Part A: Literature Review
Deindividuation describes a state of perception in which a group member cannot be distinguished as an individual, the effects of which make them behave contrary to their real values and beliefs. They develop what experts of social psychologists call perceived anonymity. The social identity model de-individualization effect (SIDE) is a psychosocial theory that describes the extent to which people affiliate themselves to the norms of the groups they belong to, which regards whether they conform or maintain anonymity to the group's norms. SIDE seeks to explain crowd behavior through the conformity of individuals to salient group norms (Kugihara, 2001). The theory holds that crowd behavior is more controlled based on the goals and vision of a group (Reicher et al., 1995). It concentrates on the positive, as opposed to the negative, status of deindividuation.
This theory was developed in the wake of the increasing influence of technology on the behavior of people. The nature of this form of communication dictates specific tendencies of people. The computer-mediated communication involves reduced visual cues, feedback, and anonymity besides being synchronous or asynchronous (Walther et al., 2008). Anonymity in communication is more real in Social Networking Websites (SNSs) than in any other communication technology. This technology allows users to post personal information to communicate with friends and share some personal information including photos and preferences to specific brands.
This psychosocial model proposes two versions of deindividuation influences related to how a group behaves. The first effect is cognitive. This effect relates to deindividuated consequences of circumstances involving others as anonymous entities. The second effect is the strategic repercussion. It relates to conditions in which others are familiar to the self (Douglas & McGarty, 2001).
According to this model, people who are proud of and attach significant value to their affiliate group are more likely to conform to the specific norms of the group (Kugihara, 2001). The salience of a group motivates a person to identify with the group and behave according to the rules and principles of the group. That means they act or behave in a way that echoes the values and beliefs of the group. The theory means that people are inclined to express their real opinions or behave honestly when their identity is hidden; that is, they are individuated. On the other hand, they would behave or give statements that reflect the values of the group they affiliate with when they are in a group context.
The Social Identity model of De-Individuation Effects makes various assumptions about the effects of anonymity and processes. The assumptions the theory makes were tested by different researchers. Lea, Spears, and de Groot (2001) investigated the mechanism behind visual anonymity on the behavior of a group. They assess the repercussions of self-categorization and stereotyping within a group. They used video-identifiable and visually anonymous groups interacting via computer. The findings of the study proved that anonymity heightened self-affiliation with the group which in turn increased attraction to the group and augmented attraction to the group by promoting stereotyping of others based on the group characteristics and vision.
Part B: Rationale and Research Question
This study aims to identify the circumstances that promote deindividuation on social media, in this case, Facebook. The research question therefore is what circumstances are likely to promote deindividuation of members of a Facebook group, when on the Facebook group profile and when in privacy. Specifically, the study used a questionnaire to evaluate the effect of visual anonymity social identity on an inclination to admit having a socially negative perspective first on the hardcopy questionnaire form, and the same questionnaire on on a specially designed Facebook page. The participants were required to give their remarks on controversial statements anonymously and repeat their remarks on the Facebook group page.
Based on the SIDE model of psychosocial theory, the participant’s responses in a private context and Facebook group page would be different. The individual’s responses in the private setting would be real and personalized, while in the Facebook group context would be consistent with the Facebook group values and aspirations. Importantly, the responses of the sample would be more uniform and depersonalized than the responses in the private setting. The effect of visual anonymity would be high in the context of the Facebook group page and low in the private context. In other words, the effect of deindividuation is high in the Facebook group context and low in the private context.
Part C: Methodology
In the research, a group of 100 individuals with active Facebook accounts were assembled. The group was carefully handpicked from several people who were seen as active participants of Facebook in group chats and pages. Every shortlisted participant was sent an email through which they could easily access the survey and ensure they followed instructions as required and stated on the website. The criteria used were the years one had spent on social media sites, especially Facebook. Demographics such as age and gender did not matter since both young and middle-aged people underwent the same deindividualization effects under different circumstances. Each participant was given a questionnaire containing two questions based on the topic, and every question had several answers. This was necessary to ensure that all aspects that caused the psychological effect were covered. The questionnaire used is shown in Appendix 1.
The questionnaire comprises two sections. Section one includes questions that aim at finding out how the participants view others, while section two contains questions based on individualism and how people view themselves on social media. Additionally, section one had five questions while section two had 10 questions. The survey was conducted online after the random choosing of participants and also it was distributed online among members through email. After filling out the questionnaires, participants were requested to submit them via the same email after three days.
The questionnaire comprises two sections. Section one includes questions that aim at finding out how the participants view others, while section two contains questions based on individualism and how people view themselves on social media. Additionally, section one had five questions while section two had 10 questions. The survey was conducted online after the random choosing of participants and also it was distributed online among members through email. After filling out the questionnaires, participants were requested to submit them via the same email after three days.
In the coding manual (appendix 2), the first section of the questionnaire shows the majority of the participants’ anonymous behavior due to their concealed identity, while the second section shows the effects of group psychology on an individual. People became DE individualised after being in groups hence concealed their real personalities and adopted that of the group.
Part D: Results
Technological innovation, for example, social media, has had a significant influence on how individuals perceive social experience. Gamble and Gamble (2013) affirm that social media has the capability to change individuals’ perception of reality. Social media has significantly transformed interaction between individuals.
The Social Identity Deindividuation (SIDE) model hypothesizes that social media has shifted the foundation of social interaction from interpersonal cues to the integration of social categories (Humphreys 2016). For example, individuals might brand other people depending on the comments that they post on social media. However, the perceptions created by the comments posted online might be far from the truth. For example, a comment perceived to be in support of a particular policy that is of social interest, for example, gun control or homosexuality, might result in the development of negative cues towards the person who comments on such issues.
