In this essay it will be argued that the concept of deindividuation theory is not always straight forward as they are many perspectives and beliefs that form such a theory. Various social psychologists like Gustave Le Bon, Festinger and Diener to name a few have explained deindividuation as a process whereby the individual ceases to identify with their selves but starts to act and think similar to one another. They all go on to further explain behaviour within crowds from different point of views but this is the starting point and for the sake of this essay I shall look at the different explanations surrounding deindividuation theory in relation to crowd behaviour as each of them have strengths and weaknesses and it is quite impossible to only …show more content…
During this period Le Bon states individuals go through a process called ‘contagion’ which merely means the individual stops acting as they would normally act as an individual and they submerge fully in to the group and start to experience a collective group feeling seen in looting. This behaviour exhibits a primitive barbaric behaviour that is unpredictable, aggressive, dangerous, and unapologetic and above all causes loss of individual rationality. This is not to say every crowd goes through these descriptions as they are other crowds that are peaceful and will not demonstrate the above mentioned. It is only when the crowd crosses over to deindividuation and adopt a ‘crowd mind’ as termed by Le Bon and also seen during the UK, London riots of 2011. The crowd started to imitate each other and that lead to various levels of looting from stealing to the more severe acts of murder. Le Bon‘s theory of individuation is regarded as outdated and discredited (Reicher and Stott, Guardian, 2011) as it limits the understanding of crowds to only consider the gruesome forms of crowd behaviour but does not further explain why the behaviour occurs nor does it explain the feelings and thoughts of those involved as Le Bon did not conduct his experiments within crowds but from a observational distance (Dixon et. al, BK 1, 2012, pg. 5). This criticism does not make the theory of ‘crowd mind’ less valid but it limits the reader to the language used and only to view crowds in negativity which is not always the
Many people have trouble being apart of a society. These troubles come from trying to fit in, which is also known as conforming. Another trouble is trying to express one’s own style with one’s own opinion. This is a trouble due to the fact that many people have the fear of being frowned upon when being the black sheep of the group if one’s opinion does not correspond with other opinions. This is where one’s own sense of who they are, individuality, and trying to fit in, conformity, can get confused. A nickname for conformity is “herd behavior” which is the name of an article where the author relates animals that herd with people that conform. Many people have a different philosophy of this topic which will be expressed in this essay. An important
“Something happens to individuals when they collect in a group. They think and act differently than they would on their own. (17)” States Carol Tavris in her article, “In Groups We Shrink From Loner’s Heroics”. Tavris believes people who are in groups tend to act in a more sluggish manor than those alone. She states many examples of this theory in her article, including the story of Kitty Genovese which is stated in the first paragraph. Kitty was stabbed repeatedly and killed in front of her New York apartment. No one did anything to stop this heinous action from taking place. Within her essay she obtains rhetorical appeals to prove that her statements are plausible to the audience.
“The anger of the city poor often expressed itself in futile violence over nationality or religion…The crowd, shouting ‘Burn the damn den of aristocracy,’ charged, throwing bricks” (227).
It was Genovese’s murder that first sparked research and discussion in this area. Her case has had a substantial effect on social psychology and how group mentality works. Originally, the conclusion was that urban people tended to be apathetic due to the stress of city life. Social psychologists Bibb Latané and John M. Darley, inspired by the case, conducted the renowned Bystander Apathy Experiment and Smoke Filled Room Experiment (Latané, Darley, 1968). Their findings have changed public thought on Genovese’s case; it is not that urban citizens are less likely to help, but groups in general tend to exhibit the same behaviour (Rendsvig,
Firstly, (re-presentation) the media language used to describe the initial events of the riots was exaggerated. Strong words/phrases like, “Anarchy”, “The Battle Of London”, and “the rule of the mob” or “Police and the riot blunders” were the headlines on widely distributed newspapers. These exaggerated headlines make it seem as if that there was a political motive behind these riots and that the riots were planned attacks (rebellion) to take over the country’s capital. Furthermore, the rioters were described as young and opportunist people who were benefiting from the looting. The media also reported the different types of merchandise the looters had obtained in the course of the riots. Images of looters posing in front of the merchandize they had obtained were shown in the media and this tempted others to participate in the riots as well because the merchandise looked so easy to
In the teleplay “The Monsters are Due on Maple Street” written by Rod Serling, a small street in a suburban American town falls into chaos after they lose all electricity, and in an effort to find the monsters responsible, they become animals. They search for a scapegoat and let their imagination et the best of them because “for a moment their fear almost turns their walk into a wild stampede, but Steve's voice, loud, incisive, and commanding, makes them stop. ‘Wait a minute...wait a minute! Let's not be a mob!’ The people stop as a group, seem to pause for a moment, and then much more quietly and slowly start to walk across the street. ” (Rod Serling ?). The residents of Maple Street fall victim to herd mentality. They rush to find the culprit and they lose all sense of moral and judgement. As they are about to become a mob they listen to Steve as he advises that they do not. All the residents of Maple Street listen to him and sure, he did use mob mentality to do good, but it goes to show the amount of power one man holds. Similarly, in the article “Why People Follow The Crowd” written by ABC News, the article discusses how humans are willing to let go of their beliefs, morals, and
The characteristics of a group are determined by its elements. The mob that stormed the Bastille on July 14th, 1789 was a group of citizens that were fierce, enraged, and blood-thirsty. To the people of Paris, the Bastille was a symbol of brutality and totalitarian power. It was hated because of the many stories that had emerged from its walls of horrible torture and brutality. To the people of Paris who stormed the Bastille, the prison which was the symbol of the absolute monarchy which France had been suffering under for so long. They were tired of being treated unfairly and not having a voice in most of the political affairs during the time period. They wanted "life, liberty, fraternity" and were determined to fulfill their wishes of a fair ruling system by means of force or agreement. Unfortunately, citizens had to resort to the use of force to gain what the felt lacked.
