Conformity can be observed in everyday life. The actions we take, the words we speak, and even the way we think are all affected by conformity, whether due to the desire to have an accurate perception of reality or the desire to be accepted by others . To be more precise, these influences are called informational and normative conformity, respectively. Regardless, people conform to formal or informal groups for both of these reasons. Although conformity is an intangible subject, it is a major 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 should not be banned”? Get an original essay The definition of the term “conformity” is “behavior consistent with socially accepted conventions” according to Oxford Living Dictionaries. This name first appeared in late Middle English and came 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 derives from the late Latin word conformis, meaning “similar in form” in the late 15th century. Its synonyms include agreement, agreement, congruence and congruence according to Merriam-Webster. In contrast, disagreement, incongruence and incongruity are its antonyms. Although obedience is not synonymous with conformity, these two concepts are generally closely related. Indeed, conformity and obedience are similar in many ways. For example, these are two types of social interactions, behaviors and influences visible in groups. Additionally, pressure and influence are present in both cases, so failing to meet the expectations of others could lead to self-isolation. Finally, in both situations, the notion of majority and minority still exists. There are, however, significant differences that mark a clear boundary between the two. For example, conformity involves a voluntary attempt to fit in and be correct, while obedience is a response to direct authority. More importantly, the reasons for complying and obeying differ. We conform out of fear of rejection, while we obey a supreme power to avoid punishment or other negative consequences. One aspect of conformity is compliance, which is a temporary change in a person's behavior. Conformity, or group acceptance, is the lowest level of conformity that occurs when an individual acquiesces to group norms in order to elicit a favorable reaction from a group. However, conformity does not imply a change in a person's private opinion but is manifested through outward, perceptible expressions of oneself. The most important research on conformity is the Asch Line Experiment which took place in 1951. Solomon Asch, an American psychologist, conducted an experiment designed to examine the extent to which social pressure from a majority could induce an individual to comply. A total of 50 male students from Swarthmore College in the United States participated in the experiment by taking the “vision test”. During the examination, there was only one naive participant in each room while the other seven were confederates who participated in the experiment. These confederates had agreed in advance to choose an answer that was clearly wrong without informing the naive participant. Then everyone in the room had the task of indicating which of the following lines A, B and C was thecloser to the standard line segment that appeared on a separate map in terms of length. The answer was obvious since line A was considerably shorter than the standard length, while line B was much longer than the standard length, leaving line C as the better choice. However, when everyone was asked to say their answers out loud, intentionally placing the real participant after all other confederates, 32% agreed with what the majority chose, which was clearly incorrect. Additionally, in 12 of the 18 trials, 75% of participants conformed to the majority at least once, and only a quarter of the total participants were able to resist group pressure and not conform. Surprisingly, over 99% of control participants gave the correct answer when allowed to express their judgment in private (McLeod). Asch's experiment demonstrates the first aspect of conformity, compliance, as these participants still believed in their own beliefs and only outwardly conformed to conforming to norms when in public. Another facet of conformity other than conforming to be accepted by a group is identification, which is the desire to belong that motivates people to conform to the majority. This is the intermediate level of conformity and occurs when an individual accepts influence in order to establish or maintain 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 self when the pressure to conform disappears. For example, the Zimbardo Prison Study, also known as the Stanford Prison Experiment, proves the idea of ​​identification. Stanford psychologist Philip Zimbardo and his colleagues conducted an experiment involving 21 Stanford student volunteers in 1971. The goal of the experiment was to discover whether the ferocity exhibited in the actions of American prison guards was due to the personalities natural sadists of the guards or were linked to the environment. To create ideal and fair conditions, Zimbardo ensured that all participants had no criminal records and were in good mental and physical health. Then he randomly grouped them into two roles: prisoners and guards. The ten randomly selected prisoners were locked in the simulated prison that was actually the basement of Stanford University's psychology building. Unexpectedly, guards and prisoners quickly identified their social roles; the guards became violent and the prisoners began to be passive and depressed. In fact, the more aggressive the guards became, the more submissive the prisoners became, meaning the prisoners identified more with their inferior role. Most importantly, the concept of identification is evident when the researchers found that during the experiment, 90 percent of the prisoners' private conversations focused on their thoughts about prison conditions, demonstrating that even their own private beliefs had been transformed. However, just after the experiment ended, prisoner #819 suddenly stopped crying and acted as if nothing had happened after suffering from emotional incontinence a few seconds ago due to the harsh treatment in prison . All demonstrate an identification participating in human behavior since, while they were still in the experiment, their beliefs, both public and private, were consistent with the social roles they are expected to play; However, once the experiment was over, they were able to return to their original state of mind. The soldiers,”.