The first issue in the article is about how people behave more aggressively with a larger grouping of them rather than individually. The study by Le bon (1895) demonstrates how aggressive behaviour increases and how deindividuation causes anti-social behaviour. The article suggests how crowd’s behaviour becomes aggressive as the ‘safety in numbers’ reduces the fear of individual punishment. It also shows that as an individual identifies himself as a group member in the crowd he begins to behave like he would not normally do individually (adopting the inferior mentality of the crowd), in this case becoming alarmingly discriminative and racist.
The second issue in the article states ‘that not one of the people sitting near this young man felt it necessary to do or say anything’
The second issue in the article is about how someones actions to confront a troublemaker are seized when we fear that we may be put to harm by getting involved. This helps to bring out the concept of ‘diffusion of responsibility’ described by Darley & Latane. In this case the fans sitting near the troublemaker may have assumed that someone was better equipped to help, for example the security guards and therefore did not get involved.
Additionally the individual may have accepted responsibility, however it was shared by all the witnesses and therefore someone else rationalised that somebody else may have already intervened.
It is evident that in the presence of others intervening will be inhibited.
The third issue in the article states ‘I would estimate that at least 70 percent turned away from the match and focused their attention and directed their chanting of ‘BURNLY, BURNLY, BURNLY’to the encouragement of the hooligans.
The third issue in the article describes how discrimination evolves from certain settings in the crowd, when they are arbitrarily divided into groups.
The important idea is identification. We identify with groups that we perceive ourselves to belong to, this is evident as the crowd shout out “ Hello, hello, we are the George boys “. This demonstrates that the crowd perceive themselves as unique individuals and self-categorise themselves as one of the group.
They study by Sherif (1956) involved 11-12 year old boys who were assigned into groups and took part in sporting activities. He explained that if groups are negatively independent and are achieving the same goal, in this case wanting their team to win then group conflict develops and ethnocentric attitudes appear. This can be seen in the crowd as verbal comments are shouted. It is evident that allocating people into arbitrary social categories is sufficient to elicit discriminatory behaviour.
(C)
The problem with crowds settings is that deindividuation is created, where people tend to lose their identity and feel as if they are less likely to be punishment in a mass of people. In order to eliminate this in stadiums, CCTV could be introduced to so those individuals can be identified. By using cameras to identify individuals it could help to personalise them and therefore eliminate deindividuation from occurring. The study by Zimbardo (1969) refers to shocks given to individuals in the denidividuated and individuated settings. The results showed that in the deindividuated (in a crowd) settings the victim received more shocks. This helps to show how settings like being in a crowd hidden away can cause more aggressive behaviour than being alone (individuated). By using CCTV cameras it can help identify and possibly pose a threat to individuals who are becoming aggressive.
Situational factors affect behaviour therefore the situation could be altered so that people are more likely to help. It has been found that a stamped addressed envelope dropped in a crowded place were less likely to be posted. Holahan (1977) argues that this is due to fears for personal safety. Therefore the environment could be altered so that a more friendly approach is created and so that external factors do not affect someones safety. For example creating more space between individuals and introducing more stewards could help to decrease the diffusion of responsibility.
Discrimination and racism in football is inevitable. However lowering the extent to which it is displayed can be controlled. As discrimination is mainly caused by groups (self-categorisation) it would be possible to blur boundaries between groups or even lower competition could help to lower hostility. The study by Deutsch and Collins (1951) compared two kinds of housing projects between blacks and whites. It was found that neighbourly contact lead to a decrease in prejudice. This study demonstrates that prejudice can be lowered significantly if cultures such as black & whites are in contact environmentally. Educating about racism could also help reduce prejudice for example in schools.
