Deindividuation

Deindividuation theory of aggression

Developed by Gustave Le Bon the main assumption is that identifying with a group causes aggression as we become disinhibited (not following social norms) as we are unidentifiable/anonymous. Conditions such as darkness, intoxication, or masks increase deindividuation as we cannot be negatively judged/face sanctions. Zimbardo states that when we are individuated we are aware of how others view us and responsible for our behaviour whereas when individuated we no longer feel responsibility as we are anonymous. Prentice Dunn and Rogers believe being anonymous preps us to tune my private self awareness to the groups actions and group norms become my own, equally our public self awareness is reduced as we feel unidentifiable and therefore are more likely to use aggression as we do not fear consequences.

DODD STUDY

Almost 230 undergraduates asked "if you could do anything humanly possible with no ramifications what would you do?" - almost 40% of answers were anti-social, about 1 quarter were criminal, mostly robbing banks, but some went as far as murder or political assination. Less than 10% went for prosocial acts. Illustrating that deindividuation is a likely explanation for aggression.

AO2

Eleni was behaving that way because she was experiencing deindividuation and disinhibited. (1) People behave that way because they are unidentifiable and sharing a group identity due to wearing a mask, or in this case a being in a large group behind a sign therefore ignoring social norms in favour of the group identity. (2) Prentice Dunn and Rogers would examine her private self-awareness and public self-awareness and explain that she behaved that way because her group awareness was heightened and her self-awareness (norms) was lowered. (3) She stopped rioting when she saw her mother (Heidi) because she had become individuated and she become aware of how she was being viewed. Her public self-awareness increased and she became aware she is not a bad person who shouts at random strangers (anymore!) - her private self-awareness increased. (4)

AO3: Strength: Research Support: Flaming

P: The deindividuation explanation of aggression has research support
E: The most anonymous posters on social media displayed the most flaming (trolling, threatening messages), even driving targets of this hate offline i.e Ed Sheeran no longer uses social media.
J: This shows that the anonymity leads to deindividuation - they do not feel accountable and become disinhibited - and thus aggression occurs.

AO3: Weakness - Deviance in the Dark?

P: The central premise that deindividuation leads to aggression challenged by research evidence
E: The deviance in the dark study placed 8 strangers into a dark room for an hour, they were told they would/would never see each other again afterwards. Neither group showed aggression, both showed sexually driven behaviours, but this was less shown in the meet again condition.
J: This refutes the prediction that deindividuation produces aggression

AO3: Weakness: The Role of Identification

P: The outcome of deindividuation seems to be affected by the identify of the group with which the individual identifies with
E: For example, in a study where participants dressed either as the KKK, nurses, or control (their own clothes), nurses gave the least electric shocks to confederates and the participants dressed as the KKK gave the most, suggesting that people conform to the social role.
J: Therefore deindividuation can lead to either anti or pro social behaviour, signifying deindividuation/disinhibited behaviour is directed by normative cues.

AO3: Weakness - The SIDE Model

P: Support for the above is provided - The SIDE (social identity model of deindividuation) which suggest that
E: The character of the group plays a role in the social identity that a person will display, for example a group of doctors may lead to prosocial behaviour, whereas a group of protestors may lead to aggression (anti-social) behaviour
J: This challenges the idea that deindividuation leads to aggression and suggests instead it simply leads to a shared identity directed by the groups characteristics/intentions.

AO3: Issues and debates: nurture

P= The deindividuation theory falls on the nurture side of the debate
E: This is because Even people who rarely display aggression - therefore are not genetically, or biological predisposed - can get caught up in aggression when they become anonymous.
J: This offers evidence that aggression is not biologically determined and that rather the environment is the key determinant in the display of aggressive behaviours.