NatCen (key study) (Social influence)

Question 1

What was the background?

Answer 1

Rioting took place in London from 6th August to 11th August 2011. It started during a peaceful protest that was protesting the fatal shooting of Mark Duggan by police.

Question 2

What was the aim?

Answer 2

Investigate what had triggered the August 2011 riots and the extent and nature of the youth involvement.

Question 3

What was the hypothesis?

Answer 3

• There were no specific hypotheses but they wanted to find out:
  -What occured in Tottenham based on eyewitness, police, and media reports
  -Who was involved
  -What and how young people were involved

Question 4

What was the design?

Answer 4

Participants were interviewed individually or in groups of 2-4 as some participants felt more comfortable in a group situation.

Question 5

What was the sample?

Answer 5

• 36 participants
• An even split between over and under 18 year olds
• Diversity of gender, ethnicity, and work status
• Majority still in education

Question 6

What was the procedure?

Answer 6

Participants were interviewed, either individually or in groups of up to 4 people

Question 7

What were the results?

Answer 7

• There was a wide range of different people involved, including a mix of age groups, ethnicities, and work status.
• The researchers created 4 different categories of involvement:
  -Watchers: People who were present and observed the riots but didn’t get involved in the criminal activity
  -Rioters: Young people who were actually involved in violent disturbances and vandalism
  -Looters: Young people involved in breaking into shops, stealing from broken-into shops, or stealing goods that had been left on the street
  -Non-involved: young people who did not take part

Question 8

Why did people become ‘watchers’?

Answer 8

• Bystanders: People who happened to live there
• The Curious: Curious people who deliberately chose to be there to see what was going on

Question 9

Why did people become ‘rioters’?

Answer 9

• Protesters: People who were protesting because they were upset about the death of Mark Duggan
• Retaliators: people who acted to get back on ‘the system’ or the police
• Thrill seekers: People who got involved because they enjoyed the excitement or the ‘buzz’

Question 10

Why did people become ‘looters’?

Answer 10

• Opportunists: people who saw the chance to steal things for themselves, friends, or family.
• Sellers: People who planned their involvements to maximise their ‘profits’.

Question 11

Why did people become ‘non-involved’?

Answer 11

• Stay-aways: people who chose not to get involved or observe.
• Wannabes: People who weren’t there but wanted to be there.

Question 12

What are nudge factors?

Answer 12

Things that encouraged people to get involved

Question 13

What are tug factors?

Answer 13

Things that discouraged them from getting involved

Question 14

What were the non-dispositional factors affecting the decision making in people?

Answer 14

• Family attitudes
• Community
• Belonging
• Poverty and materialism

Question 15

What were the nudge and tug factors for family attitudes?

Answer 15

• Nudge: Relatives not disapproving.
• Tug: Relatives not approving ‘not brought up like that’.

Question 16

What were the nudge and tug factors for community?

Answer 16

• Nudge: Attachment to a community with a culture of low-level criminal activity.
• Tug: Attachment to a community with pro-social values (including religious communities).

Question 17

What were the nudge and tug factors for belonging?

Answer 17

• Nudge: Little sense of ownership or stake in society.
• Tug: Sense of ownership or stake in society.

Question 18

What were the nudge and tug factors for poverty and materialism?

Answer 18

• Nudge: Desire for material goods but no means to pay for them.
• Tug: Adequate resources to purchase the desired goods

Question 19

What were the dispositional factors affecting decision making in people?

Answer 19

• Previous criminal activity
• Attitude towards authority
• Prospects

Question 20

What were the nudge and tug factors for previous criminal activity?

Answer 20

• Nudge: Easy to get involved
• Tug: Doesn’t want to be caught again

Question 21

What were the nudge and tug factors for attitude towards authority?

Answer 21

• Nudge: Cynicism towards politicians, authority figures. Negative experience with the police.
• Tug: No negative experience with the police.

Question 22

What were the nudge and tug factors for prospects?

Answer 22

• Nudge: Poor job prospects, low income, limited hope for the future. (nothing to lose)
• Tug: In work or having expectations for future work, aspirations for the future. (a lot to lose)

Question 23

What were the conclusions?

Answer 23

• Anti social criminal behaviour is influenced by:
  -Collective behaviour/group processes
  -Dispositional/individual factors
  -What young people believe is right and wrong
  -An individual’s assessment of the risks and benefits of involvement

Question 24

What were the criticisms?

Answer 24

• People’s memories aren’t always reliable (5 weeks after the riots)
• A distrust of authority may have affected participants’ honesty (data relied on self report)
• Participants might have been affected by ‘social desirability’ when responding to interviewers. (exaggerating the events to sound better)
• Researchers had difficulty recruiting participants, making it hard to generalise results. (only recruited from people who had been imprisoned for their involvement)