Abstract
Conformity and violations of the law or rules are often conceived as behaviors that are underpinned by opposing modes of thinking, but of identical determinants. We tested this general hypothesis in two studies. In both studies, the type of event (violation versus conformity) was primed by design instructions. In the first study, we collected spontaneous thoughts about law-violation versus law-abiding. In the second study, we focused on the determinants of intention associated with violations. The results highlight the fact that violation is thought of in reference to the consequences of the behaviors, that it is determined by attitude and that it induces a mode of thought underpinned by an implicit positive causality: what causes them and what they provoke. On the contrary, conformity is thought of in reference to the antecedents of behaviors, is determined by behavioral control and induces a mode of thought underpinned by a negative implicit causality: what prevents it and what it prevents. Overall, these two studies suggest that the law-relationship depends on whether violation or conformity is contemplated.