DE-INDIVIDUATION Flashcards
WHO ORIGINALLY USED THE CONCEPT OF DE-INDIVIDUATION?
De-individuation is a concept originally used by LeBon to explain the behaviour of individuals in crowds.
WHAT IS THE RESULT OF BEING EASILY IDENTIFIED BY OTHERS?
Usually, because we are easily identified by others, our behaviour is constrained by social norms, and we live in a society where most forms of aggressive behaviour is discouraged.
WHAT HAPPENS WHEN WE BECOME APART OF A CROWD?
When we become apart of a crowd, we lose restraint and have the freedom to behave in ways we wouldn’t otherwise contemplate. We lose our senses of both individual self-identity and responsibility for our behaviour and we have a greater disregard for norms and even laws. Responsibility becomes shared throughout the crowd, so we experience less personal guilt at harmful aggression directed at others.
HOW DOES DE-INDIVIDUATION LEAD TO AGGRESSION?
Zimbardo distinguished between individuated amd de-individuated behaviour. In an individuated state, our behaviour is generally rational and normative (ie conforms to social norms). In a de-individuated state, behaviours are emotional, impulsive and irrational; most importantly, they are anti-normative and disinhibited. When we are in a de-individuated state, we lose self awareness, we stop monitoring and regulating our own behaviour, we ignore social norms and ‘live in the moment’, failing t form longer-term plans.
WHAT ARE THE CONDITIONS THAT PROMOTE AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOUR?
Darkness, drugs, alcohol, uniforms, masks and disguises. A major factor is anonymity
; according to Dixon et al, ‘anonymity shapes crowd behaviour’. We have less fear of retribution because we are a small and unidentifiable part of a faceless crowd. The bigger the crowd, the more anonymous we are. Anonymity provides fewer opportunities for others to judge us negatively.
OUTLINE THE PROCEDURE OF DODD’S RESEARCH INTO DE-INDIVIDUATION
Dodd (psychology teacher) asked 229 undergraduate psychology students in 13 classes this question “if you could do anything humanly possible, what would you do?” The students were aware that their responses were completely anonymous. 3 independent raters who did not know the hypothesis decided which categories of antisocial behaviour the responses belonged to.
OUTLINE THE FINDINGS OF DODD’S RESEARCH INTO DE-INDIVIDUATION
Dodd found that 36% of the responses involved some form of antisocial behaviour. 26% were actual crimes, with the most common answer being ‘rob a bank’. A few students opted for murder, rape and assassination of a political figure. Only 9% of behaviour were pro-social behaviours such as helping people. This study demonstrates the link between anonymity, de-individuation and aggressive behaviour.
OUTLINE ONE STRENGTH OF DE-INDIVIDUATION
Douglas et al looked at aggressive online behaviour in chatrooms and uses of instant messaging and found a strong correlation between anonymity and ‘flaming’ (sending or posting threatening and/or hostile messages). The most aggressive messages were sent by those who chose to hide their real identities. This suggests that the link between anonymity, de-individuation and aggression has greater relevance today. This is because of the explosion of social media use, the activities of online ‘trolls’ etc.
OUTLINE ONE WEAKNESS OF DE-INDIVIDUATION
Some research studies show that de-individuation does not always lead to aggression. In their ‘deviance in the dark’ study, Gergen et al selected groups of 8 ppts, who were all strangers to each other. They were placed in a dark room for one hour and were told to do whatever they wanted to do without any rules to stop them. It was impossible for ppts to identify one another and they were given the guarantee that they would never encounter each other again. It didn’t take long for them to stop talking and start kissing and touching each other intimately. When the study was repeated but ppts were told they would come face to face with the ppts after, kissing and touching declined significantly. Of all the behaviours that de-individuation could have given rise to in this study, aggression was not one of them.
OUTLINE ANOTHER STRENGTH OF DE-INDIVIDUATION
Johnson and Downing conducted a study where female ppts had to give (fake) electric shocks to a confederate. In one condition, the females were dressed in a KKK type outfit, with masks hiding their faces. Ppts in the other condition dressed up as nurses and the third (control) group wore their own clothes. Compared with the control group, the KKK dressed ppts gave more and intense shocks and the nurses gave fewer at lower levels. The researchers found that the ‘nurses’ were also more compassionate with their ‘victim’, in line with their pro-social role associated with the nurses uniform. It seems like both aggression and pro-social behaviour are potential outcomes of de-individuation (not just aggression) and normative cues in the situation determine which is most likely to occur.
