The Herding Impulse & the Crowd

THE HERD INSIDE

Human herding behavior is the product of impulsive mental activity in individuals retorting to signals from the behavior of others (Prechter, 2001).The herding behavior, while appropriate in some primitive life threatening situations, can be detrimental in others. I typically see it unfold every day in the world of financial markets, where people have lost their fortunes, their hard earned savings, because of a tip or a rumor that they blindly followed. 

In a person’s lifetime, there are very few moments where one can witness history in the making. The February 2011 Arab Spring was one of those moments, Lebanon October 2019 protests again is one of those moments. Socio-political events brought in new orders replacing the rubrics in their respective countries. There exists no better illustration of the crowd phenomenon than the actions we came about in the Tunisian riots in the Arab World where Egypt, Yemen, Algeria, Jordan and Sudan expressed and voiced their frustrations in a rebellion that has so far seen the Egyptian government overthrown (Reuters, world news, CBS interactive, World Lingo Translations LLC).

Crowd psychology (Group behavior) & the herding impulse is a branch of social psychology. Social psychologists study Groups as well as individuals (Weiten, 2008)

THE HERDING IMPULSE

Herding is a very important concept in cognitive psychology. This article presents an interdisciplinary integrative review of the history of the herd psychology, discusses the different herding theories, and addresses the different and diverse approaches to the concept of herding.

Throughout the past and as far back as human’s documented history can take us , large groups of people otherwise known as “Crowds”, have always been able to bring about dramatic and sudden social changes in a manner that bypasses conventional routes & behavioral norms.

Social Psychologists, focus in explaining the herding impulse, crowd phenomenon and group behavior on the different behavior patterns that necessitate the existence of the crowd.

Paul MacLean, former head of the laboratory for brain evolution at the national institute of mental health developed the concept of the Triune Brain, which divides the brain as: The brain stem, the limbic system and the neocortex. 

The neocortex processes different thoughts and ideas by reverting to reason, but that unfortunately cannot be attributed to the other parts of the brain. The more impulsive and emotionally propelled actions originate in the limbic system and what is known as the Basel ganglia.

The Basel Ganglia controls matters and actions such as flocking, fighting, fleeing and herding, while being fed different emotions and sensations by the Limbic system. Unfortunately the rational cortex is helpless against the impulsive signals generated by the other parts of the brain, for it has been discovered that the limbic system is faster in response to considered ideas then the neocortex is, and that all neural pathways for emotional responses that go through the neocortex are up to 40 milliseconds faster than the neocortex itself, thus emotions are often not reactions to considered ideas, but rather immediate reactions to perceptions relayed by the senses. (Prechter, 2001).

The analogy that needs emphasizing upon here is the fact that the herding behavior originates from the primitive portion of the brain, the basil ganglia and the limbic system, hence herding is similarly impulsive and unreflective. It is observed that dependence upon the behavior of others can substitute for reasoning when knowledge and understanding are missing.

So what do you get when more than one Basel ganglia, and more than one limbic systems are congregated together?

You get a throng and rigid interaction of unreasoning masses. You get a Herd. 

THE HISTORY OF THE HERD

The date or period of time that the study of large groups and the dynamics of herding became a main focus for group psychotherapists is still unclear (Schneider & Weinberg, 1988).

It was not until 1972, that the institute of Group Analysis and the Group Analytic society officially and formally included the large group experience as an experiential part of its conferences (Schneider & Weinberg, 1988).

The herding impulse and the concept of the group could acadamecilly be traced back to the legendary studies of Gustave Le Bon,(1841- 1931) ,a French social psychologist, sociologist, and amateur physicist, that led to the development of group psychology studies, and paved the way for other scientific and psychological thinkers to nurture the tails of group dynamism.

 Le Bon’s classic book “The crowd” originally published in 1896 was the theoretical debut of large group studies (Schneider & Weinberg, 1988).

