Social norms are a pervasive aspect of human life. Previous research has shown that while norm adherence can persist for a long time, it ultimately declines. However, the mechanisms that drive the erosion of norm adherence are not yet understood. Building on a reinforcement learning perspective, the present study (N = 429) examined how forgetting affects norm adherence. Using a diffusion model approach, we examined whether norm forgetting is due to a decline in judgmental bias, perceptual bias, or both. Results showed that norm adherence declined over time but remained reliable for up to 7 days post-acquisition. Diffusion model analyses revealed that norm forgetting was driven by the combination of a rapidly declining perceptual bias and a more gradually declining judgmental bias.
AllcottH.RogersT. (2014). The short-run and long-run effects of behavioral interventions: Experimental evidence from energy conservation. American Economic Review, 104(10), 3003–3037. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.104.10.3003
2.
AxelrodR. (1986). An evolutionary approach to norms. American Political Science Review, 80(4), 1095–1111. https://doi.org/10.2307/1960858
3.
BallietD.MulderL. B.Van LangeP. A. M. (2011). Reward, punishment, and cooperation: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 137(4), 594–615. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023489
4.
BernedoM.FerraroP. J.PriceM. (2014). The persistent impacts of norm-based messaging and their implications for water conservation. Journal of Consumer Policy, 37(3), 437–452. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10603-014-9266-0
5.
BicchieriC.XiaoE. (2009). Do the right thing: But only if others do so. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 22(2), 191–208. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.621
6.
BoutonM. E. (1994). Conditioning, remembering, and forgetting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 20(3), 219–231. https://doi.org/10.1037/0097-7403.20.3.219
7.
DienesZ. (2021). How to use and report Bayesian hypothesis tests. Psychology of Consciousness: Theory, Research, and Practice, 8(1), 9–26. https://doi.org/10.1037/cns0000258
8.
DuderstadtV. H.MojzischA.GermarM. (2022). Social norm learning from non-human agents can induce a persistent perceptual bias: A diffusion model approach. Acta Psychologica, 229, 103691. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103691
9.
DutilhG.AnnisJ.BrownS. D.CasseyP.EvansN. J.GrasmanR. P. P. P.HawkinsG. E.HeathcoteA.HolmesW. R.KrypotosA.-M.KupitzC. N.LeiteF. P.LercheV.LinY.-S.LoganG. D.PalmeriT. J.StarnsJ. J.TruebloodJ. S.Van MaanenL.. . .DonkinC. (2019). The quality of response time data inference: A blinded, collaborative assessment of the validity of cognitive models. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 26(4), 1051–1069. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-017-1417-2
EndlerN. S. (1960). Social conformity in perception of the autokinetic effect. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 61(3), 489–490. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0040606
12.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA.-G.BuchnerA. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146
13.
FischbacherU.GächterS. (2010). Social preferences, beliefs, and the dynamics of free riding in public goods experiments. American Economic Review, 100(1), 541–556. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.100.1.541
14.
GelfandM. J.GavriletsS.NunnN. (2024). Norm dynamics: Interdisciplinary perspectives on social norm emergence, persistence, and change. Annual Review of Psychology, 75(1), 341–378. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-033020-013319
GermarM.AlbrechtT.MojzischA. (2023). Social norm learning alters feature-based visual attention: Evidence from steady-state visual evoked potentials. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 49(11), 1460–1466. https://doi.org/10.1037/xhp0001156
17.
GermarM.DuderstadtV. H.MojzischA. (2023). Social norms shape visual appearance: Taking a closer look at the link between social norm learning and perceptual decision-making. Cognition, 241, 105611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2023.105611
18.
GermarM.MojzischA. (2019). Learning of social norms can lead to a persistent perceptual bias: A diffusion model approach. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 84, 103801. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2019.03.012
19.
GermarM.SchlemmerA.KrugK.VossA.MojzischA. (2014). Social influence and perceptual decision making: A diffusion model analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(2), 217–231. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167213508985
Krefeld-SchwalbA.DonkinC.NewellB. R.ScheibehenneB. (2019). Empirical comparison of the adjustable spanner and the adaptive toolbox models of choice. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 45(7), 1151–1165. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000641
22.
LegrosS.CislaghiB. (2020). Mapping the social-norms literature: An overview of reviews. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 15(1), 62–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691619866455
23.
LercheV.VossA. (2016). Model complexity in diffusion modeling: Benefits of making the model more parsimonious. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Article 1324. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01324
24.
LercheV.VossA.NaglerM. (2017). How many trials are required for parameter estimation in diffusion modeling? A comparison of different optimization criteria. Behavior Research Methods, 49(2), 513–537. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-016-0740-2
25.
