To Conform or Not to Conform: Spontaneous Conformity Diminishes the Sensitivity to Monetary Outcomes

When people have different opinions in a group, they often adjust their own attitudes and behaviors to match the group opinion, known as social conformity. The affiliation account of normative conformity states that people conform to norms in order to ‘fit in’, whereas the accuracy account of informative conformity posits that the motive to learn from others produces herding. Here, we test another possibility that following the crowd reduces the experienced negative emotion when the group decision turns out to be a bad one. Using event related potential (ERP) combined with a novel group gambling task, we found that participants were more likely to choose the option that was predominately chosen by other players in previous trials, although there was little explicit normative pressure at the decision stage and group choices were not informative. When individuals' choices were different from others, the feedback related negativity (FRN), an ERP component sensitive to losses and errors, was enhanced, suggesting that being independent is aversive. At the outcome stage, the losses minus wins FRN effect was significantly reduced following conformity choices than following independent choices. Analyses of the P300 revealed similar patterns both in the response and outcome period. Our study suggests that social conformity serves as an emotional buffer that protects individuals from experiencing strong negative emotion when the outcomes are bad.

[1]  Andrew Whiten,et al.  Integrating the study of conformity and culture in humans and nonhuman animals. , 2012, Psychological bulletin.

[2]  Jonas K. Olofsson,et al.  Affective picture processing: An integrative review of ERP findings , 2008, Biological Psychology.

[3]  R. Compton,et al.  Social deviance activates the brain’s error-monitoring system , 2012, Cognitive, affective & behavioral neuroscience.

[4]  Caroline F. Zink,et al.  Neurobiological Correlates of Social Conformity and Independence During Mental Rotation , 2005, Biological Psychiatry.

[5]  Clay B. Holroyd,et al.  The feedback-related negativity reflects the binary evaluation of good versus bad outcomes , 2006, Biological Psychology.

[6]  A. Turken,et al.  Dissociation between conflict detection and error monitoring in the human anterior cingulate cortex , 2002, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[7]  Xiaolin Zhou,et al.  The P300 and reward valence, magnitude, and expectancy in outcome evaluation , 2009, Brain Research.

[8]  W. Pritchard Psychophysiology of P300. , 1981, Psychological bulletin.

[9]  Adrian R. Willoughby,et al.  The Medial Frontal Cortex and the Rapid Processing of Monetary Gains and Losses , 2002, Science.

[10]  N. Yeung,et al.  On the ERN and the significance of errors. , 2005, Psychophysiology.

[11]  Gregory S. Berns,et al.  Neural mechanisms of the influence of popularity on adolescent ratings of music , 2010, NeuroImage.

[12]  Clay B. Holroyd,et al.  The neural basis of human error processing: reinforcement learning, dopamine, and the error-related negativity. , 2002, Psychological review.

[13]  Rongjun Yu,et al.  Brain responses to outcomes of one's own and other's performance in a gambling task , 2006, Neuroreport.

[14]  A. Sanfey,et al.  Independent Coding of Reward Magnitude and Valence in the Human Brain , 2004, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[15]  Matthew J. Salganik,et al.  Experimental Study of Inequality and Unpredictability in an Artificial Cultural Market , 2006, Science.

[16]  G. Fernández,et al.  Reinforcement Learning Signal Predicts Social Conformity , 2009, Neuron.

[17]  Atsushi Sato,et al.  Effects of value and reward magnitude on feedback negativity and P300 , 2005, Neuroreport.

[18]  E Donchin,et al.  A new method for off-line removal of ocular artifact. , 1983, Electroencephalography and clinical neurophysiology.

[19]  Noah J. Goldstein,et al.  Social influence: compliance and conformity. , 2004, Annual review of psychology.

[20]  Elliot T. Berkman,et al.  Prediction-error in the context of real social relationships modulates reward system activity , 2012, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

[21]  B. Bernheim,et al.  A Theory of Conformity , 1994, Journal of Political Economy.

[22]  Clay B. Holroyd,et al.  ERP correlates of feedback and reward processing in the presence and absence of response choice. , 2005, Cerebral cortex.

[23]  Dirk J. Heslenfeld,et al.  Activity in human reward-sensitive brain areas is strongly context dependent , 2005, NeuroImage.

[24]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  The neural basis of error detection: conflict monitoring and the error-related negativity. , 2004, Psychological review.

[25]  Daniella K. Villalba,et al.  Memory conformity affects inaccurate memories more than accurate memories , 2012, Memory.

[26]  Jonathan D. Cohen,et al.  Conflict monitoring and anterior cingulate cortex: an update , 2004, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[27]  S. Asch Effects of Group Pressure Upon the Modification and Distortion of Judgments , 1951 .

[28]  M. Deutsch,et al.  A study of normative and informational social influences upon individual judgement. , 1955, Journal of abnormal psychology.

[29]  Clay B. Holroyd,et al.  Reinforcement-related brain potentials from medial frontal cortex: origins and functional significance , 2004, Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews.

[30]  T W Picton,et al.  The P300 Wave of the Human Event‐Related Potential , 1992, Journal of clinical neurophysiology : official publication of the American Electroencephalographic Society.

[31]  Ben Seymour,et al.  Insula and Striatum Mediate the Default Bias , 2010, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[32]  Hiroaki Masaki,et al.  Affective-motivational influences on feedback-related ERPs in a gambling task , 2006, Brain Research.