 According to le Bon, A numerically strong agglomeration of individuals does not constitute a crowd. It is when and only when the sentiments and ideas of all the persons in the gathering take one and the same direction and their conscious personality vanishes. So only when the crowd forms a single being, and is subjected to the law of the mental unity of crowds, can we call it an organized or psychological crowd. (Le bon, 1985)

Sigmund Freud’s (1856-1939) approach to psychology grew out of his efforts to treat mental disorders (Weiten 2007). Freud’s crowd behavior theory revolves around the idea that people who are in a crowd act differently towards people from those who are thinking individually. The minds of the group would merge to form a way of thinking. As a result each member's enthusiasm would be increased, and one becomes less aware of the true nature of one's actions. Freud’s Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Ego, (1921) based on a critique of Le Bon's work, led to further development in theories of group behavior in the latter half of the twentieth century

Wilfred Batten Lewis Trotter, (1872–1939), was famous for his theories about Herd behavior through his celebrated 1917 book titled “Instincts of the Herd in Peace” (Schneider & Weinberg, 1988).

In the 1930s, psychiatrist, dramatist, philosopher and theoretician, Jacob L. Moreno (1889-1974) and founder of psychodrama, was recognized as one of the leading social scientists and the foremost pioneer of group psychotherapy , and it was Moreno who coined the term "group psychotherapy".

In 1943 came Kurt Zadek Lewin (1890 - 1947) a German-American psychologist, known as one of the modern pioneers of social, organizational, and applied psychology founded the movement to study groups scientifically, and coined the term group dynamics to describe the way groups and individuals act and react to changing circumstances.

In 1958, William Schutz (1925-2002) an American psychologist examined interpersonal relations from the perspective of three dimensions: inclusion, control, and affection. His research and ideas later became the basis for a theory of group behavior that sees groups as resolving issues in each of these stages in order to be able to develop to the next stage.

After that, came Wilfred Ruprecht Bion (1897 –1979) who was a very influential British psychoanalyst, who also chaired the board of the British Psychoanalytical Society from 1962 to 1965. Bion, influenced by his roommate’s and co-worker’s ideas Wilfred Trotter, wrote a collection of papers on Experiences in Groups that proved prominent to this day. Bion’s 1961 book“ experiences in Groups“, which paved the way and constituted the guideline for Tavistock, A.K. Rice group relations and the Leicester conferences. (Schneider & Weinberg, 1988).

The concept of the large group was applied in a different manner by Main (1946), who began to view the the psychiatric hospital as a large threaupatic institituion (Schneider & Weinberg, 1988).. After Main, a true pioneer of large group theraupatic communities appeared, it was Maxwell Jones (1953), who during his era, social factors in psychiatry became instrumental in treating large numbers of patients. (Schneider & Weinberg, 1988).

Bruce Wayne Tuckman (1938) an American Psychologist, who has carried out extensive research into the theory of group dynamics, revealed in 1965 his revolutionary theory in what is known as "Tuckman's Stages", which included four stages for group think: forming, storming, norming and performing. In 1977, Truckman added a fifth stage named Adjourning. This model refers to the overall pattern of the group, but of course individuals within a group work in different ways. If distrust and doubt persist, a group may never even get to the norming stage, but ponder endlessly in the storming stage.

Marshall Edelson came afterwards in 1970, and was successful in implementing large group theories in understanding how sico-therapy can deal with intergroup tensions. In 1975, Foulkes was able to utilise group analytic pinciples in non-task oriented groups. (Schneider & Weinberg, 1988).

De Mare (1972,1985,1989) coined the term“ larger group“, to refer to groups that had numbers above the usual and traditional amount., which set the standard for differentiating between small groups, groups, median groups, and large groups. (Schneider & Weinberg, 1988).

