Study title

This experiment was one of a series of experiments aimed at investigating the role of social identity as an alternative explanation to 'automatic' contagion for of the spread of aggression, since as an account it fails to adequately explain social group boundaries of ‘passive’ social influence.This experiment used a 2 (identity; Sussex student vs student) x 2 (aggressive noise; Sussex vs Brighton) between subjects design. The independent variables are the identity of the noise source; Brighton or Sussex students and the participant’s identity with multiple levels; subordinate (‘Sussex University student’), superordinate (‘student’). The dependent variables are participant’s aggression ratings (implicit and explicit), as well as their reported fear levels. There was a significant interaction between identity salience and crowd source noise on implicit aggression (IAT scores lower, i.e., aggression higher, in Student-Sussex condition as predicted, and Sussex-Brighton condition which was not). Pride when hearing the aggressive crowd noise was significantly greater for the IG than OG conditions. Explicit and implicit aggression were correlated with each other.How and why do behaviours spread from person to person? In particular, how does aggression and violent behaviour spread? When, as in 2011, riots began in London, why did they then occur in Birmingham, Manchester, and Liverpool? One of the most common ways of addressing such issues is through the notion of 'contagion'. The core idea is that, particularly in crowds, mere exposure to the behaviour of others leads observers to behave in the same way. 'Contagion' is now used to explain everything from 'basic' responses such as smiling and yawning (where the mere act of witnessing someone yawn or smile can invoke the same response in another) to complex phenomena like the behaviour of financial markets and, of course, rioting. What is more, laboratory experiments on the 'contagion' of simple responses (such as...