ABSTRACT
Groups have a particular quality that fosters a desire for consensus and compliance (e.g., Asch, 1952; Boyanowsky & Allen, 1973; Burnstein & Vinokur, 1975; Festinger, 1950; Hogg & Hains, 1998; Insko, Drenan, Solomon, Smith, & Wade, 1983; Janis, 1982; Levine, 1989; Sherif, 1936). Disunity potentially undermines both the social reality offered by the group and the potential to attain group goals, so it is not surprising that group members conform themselves and make attempts, often successfully, to induce conformity to the group (see Berkowitz & Howard, 1959; Davis & Witte, 1996; Deutsch & Gerard, 1955; Earle, 1986; Latané & Nida, 1981; Levine & Thompson, 1996; Mullen, 1991; Schachter, 1951; Williams, Cheung & Choi, 2000). As M.E.Shaw (1976) observed, “An individual who can be expected to behave in conventional ways is unlikely to disrupt the group, whereas an unconventional person is likely to cause disorder and dissatisfaction.” (p. 176). This perspective on group processes suggests that reactions to group members will be driven substantially by the magnitude of their differences from the group norm.
