De-individuation Flashcards
Describe the crowd theory that deindividuation is based on
- Le Bon described how an individual was ‘transformed’ when part of a group. The combination of anonymity, suggestibility and contagion meant that a ‘collective mind’ takes possession.
- As a result, the individual loses self-control and becomes capable of acting in a way that goes against personal or social norms (becoming aggression)
Outline deindividuation theory
- Initially developed by Festinger, later developed by Zimbardo
- It’s a psychological state characterised by loss of the sense of individuality and a submerging or personal identity and accountability in a group
Outline the conditions that can affect deindividuation and then promote aggression
- Crowds
- Uniform
- Darkness
- Drugs and alcohol
- Disguises/masks
How do those conditions affect deindividuation?
- They provide a ‘cloak of anonymity’ that diminishes personal responsibility and self-awareness
- But drugs and alcohol don’t, but they alter the consciousness so affects deindividuation
What are the 2 states in the deindividuation theory?
Zimbardo distinguishes between:
- individuated state: rational and normative (conforms to social norms)
- deindividuated state: emotional, impulsive, irrational, anti-normative (governed by norms/expectations of the group)
- There’s a switch when we become anonymous in a group.
What does are the effects of being in a crowd?
- We have a reduced private self awareness (attention to our feelings/behaviour), reduced public self awareness (attention to how others perceive our behaviour), and share responsibility amongst the group (we feel less guilt)
- These all weaken our normal barrier to anti-social
Describe Zimbardo’s prison study applied to de-individuation
- Zimbardo’s study found those who played the role of guards (in a de-individuated state) acted aggressive towards those in the role of prisoners
- The guards wore mirrored sunglasses (hides identity) and a uniform which accentuated their de-individuated state. This led to guards feeling reduced self-awareness, leading to anti-normative aggressive behaviour.
Give evaluation for deindividuation theory (research support)
- Rehm et al observed 30 games of handball in a school. 1 team in each game wore the same orange shirts, while the other team wore different-coloured shirts, They found that the uniformed teams showed more aggression during the game than the other teams
- Therefore, this suggests that uniform is a condition that elicits deindividuation and then increases aggression, providing validity to deindividuation as an explanation
Give evaluation for deindividuation theory (support from anthropological evidence)
- Watson collected data on how much warriors in 23 societies changed their appearance prior going to war and how much they killed.
- Those societies where warriors changed their appearance (with war paint) were more aggressive to their victims compared to those who didn’t change.
- This supports the notion of how uniform and disguises increase anonymity, resulting in more aggression. This then supports deindividuation as an explanation for aggression in real life settings
Give evaluation for deindividuation theory (support from real-life application of the theory)
- Deindividuation can help us understand aggression on online gaming services as they have features that promote a state of deindividuation
- e.g. There’s a reduction of personal identity, with playing using ‘handles’ to identify themselves, and a presence of a ‘crowd’ in the form of a (potentially worldwide) audience.
- This evidence has supported the movement towards ID verification on sociated to prevent aggression in deindividuation situations. By understanding deindividuation and the conditions that may lead to aggression, we can aggress aggressive behaviour in society
Give evaluation for deindividuation theory (some research shows that deindividuation doesn’t always lead to aggression.
- Gergen et al selected groups of participants who were all strangers. They were placed in a dark room for 1 hour, and told to do whatever they wanted to. It was impossible to identify each other and they were guaranteed they wouldn’t encounter each other again. Participants then stopped talked and started kissing and touching each other.
- The study was repeated, but they were told they would come face to face after the hour. The touching and kissing declined, and there was no aggression.
- Shows that this is a limited theory and other facts, dispositional or biological factors, may determine whether deindividuation leads to aggression
