intergroup relations- crowds: normative controls

Question 1

what is violence in crowd said to be due to (2 things)

Answer 1

• nature of peope coming together
• psycholigical transformation of normally civilised people

Question 2

in crowds, they reduce behaviour to internal factors such as? 2 things

Answer 2

• individual personality
• forces released by collective membership

Question 3

what did Le Bon 1986 say about crowds

Answer 3

• creature acting by instinct
• sacrifice of personal interest to collective interest
• unthinking behaviour

Question 4

what themes did Le Bon 1986 say about crowds

Answer 4

• loss of conscious rationality (behaviour not controlled cannot tell right from wrong)
• barbaric behaviour (no longer thinking, reversion to barbaric behaviour)
• emotional contagion (people more suggestible to ideas and spread quickly)

Question 5

what was the overall image Le Bon made of crowds

Answer 5

• violence ever present danger- primitive instincts waiting to be brought to fore
• violence is unthinking and meaningless

Question 6

what are things that make Le Bon’s theory problematic about crowds 1

Answer 6

• crowd behaviour is intergroup behaviour, but no sense of that from his work- misses intergroup context
• crowd appears as psychopathic
• presents crowds as having a fixed set of behaviours, when crowds are diverse

Question 6

what are things that make Le Bon’s theory problematic about crowds 2

Answer 6

• limit to social influence, Police rarely ever join in so isnt ‘contagious’
• irrationality of crowd behaviour: from inside crowd behaviour may appear differently (misunderstood)

Question 7

why was le bon 1986 work influential

Answer 7

• legitmated tough response, should respond legitamtely and firmly
• appealed to people like Mussolini and Hitler
  -Mussolini turned to work of le bon

Question 7

what is de individuation

Answer 7

• loss of sense of identity, said to make people act more for collective interest

Question 8

what certain conditions may de individuation occur

Answer 8

• in annoyminty (e.g theatre)
• large group size
• diffusion of responsability

Question 9

what was found from de individuation by Zimbardo

Answer 9

• use of war paint, leads to loss of self (not able to identify)
• Watson: of 23 societies, 15 had warriors using war paint
• 90% when people mutilated/ killed people they were wearing the paint
• said the war paint de individuated them

Question 10

what did Fesingter, pepitione and Newcombe 1952 do in their study

Answer 10

• made people less identifiable
• people gave more rash/ daring descriptions of their parents (at time was uncommon to speak badly of parents)

Question 11

singer et al 1995 study

Answer 11

• use of laboratory coats
• made people use more obscene language when talking about erotic subjects
• people normally use more explicit language

Question 12

zimbardo 1970 study

Answer 12

• dressed in hoods and robes
• involved giving punishment to people
• found people gave higher shocks when unidentifiable

Question 13

diener and wallbom study 1976

Answer 13

• given IQ test that was impossible
• experimenter said they had to go and left person alone in room with book of answers
• manipulated if there was a mirror to see themselves or not to go cheat
• when mirror: 7% cheated
• without mirror: 71% cheated

Question 14

what was dinner 1980s theory of de individuation

Answer 14

• the dimension of self awareness, argues in a crowd we dont self monitor, dont plan behaviour, behaviour less associated with norms, more guided by immediate cues and emotions
• less likely to feel responsible and less likely to notive your behavour to others

Question 15

what was dienars 1980 conclusion or contradictory to crowds

Answer 15

• theres a pattern to crowds, showing behaviour appears to be controlled
• studies show crowds have a social form

Question 16

whats an example of a riot as ‘not random’

Answer 16

• Gordon 1780 riots
• targetted specifics
• shows pattern to killings etc