What is the herd instinct in people? Herd Instinct - how justified is it? Herding is a person’s desire for complete, unconscious subordination of individual behavior to the example of the crowd. Herding is the tendency to receive satisfaction from

IX. Herd instinct

We will not long rejoice at the illusory solution to the riddle of mass by this formula. We will immediately be disturbed by the thought that we have, in essence, referred to the riddle of hypnosis, in which there is still so much unresolved. And here a new objection to further research arises.

We must tell ourselves that the numerous affective attachments that we have noted in the masses are quite sufficient to explain one of its characteristic features: the lack of independence and initiative of the individual, the homogeneity of his reactions with the reactions of all others, his reduction, so to speak, to a mass individual. But the mass reveals something more if we consider it as a whole; traits of weakness of intellectual activity, affective uninhibition, inability to curb and delay, a tendency to cross boundaries in the manifestation of feelings and to the complete transition of these feelings into actions - all this, etc., so vividly outlined by Le Bon, creates an undoubted picture of regression of mental activity to an earlier stage, such as we usually find in savages and children. Such regression is especially characteristic of ordinary masses, while in highly organized artificial masses it, as we have heard, cannot be deep.

Thus we get the impression of a state in which the individual emotional impulses and the personal intellectual act of the individual are too weak to manifest themselves separately, and must necessarily await reinforcement in the form of uniform repetition on the part of other people. Let us remember how many of these phenomena of dependence relate to the normal constitution of human society, how little originality and personal courage there is in it, how strongly each person is at the mercy of the attitudes of the mass soul, manifested in racial characteristics, class prejudices, public opinion, etc. e. The mystery of suggestive influence is increased for us by the affirmation of the fact that such influence is exerted not only by the leader, but also by each individual on another individual, and we reproach ourselves for the fact that we unilaterally emphasized the attitude towards the leader, without paying any attention to the other mutual suggestion factor.

Out of modesty, we will want to listen to another voice that promises us an explanation based on simpler principles. I borrow this explanation from W. Trotter's excellent book on the herd instinct and regret only that it did not completely escape the antipathy that resulted from the latter great war.

Trotter considers the described mental phenomena of the masses to be a derivative of the herd instinct (gregariousness), which is innate both for humans and for other animal species. This gregariousness is biologically an analogy and, as it were, a continuation of multicellularity; in the sense of libidinal theory, it is a further manifestation of the tendency, arising from libido, of all homogeneous living beings to unite into units of large volume. An individual feels incomplete when he is alone. The fear of a small child is already a manifestation of this herd instinct. Contrary to the herd is tantamount to separation from it and is therefore avoided with fear. The herd denies everything new and unusual. The herd instinct is something primary that cannot be split up.

Trotter cites a number of drives (or instincts) that he considers primary: the instinct of self-preservation, nutrition, sexual instinct and herd instinct. The latter must often be opposed to other instincts. Consciousness of guilt and a sense of duty are the characteristic property of the gregarious animal. According to Trotter, the repressive forces that psychoanalysis discovered in the “I” also come from the herd instinct, and, consequently, the resistance that the doctor encounters during psychoanalytic treatment. Language owes its meaning to its ability to give people the opportunity for mutual understanding in a herd; it is mainly the identification of individuals with each other that rests on it.

Just as Le Bon focused primarily on characteristic short-lived masses, and Mc Dougall - stable societies, so Trotter focused his attention on the most common associations in which a person lives, this zwou politikou, and gave them a psychological justification. Trotter does not need to look for the origin of the herd instinct, since he considers it primary and insoluble. His remark that Boris Sidis considers the herd instinct to be a derivative of suggestibility is, fortunately, unnecessary for him; This is an explanation according to a well-known, unsatisfactory template, and the opposite position, which states that suggestibility is a derivative of the herd instinct, turned out to be more obvious to me.

But one can object to Trotter's presentation with even greater right than against others that it pays too little attention to the role of the leader in the mass, while we are inclined to the opposite opinion that the essence of the mass cannot be understood if we neglect leader. The herd instinct leaves no place for a leader at all, the leader only accidentally comes into the herd, and in connection with this stands the fact that from this instinct there is no path to the need for a deity; the flock lacks a shepherd. But, in addition, Trotter’s presentation can be psychologically refuted, that is, it can at least be made probable that the herd instinct is decomposing, that it is not primary in the same sense as the instinct of self-preservation and the sexual instinct.

