Deindividuation

• Who came up with this theory?

  • Festinger (1952) claimed that there is a sort of release when in groups that allows people to behave in abnormal ways.
  • Festinger said that “people are freer from restraints, less inhibited. This has been called “doing what we would never do alone”
• What is the actual state?

  • Festinger claimed that deindividuation refers to a state in which an individual loses awareness of himself as a separate person.
  • This state is likely to occur when there is a high level of arousal and anonymity.
  • This state disinhibits leading to impulsive behaviour.
  • For example, in a carnival, revellers may join in wild dancing. (revelling in dark magic) 
• Anonymity and social arousal?

  • Anonymity - Having anonymity means that the person has no responsibility and leads to more disinhibited behaviours. 
  • Social arousal - This is the situation around the group or the external cues to which the group is responding to (high stress caused by political unrest)
• Decreased self-awareness + diffusion of responsibility?

  • Decreased self-awareness - Individuals are no longer thinking of their own actions but of the group. They will comply with the group by looking at the majority actions.
  • Diffusion of responsibility - People no longer feel responsible for actions as there are also others to share the blame. They do not feel as guilty and have negative consequences. Deindividuation happens as the individual is fully immersed and no longer functional as just their own actions
• Hooded shock study procedure?

  Recruited female undergrad students to give electric shocks to take part in an experiment that required to give electric shocks to another student; “to increase stress in an interview”

  Some of the students were deindividuated through the use of coats and hoods which hid their faces and never referred to by name.

  The other half were individuated as they were referred to by name, wore name tags and their own clothes. (the two conditions) 

  The shocks appeared to be harmful through a one-way mirror but they were not real.
• What were the findings of the hooded shock study?

  The deindividuated individuals pressed the shock button for twice as long as the individuated people.
• 2nd version of the hooded shock study?

  • In another version, some groups saw a pleasant women being interviewed whilst others saw an obnoxious women being interviewed.
  • P’s wearing name tags shocked the obnoxious women more than the pleasant women.
  • Deindividuated shocked both, they were more indiscriminate and unreasonable as they gave the shocks and did not need a reason unlike the individuated condition. 
• Demand characteristics of Zimbardo's study?

  • P’s in Zimbardo’s study wore clothing worn by the Klu Klux Klan.
  • This uniform may have led p’s to act under demand characteristics as they thought that extreme behaviour was expected of them.
  • Johnson and Downing (1979) found when p’s wore surgical masks, delivered less shocks than whose names were emphasised.
  • It is the parent’s clothing that led to differences in behaviour.
  • P’s dressed up like a doctor, feeling that they could not harm another being.
  • There are problems with this study as it may not be valid evidence for deindividuation.
• Brick study evaluation?

  • Geurin (1999) - An experiment conducted in which p’s worked on a brainstorming experiment for uses of a brick.
  • They were identified by name on their answer sheet or were anonymous.
  • The number of socially unacceptable answers to uses of the brick were measured.
  • P’s who were individually identifiable produced less socially unacceptable uses of a brick than those who were anonymous.
• Zimbardo prison study?

  • The outcome of the prison study shows deindividuation.
  • The guards conformed to their role with such zeal, the study was stopped after 6 days.
  • The guards displayed creativity in their evils, increasing the level of their aggression such as causing sleep deprivation, and humiliation.
  • They exhibited passive behaviour and even depression. Guards and prisoners were deindividuated.
  • Guards wore khaki uniforms and glasses so eye were hidden and prisoners only referred to as numbers. This helped escalate the violence
• Negative demand characteristics of prison study?

  • Zimbardo’s study lacks validity as p’s behaviour may be a result of demand characteristics rather than deindividuation.
  • One guard admitted to basing his performance on Cool Hand Luke of the main character.
  • The p’s may have then acted the way they thought Zimbardo wanted them to.
  • There are problems with this study so it may not be valid evidence for the role of deindividuation in aggression .
• Real life evidence?

  • Events at the Abu Ghraib prison shows how easily violence can occur in a prison situation.
  • Prison officers abused and tortured Iraqi prisoners. The prison was overcrowded with high emotional arousal and most atrocities happened at night, which may reflect anonymity.
  • It was unclear who was in charge of the prison, so there was diffusion of responsibility.
  • Real life evidence suggest that deindividuation is important in aggression