks [Internet]. Available from: https://blogs.cornell.edu/info2040/2015/11/20/autokinetic-effect-and-social-norms/

⁵ Mead EL, Rimal RN, Ferrence R, Cohen JE. Understanding the sources of normative influence on behavior: the example of tobacco. Soc Sci Med. 2014 Aug;115:139-43. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.05.030. Epub 2014 May 21. PMID: 24910005; PMCID: PMC4124724.

⁶ Sowden S, Koletsi S, Lymberopoulos E, Militaru E, Catmur C, Bird G. Quantifying compliance and acceptance through public and private social conformity. Conscious Cogn. 2018 Oct;65:359-367. doi: 10.1016/j.concog.2018.08.009. Epub 2018 Sep 12. PMID: 30219289; PMCID: PMC6204883.

⁷ Asch, S. E. (1951). Effects of group pressure upon the modification and distortion of judgments. In H. Guetzkow (Ed.), Groups, leadership and men; research in human relations (pp. 177–190). Carnegie Press. Available from: https://faculty.babson.edu/krollag/org_site/soc_psych/asch_conform.html

⁸ Kelman HC. Compliance, identification, and internalization: Three processes of attitude change. Journal of Conflict Resolution. 1958;2 (1) :51-60. Available from: https://scholar.harvard.edu/hckelman/publications/compliance-identification-and-internalization-three-processes-attitude-change

⁹ Gibson S. Obedience without orders: Expanding social psychology’s conception of ‘obedience’. Br J Soc Psychol. 2019 Jan;58(1):241-259. doi: 10.1111/bjso.12272. Epub 2018 Aug 29. PMID: 30156301.

¹⁰ Grzyb T, Dolinski D. Beliefs about Obedience Levels in Studies Conducted within the Milgram Paradigm: Better than Average Effect and Comparisons of Typical Behaviors by Residents of Various Nations. Front Psychol. 2017 Sep 20;8:1632. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01632. PMID: 28979232; PMCID: PMC5611685.

¹¹ Russell NJ. Milgram’s Obedience to Authority experiments: origins and early evolution. Br J Soc Psychol. 2011 Mar;50(Pt 1):140-62. doi: 10.1348/014466610X492205. PMID: 21366616.