CROWD PSYCHOLOGY Myths of Crowd Psychology What is

CROWD PSYCHOLOGY Myths of Crowd Psychology

What is a myth? A myth is a story that we believe in, although there is actually no basis or evidence for believing in it.

How do mobs behave? � � HOW DO YOU imagine a crowd of people - say at a concert, a sporting event or a demonstration? If you picture an irrational, spontaneous, suggestible, emotional and even potentially dangerous group then you are in good company. Sociologists have found that this view of crowds is promoted by many authors of introductory sociology textbooks. . Despite these beliefs both in sociology textbooks and in the general public, the actual evidence does not support it. Crowds are not the many-armed destructive monsters of the popular or even fascist imagination

IS IT DANGEROUS TO BE IN A CROWD ?

Is it dangerous to be in a crowd? � If you picture an irrational, spontaneous, suggestible, emotional and even potentially dangerous group then you are in good company � Despite these beliefs both in sociology textbooks and in the general public, the actual evidence does not support it. Crowds are not the many-armed destructive monsters of the popular or even fascist imagination

Despite these beliefs both in sociology textbooks and in the general public, the actual evidence does not support it.

So now we have learnt that it is not dangerous to be part of a crowd. Let’s look at some of the “myths” which cause people to believe that it is dangerous. � �

What is the main cause of violence in crowds? � � � The most common myth about crowds is that they are spontaneous, or worse, that they are hotbeds of violence, with complete chaos only a few ill-judged jostles away. Research into crowd violence does not support this. One study of riots shows that violence is normally related to the presence of two opposing factions. Mixed crowds - which are the norm - are in fact usually peaceful and only engage in stereotypical crowdbehavior, e. g. whistling and clapping, face-painting, singing and shouting depending on the occasion. In reality most people will go to almost any length to avoid actual violence, whether they are in a crowd or not.

2. Crowds are suggestible The idea that people in crowds have heightened suggestibility is also a relatively common myth. People are said to copy each other, looking for a leader, being open to others' suggestion about how they should behave, perhaps resulting from a lack of social structure. Schweingruber and Wohlstein simply find no research to back up this claim. If there is some truth to the idea that people in crowds are suggestible, no one has managed to demonstrate it empirically. One scholar has asked why, if crowds are so suggestible, they don't disperse when asked to do so by an authority figure.

To what do the words “this claim” refer? � � The idea that people in crowds have heightened suggestibility is also a relatively common myth. People are said to copy each other, looking for a leader, being open to others' suggestion about how they should behave, perhaps resulting from a lack of social structure. Schweingruber and Wohlstein simply find no research to back up this claim. If there is some truth to the idea that people in crowds are suggestible, no one has managed to demonstrate it empirically.

“This claim” refers to the idea that people behave irrationally when there is a panic

What do the examples of the underground station and the World Trade Center illustrate? Crowds are irrational � One type of irrationality frequently attributed to crowds is panic. Faced by emergency situations people are thought to suddenly behave like selfish animals, trampling others in the scramble to escape. � A long line of research into the way people behave in real emergency situations does not support this idea. Two examples are studies on underground evacuations and the rapid, orderly way in which people evacuated the World Trade Center after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Many lives were saved that day because people resisted the urge to panic. Resisting the urge to irrationality, or panic, is the norm.

The main idea can come before or after the example but the examples always illustrate the main idea.

What do the examples of the World Trade Center and the underground illustrate? Crowds are irrational One type of irrationality frequently attributed to crowds is panic. Faced by emergency situations people are thought to suddenly behave like selfish animals, trampling others in the scramble to escape. A long line of research into the way people behave in real emergency situations does not support this idea. Two examples are studies on underground evacuations and the rapid, orderly way in which people evacuated the World Trade Center after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Many lives were saved that day because people resisted the urge to panic. Resisting the urge to irrationality, or panic, is the norm.

Crowds are irrational One type of irrationality frequently attributed to crowds is panic. Faced by emergency situations people are thought to suddenly behave like selfish animals, trampling others in the scramble to escape. A long line of research into the way people behave in real emergency situations does not support this idea. Two examples are studies on underground station and the orderly, rapid way in which people evacuated the World Trade Center after the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Many lives were saved that day because people resisted the urge to panic. Resisting the urge to irrationality, or panic, is the norm.

Crowds increase anonymity A less common myth, but still popular is the idea that people become more anonymous when they are in a crowd. This anonymity is said to feed into spontaneity and even destructiveness, helping to make crowds violent, dangerous places in which society's laws are transgressed. Everyday experience, though, is that people usually travel in groups, with their family or friends, and so are not anonymous at all. Research confirms this, for example one study from the 70 s found that most people at a football match were with one or more friends. Later research has repeated this finding.

What are the real effects of being with friends? � Everyday experience, though, is that people usually travel in groups, with their family or friends, and so are not anonymous at all. Research confirms this, for example one study from the 70 s found that most people at a football match were with one or more friends. Later research has repeated this finding

Crowds are particularly emotional; true or false? Support your answer from the text. Crowds are emotional Less widespread this myth - nevertheless crowds are thought by some to be particularly emotional. It is argued that increased emotionality is linked to irrationality and perhaps violence. Modern psychological research, though, doesn't see the emotions as separate to decision-making, but rather as an integral part. To talk about an 'emotional crowd' as opposed to a 'rational crowd', therefore, doesn't make sense. People in crowds make their decisions with input from their emotions, just as they do when they're not in a crowd

Crowds are particularly emotional; true or false? Support your answer from the text. Crowds are emotional Less widespread this myth - nevertheless crowds are thought by some to be particularly emotional. It is argued that increased emotionality is linked to irrationality and perhaps violence. Modern psychological research, though, doesn't see the emotions as separate to decision-making, but rather as an integral part. To talk about an 'emotional crowd' as opposed to a 'rational crowd', therefore, doesn't make sense. People in crowds make their decisions with input from their emotions, just as they do when they're not in a crowd

So crowds are not particularly emotional; people are no more emotional in a crowd than in any other situation

Why do people believe that crowds are destructive? You may have to infer your answer.

. Crowds are destructive The least common myth in the sociology textbooks, but quite a strong cultural stereotype of crowds, is that they are destructive. This is closely related to the myth of spontaneity and is often connected to violence. Again Schweingruber and Wohlstein find that the research shows violence in crowds is extremely rare. And what violence does occur is normally carried out by a small minority these are the people that make it onto the news.

Why do people believe that crowds are destructive? Crowds are destructive The least common myth in the sociology textbooks, but quite a strong cultural stereotype of crowds, is that they are destructive. This is closely related to the myth of spontaneity and is often connected to violence. Again Schweingruber and Wohlstein find that the research shows violence in crowds is extremely rare. And what violence does occur is normally carried out by a small minority - these are the people that make it onto the news.

There is often a small group of people in a crowd who become destructive and this is what interests the media; this is what we , the public hear about. We don’t hear about the majority who are quiet and well behaved.

So what myths about crowd psychology have we destroyed? � � � 1. Crowds are violent – no they are not! 2. Crowds are suggestible - don’t seem to be! 3. Crowds are irrational – not according to what we read. 4. Crowds increase anonymity – says who? 5. Crowds are emotional – don’t you believe it! 6. Crowds are destructive – that is not what the evidence claims.

So we can see that the myth of psychology of be very different from the crowds appears to reality. Let’s hope that any terrible stories you have heard about the final exam also turn out to be myths!

� Let’s hope that any terrible stories you have heard about the final exam also turn out to be myths!