In 1975 Kreeger came along with his book entitled “ the large group: Dynamics and therapy“. Then in 1978 came Morgan Scott Peck (1936–2005) an American psychiatrist and best-selling author, wrote “The Road Less Traveled”. Peck developed stages for larger scale groups which are similar to Tuckman's stages of group development, but are more focused on the essence and nature of the crowd. Peck describes the stages of a community as: Pseudo community, chaos, emptiness and True community. Peck states that Communities may be distinguished from other types of groups, by the need for members to eliminate barriers to communication in order to be able to form true community.

In 2002, Richard Hackman, professor of Social and Organizational Psychology at Harvard University, author of leading teams: Setting the stage for great performances (2002), and winner of the Academy of Management’s Terry Award for the most outstanding management book of the year award in 2004, developed his own research based model for designing and managing work groups. He suggested that groups are successful when they satisfy internal and external clients develop capabilities to perform in the future, and when members find meaning and satisfaction in the group.

In 2004, Robin Ian MacDonald Dunbar (1947) is a British anthropologist and evolutionary psychologist and a specialist in primate behavior, who is currently a Professor of Evolutionary Anthropology and the Director of the Institute of Cognitive and Evolutionary Anthropology of the University of Oxford and the Co-director of the British Academy Centenary Research Project. Dunbar stated that the human brain evolved in response to certain problems associated with the size of social groups.

HERDING THEORIES

Experimental Research suggest that impulsive thoughts originate in the basal ganglia and limibic system, whereby human beings possess biologically based psychological sources of unconsious emotional imperatives. In emotionally charged situations the limbic system’s impulses are quicker and more dominant than rational reflection performed by the neocortex.(Prechter, 2001).

Social Psychologists, focus in explaining the herding impulse, crowd phenomenon and group behavior on the different behavioral patterns that necessitate the existence of the crowd. There exist diverse social models which explain The Herd or Crowd phenomenon, whereby psychologists try to identify the main principles or precipitators that drive the Herd and interpret it in ways that can help organize and categorize perceptions of behaviors of individuals and give rise to the perception of a group. (Ip, G. Chiu & Wan, 2006).

Science distinguishes several theoretical categories for herding which consist of the following approaches (Parker & Prechter, 2004):

The Information Theory approach:

The information herding theory approach stipules that an informational cascade occurs when it is optimal for an individual, having observed the actions of other people to follow the manner of conduct of the preceding individual without any regard to his own information, as if the herding behavior is a rational and conscious process whereby causality is something exogenous.

The Ethological approach:

The ethological herding approach relies on ethology which is the study of animal behavior to explain analogue herding behavior demonstrated by human beings. The theory compares herding to the process of recruiting in ant behavior, whereby efficient recruitment behaviors have been selected in a convergent way among different species by similar population or/and environmental constraints.

The Econophysics approach:

The econophysics approach compares herding to a mechanistic non living system. Econophysics models attempt to model endogenously the dynamics of causality of the herding impulse.

The medical approach:

The medical theory of herding draws its usefulness and explanatory power from insensible processes, whereby the herding behavior is seen as a cataleptic process that involves unconscious driven acts.

The Socionomics approach:

The Socionomics theory of herding behavior involves an endogenous approach of cumulative unconscious impulses under conditions of uncertainty, which impels and produces the different social actions demonstrated by mass human behavior (crowds)

THE PERSPECTIVES

It is again crucial for understanding the herding impulse & Crowd psychology to sketch the different discourses that enable us to fully discern its meaning. The herding impulse and Crowd psychology establishes its routes from the works and legendary writings of celebrated thinkers, geared from various psychological perspectives, from the evolutionary perspective, to the behavioral and cognitive perceptions.

An Evolutionary perspective:

Followers of the Evolutionary perspective in psychology explain human and animal activities via focusing on the different behavior patterns that enhance reproductive success. (Weiten, 2007) .One of the fathers of evolutionary psychology, Charles Darwin (1859, 1871) suggested in his theory of natural selection, that the typical characteristics of a species must serve some purpose (Weiten, 2007) .Darwin pointed out that group living is an adaptive strategy for species such as humans, which has lead to the development of various psychological mechanisms that promotes and encourages living in groups .David Buss (1997) argued that group topics, such as dominance, status, intergroup relations, are all part of a large number of functionally specialized evolved mechanisms that get integrated with each other and manifest this group behavior (Weiten, 2007).

