Crowds and Collective Behavior
Abstract
The challenge for a psychology of crowds and collective behavior is to explain how large numbers of people are, spontaneously, able to act together in patterned and socially meaningful ways and, at the same time, how crowd events can bring about social and psychological change. Classical theories, which treat crowd psychology as pathological, deny any meaning to crowd action. More recent normative and rationalist models begin to explain the coherence of crowd action but are unable to explain how that links to broader social systems of meaning. In both cases, the explanatory impasse derives from an individualistic conception of selfhood that denies any social basis to behavioral control. Such a basis is provided by the social identity approach. This proposes that crowd formation is underpinned by the development of shared social identity whereby people see themselves and others in terms of membership of a common category. This leads to three psychological transformations: members perceive the world in terms of collective values and belief systems; they coordinate themselves effectively; and hence they are empowered to realize their collective goals. These transformations explain the social form of crowd action. At the same time, crowd events are intergroup phenomena. It is through the intergroup dynamics between the crowd and an out-group (typically the police)—more specifically the way the social position of crowd members can change through the way police officers understand and respond to their actions—that change can occur. The social identity framework helps make sense of a range of phenomena beyond conflict crowds, including behavior in emergencies and disasters and the psychology of mass gatherings. The practical adequacy of the social identity approach is demonstrated by its use in a number of applied fields, including “public order” policing, crowd and emergency management, mass gatherings, health, and pedestrian modeling.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The theory of collective behavior is a relevant construct linked to psychological and sociological elements in society provoked by news and media.
“The theory of collective behavior that incorporates behaviors such as crowd, mob, panic, riot, disaster behavior, rumor, mass hysteria, moral panic, and crazes is a relevant construct that is linked to psychological and sociological elements in society provoked by news and media (Aguirre et al., 1998; Drury and Reicher, 2020).”
From Understanding media empowerment: citizen journalism in Palestine (2023) · cites this paper as Drury and Reicher, 2020
Cites
Novelli, D., Drury, J., Reicher, S., & Stott, C. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0078983 · Cited by 117 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Understanding media empowerment: citizen journalism in Palestine
Horoub, I. (2023) · Humanities and Social Sciences Communications · doi:10.1057/s41599-023-01526-z · Cited by 14 · see citing works
“…that incorporates behaviors such as crowd, mob, panic, riot, disaster behavior, rumor, mass hysteria, moral panic, and crazes is a relevant construct that is linked to psychological and sociological elements in society provoked by news and media (Aguirre et al., 1998; Drury and Reicher, 2020).”
Background
- Authors
- Drury, J., & Reicher, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Sussex
- University of St. Andrews
- Venue
- Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Psychology
- Publisher
- Oxford University PressNew York, NY
- Published
- 2020-08-27
- Cited by
- 23
- References
- 1
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review