Deindividuation

Deindividuation refers to the phenomenon of relinquishing one's sense of identity. This can happen as a result of becoming part of a group, such as an army or mob, but also as a result of meditation. It can have quite destructive effects, sometimes making people more likely to commit a crime, like stealing (Diener, 1976) or even over-enforce the law, such as police in riots situations. It is the motivational cause of most riot participants' actions for example, the violent 1992 riots that took place in LA's south central district. Deindividuated individuals' self-awareness becomes absent and they are oblivious to outside evaluation. This is when evaluation apprehension ceases to exist, ultimately breaking down any inhibitions.

We normally carry our sense of identity around with us and are thus well aware of how we are relating to other people. There are ways, however of losing ourselves, including:

• Becoming a part of a large group, such as a mob or army.
• Becoming engrossed in an interesting task, such as a hobby.
• Meditation and other contemplative activities.

Deindividuation into a group results in a loss of individual identity and a gaining of the social identity of the group. When two groups argue (and crowd problems are often between groups), it is like two people arguing. The three most important factors for deindividuation in a group of people are:

• Anonymity, so I can not be found out.
• Diffused responsibility, so I am not responsible for my actions.
• Group size, as a larger group increases the above two factors.

A paradox of deindividuation is that when you let go of your self, returning to you self can be an exhilerating experience. This is one of the rewards of engrossing hobbies and meditation.

Significant external stimulation helps deindividuation as it distracts you from internal chatter and rumination. This is one reason that pop and rock music (and orchestral music, for that matter) is often played loudly along with dramatic visual lighting effects.

Deindividuation theory is a social psychological account of the individual in the crowd. Deindividuation is a psychological state of decreased self-evaluation, causing anti-normative and disinhibited behavior.

The impact of deindividuation theory in science and society (especially 20th century politics) make it one of social science's more influential contributions. Deindividuation theory is rooted in some of the earliest social psychological theorizing, more than a century ago. It seeks to explain the apparent transformation of rational individuals into an unruly group or crowd. It posits that the group provides an environment in which the individual --submerged and anonymous -- suffers from a loss of self-awarenes. Deindividuation hinders reflection about the consequences of actions, rendering social norms impotent while increasing suggestibility to random outside influences.

The theory has been invoked to account for a range of phenomena such as collective behavior, behavior in online groups and in CMC, and the results of the classic Stanford Prison Experience. Despite its status and impact, empirical support for deindividuation theory is minimal. Recently, this lack of support has been attributed to the faulty assumption that crowds cause a loss of self. Instead, it has been proposed that deindividuation marks a transition from individual identity to social dimensions of the self. This transition to a social identity may increase responsiveness to social norms particular to the crowd, instead of decreasing responsiveness to generic social norms, as suggested by deindividuation theory.

What is Deindividuation
According to deindividuation theory, the psychological state of deindividuation is aroused when individuals join crowds or large groups. The state is characterized by diminished awareness of self and individuality. This in turn reduces an individual's self-restraint and normative regulation of behavior. In social psychology, deindividuation is a major theory of group behavior: it provides an explanation of collective behavior of violent crowds, mindless hooligans, and the lynch mob. In addition, deindividuation has been associated with other social phenomena such as genocide, stereotyping, and disinhibition in other settings such as computer-mediated communication. Below, the theoretical evolution of deindividuation is sketched, followed by a brief impression of the empirical support for this theory. Finally, recent research is discussed, which argues for a reconceptualization of deindividuation: It appears deindividuation is not a loss of individual identity, but may be better construed as a transition to a social identity.

Research
Diener et al gave trick-or-treaters the opportunity steal candy. When they were in groups and when they were sure of their anonymity, the stealing went up threefold.

Example
The effects of mobs are particularly alarming as lynchings, riots and wartime atrocities have all been done during periods of deindividuation. Crowds give you the opportunity to hide and also allow you to share the blame, reducing the sense of individual responsibility. Uniforms and war-paint also help hide your true identity. Even sunglasses can support aggressive attitudes as they hide the eyes, a very important part of the individual.

Application
To get someone to do something they would not normally do, provide lots of external distractions, including noise and visual action. Also camouflage or disguise them so they do not worry about being discovered by others.

Beware of crowd effects and especially other people who encourage you to join in and do things that you would not normally do. If things get nasty, fade into the background. Others who are caught up by the mass hysteria will not notice.

To reduce deindividuation in others, make them more self-aware. Use their name. Tell them what they are doing.

In sum, whereas deindividuation theory argues that the crowd causes a loss of identity, reverting the individual to irrationality, it seems more productive to reconceptualize deindividuation as a shift from a personal identity to a social identity, shared by members of the crowd. This may explain the normative restraint within the crowd as observed by historians, as well as the normative restraint observed in experimental studies of deindividuation.