Social Influence and Conformity: A Transorientational Model

Abstract

Historically, social influence and conformity have been of major concern to social psychologists. Some of the earliest research in the discipline relates to this topic (Sherif, 1936), and it continues to generate a considerable amount of empirical and theoretical activity (Cialdini, 1988; Kiesler & Kiesler, 1969; Latané & Wolf, 1981; Maass & Clark, 1984; Nail, 1986; Stasser & Davis, 1981; Tanford & Penrod, 1984). Despite its centrality and importance and despite several reasonable attempts to clarify terminology (Jahoda, 1959; Kelman, 1958; Nail, 1986; Stricker, Messick, & Jackson, 1970; Willis, 1963), little consistency (conformity?) exists among investigators in this area. They continue to create their own idiosyncratic definitions, and these may vary widely. These definitions also vary from one era to another (e.g., Deaux & Wrightsman, 1984; Wrightsman, 1972). Even within a particular era, certain paradigms (e.g., forced compliance, foot-in-the door, obedience, the Crutchfield apparatus, etc.) are often studied to excess while several others are ignored or excluded.