Do People Behave Differently When Alone VS in a Group?

The behavioural differences of an individual when alone versus in a group is explored by behavioural psychologists and can be influenced by many factors. People behave differently in groups due to social influences, personality differences and social identities. People behave differently when alone and in a group. Furthermore, differences in behaviours being in a group itself, can be explained by ‘in-group’ and ‘out-group’ characteristics. In-group influences can be in the forms of conformity, domination of a certain idea, fear of intergroup conflict among many others.

People behave differently alone versus in a group due to their individual personalities. Personality and the evaluation of others' characters have hereditary, social, and neural influences (Cavalli-Sforza & Seielstad, 2000). Due to these personality differences, we categorise ourselves into the ‘in-group’ and ‘out-group’. Awareness of personality traits leads to people who share many similarities being considered as an ‘in-group’ while contrasting with differing ‘out-group’ individuals (Halevy & Bornstein, 2012). People who are in the ‘in-group’ are aware that they are in the ‘in-group’. As such, they tend to regard members of the ‘out-group’ differently. Additionally, being in the ‘in-group’ causes us to have the mentality that our status is elevated. We tend to think of ourselves as being superior to members of the ‘out-group’. Moreover, being exposed to experiences, ideologies and opinions from each other influences our behaviours in many ways. We tend to align our beliefs and opinions with that of the majority of the group. Hence, people have different beliefs and opinions in a group compared to when they are alone.

We sometimes fear conflict when a group is not in common consensus or judgement. In other instances, we fear being left out of the group. This leads to the occurrence of group polarisation. “In the most extreme form of group polarisation, the normative pressure to reach a decision and maintain group consensus prevents the introduction of any information that could demonstrate the decision’s inappropriateness” (Stockdale, Franks & Provencher, 2019). This leads to people potentially agreeing to decisions that may be contrary to their own beliefs. As such, people conform to the views and opinions of others. This leads to the change in their private and public beliefs and behaviour. Thus, people behave differently alone compared to being in a group.

Gathering alliance gives instant insurance (Shaw & Wong, 1989). People tend to rely on each other’s opinion in a group. Thus, the fear of missing out on ‘group alliance’ or being seen in the lens of opposition within the group, may alter our behaviour. Group alliance might be banked on examples such as work ethics, community, basic interests, culture, or leisure activity. One hypothesis that progresses this view is the social personality hypothesis which is generally acknowledged among sociologists and social psychologists (Tajfel & Turner, 1979). Thus, people behave differently when alone compared to being in a group.

Deindividuation leads to people behaving differently when alone compared to being in a group. Deindividuation leads to ‘the loss of identity and sense of individuality, together with reduced interest in the appraisal of others’ (Stockdale et al., 2019). Higher arousal and loosening of personal controls over behaviour occurs when people are in groups, specifically crowds (Stockdale et al., 2019). Deindividuation occurs when people are anonymous, leading to the diffusion of responsibility. When in a group, people might rely on others to do their share of work rather than put in the typical amount of effort for an individualized task. The murder of Kitty Genovese well illustrates this phenomena. Neighbours could hear Genovese’s screams for help but did not notify the police. This occurred as the neighbours assumed that others who heard the screams would call the police. Conversely, if there was only one neighbour who knew of the murder, he would have been more likely to call the police as there would have been no diffusion of responsibility. This reinforces the fact that people behave differently alone compared to being in a group due to deindividuation and diffusion of responsibility.

On the other hand, we also gain positive feelings when being in a group and may feel a sense of security (Cavalli-Sforza & Seielstad, 2000). This can be understood when people ‘have each other’s backs’ and share a sense of happiness and comfort. Overall, finding healthy ways to embrace differences is the best way to stay true to ourselves and maintain a sense of identity while being in a group setting.

REFERENCES:

1. Cavalli-Sforza, L., & Seielstad, M. (2000). Genes, peoples, and languages / Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza ; translated by Mark Seielstad. (1st ed.). North Point Press.

2. Halevy, N., Weisel, O., & Bornstein, G. (2012). “In‐Group Love” and “Out‐Group Hate” in repeated interaction between groups. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 25(2), 188–195. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.726

3. Shaw, R., & Wong, Y. (1989). Genetic seeds of warfare : Evolution, nationalism, and patriotism / R. Paul Shaw and Yuwa Wong. Unwin Hyman.

4. Stockdale, J. E., Franks, B., & Provencher, C. M. (2019). Elements of social and applied psychology. University of London.

5. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1979). An integrative theory of inter-group conflict. In Austin, W. G., & Worchel, S. (Eds.), The social psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 33–47). Monterey: Brooks/Cole.