Old Blog post #4 - The Kaiser Chiefs saw it coming...can psychology explain it?

August 2011

Today I read an interesting blog article on the recent London Riots and the nature of crowd psychology. Despite people’s personal opinions on the usefulness, relevance and academic standing of the subject, suddenly psychology seems really very important. If we can begin to understand why these apparently random riots took place, perhaps a solution or method of prevention could be found.

Psychologist Clifford Stott’s ideas were discussed in this article. He researches the inter-reactions between police and crowds. An interesting point is raised as to how policing in events such as these should be carried out - because the reality is many youths would not have intended to commit any real crime and were on the streetsbecause everyone else was. But suddenly police action and use of batons/crowd control made this an us vs them scenario, and the rioters are united against the police and public order.

This is the Elaborated Social Identity Model and essentially means that while you may feel no personal connection to the group of people around you (in a classroom, on a train) if you are threatened or affected as a group (be it an attack or a mere traffic-jam) you feel instantly affiliated to those around you.

While the London Riots have been labelled as the first ‘networked riots’, psychologeek is asking, did these invisible ties come fromthe world of facebook and the internet,or were they the result of a crowd of disconnected youths connecting to protect themselves from perceived threat?

Old Blog post #3 - A Conundrum Courtesy of Kohlberg

July 2011

Lawrence Kohlberg spent many years developing the findings and theories of other psychologists such as Piaget on the subject of moral development. To test his theories, he devised a number of dilemmas for his subjects. Have a go at the most famous, I will add discussion of the findings at a later date :)

Heinz and the Druggist

Heinz’s wife is near death due to cancer. The doctor believes there is one drug, recently discovered by a biochemist, which may be able to save her. The drug is pricey to produce - costing $200 for a course of treatment, however the biochemist is charging $2,000 for this amount. Heinz tries many forms of fundraising and borrowing to raise the money, but cannot gather more than $1,000. Heinz goes to the biochemist, asking him for a reduced price or to let him pay at a later date, however the biochemist stubbornly sticks to his price. An act of desperation, Heinz breaks into the biochemist’s lab and steals some of the drug.

Was Heinz justified in his action? If so, why? If not, why not?

Old blog post #2 - Mindfulness: Positive Psychology for Children?

October 2011

Today I read about Mindfulness in schools. Funnily enough, today I also walked past a sign for ‘mindfulness continuum movement’ and laughed. While the term (which is actually a concept from Buddhism - part of the eightfold noble path) has been adopted loosely into Western culture and media, Mindfulness has also been developed as a cognitive therapy. Now they are wondering if it should be used in schools.

Mindfulness Based Cognitive Therapy was developed by Segal, Williams and Teasdale in 2002 and is supposed to be affective in reducing frequency and severity of relapse into depression. It involves concentrating on breathing and other actions in a mindful way, avoiding ‘auto-pilot’ or being dismissive. The aim is not to clear the mind, but to note each thought and let it pass without judgement.

Last year a study took place in two schools in Cambridge. Huppert and Johnson delivered a course of 4 x 40 minute classes to boys aged 14 or 15. The boys were also encouraged to practice Mindfulness at home. The results were recorded through online questionnaires using various psychological scales. The study concluded that there was a ‘significant increase in well-being’ amongst the students, and that the more individual practice was done the more benefit was seen. Importantly, students with ‘low emotional stability’ received the greatest benefit.

So is mindfulness a good idea for schools? It is suggested that it could be used as young as pre-school age and would give children the coping-skills necessary to avoid anxiety and depression at a later stage. It is noted that the teachers must also be trained and experienced in Mindfulness.

When I was at primary school we did ‘brain gym’. Every morning we would go through a series of physical exercises followed by a period of quiet reflection sitting in a specific pose…and lots of sipping water. If there were benefits and what they were is hard to know, but certainly the routine allowed a feeling of security that helped us to cope with the day. At a school where I volunteer, on the teachers say-so heads go down on desks…and silence attempts to fall… usually unsuccessfully…

Would Mindfulness actually help children? Would children accept Mindfulness, or dismiss it like I did today walking past the sign? Tough questions, but worth thinking about.

I hate to have an empty blog, so I'll share my personal highlights from my old page.

#1 'The police are the public, and the public are the police' - November 2011

An interesting sentiment. If the Police are ordinary people with a place in society and a role to protect the public, does the public have a duty to protect itself and its society and to police the community?

Psychologeek has read two very interesting and contrasting documents on the August London riots in the last couple of weeks. First Cliff Stott and Steve Reicher’s ‘Mad Mobs and Englishmen?’ and today the Executive Summary of The Riots, Communities and Victims Panel’s officially sanctioned report on the riots.

In some ways there in consensus between the two. Both agree that ‘Stop and Search’ policies need to be addressed in many areas in London, especially disadvantaged areas. Young people feel this process is happening too often, unfairly and with disrespectful treatment and bias. It was seen that this was part of growing tension between some communities in London and the police.

Similarly, both agree on the part played by the death of Mark Duggan on the 4th August 2011. Police protocol was seen to have broken down, with no commission of a Family Liaison Officer or sufficient information being given to family. What began as a peaceful protest sparked violence in the community.

Both agree that there are many reasons behind the riots; that there were many different groups of people taking part - some opportunists hoping for the latest gadget dictated by our consumerist society, some people engaging in anti-police rioting as a culmination of generations of mistrust and anger, and some joining in because it was suddenly okay to rebel against ‘the machine’.

However there is dispute. What was the part played by the police in the causing of the riots? ‘Mad Mobs and Englishmen’ argues that the tension between communities and police was a significant factor leading to the riots and police control methods must be carefully reviewed (and that water cannons and plastic bullets should not have even been considered). The report argues that many people rioted because it was seen that the police were not keeping control, could not be trusted and therefore rebellion was possible. It has been said that the panel found great feelings of abandonment in affected communities and are in favour of tougher policing.

Psychologeek would argue that both of the above may well be true with regards to attitudes to police, as different people interpreted events differently.

The police force cannot necessarily be expected to have a contingency plan of large enough scale to tackle such a huge eruption of disorder, and many members of the force showed incredible bravery to protect the public. Certainly, however, all literature on the riots calls into question policing in this country - where is the line between public and police, and can a happy medium be found so anti-police riots are not considered and the police can be trusted to protect us when disorder does occur?

welcome :)

Psychologeek is new to blogspot. It's all part of a quest for the right place on the online ether for the tale psychologeek has to tell. I want to talk about things that matter, in a way that means everyone can understand. I want to help make psychology more accessible, while keeping it firmly in the realm of the scientific. I want to talk about politics, without getting too political. I want to explore society, crowd psychology, individuals, classic psychologists, new ideas and my own psychological discoveries. If you're reading this, you're interested enough to see past the pretension and flouncy language. This means you're keen to find out more about the most important science there is. welcome :)