However, this does not fully account for violent crowds, because even if individuals gain anonymity through the crowd and thus are free to engage in violent behavior, one must explain just how this violent behavior is instigated and transmitted through the crowd, because although there is a positive connection between anonymity and violent or unethical behavior, one cannot go so far as to say that anonymity causes this behavior. Instead, one may look to a topic in bio-mechanics that, while usually reserved for discussions concerning birds or machines, actually goes a long way in explaining how violent crowds can form, or how previously nonviolent crowds can transition rapidly.
"Flocking" is a term first developed by animal biologists but which has found important applications elsewhere, and it describes the paradoxically well-coordinated movements of a group (usually birds) that shows no signs of central leadership or organization. Observers have long noted that flocks of birds can travel seamlessly, making dramatic shifts in direction and velocity while minimizing in-air collisions, but only recently has this complex behavior been demonstrated to be the result of relatively simple responses to specific variables.
Essentially, collision-free flocking is made possible due to the fact that any one bird need not know the relative position of every other member of the flock, but instead only needs to be aware of the birds immediately surrounding it. Because each bird holds to this rule, the flock can move as a unit because adjustments in flight are transferred from bird to bird. With every bird ensuring that it does not collide with its immediate neighbors, the flock can maintain itself in a state of dynamic tension, such that it can move and reconfigure itself with little direct coordination. In the same way, violence can move through a crowd with surprising speed, because each individual will very likely imitate the individuals surround him or herself, and as such what begins with a few members of a crowd can balloon to envelope everyone.
This behavior is undoubtedly the result of evolution, and one may view "flocking in birds, troop formation in primates, and similar multi-species social behavior in other taxa" as evolutionary developments influencing "population dynamics by enhancing survival probability, either through decreased predation probability or through increased foraging efficiency."
However, flocking describes more than mere social group formation, because it also accounts for the near-unconscious behavior of actors in a group. In this sense the notion of flocking can offer some insights into violent crowds, because it offers an elegant means of describing how a group of people can engage in violent action, even without central leadership or organization (as in the case of riots).
The algorithms which explain flocking in birds depend upon their particular biology; for example, birds tend to pay more attention to the birds on their sides, because their eyes are oriented that way. Recognizing this, one can begin to understand how human beings' particular sensory apparatus influence their behavior in violent crowds, and particularly how mobile communications technology has expanded the range of violent crowd action. While violent crowds in the past depended upon human beings viewing the actions of those around them and imitating it, mobile communication technology means that violent crowds can exhibit flocking behavior even when members are not in direct proximity. A prime example of this is the 2011 riots in England, where reports of crowd violence were spread through instant messaging programs, instigating new outbreaks of crowd violence relatively far away from the epicenter. In this sense, human flocking as it relates to crowd violence involves not only immediate sensory transmission and imitation, but also technological transmission.
Thus, one come to the conclusion that the most salient factors influencing the formation and actions of violent crowds are psychological, sociological, and biological. Beginning...
Collective behavior" and the Stonewall Riots The term "collective behavior" refers to behavior that militates against social norms and conventions regarding the way that individuals should behave in society and differing to the way that they normally behave when not in a crowd environment. A crowd environment causes certain spontaneity to actions and a certain animal emotion that is lacking in regular 'separate existence'. Scholars have devoted considerable attention to
These communicative actions help form the basis of human society. In fact, a major part of action psychology focuses on the tension between autonomy and heteronomy, which focuses on the social and cultural context of actions. Some action theorists attempt to resolve that tension by assuming that cultural rules are man-made, although the implied intentionality of those norms may be incomprehensible in modern times, because they have been passed down
In this regard, when wage levels fell in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries, the standard of living for laborers and cottagers in England declined precipitously and they were compelled to use the majority of their cash, garden crops, and milk just to buy bread and clothing (Kulikoff 2000:19). Not surprisingly, many of these workers found it almost impossible in some cases to even survive, even with the
One of the critiques of this theory is that it assumes that groups coalesce or converge in an environment which is normless. While the theory is suited to an explanation of spontaneous group formation, it does not address the fact that movements such as fascism are grounded on prior normative formations and value systems that lead to the collective behavior. At the same time it must be acknowledged that this
Introduction The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) arose from the ashes of the Twin Towers on 9/11 as the federal government’s response to the threat of terror. That threat has been represented in a number of incarnations: the Saudi hijackers, Al-Qaeda, Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, Assad, ISIS, and so on. Today, with ISIS being acknowledged as largely defeated in the Middle East, the new security threat that the U.S. faces is unclear
People are aware of the impact that major stressful events can have on a person's life. In general, society is solicitous of people undergoing major stressors like major illness, divorce, or a death in the family. However, it is interesting to note that, for the individual, small stressors can actually be more significant than major stressors. For example, a friend of mine was fired from her job the day before
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now