“Conformity is a form of social influence that involves a change in behavior or belief so that one can fit in with a certain group” (McLeod). Such a change is a response to imagined (which involves the pressure of expectations or social norms) or real (which involves the presence of others) group pressure. Another definition of conformity can be “yielding to group pressures”. Group pressure can take many forms, for example persuasion, teasing, bullying, criticism etc. Conformity is also referred to as group pressure or majority influence. The term conformity is mostly used to show an agreement to the position of the majority, and this is brought about by either by the desire to be liked or to fit in, or just to match a social role. The aim of this paper is to argue that conformity is among people because they always live in groups-work groups, family, political, religious and social groups. At the same instance, they are adjusted to obey authority. A conformist mentality makes it easy for people to be influenced by others.
It is no surprise then that with such heavy issues weighing on the minds of the peasantry, that there was such a surge of violence with the murder of Monéy. When the town of Hautefaye began to celebrate the commemoration of the First Empire on August 15th, drinking became the main activity causing the celebration to become a likely place for violence. Corbin suggests that what makes the murder of Monéy distinguishable from other acts of violence, was that the event was past the French period where such violence was common, as well as it was unusual for the crime to take place at the time of day that it did. Ultimately, given the amount of heavy issues weighing on the minds of the peasantry at a time when France was in such turmoil, it’s logical that a surge of violence occurred within the town of Hautefaye.
Have you ever witnessed or participated in an act of mob mentality? Many people without realizing it take part in a form of mob mentality, whether it is at a sporting event, concert, or even a protest or riot; these are all forms of mob mentality. The term “mob mentality” is usually something negative, where large groups of people deindivduate themselves. People lose control and are pressured to fit in with what the rest of the crowd is doing. In the book, A Tale of Two Cities, by Charles Dickens, mob mentality has a big impact on the plot. A Tale of Two Cities, shows how mob mentality ties in with history repeating itself, portraying manslaughter and homicide, and also depicting riots.
A factor that could influence conformity is deindividuation; deindividuation is when people engage in unusual behaviour because their normal identities have been compromised (Lilienfield et al., 2012). This could be when Ku Klux Klan members put on their masks, when prisoners are referred to by their numbers not their name or when a person logs onto the internet and takes on a certain persona (Lilienfield et al., 2012).
In all aspects of their lives we associate with various groups, for example demographic, cultural or peer groups. Social Identity theory developed by Henri Tajfel in 1979 explains how people develop a sense of belonging and membership in particular groups. This theory explains behaviors in terms of social groups, we form social groups and create perceptions of others and ourselves that are influenced by the various groups to which we belong. A social group is a set of individuals who hold a common social identification or view themselves as members of the same social category (Chen & Li, 2009). Individuals can have multiple, co-occurring identities which could vary. This paper aims to explain how the Social Identity theory is used to explain violence and prejudice behavior and it also looks at the advantages and disadvantages of this theory compared to other theories in explaining the same behavior.
In her essay “Group Minds,” Doris Lessing discusses our paradoxical ability to call ourselves individuals and our inability to realize that groups define and influence us. We, as humans, hold individualism in the highest regard yet fail to realize that groups diminish our individuality. Lessing writes, “when we’re in a group, we tend to think as that group does... but we also find our thinking changing because we belong to a group” (p. 334). Groups have the tendency to generate norms, or standards for behavior in certain situations. Not following these norms can make you stand out and, therefore, groups have the ability to influence our thoughts and actions in ways that are consistent with the groups’. Lessing’s essay helps set the context to understand the experiments that social psychologists Solomon Asch, Stanley Milgram and Philip Zimbardo conducted to explain conformity and obedience.
In conclusion, society shapes our perspective on people which classifies them into various social groups. Each defined by different characteristics that can be physical, ideological or ethnical. This leads to a discrimination of them for their difference traits. For this reason in the novel social groups are represented in particular ways so the audience can reflect over stereotypical issues.
Social identity theory is based on four interrelated concepts: social categorization, social identification, social comparison and positive distinctiveness. Social categorization is tendency to divide and therefore categorise individuals into in-groups (individual belongs) and out-groups (individual does not belong); it groups different social circles based on the members’ stereotypical culture and behaviour. This often leads to category accentuation effect, which is exaggerating of intergroup differences and intragroup similarities; individual underestimate perceived variability within groups but overestimate variability between groups. Social identification is way of identifying individual with a particular social group based on their in-group norms and by doing so, may adopt some of the values and behaviours of that particular group. Social comparison and positive distinctiveness is when social identity contributes to our self-image so we seek positive social identities to maintain and enhance self-esteem. We compare in-group with out-group and also discriminate the out-group to establish the superiority of in-group, enhance their self-image...