IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pcbi00/1009530.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How conformity can lead to polarised social behaviour

Author

Listed:
  • Folco Panizza
  • Alexander Vostroknutov
  • Giorgio Coricelli

Abstract

Learning social behaviour of others strongly influences one’s own social attitudes. We compare several distinct explanations of this phenomenon, testing their predictions using computational modelling across four experimental conditions. In the experiment, participants chose repeatedly whether to pay for increasing (prosocial) or decreasing (antisocial) the earnings of an unknown other. Halfway through the task, participants predicted the choices of an extremely prosocial or antisocial agent (either a computer, a single participant, or a group of participants). Our analyses indicate that participants polarise their social attitude mainly due to normative expectations. Specifically, most participants conform to presumed demands by the authority (vertical influence), or because they learn that the observed human agents follow the norm very closely (horizontal influence).Author summary: What drives people to extreme acts of generosity? What causes behaviour that is unduly spiteful? This study explored how our social decisions polarise. Participants chose whether to spend money to increase or decrease the earnings of an unknown person. Halfway through this task, they observed another agent playing. The agent took participants’ choices to the extremes: if for instance the participant was moderately generous, it spent considerable sums to help the other. Participants conformed regardless of whether the agent was a computer algorithm, a person, or a group of people. We tested several competing explanations of why this happened with the help of cognitive modelling. Our analyses identify two factors behind polarisation: willingness to comply with the experimenter expectations (social desirability), and concern about appropriate behaviour (norm conformity). Our approach provided insight into how social choices are influenced by others, and could be applied in the study of conformity in other types of decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Folco Panizza & Alexander Vostroknutov & Giorgio Coricelli, 2021. "How conformity can lead to polarised social behaviour," PLOS Computational Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(10), pages 1-27, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1009530
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009530
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009530
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009530&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009530?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Agerström, Jens & Carlsson, Rickard & Nicklasson, Linda & Guntell, Linda, 2016. "Using descriptive social norms to increase charitable giving: The power of local norms," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 147-153.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bartels, Lara & Kesternich, Martin, 2022. "Motivate the crowd or crowd- them out? The impact of local government spending on the voluntary provision of a green public good," ZEW Discussion Papers 22-040, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    2. Bamieh, Omar & Cintolesi, Andrea, 2021. "Intergenerational transmission in regulated professions and the role of familism," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 192(C), pages 857-879.
    3. Bartke, Simon & Friedl, Andreas & Gelhaar, Felix & Reh, Laura, 2017. "Social comparison nudges—Guessing the norm increases charitable giving," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 73-75.
    4. repec:cup:judgdm:v:15:y:2020:i:2:p:182-192 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Fazio, Andrea & Reggiani, Tommaso & Scervini, Francesco, 2023. "Social media charity campaigns and pro-social behaviour. Evidence from the Ice Bucket Challenge," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    6. Francesco Bogliacino & Laura Jiménez & Gianluca Grimalda, 2015. "Consultative, Democracy and Trust," Documentos de Trabajo, Escuela de Economía 12696, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, FCE, CID.
    7. Bunn, Philip & Haldane, Andrew & Pugh, Alice, 2020. "Has monetary policy made you happier?," Bank of England working papers 880, Bank of England.
    8. Itzhak Rasooly & Roberto Rozzi, 2022. "Masks, Cameras, and Social Pressure," Working Papers hal-03892947, HAL.
    9. David Fielding & Stephen Knowles & Ronald Peeters, 2022. "In search of competitive givers," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 88(4), pages 1517-1548, April.
    10. Gravert, Christina & Olsson Collentine, Linus, 2021. "When nudges aren’t enough: Norms, incentives and habit formation in public transport usage," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 1-14.
    11. Erlandsson, Arvid & Västfjäll, Daniel & Sundfelt, Oskar & Slovic, Paul, 2016. "Argument-inconsistency in charity appeals: Statistical information about the scope of the problem decrease helping toward a single identified victim but not helping toward many non-identified victims ," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 56(C), pages 126-140.
    12. Ennio Bilancini & Leonardo Boncinelli & Valerio Capraro & Roberto Di Paolo, 2020. "The effect of norm-based messages on reading and understanding COVID-19 pandemic response governmental rules," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 4(S), pages 45-55, June.
    13. Ma, Xuejing & Wang, Zetao & Liu, Hongju, 2022. "Do long-life customers pay more in pay-what-you-want pricing? Evidence from live streaming," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 142(C), pages 998-1009.
    14. Christina Gravert & Linus Olsson Collentine, 2019. "When nudges aren't enough: Incentives and habit formation in public transport usage," CEBI working paper series 19-10, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).
    15. Alix Rouillé, 2023. "Norm from the top: a social norm nudge to promote low-practiced behaviors without boomerang effect," Working Papers halshs-03673004, HAL.
    16. Graf, Caroline & Suanet, Bianca & Wiepking, Pamala & Merz, Eva-Maria, 2023. "Social norms offer explanation for inconsistent effects of incentives on prosocial behavior," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 429-441.
    17. Pietro Guarnieri & Lorenzo Spadoni, 2024. "Norms and anti-coordination: elicitation and priming in an El Farol Bar Game experiment," Discussion Papers 2024/303, Dipartimento di Economia e Management (DEM), University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
    18. Migchelbrink, Koen & Raymaekers, Pieter, 2023. "Nudging people to pay their parking fines on time. Evidence from a cluster-randomized field experiment," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    19. Ye, Jun & Zhou, Kun & Chen, Rui, 2021. "Numerical or verbal Information: The effect of comparative information in social comparison on prosocial behavior," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 124(C), pages 198-211.
    20. Itzhak Rasooly & Roberto Rozzi, 2022. "Masks, Cameras, and Social Pressure," SciencePo Working papers hal-03892947, HAL.
    21. Nhat Quang Le & Magne Supphellen & Richard P. Bagozzi, 2021. "Effects of negative social information on the willingness to support charities: the moderating role of regulatory focus," Marketing Letters, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 111-122, March.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pcbi00:1009530. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ploscompbiol (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/ploscompbiol/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.