The Behavioral Perspective:

Followers of the behavioral perspective in psychology, focus in their scientific approach to elucidate from observable events the stimulus-response relations, and the effect of the environment on the behavior of humans and animals(Weiten, 2007).Gustave Le Bon argued that whenever a certain number of individuals are gathered together in a crowd for purposes of action, observation proves that there result certain new psychological-racial characteristics that are attributed to the group but differ from them at times to a very considerable degree. Crowds are readily influenced by suggestions, and are more deceived by the unanimity of witnesses and opinions. They are ever impulsive and at the mercy of all exterior causes. These impulses are so domineering that they overcome personal feelings and individual logical assessment. Crowds are more socially influenced by ideas that can seem contradictory to individuals, but to the crowd these ideas are independent of the degree of truth they may contain.

John Darley and Bibb Latane (1968) conducted a study on students, where individuals were placed in cubicles connected by an intercom and participated in discussion groups of three sizes. One of the accomplices was presented as a student, and during the discussion, he faked a seizure and cried for help. Darley and Latane concluded that the tendency to seek help declined as the group increased in size (Weiten, 2007). This paradox was termed by Weiten (2007) as: The Bystander Effect; and it stated that people are less likely to lend a helping hand when they are in groups than when they are alone. Latane, Williams and Harkins (1979) argued that individuals’ productivity often declines in larger groups. (Weiten, 2007) and concluded that this decreased productivity is attributed to the following factors:

Reduced efficiency, provoked by the loss of coordination and duplication of effort among workers and social loafing, which involves a reduction in individual output goaded by the subsistence of the group. Social loafing increases as group size increases, for the responsibility of getting a job would be divided among more people and many folks would ease up because they would go by unnoticed in the crowd. (Weiten, 2007)

The cognitive viewpoint:

Cohorts of the Cognitive perspective in psychology, emphasize the way the human brain acquires stores and processes different mental thoughts & information. (Weiten, 2007).Gustave Le Bon‘s contributions to group behavior extend to the cognitive side as well. Le Bon makes the following observations about crowds:

Crowds do not exhibit uncertainty or doubt and always reach extremes in their behavior and sentiments. They are rarely guided by morals, principles or ethics, which are most often exclusive to individuals. Crowds possess lower reasoning facility. Their reckoning and logical capabilities capability are always more inferior than those of an individual.

Stoner (1961) conducted a study that was later replicated by Pruitt (1971), where he asked individuals to give their recommendations on certain sturdy decisions and then asked them to brainstorm in groups and align their opinions. (Weiten, 2007).Stoner concluded that groups tend to take the riskier path and go with the riskier decisions than that of an individual. This experiment was later duplicated by Pruitt in 1971 and was termed: risky shift.

Myers & Lamm and later Friedkin concluded that groups can lean in their decisions towards risk in one occasion or use cautiousness in other occasions, depending on which way the inclination of the group was routed towards to begin with. (Weiten, 2007)

Tindale, Kameda and Hinsz (2003) termed a group’s dominating fondness and shift towards extreme positions: Group polarization. (Weiten, 2007)

Tindale, Kameda and Hinsz consummated that when there is group discussion in progress that strengthens a group’s dominant view, which produces an extreme shift in decision towards that view. (Weiten, 2007)

