Social Psychology Distinctions

6 min read Updated Apr 19, 2026

Conformity vs. Obedience

Conformity. Matching behavior to a PEER group. Asch’s line studies.
Obedience. Complying with an AUTHORITY figure. Milgram’s shock experiments.

Key distinction: conformity is peer-based. Obedience is hierarchical. Both are forms of social influence but operate on different axes.

Normative. Going along to be ACCEPTED or avoid rejection. You know the group is wrong but don’t want to stand out.
Informational. Going along because you think the group has BETTER INFORMATION than you.

Key distinction: normative = about fitting in. Informational = about being right. Both produce conformity but via different motives.

Social facilitation. Presence of others ENHANCES easy/well-learned tasks, IMPAIRS complex/novel tasks (via arousal).
Social loafing. In a group, individuals exert LESS effort when contributions aren’t identifiable.

Key distinction: facilitation = performance on a task changes with observers. Loafing = less effort when submerged in a group. Facilitation is about arousal; loafing is about diffused responsibility.

Deindividuation vs. Groupthink

Deindividuation. Loss of SELF-AWARENESS and accountability in a group, especially with anonymity. Leads to unrestrained behavior (mobs, rioters, online trolls).
Groupthink. Dysfunctional DECISION-MAKING in cohesive groups. Desire for harmony overrides critical evaluation. Smart people make bad group decisions.

Key distinction: deindividuation = loss of individual identity in a crowd (mob behavior). Groupthink = poor group decisions that individuals wouldn’t make alone (Bay of Pigs).

Group Polarization vs. Groupthink

Group polarization. Discussion makes a group’s initial position MORE EXTREME.
Groupthink. Group suppresses dissent and makes bad decisions.

Key distinction: polarization = becomes more extreme (both directions). Groupthink = becomes more dysfunctional. Polarization can produce groupthink but they’re distinct phenomena.

The Three Attribution Errors

Fundamental attribution error. Explaining OTHERS’ behavior with DISPOSITIONAL causes while underweighting situational causes. “She cut me off because she’s rude” (not “because she’s rushing to a hospital”).
Actor-observer bias. Explaining OTHERS’ behavior with disposition but OWN behavior with situation. “I cut you off because I was in a hurry; she cut me off because she’s rude.”
Self-serving bias. Attributing OWN successes to disposition and OWN failures to situation. “I got the A because I’m smart; I failed because the test was unfair.”

Key distinction: fundamental = others get disposition. Actor-observer = others/dispositional, self/situational. Self-serving = successes are you, failures aren’t.

Stereotype vs. Prejudice vs. Discrimination

Stereotype. Generalized BELIEF about a group (cognition).
Prejudice. Negative ATTITUDE or feeling toward a group (emotion).
Discrimination. Unequal TREATMENT based on group membership (behavior).

Key distinction: stereotype = thought. Prejudice = feeling. Discrimination = behavior. Can occur independently - you can discriminate without prejudice (via institutional policy) or hold prejudice without discriminating (keeps it to yourself).

Individual vs. Institutional Discrimination

Individual. One person treating another unequally.
Institutional. Policies, practices, or systems that produce unequal outcomes, even without any individual holding prejudice.

Key distinction: individual = one actor. Institutional = structural, often invisible. Algorithmic bias is usually institutional.

In-group vs. Out-group

In-group. Group you IDENTIFY with.
Out-group. Group you DON’T identify with.

Predictable effects:

In-group favoritism (prefer in-group members).
Out-group homogeneity (“they all look the same”).
Even arbitrary group assignment produces these.

Stereotype Threat vs. Self-Fulfilling Prophecy

Stereotype threat. A stigmatized group member’s performance is LOWERED by awareness of the stereotype. “Black students reminded of race underperform on standardized tests.”
Self-fulfilling prophecy. An expectation about someone causes BEHAVIOR that CONFIRMS the expectation. Rosenthal’s Pygmalion study: teachers told certain students were “late bloomers” unconsciously treated them differently, and those students improved more.

Key distinction: stereotype threat = the stigmatized person’s performance drops because of the stereotype. Self-fulfilling prophecy = others’ expectations cause behavior that confirms them. Both involve expectations but the mechanism differs.

Mead’s “I” vs. “Me”

“I”. The spontaneous, creative, subjective self. Initiates action.
“Me”. The internalized social self. How you perceive others see you.

Key distinction: “I” = agent. “Me” = object of reflection. Healthy functioning balances both.

Mead vs. Cooley

Mead. Self develops through role-taking stages (preparatory → play → game). Includes “I” and “Me.”
Cooley. “Looking-glass self.” Self-concept forms from perceived judgments of others: (1) imagine how you appear, (2) imagine how others judge, (3) develop self-concept accordingly.

Key distinction: Mead’s stages describe the developmental trajectory. Cooley’s model describes the reflective mechanism. Both are symbolic interactionist - they complement each other.

Proximity vs. Similarity vs. Reciprocal Liking (Attraction)

Proximity. Physical closeness → mere exposure effect → liking.
Similarity. Shared values, backgrounds, attitudes → attraction.
Reciprocal liking. We like people who like us.
Physical attraction. Symmetry, averageness, signs of health.

Key distinction: proximity gives opportunity (you can only like people you encounter). Similarity gives alignment. Reciprocal liking gives mutual reinforcement. Physical attraction is initial. All four contribute.

Kin Selection vs. Reciprocal Altruism

Kin selection. Favoring relatives who share your genes (Hamilton’s rule: rB > C).
Reciprocal altruism. Favoring non-relatives in stable groups who are likely to RETURN the favor.

Key distinction: kin selection relies on genetic relatedness. Reciprocal altruism relies on expected reciprocity. Both explain how altruism evolved.

Instrumental vs. Hostile Aggression

Instrumental. Aggression as a MEANS to an end. Mugger, soldier in combat.
Hostile. Aggression driven by ANGER, aimed at harming for its own sake. Rage fight.

Key distinction: instrumental = strategic. Hostile = emotional.

Bystander Effect: Diffusion of Responsibility vs. Pluralistic Ignorance

Diffusion of responsibility. “Someone else will help.”
Pluralistic ignorance. “If no one else is reacting, maybe it’s not an emergency.”

Key distinction: both produce the bystander effect. Diffusion splits responsibility. Pluralistic ignorance takes cues from others’ inaction. Usually operate together.

Collective Behavior vs. Group Behavior

Group behavior. Structured, long-lasting, stable membership, well-defined norms.
Collective behavior. Short-lived, loose structure, open membership, fluid norms (crowd, fad, panic).

Key distinction: group = ongoing and organized. Collective = momentary and loose.

Fad vs. Fashion vs. Trend

Fad. Very short-lived, intense, specific behavior (pet rock).
Fashion. Longer-lasting style shift (a decade’s clothing aesthetics).
Trend. Broader, longer-lasting social pattern (rising smartphone use).

Key distinction: fads are months. Fashions are years. Trends are decades.

Primary vs. Secondary Deviance

Primary deviance. Initial rule-breaking that doesn’t alter self-image.
Secondary deviance. Rule-breaking that follows a LABEL, where the label shapes identity and produces more deviance.

Key distinction: primary = initial act. Secondary = amplified deviance driven by labeling.