Psychology, Mass

Mass psychology is the study of people behavior in groups, from occupational groups to crowds to whole societies, and how their behavior may change when they perceive themselves as a member of a group rather than as an individual. The study of mass psychology began in the late 19th century, but flourished particularly around the middle of the 20th century, when it was invoked to study social movements such as fascism as well as the behavior of people in crowds. Mass psychology is relevant to disaster relief professionals both because the behavior of a crowd may cause a disaster (e.g., a riot among spectators at a sporting match) and because disasters may force people into a crowd situation (e.g., seeking shelter after a flood). Those in charge must know how to control the crowd effectively and mitigate situations that could become dangerous. Additionally, mass psychology is relevant because it studies conditions in societies that may predispose people to violent behavior such as terrorism.

Implied in the study of mass psychology is that people may behave differently according to their situation, and in particular, their behavior may change if they perceive they are acting as an individual versus as part of a collective or crowd. Normally, the term crowd applies to a large number of people in close proximity, while collective behavior can be invoked even in individuals or small groups by giving them emblems (such as a uniform), implying membership in some collective. Crowds are a common occurrence in social life (busy shopping districts, sporting events, mass transportation, and even a school playground at recess) and do not necessarily influence people's behavior for the worse. However, much of the research into crowd behavior is focused on disorderly or violent crowds, and most crowd situations involve neither disorder nor violence.

Some research has focused on the question of what predisposes a crowd to become violent. One predisposing factor is when a crowd is formed as the result of grievances (such as the U.S. race riots in the 1960s) or when two opposing groups confront each other (such as a group of striking workers opposing another group intent on crossing the picket line). Another factor is when a crowd is formed of people whose basic needs are not being met, and no information about the timing of assistance is communicated to them. This situation often occurs after a natural disaster, such as the 2010 earthquakes in Haiti, when the usual channels for food, water, and communication were disrupted.

The behavior of officials charged with keeping order in crowd situations can also affect the occurrence and spread of violence. For instance, football (soccer) hooliganism has been a persistent problem in Europe: some individuals attend the matches to purposely engage in fighting and other violent behavior, and their behavior can spread to spectators who had no intention of becoming involved in violence. The result of such escalation can be a large-scale riot that began with a small number of people. However, it has been observed that policing style can mitigate the effects of hooliganism and prevent the spread of violence. For instance, at the 2004 European football finals, the police concentrated on isolating and marginalizing violent groups from the larger community, keeping their insolent behavior from spreading, while also respecting the remainder of fans as rational individuals there to enjoy the game. This approach showed that contrary to the usual view, not all crowd members are equally irrational and prone to violence. Previous militaristic attempts at clamping down on the entire crowd at a match when a few individuals behaved violently created hostility toward the police, and made their presence appear illegitimate in the eyes [Page 519]of many otherwise peaceful crowd members, who were therefore motivated to side with the hooligans and escalate the conflict.

...