What We Know About Crowd Psychology and the Art of Mass Influence

How Our Understanding of Crowd Psychology Has Changed

Today, a crowd is generally understood as a gathering of people (in a real physical space) who share a common focus of attention. Crowds can range from very simple forms to highly organized groups. An example of the former would be people who are united only by a shared interest, such as a group gathering around street performers. These types of crowds are very unstable: they exist as long as there is a center of interest, but they easily disperse.

On the other hand, organized groups of people have a common goal. For example, people who voluntarily join a demonstration fall into this category. Such groups are more stable and have a different psychological dynamic.

In modern psychology, the behavior of individuals in a crowd as such is not specifically studied. There are two main reasons for this. First, crowds are diverse, and therefore, people’s behavior within them also varies. Second, scientific research requires special procedures to allow for more or less objective conclusions. In most crowds, organizing such research is either very difficult or impossible. As a result, psychologists today are more likely to study the conditions under which people are willing to participate in so-called “collective actions,” most often political protests. In this context, street actions—rallies and demonstrations—are considered alongside other forms of collective action (such as signing petitions).

Is It Possible to Control the Masses?

Gustave Le Bon believed that people in crowds are irrational and easily influenced. He divided the crowd into “leaders” and “followers.” The “leader” sets the direction, and the rest follow. At the same time, a “follower” in a crowd perceives what’s happening in a particular way. On one hand, they analyze information poorly and make very simple judgments. On the other hand, they are susceptible to emotional influence and can easily change their opinions. Therefore, the “leader” must constantly hold people’s attention and communicate with “followers” using words and simple slogans that matter to them.

However, Le Bon wrote his works on crowds at the end of the 19th century, when psychology as a science was just beginning to take shape. Psychologists knew very little about how people process information and make decisions. Le Bon described what he saw (or wanted to see) in mass behavior, but it later became clear that he greatly oversimplified things. This is especially evident when we talk about mass street actions, where people gather with economic or political demands—events that once drew Le Bon’s attention.

• First, such crowds are psychologically heterogeneous. In particular, a crowd has a simple structure: a “center” and a “periphery.” People in the “center” of the crowd are more involved in what’s happening and, therefore, more susceptible to influence than those on the “periphery.” In addition, people end up in crowds for different reasons. For example, at a political rally or concert, some come by choice, some come along with friends, and some are brought by force. Those who come voluntarily are more susceptible to influence than those who are forced to attend.
• Second, people can use different strategies to analyze information. These strategies exist on a continuum. On one end, people can make judgments quickly, without thinking deeply, relying only on obvious cues (such as the communicator’s attractiveness). On the other end, they can carefully analyze messages, compare different pieces of information, and make well-founded judgments. The choice of strategy largely depends on the situation. In a crowd, it is indeed harder for people to analyze information, but depending on the specific context, they may use different strategies.
• Third, people do not end up at mass events by accident. In modern psychological research, participation in rallies and demonstrations is seen as a way to protect one’s interests. People participate when they see themselves as members of a victimized group, feel outraged by what is happening to them, and believe they can change things for the better. In other words, crowds consist of people who already have a certain perspective on what’s happening and are unlikely to change it just because of what they hear. At the same time, the influence on people who came out of curiosity or under external pressure is limited by the factors described above.
• Finally, fourth, a crowd is a short-lived phenomenon. It lasts from a few minutes to several hours (sometimes days), but no longer. After a person leaves the crowd and returns to their usual activities, its influence is left in the past. Of course, someone may become interested in certain ideas or feel that these ideas have many supporters. However, in today’s world, participating in a single event is not enough for a lasting effect: ongoing communication with others is necessary.