Aggression: Evaluating Deindividuation

These study notes follow on from the 'Aggression: Deindividuation' notes.

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.

Exam hint: It is very tempting to include methodological evaluation for all studies mentioned. However, marks for methodological evaluation will only be mark worthy if linked back to the implications for the theory. As the research is being quoted to evidence a theory or model, it is very important that methodological evaluation is used effectively and for the student to ask 'why does this matter' to the overall theory.

For More Study Notes

To keep up-to-date with the tutor2u Psychology team, follow us on Twitter @tutor2uPsych, Facebook AQA / OCR / Edexcel / Student or subscribe to the Psychology Daily Digest and get new content delivered to your inbox!