Festinger 1952 - Some Consequences of De-Individuation in a Group

Google Scholar Link

Festinger, L., Pepitone, A., & Newcomb, T. (1952). Some consequences of de-individuation in a group. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 47.

Summary

De-individuation in a group is the tendency for individuals to become “submerged in the group.” When de-individuation occurs, individuals are not singled out or seen as individuals. In these situations, individual group members tend to act less inhibited than they normally would. This decreased restraint allows individuals to do things that they want to do but might not otherwise do. An example of this can be seen when a crowd becomes violent to an outgroup member (as can sometimes occur in political rallies). Groups that provide de-individuation are attractive because they allow an individual to act without restraint. If a group only provides de-individuation, it will not be very stable. Another effect of deindividuation is that there will be less attention paid to which individual member does what. If a group provides only individuation (i.e., they will be treated as if they were not in the group and were simply an unaffiliated individual), it will most likely not provide any benefit to its members.

This was tested by having discussion groups of male students that were asked to speak about hating their parents (a topic that would normally be treated with restraint). Additionally, they were informed that those who denied hating their parents or were unwilling to discuss their feelings towards their parents were most likely to possess the “most violent forms of hostility.” In this way, participation was induced (in a pilot study without that last bit of inducing information, they just avoided the topic entirely. There are some scientific problems with this procedure, but it is also a funny conversation prompt. When more negative feelings were expressed, individuals were later better able to remember what had been said.

Application

Though this experiment would most likely not pass today’s more rigorous scientific standards, the findings do seem to be accurate. This seems highly related to how anonymity affects behavior (regardless of in a group or not).