Crisis in France: Understanding violent behavior by groups

At the time of this writing, violence continues to erupt in nearly 300 cities and towns across France.

Destructive rioting that originated on October 27 in Paris's suburbs has spread, recently turning deadly, as a 60 year-old man was reported killed. Thousands of cars have been torched during more than two weeks of nightly violence; two churches and three schools were firebombed, according to news reports. Even police, attempting to quell the violence, have come under fire, leaving thirty-six officers wounded, two seriously.

The sudden, widespread appearance of mob violence like this raises some interesting questions about human behavior. Why would so many people suddenly resort to such extreme, destructive behavior? What forces are at work in episodes like this?

The general wisdom that has emerged in news commentary relates these ugly incidents to frustration experienced by ethnic minorities over poverty, racial discrimination, high rates of unemployment, their low status in French society, and related injustices. The violence was reportedly triggered by the accidental electrocution of two teens as they attempted to elude police. It subsequently seemed fueled by the unfortunate comments of France's Interior Minister, who characterized the rioting immigrant youths as “rabble.”

While frustration over long-festering injustices might seem to be a reasonable factor leading to this explosion of anger fueled violence, is it sufficient to account for the extreme behavior exhibited by the members of these mobs? What light might psychological research shed upon these troubling events?

Psychologists have demonstrated that groups have a set of dynamics that do not exist when people are acting individually. Do you recall the feelings you experienced as a member of a crowd at a sporting event, a music concert, or a political rally? Perhaps you felt a sense of excitement and power, a sense that you were a part of something bigger than yourself. Members of groups have been shown to be aroused, meaning that they are more physically activated, excited, primed and ready for action.

Researchers have also theorized that a person generally feels less personal responsibility as a member of a group, than as an individual. For example, a person is less likely to offer assistance if he encounters an emergency situation as a member of a group, than if he witnesses the same emergency while alone. In addition, a person seems capable of performing acts as a member of a group that he or she might never even consider performing as an individual. It’s as if responsibility for behavior becomes diffuse within a group situation.

Like the rioting in France, episodes of looting, police brutality, rioting at sport events, military massacres of civilians, and lynchings are actions that are performed almost exclusively by groups. It would be difficult to imagine these activities being performed by individuals. Psychologists Leon Festinger, Albert Pepitone, and Theodore Newton coined the term, “deindividuation” to describe a process whereby people lose a sense of their own identity, adopting instead, the norms of behavior of the group which make these activities possible.

Deindividuation occurs most easily when certain conditions are in place. The size of the group is one important factor. Vandalism performed by a large group hides the vandalism of an individual. Participants become faceless in a rioting mob. Darkness serves the same purpose, hiding the identities of the individuals performing the violent acts. It is noteworthy that the rioting in France occurred predominantly or exclusively at night and in groups. Larger crowds are capable of greater atrocities because they afford greater anonymity to their members.

Psychologist Philip Zimbardo hypothesized that crowded cities create conditions of anonymity for the inhabitants, permitting antisocial acts to more easily occur. To test his hypothesis, he abandoned two cars with their hoods left open. One car was left on a busy New York City street, and the other in Palo Alto, a comparatively smaller city. As predicted, the New York vehicle was quickly and repeatedly vandalized; a total of 23 times over three days. By contrast, the car abandoned in Palo Alto was never touched, except when a passerby stopped to lower the hood when it started to rain.

There is no doubt that the violent behavior by crowds of people is a complex phenomenon with multiple causes or influences. The apparently longstanding injustices suffered by ethnic minorities in France must certainly be considered an important factor leading to their decision to participate in these violent acts. There is, however, more involved than injustice.

The French, after all, do not have a monopoly on injustice, and rioting is not a common response to such conditions. Further, it is not unheard of for groups to choose to respond to injustice using nonviolent means. Psychologists and other social scientists are actively exploring issues like these. Perhaps as we advance our understanding of group behavior, we will develop means of reducing the potential for violent and destructive acts like those we are witnessing today in France.