Crowds Flashcards
Le Bon’s model
Anonymity-irresponsibility Contagion-Unpredictable Suggestibility-Savage instincts = Uncivilised Behaviour
Deindividuation
A process by which people lose their sense of socialised individual identity and engage in unsocialised, often antisocial, behaviours. Link festinger (coined the term) negative talk about parents 1952
Problems with deindividuation study
Johnson and Downing (1979) KKK or nurse condition- nurses reduced aggression- overall KKK more aggressive- people respond to normative cues associated with social context
Emergent Norm Theory- real focus on NORMS…
no association or existing norms
Dinstinctive behaviour perceived as implicit norm
Pressure against nonconformity
Inaction of majority seen as support for norm
COLLECTIVE BEHAVIOUR
Criticism’s of ENT
Deindividuation suggests people in crowds are not self aware enough for norms to emerge.
Reicher’s:
Crowds are an intergroup phenomenon (in-group and out-group)
they gather for a reason
People don’t lose their identity they shift to a social identity.
Social Identity Theory- the identity which is part of our self concept in which we derive from group membership. We are motivated to think positively of our in-group and negatively of our outgroup- show superiority- motivation due to increases in self esteem- Fein and Spencer.
Don’t lose identity like deindividation but instead shift to specific group level identity (e.g. student)
SIDE (social identity Model of depersonalisation)- crowds share a social identity, one’s social category e.g. student becomes primed.
Crowds share a social identity- sense of self not lost but group level identity becomes primed (e.g. student)
Individuals self categorise based on group identity
Reicher’s critique of le bon
Le bon wanted to show establishment how to control crowds not understand them through a fear of social uprising.
CROWDS RESPOND TO INEQUALITY… RATIONAL CROWD AS AN ARGUMENT, police remain unaffected.
Reicher’s studies: St Paul’s riots (1984) increasing racial tension, poor housing and alienation of black youth
RESTRAINT SHOWN- RELEVANT AREA
SOCIAL IDENTITY
Violence was constrained- restraint shown (not savage) was also targeted- for a reason
Crowd stayed in relevant area
Rioters felt strong levels of social identity (not losing identity but shifting to a social identity.
not savages acting by instinct but instead social identity.
Battle of Westminster (1996) Inter-group phenomenon
Initiation of conflict depended on MEANING of outgrip action in terms of the collective beliefs of the student category
adopting a common self
Initiation of conflict depended upon the MEANING of out-group action determined by combined beliefs of the student category- demonstrates Reicher importance of crowd being an intergroup phenomenon
Join participation in the conflict depended upon adopting a common self- categorisation (as a student) in OPPOSITION to the police.
Poll tax riots and stott
Minority violent and then crowd acting towards all this way- not representing majority- Stott implemented this into Euro 2004 football hooliganism- target specific troublemakers or outsiders who were not representing the group norms.
England Riots: Reicher and Stott (2001)
Intergroup phenomenon again similar to battle of westminster:
Protected in-group
Violence directed towards police and outsiders (out-groups)
DIRECTED!- FOR A REASON
Violence was not random (not barbarians)- it was directed towards out-group of police and shops owned by outsiders- local shops even defended and when locals were endangered rioters acted to safeguard them (in-group protected) So much more than simple criminality- it was about social problems and inequality and antipolice action- for a reason.
How does Reicher critique Le bon
Crowds gather for a reason
Crowds are an inter-group phenomenon
People don’t lost their identity, they instead shift to a SOCIAL IDENTITY.
