English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Released

Journal Article

Conformity without majority? The case for demarcating social from majority influences

MPS-Authors
/persons/resource/persons16231

Van Leeuwen,  Edwin J. C.
Comparative Cognitive Anthropology, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;
Department of Developmental Psychology, University of Jena;
Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany;

/persons/resource/persons73

Haun,  Daniel B. M.
Comparative Cognitive Anthropology, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;
Department of Developmental Psychology, University of Jena;
Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany;

External Resource
No external resources are shared
Fulltext (restricted access)
There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.
Fulltext (public)

van Leeuwen_Haun_2014.pdf
(Publisher version), 349KB

Supplementary Material (public)
There is no public supplementary material available
Citation

Van Leeuwen, E. J. C., & Haun, D. B. M. (2014). Conformity without majority? The case for demarcating social from majority influences. Animal Behaviour, 96, 187-194. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2014.08.004.


Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-002B-3214-7
Abstract
In this review, we explore the extent to which the recent evidence for conformity in nonhuman animals may alternatively be explained by the animals' preference for social information regardless of the number of individuals demonstrating the respective behaviour. Conformity as a research topic originated in human psychology and has been described as the phenomenon in which individuals change their behaviour to match the behaviour displayed by the majority of group members. Recent studies have aimed to investigate the same process in nonhuman animals; however, most of the adopted designs have not been able to control for social influences independent of any majority influence and some studies have not even incorporated a majority in their designs. This begs the question to what extent the ‘conformity interpretation’ is preliminary and should be revisited in light of animals' general susceptibility to social influences. Similarly, demarcating social from majority influences sheds new light on the original findings in human psychology and motivates reinterpretation of the reported behavioural patterns in terms of social instead of majority influences. Conformity can have profound ramifications for individual fitness and group dynamics; identifying the exact source responsible for animals' behavioural adjustments is essential for understanding animals' learning biases and interpreting cross-species data in terms of evolutionary processes.