Crowd and collective behaviour: deindividuation

In the 19th century Gustav le Bon was one of the first people to analyse the behaviour of crowds or mobs in his book ‘the crowd: a study of the popular mind’(1895). He proposed that the key feature of a crowd was anonymity.

Le Bon predicted that anonymity would lead to antisocial behaviour, behaving in a way that is harmful to others:

Normally behaviour is ruled by social norms (behaving correctly).

When we can’t be identified we lose normal restraints. We lose our normal sense of responsibility for our own actions.

We cease behaving rationally and instead behave impulsively and antisocially.

Deindividuation

Zimbardo’s study: Aim

Zimbardo aimed to investigate deindividuation in an adaptation of milgram’s obedience study with electric shocks.

Method: the participants in this study were groups of four female undergraduates. Each group was required to deliver a (fake) electric shock to another student to ‘aid learninf’.

The participants were divided into two groups:

group 1- the individuated group, wore their normal clothes, were given large name tags to wear and were introduced to each other by name. They were also able to see each other when seated at the shock machines.

Group 2- the deindividuated group, wore a large coat and a hood that concealed their identity. They were never referred to by name.

Results: participants in the deindividuated group were more likely to press a button that they believed would give shocks to a learner on another room. They also held the shock button down for twice as long as the individuated participants.

Conclusion: this supports the view that anonymity and deindividuation increase the likelihood that people will act antisocially.

Evaluation: not always antisocial

One weakness of zimbardo’s conclusion is that deindividuation does not always result in antisocial behaviour.

Robert Johnson and Leslie Downing (1979) conducted a similar study where female participants had to give fake electric shocks to a confederate. However, in this study deindividuated participants either wore a KKK style gown or a nurses outfit. There was also a third group wearing their own clothes. The participants dressed as nurses gave fewer shocks than the kkk dressed participants. The shocks from the nurses were also given at lower levels. The individuated participants have fewer shocks than either of the other groups.

This shows that deindividuation does not automatically lead to antisocial behaviour. A better interpretation of deindividuation I’d that it results in the loss of personal identity and the individual then takes on a group identity.

Evaluation: Real- world application

One strength of research on deindividuation is that it can be used to help manage crowds.

Sporting fixtures are a common situation where large crowds of people are involved. In such situations crowd control may be best achieved by making people feel more personally self aware and less deindividuated. This can be achieved by, for example using video cameras at football matches so people can see themselves and thus be more publicly self aware.

This shows that understanding deindividuation can reduce antisocial behaviour in situations involving crowds.