Of course, it is not easy to trace the ontogenesis of the herd instinct. The fear of a small child left alone (Trotter interprets it as a manifestation of instinct) more easily allows for another interpretation. It refers to the mother, subsequently to other loved ones, and is an expression of an unfulfilled desire, with which the child does not know how to do anything except turn it into fear. The fear of a small child left alone with himself will not subside at the sight of any person “from the herd”; on the contrary, the approach of such a “stranger” will only cause fear. For a long time, nothing is noticed in the child that would speak of a herd instinct or a sense of mass (Massengef?hl). Such a feeling is formed only in nurseries, where there are many children, from their attitude towards their parents, namely: like the initial envy with which an older child meets a younger one. The eldest child would, of course, jealously oust the younger one, alienate him from his parents, deprive him of all rights, but due to the fact that this child, like all subsequent ones, is equally loved by his parents, the eldest child, not being able to maintain his hostile attitude without damage for himself, is forced to identify himself with other children, and in the children's environment a feeling of mass or community arises, receiving its further development At school. The first demand of this reactive formation is the demand for justice, for everyone to be treated equally. It is known how loudly and persistently this demand manifests itself in school. If I myself cannot be a favorite, then at least let no one be a favorite. One could consider this transformation and replacement of jealousy with a feeling of mass in the nursery and at school as something implausible if the same process were not observed again a little later with different relationships.

The public spirit, esprit de corps, etc., which subsequently exert their influence in society, do not hide their origin from initial envy. No one should have the desire to advance, everyone should be equal to the other, everyone should have the same values. Social justice should mean that a person himself gives up a lot so that others also have to give it up, or - which is the same thing - cannot demand it. This demand for equality is the root of social conscience and the sense of duty. In an unexpected way we find it in the fear of infection in syphilitics, which we understand thanks to psychoanalysis. The fear of these unfortunates is an expression of their resistance against the unconscious desire to spread their infection to others. For why should they alone be infected and deprived of so much, while others should not? The beautiful parable of Solomon's judgment has this same core. If one woman's child dies, then the other should not have a living child either. By this desire it was possible to recognize the victim.

So, social feeling rests on the transformation of a feeling that was initially hostile into a positively colored attachment, which has the character of identification. Since we have so far traced this process, it appears that this transformation is accomplished under the influence of a general tender affection for a person standing outside the mass. Our analysis of identification seems to us to be inexhaustive, but for our present purpose it is sufficient to return to the proposition that the mass demands strict adherence to equality. We have already heard in the discussion of both artificial masses, the church and the army, that their prerequisite is the equal love of the leader for all members of the mass. But we do not forget that the demand for equality that exists among the masses applies only to its individual members and does not concern the leader. All members of the mass should be equal to each other, but they all want the leader to rule over them. Many equal to each other, who can identify with each other, and one and only one who surpasses them all - this is the situation that exists in a viable mass. Consequently, we allow ourselves to make a correction to Trotter’s expression that man is a herd animal; he is rather an animal of the horde, a participant in the horde led by a leader.

Stay in line, don't stick your head out. Do what others do. Go where everyone else is going. Say what they want to hear. And most importantly, don’t think, because everything has already been thought out for you a long time ago. Just be like everyone else!

This is the simple “formula for success” for most people - to be in a crowd, to be a crowd, with all the ensuing consequences: loss of individuality, lack of one’s own views, susceptibility to the influence of others, the desire to be led, the fear of expressing oneself! In a word - melancholy! Let's talk about herd instinct.

Why is herd instinct bad?

The herd instinct, along with other instincts (self-preservation and procreation), is inherent in man by nature. And what is prescribed by nature is difficult, impractical and simply stupid to dispute. But there is one “but”! If the instincts of self-preservation and reproduction help humanity to at least preserve life and reproduce well on the planet, then in the case of the herd instinct, an ambiguous picture emerges. On the one hand, we all live according to generally accepted rules, thanks to which we have an idea of ​​morality and ethics. In this case social norms do not allow the world to slide into chaos and anarchy. But there is also back side medals...

