* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download If you were totally invisible for 24 hours and were completely
Philosophy of experience wikipedia , lookup
Belongingness wikipedia , lookup
Group development wikipedia , lookup
Social facilitation wikipedia , lookup
Psychology of self wikipedia , lookup
Group cohesiveness wikipedia , lookup
Personal identity wikipedia , lookup
False consensus effect wikipedia , lookup
Social loafing wikipedia , lookup
In-group favoritism wikipedia , lookup
Relational aggression wikipedia , lookup
Social tuning wikipedia , lookup
Self-categorization theory wikipedia , lookup
Stanford prison experiment wikipedia , lookup
Father absence wikipedia , lookup
Unpopularity wikipedia , lookup
Communication in small groups wikipedia , lookup
Philip Zimbardo wikipedia , lookup
Task If you were totally invisible for 24 hours and were completely assured that you would not be detected or held responsible for your actions, what would you do? Task: Read the article by Jane McGee Task In the second paragraph of her article Jane McGee says ‘ The state (of deindividuation) is characterised by diminished awareness of self and individuality. This in turn reduces an individual’s self-restraint and normative regulation of behaviour’ What do you think are the key phrases in this statement? Write a sentence on 2 of them explaining what they mean to you. Task: On page 21, in the last paragraph of the third column, McGee cites Zimbardo (1969) offering the following as some of the key causal factors of deindividuation: Anonymity, Reduction of responsibility, arousal, sensory overload, lack of contextual structure or predictability, altered consciousness due to drugs or alcohol. Write a brief account of how these factors could influence crowd behaviour in football or music concert crowds or a political demonstration. Social psychological theories : Deindividuation The theory applies to aggression that occurs when in a group. A person loses their sense of individuality and identity. This can occur in 2 ways: 1. Becoming part of a crowd 2. Identifying with a particular role Hogg and Vaughan (98) “ a process whereby people lose their sense of socialised individual identity and engage in unsocialised, often antisocial behaviours” I.e. we become faceless and anonymous and therefore deindividuated E.g. In a crowd we become faceless and anonymous and are therefore less likely to worry about evaluation by others - normal controls based on guilt etc will be weakened. Hoodies allow people to be faceless and anonymous too Zimbardo (69) Individual behaviour is rational and conforms to acceptable social norms. Deindividuated behaviour is based on primitive urges and does not conform. Factors likely to encourage Deindividuation: Zimbardo (1969) suggests 2 factors: 1) Anonymity – e.g. wearing a uniform This encourages the individual to identify with the role created by the uniform and causes them to lose their sense of individuality 2) Altered consciousness due to drugs or alcohol. Supporting research E.g. Zimbardo (1969) Participants in the deindiviuated condition (hood and no name tag) shocked the learner for twice as long as the identifiable participant. E.g. Rehm et al (1987) Children wearing the same colour shirt (therefore harder to tell apart) played handball more aggressively than the children in their everyday clothes Mann (81) investigated “baiting” of suicides ie a crowd urging the potential suicide to jump. He analysed 21 incidents of suicides reported in American papers in the 60s and 70s In 10/21 cases baiting occurred It was more likely to occur : at night when the crowd was large and the crowd was further away from the person attempting to commit suicide. Therefore this supports deindividuation as these factors led to the people in the crowd being more anonymous ie deindividuated and therefore more aggresssive Self awareness Anonymity may not be the only cause of deindividuation An awareness of our own attitudes, feelings and behaviour is used for self regulation. Prentice-Dunn et al (1982) Self-focused individuals – focus on and act according to internalised attitudes and moral standards This therefore reduces anti-social behaviour Less privately self aware – as people become emerged in groups they become less able to regulate their own behaviour, Gender differences E.g. Cannavale et al (1970) Found that male and female groups respond differently under deindividuated conditions. An increase in aggressive behaviour was only found in ALL male groups Diener et al (1973) Found that males were more likely to lose their normal inhibitions concerning aggression in deindividuated situations This therefore suggests that males are more prone to aggressive behaviour when deindividuated. Cultural differences E.g. Watson (1973) Found that societies where warriors changed their appearance were more aggressive towards their victims than those who didn’t. Problems with the theory…. The theory doesn’t explain why not all crowds/groups act aggressively E.g. Gergen et al (1973) Found that lower levels of individuality didn’t result in aggressive behaviour. 12 participants were put into a dark room 12 participants were put into a well lit room (control) No specific instructions were given to either group. Their behaviour was observed During the first 15mins the participants in the dark room talked politely to each other After 60mins their inhibitions were lowered Barriers to intimate contact were overcome 50% of the group cuddled and 80% reported feelings of sexually arousal Computer Mediated Communication (CMC) CMC is becoming increasingly common Increases feelings of deindividuation (e.g. you don’t need to show anyone a picture) Francis et al (2006) found that adolescents felt more comfortable asking for help with mental health problems in Internet chat rooms compared to asking professionals face to face. Bloodstein (2003) Found that people with speech problems (e.g. stuttering) showed fewer problems when wearing a mask Therefore not being identified might increase self esteem and decrease opportunities for evaluation apprehension. Postmes and Spears (1998) Meta-analysis of deindividuation research Looked at 60 studies They didn’t find any consistent findings of deindividuation acting as an influence on an individual’s behaviour They found no consistent findings to support the argument that decreased inhibitions and anti-social behaviour are more likely to be seen in large groups Suggests that aggressive behaviour may be more to do with group norms. Group norms E.g. Johnson and Downing (1979) Used the same experimental conditions as Zimbardo (1969) Group 1 –anonymous through masks and overall (Ku Klux Klan) Group 2 – anonymous through nurses uniform Compared to a control group, more shocks were given when participants were dressed in the Ku Klux Klan uniforms Less shocks were given when dressed in the nurses uniforms They concluded that people respond to the social context in which they find themselves in.