Specification: Social psychological explanations of human aggression, including the frustration-aggression hypothesis, social learning theory as applied to human aggression, and de-individuation.

Not all aggression is interpersonal, i.e. carried out from one individual to another. Some aggression is carried out in groups and is impersonal. Violence and aggression has been found to be more likely to occur when people are immersed in a crowd. The process of being part of a crowd can cause deindividuation. Festinger (1952) coined the term ‘deindividuation’ suggesting there is a reduction of inner restraints of self-awareness where individuals are ‘submerged in a group’. Deindividuation has been used to explain violence in prisons, and also at sporting events where large numbers of people are in close proximity to each other. 

In western society we have strong norms against violence and aggression. Our identity is based on our compliance with social norms. Under normal circumstances an awareness of social norms prevents behaviour that is aggressive and deviant. Individuals in public places generally carry out continual self-assessment of their behaviour to ensure compliance with social norms. However, when an individual becomes part of a crowd they become anonymous and lose their individualised sense of identity, thus loosening their normal inhibitions. The process of continual self-assessment is weakened as awareness of their individual identity is weakened. Individuals in groups do not see the consequences of any aggression and social norms that are normally followed are forgotten. 

Evaluation  

Dodd (1985) developed a technique to demonstrate deindividuation. He asked 229 undergraduate psychology students: 'if you could do anything humanly possible with complete assurance that you would not be detected or held responsible, what would you do?'. Three independent raters rated the students' responses into those that were antisocial or not. The results found that 36% of the responses were antisocial and 26% were criminal (types of responses referring to acts such as 'robbing a bank'). This research demonstrates the connection between deindividuation as a result of anonymity, and subsequent aggression.  

Diener (1976) conducted a natural experiment examining the effects of deindividuation on aggression. On the night of Halloween concealed raters observed 1300 child trick or treaters under different conditions: one condition of anonymity, one of non-anonymity, and then conditions of being alone or in a group. The children were given the opportunity to steal sweets and money. Those children who were in a group and anonymous were the group who stole the most at 57%, compared to 21% in the group that were identifiable. This research demonstrates that when anonymous and in a group, children are more likely to behave in a socially deviant way, therefore supporting deindividuation theory as a social psychological theory of aggression.  

Malmouth and Check (1981) conducted a piece of research in North America and they posed the question: ‘Would you rape if you could not be caught?’ 35% of the university students said yes, supporting the theory that deindividuation can increase aggressive behaviour.  

Johnson & Downing (1979) conducted a laboratory experiment with three conditions. In the first, female participants were dressed in a Ku Klux Klan-type outfit which masked their faces entirely; in the second condition they were dressed as nurses; and in the third they wore their normal clothes. The participants then had to give (fake) electric shocks to a confederate. The participants in the Ku-Klux Klan-type outfits gave much higher levels of shocks to the confederate than the other groups. This research demonstrates that when individuals are disguised and their identity is hidden, even if they aren't part of a group they may be still more likely to undertake aggressive acts.  

It is, however, very difficult to separate the effects of deindividuation from other explanations of aggression such as social learning. Some sporting events such as football which attracts huge crowds have had a long history of violence and aggression on the pitch and from the fans. Yet sports such as rugby and cricket also attract huge crowds yet have not experienced the problems with anti-social behaviour that football fans have witnessed. This may suggest that rather than deindividuation being responsible for aggressive crowd behaviour, it may be better explained by cultural factors internalised through the process of social learning. 

Possible Exam Questions 

1. Outline one study of deindividuation as an explanation for aggression. (6 marks) 

2. John was a quiet boy who spent most of his time studying for his A levels. He had a good relationship with his parents who were loving and supportive of him. In his spare time, he enjoyed playing Xbox and watching horror films. He also enjoyed going to watch his local football match. On one occasion when he was watching them play, his friends started throwing objects on the pitch at the other team. John joined in and threw a bottle which hit the referee in the head badly injuring him. Using your knowledge of social psychological explanations of aggression try to explain why John displayed this aggressive behaviour. (12 marks) 

3. Outline and evaluate deindividuation as an explanation for aggression. (16 marks)