"They laughed at Galileo. They laughed at Einstein. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown."
It's true that being shunned or attacked is a sign that you've likely done something nonconforming and transgressive. But some things are nonconforming and transgressive just because they're stupid or obnoxious.
I think what this means is that trying to measure how non-conformist you are, and hoping that "the more non-conformist the better", is a mistake. Being unlike other people isn't a good goal, in itself, because most ways of being unlike other people are not i...
If you get attacked, you are not fully conventional... but it is not obvious where are you on the independent thinking scale. You can be attacked also for doing the most stereotypical form of rebellion (paint your eyes black, and wear black clothes with pieces of metal, or whatever it is kids these days do instead).
Sorry for a political example, but I assume that half of Trump's voters consider themselves perfectly independently thinking, while from outside, they are just another mob. In the same way, probably most SJWs. Generally, most "anything that already has a name".
This makes me think of two kinds of moderates. It is not literally about conformity but we can find a good criterion for conformity/independent thinking in there: Looking at their opinion spectrum and seeing if they are too smooth and/or short tailed to come from mostly one person.
I'd guess you can try to find accidental members for most groups.
If you yourself are an accidental member of a group with a strong identity you might feel much less belonging than others. You might even be surprised to be counted as a member as others see the (accidental) fit and it means little to you.
More markers for self observing conformity would be quite useful.