Let's look at a simple example. Before us is an average young man. Pleasant, kind, intelligent, friendly. Caring father and loving husband. Let us add, to complete his positive image, belonging to some humane profession. Let's say he works as an ambulance paramedic - saving lives. In general, he is a completely positive character who is incapable of causing harm. Our hero has one passion - football! And so, sitting at the match, he witnesses the shameful loss of his favorite team, to the delight and pleasure of the fans of the winning team. It would seem that there’s nothing wrong with it – a game is a game. But then the most “humiliated and offended” by the loss of their home team stand up and start a fight with the fans of the winning club. Something “clicks” in our hero’s head, and he, driven by motives incomprehensible to him, joins the brawl. The outcome is known - riot police arrive and, having treated the fighters with batons and machine gun butts, pack them into paddy wagons. Our hero, lying on the cold floor of the special vehicle and having acquired the ability to think soberly, asks himself one question: why?! Why did he get involved in this fight?! After all, aggression is not characteristic of him in any form, he does not maim people, he, on the contrary, saves them! The answer is simple: he turned it off critical thinking– ability to analyze a situation and formulate possible consequences. The herd instinct has completely eclipsed common sense. Everyone got into a fight and that means he must! And the boys wouldn’t understand if he left! He wasn’t himself at that moment - he was like everyone else...

Do you understand how dangerous and destructive it is to “turn off” your brain and follow the majority? Dangerous for life and health, and destructive for a person’s personality. And this was still the most “harmless” example. How many bloody wars, armed conflicts, terrorist attacks and other tragedies have occurred only because people are driven by herd mentality? Manipulators (they are also called shepherds), hiding their true selfish motives behind beautiful appealing speeches about equality, patriotism and their God, “turn on” the crowd, and it, in its blind faith in a high idea, goes to rob, kill, rape!

There have always been people who went against the rules and had their own opinions. Society has already prepared stigmas and labels for such people: “black sheep”, dissidents, dissidents, heretics, rebels, upstarts and troublemakers. Having applied a label, society takes measures to establish “justice”: from silent censure to collective persecution, called a vile word - bullying! Goal: to suppress someone who thinks differently, to put them down, to push them aside, to make it clear that they are no better. And in the overwhelming majority of cases, those who disagree either break down, becoming part of the crowd, or close themselves off and move away, because it is a thankless task to fight the “windmills” of public opinion.

Is everything that those who disagree say so wrong and harmful that society does not accept it? That's not the point!!! A follower of the crowd does not like the very fact that someone has his own opinion; he subconsciously feels the strength in such a person against the background of his intellectual weakness and “blindfolded” view, and therefore sees himself as a threat. Or, on the contrary, he may even be very smart and secretly recognize the correctness, usefulness and relevance of other people’s ideas, but he will never admit this publicly, because this is fraught with sanctions against him from the majority - he himself will find himself on the other side of the barricades. This is such a simple mechanism. Add to this the susceptibility to the opinions of others and the habit of obeying “shepherds” who, although not particularly decent, may nevertheless have strong leadership qualities and the ability to persuade.

The main reason why people gravitate towards crowds is a sense of security, because it is easier to survive in a group. We mean global negative manifestations life: wars, disasters, epidemics, etc. In this case, herdism is the basis of the instinct of self-preservation. It is a fact.

But with manifestations of herd behavior, when there is no question of survival, one can and should argue. Who forces you, along with everyone else, to spread rot on the newcomer, what is your excuse? Are you afraid to break away from the team, be branded a “black sheep” and end up in their place? This is not what you need to be afraid of. Be afraid of the lack of individuality - the very trait that makes a person different from others and shapes him as a person.

Or take all these total sales and Black Fridays. When a roaring crowd, losing their human appearance, storms the shops, trampling the fallen, in the hope of taking possession of a TV, five phones and a kilogram of batteries. And all this to the accompaniment of cries of discounts from managers (read: shepherds). Driven by the herd instinct and love for freebies, people finally lose their self-esteem.

And such examples of herd behavior can be given endlessly, but we will not do this, just as we will not draw conclusions - you will draw them yourself.

Like

In 1909, the second and final part of his work, “The Herd Instinct and Its Influence on the Psychology of Civilized Man,” was published in the journal Sociological Review. Trotter discussed his concept of human social herd in more detail in the book “The Herd Instincts in War and Peace,” which he wrote in 1916 at the height of the First World War.

