Deindividuation

Deindividuation

AO1
1. Deindividuation is a psychological state characterised by lowered self-evaluation and decreased concerns about evaluation by others. This leads to an increase in behaviour that would normally be inhibited by personal or social norms. The psychological state of deindividuation is aroused when individuals join crowds or large groups. Factors that contribute to deindividuation include anonymity (e.g. wearing a uniform) and altered consciousness due to drugs or alcohol.
  1. People normally refrain from acting in an agressive manner partly because there are social norms inhibiting such 'uncivillised' behaviour and partly because they are easily identifiable. Being anonymous, and therefore effectively unaccountable, in a crowd has the psychological consequence of reducing inner restraints and increasing behaviours that are usually inhibited. According to Zimbardo, being part of a crowd can diminish awareness of our own individuality, In a large crowd, each person is faceless and annonymous - the larger the group, the greater the anonymity. There is diminished fear of negative evaluation of actions and a reduced sense of guilt. Conditions that increase anonymity also minimise concerns about evaluation by others, and so weaken the normal barriers to anti-social behaviour that are based on guilt or shame.
    1. Zimbardo carried out a series of experiments that were instrumental in the development of deindividuation theory. In the first of Zimbardo's experiments on deindividuation, groups of four female undergraduates were required to deliver electric shocks to another student to aid-learning. Half of the participants wore bulky lab coats that hid their faces, sat in seperate cubicles and were never refered to by name. The other participants wore their normal clothes, were given large name tags to wear and were introduced to each other by name. Participants in the deindividuation conditio, i.e hooded and no name tags, shocked the learner for twice as long as did identifiable participants.
A02
1. It must be remembered however that both Cannavale et al and Diener et al have found gender differeces withinin agression research. Cannavale et al found that male and female groups responded differently under deindividuation conditions and an increase in agression was obtained only in the all-male groups. This was also the finding of Diener et al, who found greater disinhibition of agression, i.e removal of the normal inhibitions concerning aggression, in males. Thus, evidence indicates that males may be more prone to disinhibition of agressive behaviour when deindividuated than females.
2. Also, Prentice-Dunn et al offered an alternative perspective to Zimbardo's conclusion that anonymity is an important determinant of deindividuation. They claim that it is reduced self-awareness, rather than simple anonymity, that leads to deindividuation. If an individual is self-focused, they tend to focus on, and act according to their internalised attitudes and moral standards, thus reducing the likelihood of antisocial behaviour. If the individual submerges themselves within a group, they may lose this focus, becoming less privately self-aware, and therefore less able to regulate their own behaviour.
3. There is also the issue that there is lack of evidence support for deindividuation. A meta-analysis of 60 studies of deindividuation concludes that there is insufficient support for the major claims of deindividuation theory. For example, Postmes and Spears found that disinhibition and antisocial behaviour are not more common in large groups and anonymous settings. Neither was there much evidence that deindividuation is assosiated with reduced self-awareness, or that reduced self-awareness increases disinhibition or agressive behaviour.
  1. There are however methodological issues with this study due to being a meta-analysis, leading to the file drawer effect. This effect suggests that when completing research, thise that reject the null and accept the alternative hypothesis tend to get published, while a study where the null hypothesis is accepted, is less likely to be published creating a bias and limiting the diversity of the studies going 'into the drawer'. Therefor the most well known, published and talked about studies are likely to be chosen meaning that the findings will not be a true reflection of the process of deindividuation. However, while this does limit the validity of the findings, the file drawer effect also allows a variety of studies to be considered, therefore creating a variety of samples, meaning that the findings are more likely to be representative of the populations cultures, age and gender, meaning that the results can more likely be applied to society.
4. Johnson and Downing also offer an alternative explanation, arguing that rather than deindividuation automatically increasing the incidence of aggression, any behaviour produced could be a product of local group norms. They used the same experimential conditions as Zimbardo, but this time participants were made anonymous by means of a mask and overalls, reminiscent of the Ku Klux Klan, or by means of nurses uniforms. Participants were shocked more than a control condition when dressed in the Ku Klu Klan uniforms, but actually shocked less than the controls when dressed as nurses. This would suggest that participants dressed as Ku Klux Klansmen felt that aggressive behaviour was more appropriate than did the participants dressed as nurses, highlighting the importance of local group norms in agressive behaviour
5. Mann however, contrasting with all of the above studies, used the concept of deindividuation to explain a bizarre aspect of collective behaviour, the 'baiting crowds', thus supporting the theory. The baiting crows lends support to the notion of the crowd as a deindividuated 'mob'. Mann analysed 21 suicide leaps reported in US newspapers. He found that in 10 of the 21 cases where a crowd had gathered to watch, baiting had occured, i.e. the crowd had urged the potential suicide to jump. These incidents tended to occur at night, when the crowd was large and some distance from the person being taunted, particularly when the jumper was high above them. All of these features were likely to produce a state of deindividuation in the members of the crowd, showing not only support for the theory but also it's real world application.

Next up

Description

Resource summary

Similar

	Created by laracallaway about 10 years ago