To understand the circumstances that promote deindividuation on social media, the researcher undertakes a qualitative research study, by integrating a set of questionnaires. Different aspects were unidentified. The study sought to understand the respondent’s perception on several issues that include perception on dole bludgers, pedophiles, seniors, disabled and overweight persons. First, the researcher sought to understand whether people on the dole are bludgers. Forty-five (45%) of the respondents disagreed while 55% of the respondents agreed. About pedophiles, 75% of the respondents strongly disagreed that pedophiles should be sentenced to death. Conversely, 56% of the respondents strongly disagreed with the perception that of the opinion that seniors are terrible drivers while only 44% of the respondents were neutral on the issue. Eight-five percent (85%) of the respondents strongly disagreed with the view that disabled car parks are many while 15% of the respondents generally disagreed with this view. The study further sought to understand the respondent’s perception on overweight people. Sixty-seven percent (67%) of the respondents strongly disagreed with the view that disabled persons are lazy while 23% of the respondents were neutral about the issue.
The study further sought to understand the respondent’s personality. Thus, a number of aspects intended to explore the respondent’s personalities were evaluated as illustrated by table 1 below. The respondents’ opinions on the issues varied significantly.
1.I do not care about what others think about me
- Not True: 60%
- Somewhat True: 30%
2.I have not always been honest with myself
- Very True: 55%
3.My emotions usually cloud my thinking
- Very True: 45%
4.It is so hard to change my mind after I make up my mind
- Very True: 70%
5.I never regret my decisions
- Not True: 30%
6.I am a completely rational person
- Very True: 46%
7.I have taken advantage of someone else on some occasions
- Very True: 45%
8.When I hear people talking secretly, I avoid eavesdropping
- Not True: 69%
9.I have frequently kept quiet about the excess change salespeople give me
- Very True: 75%
10.I have never dropped litter on the street
- Not True: 59%
Part E: Discussions
De-individualization, which entails the loss of a person’s sense of individuality, can result in the development of aggressive, anti-normative, or dis-inhibited behavior. This might amount to a decline in the sense of self-awareness and restrain against engaging in prohibited behavior. Alternatively, Gamble and Gamble (2013) emphasize that de-individualization lessens an individual’s feeling of guilt that usually results from engaging in anti-normative behavior. Gamble and Gamble (2013) further argue that de-individualization increases the chance of individuals adhering to or aligning with situational norms. This further increases individuals’ susceptibility to social influence. Thus, de-individualization is strongly correlated with the development of collective identities. The findings from the research study on people’s perceptions of different issues indicate this aspect. For example, a significant proportion of respondents interviewed held similar views or attitudes towards people characterized by different personalities or characteristics.
The development of social media, specifically Facebook, has significantly improved how individuals interact. Additionally, social media have led to the establishment of online groups, which are comprised of several individuals whose behavior or action influences the action of the respective group members. As one of the social media, Facebook has remarkably contributed to the increase in deindividuation amongst group members through different avenues. First, Facebook has greatly enhanced deindividuation through social facilitation, which entails the extent to which connections are established between individuals irrespective of their location. Facebook has contributed to the development of connectivity between individuals belonging to diverse cultural and demographic backgrounds. Facebook has enabled individuals to maintain such connections over time (Levine & Hogg 2010). Subsequently, individuals can share information on different aspects through the Facebook platform.
Moreover, the development of social media has also significantly contributed to propagated deindividuation due to the prevalence of social loafing. Attrill (2015) asserts that social loafing increases the chance of individuals or group members conforming to groupthink. Even though individual members might possess different opinions on a particular issue, their likelihood of challenging the general view by sharing their opinions is significantly limited. Thus, such individuals end up conforming to the views held by the majority of the group members. This indicates that social media has a significant capability to influence the development of group norms that individual members might find difficult to challenge. The capacity of Facebook to influence the development of social loafing explains why social media is increasingly becoming a powerful tool in influencing individuals either positively or negatively. For example, Facebook might be applied in exerting peer influence.
References
Attrill, A 2015. Cyberpsychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Douglas, K. M., & McGarty, C. (2001). Identifiability and self-presentation: Computer-mediated communication and intergroup interaction. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 399-416.
Gamble, T & Gamble, M 2013. Interpersonal communication; building connections together, Thousands, Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
Humphreys, A 2016, Social media; enduring principles. New York: Oxford University Press.
Levine, J & Hogg, M 2010. Encyclopaedia of group processes & intergroup relations. New Delhi: Sage Publications.
Lea, M., Spears, R., & de Groot, D. (2001). Knowing me, knowing you: Anonymity effects on social identity processes within groups. PSPB, 526-537.
Kugihara, N. (2001). Effects of aggressive behavior and group size on collective escape in an emergency: A test between a social identity model and deindividuation theory. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, 575-598.
Lea, M., Spears, R., & de Groot, D. (2001). Knowing me, knowing you: Anonymity effects on social identity processes within groups. PSPB, 526-537.
Reicher, S. D., Spears, R., & Postmes, T. (1995). ‘A social identity model of deindividuation phenomena’. In W. Strobe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (pp.161-198). Chichester, UK: Wiley.
Walther, J. B., Heide, B.V, Kim, S., Westerman, D. & Tong, S. T. (2008). The role of friends’ appearance and behavior on evaluation of individuals on Facebook: Are we known by the company we keep? Human Communication Research, 34, 29-49.
