There

are two very important aspects that are used to define group behavior. These are known as conformity and compliance and are both prevalent in all types of social groups. Although they both sound very similar, they are two distinct types of behaviors. Conformity exists within a group when a member is known to change their attitude or belief in order to become equal with others in the group. An individual who tends to conform must be obedient and compliant and in order to adjust, individual must acknowledge and attribute another individual as having the legitimacy and credibility to influence their own and the groups behavior, indirectly making them the leader. Without this leader, conformity will be less evident towards the groups goals. On the other hand, the concept of compliance is similar to conformity, however they do differ slightly. In order to comply or for compliance to occur within social groups, an individual must adapt his/her actions to anothers wishes or rules whereas on the other hand, a conforming individual must have a disposition that allows them to yield to the others. Acts of compliance are occurring in peoples lives on a daily basis. A simple act of compliance that can be referred to is responding favorably to an explicit or implicit request to perform a task offered by another individual. An explicit request can be explained, as a direct request for donations and an implicit request is promotional advertisement of products without directly asking for a purchase. An effective method of gaining compliance is through rational persuasion and inspiration. Although an individual is asking another to perform a task, he/she is not asking the person to agree or disagree with the task at hand neither are they attempting to change the others beliefs but simply requires the task to be performed. This is what differentiates the acts of compliance and conformity. The central concept of conformity is that the person being influenced by a group changes their attitudes and/or beliefs in order to fit in whereas the central aspect of compliance is simply the achievement of a specified task. Commonly known researcher in the field of psychology of persuasion, Robert Cialdini outlined a set of compliance techniques that are also ways that individuals are influenced to comply with the demands or desires of others. There are six important factors that influences the likelihood of compliance to a request, they are as follows: 1. Reciprocity the need individuals feel to reciprocate or return a favor. For example if someone does something for you, like lowering the price of a product, then the individual begins to feel more obligated to do something in return for them, in this case buying the product. 2. Commitment If an individual makes a small commitment or if they agree to something either like behavior or simply a statement of belief, this makes them more like to comply and commit to similar requests. 3. Scarcity Individuals hate to feel like they cant have something and also value opportunities more when they are less readily available, thus people desire scare objects more. This explains the existence of last chance and limited time only sales.

4. Authority: An individual is most likely to comply with one in a position of authority. This is why several companies use famous people as positions of authority to advertise and endorse their product so people associate the brand with this famous person. The person in authority can range from an actual figure of authority like a doctor or the president or can simply be a popular celebrity or filmstar or someone who is well respected in the community. 5. Liking: Individuals are also more likely to comply with requests from people they like over those they dislike. 6. Social Proof/ Conformity This is explained when people comply to a behavior if they see others performing it and consider it correct. For example, if everyone is buying a specific product, then the individual will feel the need to purchase the product as well. Reciprocity is one of the most widespread and primary norms of human culture. It is metaphorically considered as a web of indebtedness, and is a unique contrivance allowing the division of labor, exchange of various goods and services and a formation of interdependencies that forcefully bind individuals together into a more functional and efficient unit. Mm This can be explained as the reciprocity principle, which states that we should treat others the way they treat us. In other words, individuals find it highly disagreeable to be in a state of obligation and find it necessary to repay what another person has provided. This principle creates confidence and enables development of a variety of relationships ensuring that what is given to another is not simply lost but a means of future obligation which will be repaid eventually. It is also true that this behavioral means is inculcated in children and they are trained to abide by it from a very young age. One very important emotion that plays a key role in reciprocity is guilt and the arousal of this feeling is a strategy used by several businesses on their customers or to attract potential customers. Dennis Regan (1971) conducted an experiment where a participant and a confederate were asked to rate pieces of art. In the controlled experiment, the confederate left the room for a two-minute break and then returned. In the treatment condition, the confederate returned with two bottles of coke, one for themselves and the other for the participant. After the rating had been done of the paintings, the participant was asked to do a favor by the confederate being told that the confederate was selling raffle tickets for a new car and if he sold the most tickets he would win a $50 prize amount. The confederate in the treatment condition managed to sell twice as many tickets than the controlled experiment. Reciprocity does not necessarily involve the giving of gifts or incentives always, but can also be the reason that someone feels another has compromised on their wants and hence the individual must make a compromise to acknowledge this behavior. A commonly used example for this is known as the door-in-the-face technique. In the case of this technique, an unreasonable request made is most likely to be turned down, after which a second request made which lowers the requirement, it is more likely to be

