Conforming to AI vs. humans: The moderating effects of social exclusion and task type
- 1Department of Psychology, Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, South Korea
Abstract
Conformity is often understood as a socially motivated process; however, individuals increasingly conform not only to humans but also to artificial intelligence (AI). It remains unclear whether the same motivational and task-related mechanisms underlie conformity across these sources. To examine whether conformity to AI reflects task- and motivation- dependent processes similar to those underlying conformity to humans, we conducted an online conformity experiment in which we manipulated opinion source (AI vs. human) and task type (objective vs. subjective), while measuring participants’ self-reported experiences of social exclusion as a potential moderator. Participants (N = 354) were randomly assigned to either an AI or human opinion-source condition and completed a series of judgment tasks. The results showed that social exclusion reduced conformity to AI-generated opinions, but not to human opinions. In contrast, task type did not significantly moderate the effect of opinion source. These findings suggest that conformity to AI may be shaped by mechanisms that differ from those underlying traditional interpersonal conformity, particularly under conditions of social disconnection. More broadly, the findings indicate that responses to AI- generated opinions may depend not only on social-affiliative motives but also on informational or epistemic evaluations of the source.
Related
- Perceptual decision-making: extending a standardized rodent task to humans
- Convergent evolution of dogs and humans: a promising new model system for human social behaviors and mental health.
- The impact of perceived social support on college athletes’ academic burnout: The moderating role of cognitive reappraisal within a serial mediation model
- Coupled social dilemmas reveal positive cross-game transfer in humans and contrasting cue use in tested GPT agents
- Testing the Translational Validity of the Learned Helplessness Model in Humans: Effects of Stressor Controllability on Reward Processing and Social Functioning
BibTeX
@article{lee2026conforming,
title = {{Conforming to AI vs. humans: The moderating effects of social exclusion and task type}},
author = {HeeJun Lee and Hyeontaek Oh and Yoonkyung Jeong},
journal = {PLOS One},
year = {2026},
month = aug,
doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0355478},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0355478},
note = {CC BY 4.0},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Conforming to AI vs. humans: The moderating effects of social exclusion and task type
AU - HeeJun Lee
AU - Hyeontaek Oh
AU - Yoonkyung Jeong
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/08/31
JO - PLOS One
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0355478
UR - https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0355478
AB - Conformity is often understood as a socially motivated process; however, individuals increasingly conform not only to humans but also to artificial intelligence (AI). It remains unclear whether the same motivational and task-related mechanisms underlie conformity across these sources. To examine whether conformity to AI reflects task- and motivation- dependent processes similar to those underlying conformity to humans, we conducted an online conformity experiment in which we manipulated opinion source (AI vs. human) and task type (objective vs. subjective), while measuring participants’ self-reported experiences of social exclusion as a potential moderator. Participants (N = 354) were randomly assigned to either an AI or human opinion-source condition and completed a series of judgment tasks. The results showed that social exclusion reduced conformity to AI-generated opinions, but not to human opinions. In contrast, task type did not significantly moderate the effect of opinion source. These findings suggest that conformity to AI may be shaped by mechanisms that differ from those underlying traditional interpersonal conformity, particularly under conditions of social disconnection. More broadly, the findings indicate that responses to AI- generated opinions may depend not only on social-affiliative motives but also on informational or epistemic evaluations of the source.
SN - 1932-6203
ER -