LinY.-S.StricklandL. (2020). Evidence accumulation models with R: A practical guide to hierarchical Bayesian methods. The Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 16(2), 133–153. https://doi.org/10.20982/tqmp.16.2.p133
26.
MorrisA.CushmanF. (2018). A common framework for theories of norm compliance. Social Philosophy and Policy, 35(1), 101–127. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265052518000134
27.
NolanJ. M.SchultzP. W.CialdiniR. B.GoldsteinN. J.GriskeviciusV. (2008). Normative social influence is underdetected. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(7), 913–923. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167208316691
28.
PanW.GengH.ZhangL.FenglerA.FrankM. J.ZhangR.-Y.Chuan-PengH. (2025). DockerHDDM: A user-friendly environment for Bayesian hierarchical drift-diffusion modeling. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 8(1), 25152459241298700. https://doi.org/10.1177/25152459241298700
29.
PeerE.BrandimarteL.SamatS.AcquistiA. (2017). Beyond the Turk: Alternative platforms for crowdsourcing behavioral research. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 70, 153–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.01.006
30.
PeirceJ.GrayJ. R.SimpsonS.MacAskillM.HöchenbergerR.SogoH.KastmanE.LindeløvJ. K. (2019). PsychoPy2: Experiments in behavior made easy. Behavior Research Methods, 51(1), 195–203. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-01193-y
31.
PriebeC.SpinkK. (2011). When in Rome: Descriptive norms and physical activity. Psychology of Sport and Exercise—PSYCHOL SPORT EXERC, 12, 93–98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychsport.2010.09.001
32.
RatcliffR.SmithP. L.BrownS. D.McKoonG. (2016). Diffusion decision model: Current issues and history. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20(4), 260–281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.01.007
33.
RobinsonE.ThomasJ.AveyardP.HiggsS. (2014). What everyone else is eating: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of informational eating norms on eating behavior. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 114(3), 414–429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2013.11.009
34.
SadehT.OzubkoJ. D.WinocurG.MoscovitchM. (2014). How we forget may depend on how we remember. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(1), 26–36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2013.10.008
35.
SadehT.OzubkoJ. D.WinocurG.MoscovitchM. (2016). Forgetting patterns differentiate between two forms of memory representation. Psychological Science, 27(6), 810–820. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616638307
36.
SanghaS.McCombC.LukowiakK. (2003). Forgetting and the extension of memory in Lymnaea. Journal of Experimental Biology, 206(1), 71–77. https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.00061
37.
SchultzP. W.NolanJ. M.CialdiniR. B.GoldsteinN. J.GriskeviciusV. (2007). The constructive, destructive, and reconstructive power of social norms. Psychological Science, 18(5), 429–434. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01917.x
38.
ToelchU.PanizzaF.HeekerenH. R. (2018). Norm compliance affects perceptual decisions through modulation of a starting point bias. Royal Society Open Science, 5(3), 171268. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.171268
39.
TukeyJ. W. (1977). Exploratory data analysis. Addison-Wesley Pub. Co.
40.
VandekerckhoveJ.TuerlinckxF.LeeM. D. (2011). Hierarchical diffusion models for two-choice response times. Psychological Methods, 16(1), 44–62. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021765
41.
Van DoornJ.Van Den BerghD.BöhmU.DablanderF.DerksK.DrawsT.EtzA.EvansN. J.GronauQ. F.HaafJ. M.HinneM.KucharskýŠ.LyA.MarsmanM.MatzkeD.GuptaA. R. K. N.SarafoglouA.StefanA.VoelkelJ. G.WagenmakersE.-J. (2021). The JASP guidelines for conducting and reporting a Bayesian analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 28(3), 813–826. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-020-01798-5
42.
VossA.NaglerM.LercheV. (2013). Diffusion models in experimental psychology: A practical introduction. Experimental Psychology, 60(6), 385–402. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000218
43.
VossA.VossJ.LercheV. (2015). Assessing cognitive processes with diffusion model analyses: A tutorial based on fast-dm-30. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 336. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00336
44.
WagenmakersE.-J.LoveJ.MarsmanM.JamilT.LyA.VerhagenJ.SelkerR.GronauQ. F.DropmannD.BoutinB.MeerhoffF.KnightP.RajA.Van KesterenE.-J.Van DoornJ.ŠmíraM.EpskampS.EtzA.MatzkeD.. . .MoreyR. D. (2018). Bayesian inference for psychology. Part II: Example Applications with JASP. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 25(1), 58–76. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-017-1323-7