In the book, Trotter believed that looking for the causes and derivatives of the herd instinct is pointless, since it is primary and insoluble. He considered the instincts of self-preservation, nutrition, sexual and herd to be primary, basic instincts. The first three, according to Trotter, are primitive and are accompanied by a feeling of satisfaction in case of successful implementation. The herd instinct, as Trotter writes, causes “an obvious obligation to act the other way around”: a person is ready not to care about self-preservation, to experience a lack of food and to show resistance to carnal impulses, submitting to a different imperative. Simply put, in a crowd, a person obeys an instinct that may be contrary to his personal benefit.

Wolves, sheep and bees

In his book, Trotter tried to explain from a psychological point of view the irrational behavior of the masses, which led to the enormous massacre on the battlefields of the World War. To do this, he put forward “a psychological hypothesis to explain the peculiarities of the German national character that are manifesting themselves at the present time.” According to Trotter, the herd instinct manifests itself in three various types: aggressive, protective and socialized, exemplified in nature by the wolf, sheep and bee, respectively.

“In studying the English mind in the spirit of a biological psychologist, it is necessary to keep in mind the society of the bee, just as in studying the German mind it was necessary to keep in mind the society of the wolf,” writes Trotter. In his opinion, the herd instinct in the British “socialized herd” has gone the way of the beehive, where each individual contributes to the overall survival. In Germany it is expressed as aggressive form, represented in nature by a pack of wolves and a flock of sheep.

His book "The Instincts of the Herd in Peace and War" is available at English language on the Internet, anyone can read it, there are many more interesting things in the same vein. But something else is more interesting: how quickly, while still a newborn, new science social Psychology found application in politics and ideology, displacing social Darwinism with its crude and straightforward postulate about the survival of the fittest.

Reproduction of instincts

Instincts in the science of human psychology appeared in the 18th century in the works of French encyclopedists and were borrowed by them from biology. Lamarck in early XIX century, he finally formulated the concept of instinct in animals “as an inclination caused by sensations based on the needs that arose due to their needs and forcing them to perform actions without any participation of thought, without any participation of the will.”

At first, transferring to a person actions performed without any participation of thought and will required a certain amount of courage from the scientist. But after Darwin the situation became reversed. The great Darwin himself wrote that instincts appeared as a result of evolution, and who was the crown of evolution according to Darwin? This is precisely what Homo sapiens was, and it was now risky for a scientist to deny instinctive behavior in humans.

Further, if earlier instincts existed only in theory and all evidence of their reality was indirect, then Ivan Pavlov experimentally proved their existence, however, calling them “complex unconditioned reflexes.” It took half a century for scientists to again begin to doubt the existence of human actions “without any participation of thought, without any participation of will.” In the meantime, psychologists have only tried to separate inherited elements of behavior from those acquired in early childhood.

Various scientists have come up with different number such inherited instincts. American psychiatrist Abraham Brill believed that “everything in life can be reduced to two fundamental instincts: hunger and love; they rule the world." The British neurosurgeon Wilfrid Trotter, as we have seen, has four. His compatriot, the physiologist William McDougall, the author of the first textbook on social psychology, first had seven of them, then (as the textbook was republished) there were 11, and then 18. Other scientists had 20, 30, 40 or more.

Scientists simply selected the appropriate instinct in an animal for each type of human activity or social institution. For example, it was believed that economic relations grew out of the instinct of nutrition, the family is built on a rationalized sexual instinct, war is based on the instinct of struggle, the state is based on the instincts of herd and fear. Their review can be read in the works of St. Petersburg University professor Dmitry Gorbatov. Continuing this series, it is not difficult to select instincts for any phenomenon in life: from participation in the green movement to gay orientation.

There are no instincts in the USSR

Compared to others, the herd instinct was used special attention in the Russian psychological school, which in this regard even led at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries. IN Russian society a bad feeling was brewing, and it did not deceive: in the near future the country would have to endure three wars, two revolutions and general unrest. Life itself demanded answers to the questions: how does the crowd influence the individual, and the individual influence the crowd? Is the tendency to crime obligatory for a crowd? How to avoid becoming its victim? Is it possible to control a crowd?

The populist theorist Nikolai Mikhailovsky viewed the crowd as “a pliable mass, ready to follow the hero anywhere and languidly and tensely shifting from foot to foot in anticipation of his appearance.” At the same time, the role of the “hero” was assigned to the situational leader - the one who captivates by example, the first to “break the ice”, taking one step that others involuntarily expect in order to blindly follow him. This hero is not at all great person”, on the contrary, is the most ordinary “man of the crowd”, and therefore its forces, feelings, instincts, and desires are concentrated in him. The hypnotic model of communication in a crowd, developed by Mikhailovsky, turned out to be quite promising. In Western social psychology, it has been developed as a “slowly spreading psychological contagion” that precedes outbursts of collective rage.

