Conformity can be observed on a daily basis. The actions we take, the words we say, and even the way we think are all influenced by conformity, whether through the desire to have an accurate perception of reality or the desire to be accepted by others. To be more specific, these influences are called informational compliance and normative compliance, respectively. In any case, people conform to formal or informal groups for these two reasons. Although conformity is an intangible topic, it is an important social phenomenon that can be distinguished into three types: conformity, identification and internalization. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay The definition of the term “conformity” is “behavior that conforms to socially accepted conventions” according to Oxford Living Dictionaries. This noun first appeared in late Middle English and originated from two different branches of the dialect. One of these is the Old French word conformite, which is defined as “similarity, correspondence in form or manner” in 14c. “Conformity” also comes from the late 15th century late Latin word conformis, meaning “similar in form”. Its synonyms include agreement, agreement, congruence and congruence according to Merriam-Webster. On the contrary, disagreement, inconsistency and inconsistency are its opposites. Although obedience is not one of the synonyms of conformity, these two concepts are usually closely related. In fact, compliance and obedience are similar in many ways. For example, it is both types of social interactions, behaviors and influences that can be seen in groups. Furthermore, in both cases there are pressures and influences such that the inability to meet the expectations of others could lead to isolation of oneself. Finally, in both situations, the concept of majority and minority always exists. However, there are significant differences that draw a clear line between the two. For example, conformity involves a voluntary attempt to fit in and be correct, while obedience is a response to direct authority. Most significantly, the reasons for conforming and obeying differ. We conform out of fear of rejection, while obeying a supreme power to avoid punishment or other negative consequences. One of the aspects of conformity is conformity, which is a temporary change in one's behavior. Conformity, or group acceptance, is the lowest level of conformity that occurs when an individual accepts group norms to elicit a favorable reaction from a group. However, acquiescence does not imply a change in one's private opinion, but manifests itself in outwardly perceptible self-expressions. The most notable research on conformity is the Asch line experiment, which occurred in 1951. Solomon Asch, an American psychologist, conducted an experiment designed to examine the extent to which social pressure from the majority could influence an individual to conform. There were a total of 50 male students from Swarthmore College in the United States who participated in the experiment by taking the “eye test”. During the examination there was only one naïve participant in each room while all seven others were accomplices who took part in the experiment. These confederates had agreed in advance to choose a clearly wrong answer without telling the naïve participant. Then, everyone present in the room was given the task of indicating which of the following lines A, B and C was closest to the standard line segment that was on a separate card in terms of length. The answerwas obvious as the A line was considerably shorter than the standard length, while the B line was much longer than the standard length, leaving the C line as the better choice. However, when everyone was asked to say their answers out loud, purposely placing the real participant after all the other accomplices, 32% accepted what the majority had chosen, which was clearly incorrect. Furthermore, in 12 of the 18 studies, 75% of participants conformed to the majority at least once, and only a quarter of total participants were able to resist group pressure and not conform. Surprisingly, more than 99% of control participants gave the correct answer when they were able to express their judgment in private. Asch's experiment demonstrates the first aspect of conformity, acquiescence, since these participants still believed in their beliefs and only conformed on the outside to fit the norms when in public. Another aspect of conformity other than conforming to be accepted by a group is identification, or the desire to belong that motivates people to conform to the majority. It is the average level of conformity and occurs when an individual accepts influence for the purpose of establishing or maintaining a satisfactory status within a group. In other words, people conform to social role expectations both publicly and privately in the presence of a group and return to their original selves when the pressure to conform disappears. For example, Zimbardo's Prison Study, also known as the Stanford Prison Experiment, demonstrates the idea of ​​identification. Philip Zimbardo, a Stanford psychologist, and his colleagues conducted an experiment involving 21 volunteer Stanford students in 1971. The purpose of the experiment was to find out whether the ferocity displayed in the actions of guards in American prisons was due to natural sadistic personalities of the guards or had to do with the environment. To create an ideal and fair condition, Zimbardo ensured that all participants had no criminal record and were mentally and physically healthy. Then he randomly grouped them into two roles: prisoners and guards. The ten randomly selected prisoners were locked in the simulated prison which was actually the basement of the psychology building at Stanford University. Unexpectedly, both guards and prisoners quickly identified their social roles; the guards became violent and the prisoners began to be passive and depressed. Indeed, the more aggressive the guards became, the more submissive the prisoners became, which meant that the prisoners further identified with their inferior role. More importantly, the concept of identification is evident when the researchers found that during the experiment, 90% of the prisoners' private conversations were about their thoughts about prison conditions, demonstrating that their private beliefs had also been transformed. However, soon after the experiment ended, prisoner no. 819 suddenly stopped crying and acted as if nothing had happened after having emotional incontinence seconds earlier due to harsh treatment in prison. All of these demonstrate identification taking part in human behavior since, when they were still in the experiment, both their public and private beliefs conformed to the social roles they should play; however, once the experiment was over, they were able to return to their initial mindset. The German soldiers who took part in the Holocaust can be seen as an important example of identification, in which they adapted their minds to become what they”.