Hive Mind: The Paradox of Individuality and Conformity

Authored by: Catherine Meng

Art by: Rachel Jacob

Imagine you are on your phone, taking a scrolling break. You begin to scroll down your Tiktok or Instagram feed when you begin to notice something weird. Each new video feels like something that you’ve seen before. The same products and content style lie in every video you watch. Eerily, even the creators look very similar. What’s even more concerning is that if you go outside and walk around, this trend repeats itself. Stores selling the same viral food trends, people wearing the same trendy clothes, and the same niche hobbies being picked up by what seems like everyone at once. This phenomenon is something known as the hive mind effect. An attribute that enables all humans to act in concert, similar to bees that build a hive [1].

This phenomenon is not only in modern society. Humans have always formed trends, cultural movements, and shared identities. From Renaissance fashion to cultures like punk or grunge, people have historically bonded through aesthetics and interests. What makes this especially interesting today is the unprecedented speed at which trends spread, and the polarizing way social media encourages both conformity and individuality. 

One notable example of this tension was the alternative Tiktok movement in 2018. In its beginning, the alternative movement was made to antagonize the “basic” part of Tiktok. The label was marketed as a symbol of uniqueness and personal identity.  However, the very act of participating in this alternative trend of bonding over not fitting in tied people to a broader community. This particular effect is explained by Barry Schwartz’s The Paradox of Choice (2004), which argues that although people believe their choices express individuality, widespread adoption of the same “unique” choices ultimately produces uniformity [2].

Another explanation for this contradiction is found in innate human nature. Evolutionarily speaking, humans are biologically social creatures. We are wired for belonging because belonging has historically increased survival [3]. Yet humans also possess what Snyder and Fromkin called the “need for uniqueness” [4]. Their research found that people seek a balance between the two ideals. An amount that is enough difference to feel special, but not so much that it leads to rejection. Social media intensifies this tension. Trends are marketed as expressions of uniqueness, but participation in those trends also signals belonging.

The knowledge of this effect is exploited greatly on social media platforms, driven by consumerism. Research shows that brands frequently harness the desire for individual expression as a marketing strategy, packaging products as “authentic” or “one‑of‑a‑kind” to stimulate desire [5]. Fashion, for instance, is structured around rapid trend adoption. Styles begin as counter‑culture symbols, like baggy pants, Y2K accessories, and streetwear, and are subsequently adopted by mainstream sellers. This effect is called scarcity marketing, and it creates a sense of individuality at first. However, once these styles are widely adopted, they become mainstream, at which point a new “unique” trend emerges. 

Ultimately, the contradiction between individuality and conformity is not a paradox of modern society, but a reflection of human nature itself. From humanity’s evolutionary instincts, the craving for both belonging and distinctiveness resonates. Through social media platforms and short form algorithms, these tendencies are highlighted, especially with consumerism as a motivating factor of brands. In a world shaped by algorithms, marketing, and digital echo chambers, the fear of being truly different becomes more pronounced [6]. We desire to stand out, yet we hesitate to risk exclusion.

References:

1. Dalley, C. (2014). Psychological projections in the emergence of hive mind. The Assisi Institute Journal, 1(1). https://digitalcommons.providence.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1006&context=assisi_journal

2. Schwartz, B. (2004). The paradox of choice: Why more is less. HarperCollins. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2004-13971-000

3. Bekmezci, M., Rehman, W. U., Khurshid, M., Eroğluer, K., & Trout, I. Y. (2022). The need to be unique and the innovative behavior: The moderating role of supervisor support. Frontiers in psychology, 13, 979909. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.979909

4. Snyder, C.R. and Fromkin, H.L. (1980) Uniqueness: The Human Pursuit of Difference. Plenum Press, New York, 145, 382-391.http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-3659-4

5. Nova Southeastern University Scholars. (2022, March 1). Authenticity attracts authenticity: The impact of brand authenticity. Journal of Brand Strategy, 10(4), 377–388. https://scholars.nova.edu/en/publications/authenticity-attracts-authenticity-the-impact-of-brand-authentici/?utm

6. Pew Research Center. (2023, June 21). Themes: The most harmful or menacing changes in digital life that are likely by 2035. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2023/06/21/themes-the-most-harmful-or-menacing-changes-in-digital-life-that-are-likely-by-2035/