Crowd Reactions to Sublethal Weapons: Universal Triggers for Crowd Violence

Abstract

Since the end of the cold war, military forces have increasingly been required to manage crowds of people, some of which may quickly turn violent. Frequently, crowd researchers identify “flashpoint” variables: environmental or social triggers that cause a crowd to become hostile. The goal of this research was to identify potential flashpoints, to assist the simulation and training communities in crowd representation. Researchers exhaustively reviewed crowd literature, surveyed subject matter experts in crowd control, and analyzed anecdotal crowd events. Survey results indicated that crowd weapons, alcohol and drugs, crowd commitment, and crowd desperation may be flashpoints for violence. However, none of these variables strongly varied with culture. Anecdotal results revealed additional flashpoint variables, such as aggression and the use of auditory stimuli by control force members, instigators within the crowd, and general masculine culture. These findings agree in part with results from existing literature, and have implications for peacekeeper training.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Department of the Army (1992). Field Manual 7-98: Operations in a low-intensity conflict. Washington, D.C.: Author.

Derlega

V. J.

Cukur

C. S.

Kuang

J. C. Y.

Forsyth

D. R.

(2002). Interdependent construal of self and the endorsement of conflict resolution strategies in interpersonal, intergroup, and international disputes. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 33 (6), 60–625.

Feinberg

W. E.

Johnson

N. R.

(1988). “Outside agitators” and crowds: Results from a computer simulation model. Agitators and Crowds. University of North Carolina Press.

Johnson

N. R.

Feinberg

W. E.

(1977). A computer simulation of the emergence of consensus in crowds. American Sociological Review, 42, 505–521.

Kenny

J. M.

Farrer

D. N.

Heal

Ijames

McPhail

Odenthal

Taylor

Waddingoton

(2001). Crowd behavior, crowd control, and the use of non-lethal weapons. (Final Report, Contact M67004-99-D-0037-0001). Quantico, VA: Joint Non-Lethal Weapons Directorate.

Klein

H. A.

Steele-Johnson

(2002). Training cultural decentering. Technical Report completed for the U.S. Army Research Institute.

McPhail

(1991). The myth of the madding crowd. New York: Aldine De Gruyter.

Miller

L. K.

(1993). The litigation connection: Perspective of risk control in the 1990s. The Journal of Physical Education, Recreation & Dance, 39, 31–34.

Phaltzgraff

Jr. Shultz

Jr. , (Eds.) (1994). Ethnic conflict and regional instability: Implications for US Policy and Army roles and missions. Carlisle, PA: Strategic Studies Institute, US Army War College.

10.

Rehm

Steinleiter

Lilli

(1987). Wearing uniforms and aggression: A field experiment. European Journal of Social Psychology, 17, 357–360.

11.

Singelis

T. M.

(2000). Some thoughts on the future of cross-cultural social psychology. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31, 76–91.

12.

Silke

(2003). De-indiviualtion, anonymity and violence: Findings from Northern Ireland. Journal of Social Psychology.

13.

Waddingron

Jones

Critcher

(1987). Flashpoints of public disorder. In Gaskell

Bennewick

(Eds.), The Crowd in Contemporary Britain (p. 155–199). London: Sage Publications.

14.

Watson

R. I.

(1973). Investigation into deindiviuation using a cross-cultural survey technique. Journal of personality and Social Psychology, 25, 342–345.