De-individuation Flashcards
what is de-individuation?
3
a psychological state in which individuals have lowered levels of self-evaluation and decreased concerns about evaluation by others
for example, when in a crowd or under the influence of alcohol or drugs
Zimbardo stressed that these same conditions may also lead to an increase in pro-social behaviours (e.g. in crowds at music festivals or large religious gatherings) but the focus of de-individuation theory is almost exclusively on anti-social behaviour
how does de-individuation link to aggression?
4
psychologists have explored the idea that membership of a large, anonymous group can lead people to behave in a more anti-social manner than they would on their own
Zimbardo (1969) introduced the theory of de-individuation to explain this
it has been used to explain the collective behaviour of violent crowds, mindless hooligans and social atrocities such as genocide
in some countries, de-individuation has been accepted as groups for extenuating circumstances in murder trials
briefly outline the de-individuation theory
5
Zimbardo (1969) introduced the theory of de-individuation
this is whereby people, when part of a relatively anonymous group, lose their personal identity and hence their inhibitions about violence
it is based, to a large extent, on the classic crowd theory of Gustave Le Bon (1895) who described how an individual was transformed when part of a crowd
in a crowd, the combination of anonymity, suggestibility and contagion means that a ‘collective mind’ takes possession of the individual
as a consequence, the individual loses self control and becomes capable of acting in a way that goes against personal or social norms
features of the de-individuation theory
3
the nature of de-individuation
the process of de-individuation
research on de-individuation
the nature of de-individuation
5
Festinger et al (1952) described de-individuation as a psychological state in which inner restraints are lost when “individuals are not seen or paid attention to as people”
Zimbardo developed the concept of de-individuation more fully
the psychological state of de-individuation is aroused when individuals join crowds or large groups
Zimbardo believed that being in a large group gave people a “cloak of anonymity” that diminished any personal consequences for their actions
factors that contribute to this state of de-individuation included anonymity (such as wearing a uniform) and altered consciousness due to drugs or alcohol
the process of de-individuation
7
people normally refrain from acting in an aggression manner because there are social norms inhibiting such ‘uncivilised’ behaviour and also because they are easily identifiable
being anonymous, and therefore effectively unaccountable, in a crowd has the psychological consequence of reducing inner restraints and increasing behaviours that are usually inhibited
according to Zimbardo, being part of a crowd can diminish awareness of our own individuality
in a large crowd, each person is faceless and anonymous and the larger the group, the greater the anonymity
there is a diminished fear of the negative evaluation of actions and a reduced sense of guilt
conditions that increase anonymity also minimise concerns about evaluation by others and so weaken the normal barriers to anti-social behaviour that are based on guilt or shame
research has demonstrated that individuals who believe their identities are unknown are more likely to behave in an aggressive manner
research on de-individuation
2
KEY STUDY: Zimbardo’s classic study on de-individuation (1969)
Zimbardo’s Stanford prison study (1972)
key study: procedure
4
Zimbardo (1969) conducted a classic study on de-individuation which led to the suggestion that anonymity, a key component of the de-individuation process, increases aggressiveness
groups of 4 female undergraduates were required to deliver electric shocks to another student to ‘aid learning’
half of the participants wore bulky lab coats and hoods that hid their faces, sat in separate cubicles and were never referred to by name — the de-individuation condition
the other participants wore their normal clothes, were given large name tags to wear, were introduced to each other by name and they were also able to see each other when seated at the shock machines
key study: findings
2
participants in the de-individuation condition (hooded and no name tags) were more likely to press a button that they believed would give shocks to a victim in another room
they also held the shock button down for twice as long as identifiable participants did
Zimbardo’s Stanford prison study (1972)
4
this is another study that demonstrates the effects of de-individuation
Zimbardo et al’s Stanford prison study (1972) found that participants who played the role of guards, and were therefore in a de-individuated state, acted aggressively towards other participants who were in the role of prisoners
the guards wore uniforms and mirrored sunglasses which gave them more anonymity and accentuated their de-individuated state
other researchers such as Zhong (2010) have found that wearing mirrored sunglasses makes people feel greater anonymity, which in turn increases the experience of de-individuation
x4 evaluation points
gender differences in the de-individuation process
research support
real world application
challenging research
EVALUATION
gender differences in the de-individuation process
6
Cannavale et al (1970) found that male and female groups responded differently under de-individuation conditions
an increase in aggression was only obtained in the all-male groups, but not in the all-female groups — only the male groups grew in aggression
this was also found by Diener et al (1973) who discovered a greater removal of the normal inhibitions that prevent aggression in de-individuated males than de-individuated females
one possible reason for these gender differences is that males tend to respond to provocation in more extreme ways than females do and these tendencies are magnified under de-individuation conditions
both of these studies suggest that there are differences in how men and women respond to de-individuation
therefore, the de-individuation theory of aggression may lack population validity as it cannot be equally applied to all genders so may be reduced in its ability to explain aggression in all people
EVALUATION
research support
5
Zimbardo et al’s Stanford prison study (1972) provides support for the de-individuation theory of aggression by demonstrating the effects of de-individuation
they found that participants who played the role of guards, and were therefore in a de-individuated state, acted aggressively towards other participants who were in the role of prisoners
the guards wore uniforms and mirrored sunglasses which gave them more anonymity and accentuated their de-individuated state
other researchers such as Zhong (2010) have found that wearing mirrored sunglasses makes people feel greater anonymity, which in turn increases the experience of de-individuation
therefore, the theory claim claim reliability and may have increased usefulness in explaining aggression
EVALUATION
real world application
9
Mann (1981) used the concept of de-individuation to explain a bizarre aspect of collective behaviour known as the baiting crowd
the baiting crowd lends support to the notion of the crowd as a de-individuated mob
Mann analysed 21 suicide jumps reported in US newspapers in the 1960s and 1970s
he found that in 10 of the 21 cases where a crowd had gathered to watch, baiting had occurred and the crowd had urged the potential suicide jumper to jump
these incidents tended to occur at night, when the crowd was large and some distance from the person being taunted, particularly when the jumper was high above them
all these features were likely to produce a state of de-individuation in the members of the crowd
the power of the baiting mob was also evident in Mullen’s analysis of newspaper cuttings of 60 lynchings in the US between 1899 and 1946
he found that the more people there were in the mob, the greater the savagery with which the perpetrators killed their victims
not only do these real life examples support the de-individuation theory’s claims that aggression and anti-social behaviour grows in large crowds, but it also demonstrates that the theory can be applied to real life which suggests it is a useful explanation of aggression as it is high in ecological validity
EVALUATION
challenging research
6
Postmes and Spears (1998) conducted a meta-analysis of 60 studies of de-individuation and concluded that there is insufficient support for the major claims of the de-individuation theory
they found that disinhibition and anti-social behaviour are not necessarily more common in large groups and anonymous settings
instead, they found that de-individuation increases people’s responsiveness to situational norms (what most people regard as appropriate behaviour) which may lead to aggressive behaviour but could also lead to increased pro-social behaviour
for instance, Spivey and Prentice-Dunn (1990) found that de-individuation could lead to either prosocial or antisocial behaviour depending on the situational factors
when prosocial environmental cues were present such as a prosocial model, de-individuated participants performed significantly more altruistic acts such as giving money and significantly fewer antisocial acts compared to a control group
this challenges the de-individuation theory of aggression