accepted. The second request is likelier to be accepted because the individual feels as though the other person has already lowered their expectations and requirements to accommodate them. Door-in-the-face technique is displayed in a research carried out by Cialdini et al. (1975) Students on a university campus were asked by Cialdini and his team who were posing as representatives of the County Youth Counseling Program whether they were willing to chaperone a group of juvenile delinquents on a one day trip to the zoo, 83% of the students refused. The second time students were stopped and asked to sign up as volunteers to work for two hours each week as counselors for a minimum of two years. Again, no one agreed to volunteer, however when the refusals were followed with requests to escort the delinquents to the zoo, the acceptance rate raised to 50% as students agreed to serve as chaperones. There are several other experiments that have also been conducted to display the door- in-the-face technique. Some particularly known ones are the Miller et al. (1976) and Cialdini and Ascani (1976). Miller at al. (1976) sent a request for volunteers with a job of two hours of work per week at an agency, again for two years and then they sent a smaller request that showed a compliance of 76%. When the smaller request was asked independently only 29% showed compliance. Having observed the show-up rate of these volunteers, 85% volunteers who turned out the first request and complied with the second showed up, where as the second group where only the small request was asked, only 50% showed up out of those that complied. Door-in-the-face technique can also be seen on a general basis where a salesperson lowers the price of a product because the customer believes its too expensive. It is more likely that the customer will now purchase the product seeing the compromise of the salesperson. Another factor that greatly influences compliance is commitment. This is explained as a consistency with previous behaviors or choices. It is argued that once people choose something or make a decision, they are most likely to encounter personal and interpersonal pressures in order to behave consistently with their selection. Experiment by Kurt Lewin in 1951 explained that behavior is driven by goal gradients that explains that the longer an individual is committed to something, they are less likely to abandon it in the long run. A technique commonly used to get individuals to commit to something is the foot-in- the-door technique that involves people to commit to something small in hope of persuading them to agree to greater deal that is yet to come. A study explaining foot-in- the-door technique was conducted by Dickerson et al. in 1992, this study aimed to get university students to conserve water during dorm showers. The students were asked to sign a poster saying, Take shorter showers. If I can do it, so can you! after which they

were made to take a survey designed to make them think about the amount of water they used while having a shower. Students who had signed the poster and taken the survey had shorter shower times with an average of 3.5 minutes that was comparatively lesser than shower times across the dormitories on an entirety. Some people however argue that these students could have also signed the poster as they may have had prior commitment to the cause. Another common technique used to display commitment is known as the low-balling technique that was demonstrated by Cialdini et al. (1974) in a university background. Students from a first year psychology class were requested to volunteer for a study based on cognition that was scheduled to meet at 7 a.m. Although these students were very enthusiastic about the subject, only 24% students actually agreed to leave the comfort of their warm beds in the morning in support of this research study. On the other hand, a second group was requested for the same favor, however they were not told the time of the survey. In this study, 56% agreed to participate, however when they were told that they were to meet at 7 a.m. and they could back out if they wished to, none of them backed out due to their commitment. 95% students showed up on the actual day from those who had promised to come for the 7 a.m. meeting. Another controversial practice of a compliance technique is known as hazing which is a series of initiation rites or practices in order to be able to join an exclusive group examples of which are sports teams, college/ university fraternities. Several stories of hazing about students dying after being exposed to extreme temperatures, drinking themselves into coma or practically digging their own graves has not been able to stop the practice of hazing. This behavior is so widespread due to the fact that it is used to make an individual realize that if they make a decision to join a group, they must rationalize that it is worth it in order to be involved. The individual also begins to feel a sense of accomplishment after they complete the process of hazing and prove their loyalty to the group. Aronson and Mills (1959) conducted an experiment to test whether a person who has endured trouble or pain to join a group will value it more than one who has got an easy access to the entry. In the study conducted, female college students were asked to join a sex discussion group. The females, some of whom had to go through an extremely embarrassing initiation, however on the other hand others were allowed to join with no initiation. When the women participated in a meeting involving confederates who were trained to be boring and uninteresting, the women who bore the pains of the initiation ceremony surprisingly found the meeting valuable compared to those who entered with no initiation who found the meetings absolutely pointless. All the factors combined with a specific focus on reciprocity and commitment explains the social influence of compliance.