SOCI 3006 – Collective Behaviour May 2007 Lecture 5

1. Administrative password for website is cjrocks

2. Individualistic Approaches crowds do not ‘create’ behaviour because of some effect of being in a group instead, some types of people, possessing certain personality characteristics, are drawn to crowd situations, and what we see is these individual personality characteristics being demonstrated in a permissive situation convergence theories – if the individual does not already have the tendency, the crowd situation will not make it ‘magically’ appear – instead, the crowd allows people with similar tendencies to ‘converge’, with what appears to be group action taking place p. 72 in text

2. Individualistic Approaches (cont’d) for example: a riot is more likely to occur at a soccer game than at an opera, because of the types of individuals drawn to a soccer game (young males, drinking) since the individuals making up each group have different characteristics, the group behaviour will be different chief assumptions of convergence theory: a) individuals are rational b) even in a crowd, individuals act according to their individual personality disposition c) individuals with certain types of personality dispositions will be attracted to certain types of crowd situations d) collective behaviour is the mass release of individualistic predispositions

2. Individualistic Approaches (cont’d) > Allport’s Theory (1924)  “there is no psychology of groups which is not the psychology essentially and entirely a psychology of individuals”  if someone engages in violent behaviour in a crowd, it is because they already had violent tendencies (predisposition)  dispositions explain why certain people gather in certain types of crowd situations (at a Stompin’ Tom concert versus a Billy Talent concert) – predispositions have a lot to do with explaining why people converge where and when they do (e.g. soccer hooligans)

2. Individualistic Approaches (cont’d) > Allport’s Theory  two types of innate human responses: “avoidance” versus “approach” – all human behaviour is a learned modification of these two responses  those least inhibited act first in group situations – acting as a model for others – through this process “social facilitation” occurs  humans are conditioned to submit to the will of the majority – hence the facilitation aspect of group behaviour

2. Individualistic Approaches (cont’d) > Allport’s Theory  rationalization process: - even if I get caught, they can’t punish everybody - such large numbers of people can’t be wrong - since so many will benefit from this act, I am doing a good thing in fact

2. Individualistic Approaches (cont’d) > Miller and Dollard (1941)  responsible for what they called “Learning Theory”  rather than assuming the source of human behaviour is innate, instead most behaviour is a learned response to different innate drives (nature versus nurture) driveresponsereward stimulus

2. Individualistic Approaches (cont’d) > Miller and Dollard (1941)  we learn on the basis of our experience with behaviour and reward/punishment  frustration (leading to violence) is caused when drives are blocked from being satisfied – known as the “Deprivation - Frustration – Aggression Hypothesis”  Dollard and Miller focused on violent crowds  “people in a crowd behave about as they would otherwise, only more so”

2. Individualistic Approaches (cont’d) > Miller and Dollard (1941)  “drive stimuli” refers to the state of excitation an individual experiences  “crowd stimuli” refers to the state of excitation created by other crowd members  these two stimuli interact, modify one another  collective behaviour is a situation when individuals act in concert with one another in unusual ways, often violent p. 78

2. Individualistic Approaches (cont’d) > Miller and Dollard (1941)  crowd stimulus varies by: - interstimulation (excitement created by others – e.g. milling) - proximity (influence increases the closer people are) - numbers (as size increases, protection, permissiveness increases) - anonymity (increases with size) - prestige factor (greater the prestige of the leader, greater the crowd stimulation)  still, no matter how influential the crowd, it cannot evoke behaviour the individual does not already have a predisposition for

2. Individualistic Approaches (cont’d) > Hogg and Abrams (1988) – ‘Social Identity Theory’  much of our behaviour reflects our self-image, and the roles we occupy, and how we have learned to play these roles (e.g. – the aggressive swimming coach, versus the devoted mother)  whatever role we are playing will determine how we behave  collective behaviour is the result of the formation of a group identity within a crowd, and individuals orient their behaviour according to this ‘new’ identity

2. Individualistic Approaches (cont’d) > Hogg and Abrams (1988) – ‘Social Identity Theory’  social acceptance as a strong need to be met, and crowd situations can be very influential in this regard  society as a ‘web of social categories’ (social statuses of different levels of power and influence)  identity based on one’s social categories (status) – there is no innate self, but rather a learned self based on our ‘personal identifications’ and our ‘social identifications’ that emerge from interpersonal relationships  in crowds, a group ‘social identification’ forms, defining what is or is not appropriate behaviour

2. Individualistic Approaches (cont’d) > Hogg and Abrams (1988) – ‘Social Identity Theory’  ‘referent informational influence’ takes place in the crowd, and group members learn the ‘critical attributes’ necessary to fit in as members (e.g. norms)  individuals can decide in advance to be members of a group  ‘crowd behaviour is driven by a new identity – “crowd member”, to which individual identities are subjugated  p. 83

2. Individualistic Approaches (cont’d)  Criticisms -teleology (the event occurred because of the individualistic tendencies of the members; or, if a person behaves violently, it is because they have a predisposition toward violence) -do people really have to be predisposed always? - danger of branding those in crowds as ‘certain types’ of people, as ‘radicals’, ‘nuts’ or ‘uniformed’