Irving Janes (1972) conducted thorough research on group dynamics, and developed a model that illustrates a phenomenon that occurs when interconnected groups get together; where members of the group, in order to kowtow to the supplementary opinion of the rest of the participants, defer from finding sanctuary in critical thinking and surrender to the pressures of conformity. This was termed as Group think. Groupthink led Shculz-Hardt et al. (2000) to conclude that Groups can display, like individuals, a confirmation bias, that makes them rely solely on information that supports their initial views and discard all other relevant outside information that is somewhat opposing to their views but somewhat might have proven beneficial in one way or another. (Weiten, 2008).Groupthink’s occurrence was attributed to group cohesiveness, and particularly when it is high. Team spirit is occasionally a very good thing, but when it is too high, it can prove detrimental. Groupthink will be most present in groups which are dominated by a strong leader or/and when the decision is tough and a nippy and prompt action is required. (Weiten, 2008)

Weiten (2008) delineated Groupthink as a disease that can infect decision making in groups and occurs when members of a cohesive group emphasize concurrence at the expense of critical thinking in arriving at a decision.

CONCLUSION:

Although disparities can exist and did exist in our research on the herding impulse & Crowd Psychology, yet instead of taking sides, and routing for one tone at the expense of the other, or one perspective over the other, and then specify which is the better perspective, our focus was on the benefits that such distinguished and yet so different approaches can contribute to the further growth and nurture of this branch of social psychology.

Individuals tend to seek signals from others in matters of behavior to align their feelings and convictions to fit the pack. The mere fact that you pertain to a group can have a powerful influence on your emotions and overwhelm your higher brain functions.

The impulsive reactions of a group fall at the mercy of all exterior events surrounding it, and these reactions can reach extremes, making the people in the group become less aware of the true nature of their actions. Group living is an adaptive strategy for us humans, which led to the development of various psychological mechanisms that encourage living in groups, and this has been demonstrated throughout decades of societal human history.

Throughout the history of mankind, large groups of people have always been able to bring about dramatic and sudden social change in a manner that bypasses established processes.

REFERENCES

Brown, S. (1921) the Herd Instinct. The journal of abnormal psychology and social psychology, Vol 16 (4), pp 232-242

Bion, W (1961). Experiences in Groups: And Other Papers. Tavistock. Reprinted, 1989 Routledge

Greenspan, A. (2003). Remarks at the symposium in Jackson Hole, WY. www.federalreserve.gov/board docs/speeches/2003

Ip, G. Chiu, C. and Wan, C. (2006). Birds of a feather and birds flocking together: Physical versus behavioral cues may lead to trait versus goal based group perception. Journal of personality and social psychology, Vol 90(3), pp368-381

Jordan, E. (1909). Review of “Herd instinct and its bearing on the psychology of civilized Man”. Psychological bulletin, Vol 6(12), pp420-421

Le Bon, G. (1985). The Crowd. Penguin books (reprint Ed. 1977). NY

Mackay, C. (1841). Extraordinary popular delusions and the madness of crowds. (Reprint Ed. 1996). NY.

Parker, W. & Prechter, R. (2004).Herding: An introductory Integrative Review from a Socionomics perspective. Gainesville, Georgia.

Prechter, R. (1999). The Wave principle of Human social Behavior and the new science of Socionomics. Gainesville, GA

Putnam, J. (1916). Review of “Instincts of the herd in peace and war” The journal of abnormal psychology, Vol 11(5), pp 347-353

Schneider,S. and Weinberg, H. (1988). The Large Group Re-visited. The Herd, primal Horde, Crowds and Masses. (Reprint Ed.2003). London, England.

Sigmund, F. (1921) Group Psychology and the Analysis of the Egotandard Edition (vol XVIII).The Hogarth Press reprint, London, 1981.

Surowiecki, J. (2004). The Wisdom of Crowds: why the many are smarter than the few and how collective wisdom shapes business, economies, societies and nations, Anchor books, New York

Tuckman, B. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological bulletin.

Trotter, W. (1916), Instincts of the Herd in Peace and War. (Reprint Ed. 2005) NY.

Weiten, W. (2007). Psychology: Themes and variations (7th Ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth

Weiten, W. (2008). Psychology: Themes and variations (7th Ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth