We often align our behaviors, attitudes, and opinions in line with a majority of others, a phenomenon known as “social conformity.” A seminal framework has proposed that conformity behaviors are mainly driven by three fundamental motives: a desire to gain more information to be accurate, to obtain social approval from others, and to maintain a favorable self‐concept. However, previous studies usually have interpreted conformity behaviors as driven by one motive or another, largely ignoring the fact that human behaviors could be concurrently induced by multiple and even conflicting motivations. Adopting a typical conformity paradigm widely used in previous studies, we explored distinct and concurrent motives underlying the same conformity behavior, combining personality and individual differences with more nuanced analyses of observed conformity behaviors. Our findings provide novel evidence to show that three motivations exist within a single conformity behavior, suggesting that multiple motivations drive the conformity concurrently. These findings provide a potential solution for the extensive debate about what drives human social conformity and help to better understand the conformity behavior in daily life.

The current literature has revealed mixed evidence on whether loss (vs. gain) context promotes or curtails human prosociality. The current study (N=96) aimed to address this issue by examining whether gain/loss context has distinct effects on different prosocial preferences combining computational modelling with Dictator Game and Message Game. These interactive games allow for dissociating preferences for generosity and honesty, which have been respectively associated with intuitive and deliberative systems. Our behavioural and computational modelling results indicate that loss context enhances concerns for generosity but reduces concerns for honesty.These findings support an account under the framework of dual process model asserting that loss facilitates intuitive responses during social decision-making, regardless of whether they are prosocial or proself. The current findings reconcile previous debates on the relationship between loss-gain context and human prosociality and shed light on the design of institutions to promote human prosocial behaviours.