Deindividuation

Deindividuation

Characteristics of D
1. A01
  1. D = psychological state characterised by lowered self-evaluation + decreased concerns about eval
    1. Leads to increase in behaviour that would normally be inhibited by personal or social norms
      1. Psychological state aroused when indivi. joins crowds or large groups
      2. Contributing factors = anonymity (wearing uniform) + altered consciousness due to drugs or alcohol
        Zimbardo
        Stressed these same conditions may lead to an increase in pro-social behaviour, but focus of D theory has been almost exclusively on antisocial behaviour
        Crowds at music festivals + large religious gatherings
2. A02
  1. Johnson + Downing
    1. Explored idea rather than D automatically increasing incidence of aggression, any behaviour produced could be product of local group norms
      1. Same experimental conditions as Zimbardo
      2. Ppts made anonymous by means of mask + overalls (reminiscent of KKK), or by means of nurses' uniforms
        Ppts shocked more than control condition when dressed in KKK uniforms, but actually shocked less than controls when dressed as nurses
        Findings illustrate people respond to normative cues associated w/ social context in which they find themselves
        As was case in Zimbardo et al's Stanford Prison Experiment
        Ppts dressed as KKK clearly felt aggressive behaviour was more appropriate than did ppts dressed as nurses
Anonymity
1. A01
  1. People refrain from acting in aggressive manner partly because social norms inhibit such 'uncivilised' behaviour + partly because they're easily identifiable
    1. Being anonymous (effectively unaccountable) in crowd has psychological consequence of reducing inner restraints + increasing behaviours that are usually inhibited
  2. Zimbardo
    1. Carried out serious of experiments instrumental in development of D theory
2. A02
  1. Research support
    1. Zimbardo
      1. Groups of 4 F undergraduates required to deliver electric shocks to another student to 'aid learning'
        1/2 wore bulky lab coats and hoods that hid their faces, sat in separate cubicles + were never referred to be name
        Others wore normal clothes, given large name tags + were introduced to each other by name
        Were also able to see each other when seated at shock machines
        Both sets were told they could see person being socked
        Ppts in D condition shocked 'learner' for twice as long as did identifiable ppts
    2. Rehm et al
      1. Investigated wearing uniform when part of sports team
        Randomly assigned German schoolchildren to handball teams of five people, 1/2 wearing same orange shirts other 1/2 wore normal street clothes
        Children wearing orange (harder to tell apart) played game consistently more aggressively than children in everyday clothes
  2. IDA - Gender bias
    1. Apparent in Rehm's study
    2. Cannavale et al
      1. Found M + F groups responded differently under D conditions, as there was an increase in aggression only obtained in all-M groups
    3. Diener et al
      1. Found greater D of aggression in M, suggesting M may be more prone to disinhibiton of aggressive behaviour when D'ed
Faceless crowd
1. A01
  1. According to Zimbardo
    1. Being part of crowd can diminsh awareness of our own individuality
    2. In large crowd, each person is faceless + anonymous - larger group, greater anonymity
      1. Diminished fear of negative eval of actions + reduced sense of guilt
        Conditions increase anonymity, minimise concerns about eval by others, so weaken normal barriers to antisocial behaviour based on guilt or shame
  2. Mullen
    1. Analysed newspaper cuttings of 60 lynching's in US between 1899 + 1946
      1. Found more people there were in mob, greater savagery with which they killed victims
2. A02
  1. IDA - Real-world application
    1. Mann
      1. Used concept of D to explain bizarre aspect of collective behaviour - 'baiting crowd'
      2. Analysed 21 suicide leaps reported in US newspapers in 1960s + 1970s
        Found in 10/21 cases where crowd had gathered to watch, baiting had occured
        Incidents tended to occur at night, when crowd was large + some distance from person being taunted
        These features were likely to produce state of D in members of crowd
  2. Cultural differences
    1. Robert Watson
      1. Collected data on extent to which warriors in 23 societies changed appearance prior to going to war + extent to which they killed, tortured or mutilated their victims
        Those societies where warriors changed appearance were more destructive toward victims compared to those who didn't change appearance
Reduced private self-awareness
1. A01
  1. Prentice-Dunn et al
    1. Offer alternative perspective to Z's conclusion anonymity is important determinant of D
      1. Claim reduced self-awareness, rather than simply A that leads to D
        If indivi. is self-focused, tend to focus on, act according to, internalised attitudes + moral standards, thus reducing likelihood of antisocial behaviour
        If indivi. submerges themselves in group, may lose focus, becoming less privately self-aware, therefore less able to regulate own behaviour
2. A02
  1. Postmes + Spears
    1. Meta-analysis of 60 studies concludes there's insufficient support for major claims of D theory
    2. Found D + antisocial behaviour aren't more common in large groups + anonymous settings
      1. Nor was there much evidence that D is associated w/ reduced self-awareness, or that reduced self-awareness increases aggressive behaviour
  2. Pro-social consequences
    1. Spivey + Prentice-Dunn
      1. Found D could lead to either pro-social or antisocial behaviour depending on situational factors
        When pro-social cues where present, D ppts performed slightly more altruistic acts + significantly fewer antisocial acts compared to control group

Next up

Description

Resource summary

Similar

	Created by bebe97 almost 9 years ago