Professor of criminal law Vladimir Sluchevsky formulated the concept of “animal principle” as an explanation of why a person is able to change in a crowd to the point of forgetting moral guidelines. “Who in his thoughts... has not committed serious crimes, or at least did not wish for the occurrence of such events, for the implementation of which he would never have decided to have a hand!” - he wrote. In a crowd, this property, for insignificant reasons, leads to extreme cruelty and destructive activity. In Western mass psychology, similar ideas were developed by the sociologist and criminologist Spicy Sigele, who considered the crowd “a substrate in which the microbe of evil develops very easily, while the microbe of good almost always dies, not finding suitable living conditions.”

Zoologist Vladimir Wagner proposed simpler and more materialistic reasons for crowd behavior. According to his theory, the physical impact of some individuals on others, expressed in touches and collisions, movements in front of the eyes, noise during movements, is transformed into nervous excitement in a person in a crowd. This excitement, in turn, thanks to the herd instinct, which involves imitation of individuals who were the first to react to a critical change in the situation, leads to unpredictable behavior of the crowd.

It is clear that in the Soviet Union similar theories could not take root and develop. In 1976, Pyotr Galperin, a professor at Moscow State University named after M.V. Lomonosov, wrote: “The question is whether instincts are compatible with the social organization of people’s lives, with the social nature of man, with a moral assessment of behavior and responsibility for actions. And the fact of the matter is that they are incompatible."

There were no scientists in Soviet psychological science who wanted to refute this; probably, another basic instinct was triggered for them - self-preservation.

Shepherds of the virtual flock

For more than a hundred years, the science of the herd reflex has gone through a lot. It almost ended in the 1920s and 1930s when behaviorism came into fashion, but was revived again with the advent of ethology. However, there is no need to fear that it will someday go out of fashion and be pushed to the margins of social psychology. The possibility of controlling the herd reflex for politics and trade looks very tempting.

The second area of ​​application of knowledge about the herd reflex - in the markets of goods and services - began to develop rapidly in post-war years. True, in relation to politics and trade today, no special breakthroughs have been observed in the psychology of the herd reflex, although psychologists are trying their best. It seems that all the private mechanisms of behavior of the crowd and the person in it have already been studied, but this does not bring us any closer to understanding what is happening to them.

The maximum that political strategists and marketers can now achieve in practice is to form a short-term conditioned reflex drooling over this or that product or this or that election candidate, as in Pavlov’s experiments. Or, on the contrary, a reflexive rejection of the first and second, as in other experiments of the same Pavlov. The fine tuning of Trotter’s socialized herd has not yet been achieved; the human herd, not in theory, but in its carnal form, still remains for science something like the thinking jelly Solaris from Stanislaw Lem’s science fiction novel, which, in response to any attempt to study it, extracts it from the subconscious scientist phantoms and offers to study them.

More promising are studies of virtual herds that have recently appeared on the Internet. Here the success of their management is more impressive, and perhaps it is here that social psychology will find a universal algorithm for managing the herd instinct.

Sergey Petukhov

Our joy over the illusory solution, with the help of this formula, of the riddle of mass will be brief. Very soon we will begin to be disturbed by the thought that, in essence, we have accepted a reference to the riddle of hypnosis, in which there is still so much unresolved. And now a new objection opens up a further path for us.

We have the right to say to ourselves that the extensive affective connections that we have noticed in the masses are quite sufficient to explain one of its properties, namely, the individual’s lack of independence and initiative, the homogeneity of his reactions with the reactions of all others, his reduction, so to speak, to level of the mass individual. But when considering the mass as a whole, it shows us more: features of weakened intellectual activity, uncontrollable affects, inability to moderation and delay, a tendency to go beyond all limits in the expression of feelings and to completely withdraw emotional energy through actions - this and much more that so Le Bon vividly expounds and gives an undeniable picture of the regression of mental activity to an earlier stage, which we are accustomed to finding in savages or children. Such regression is especially characteristic of the essence of ordinary masses, while in highly organized, artificial masses such regression can be significantly delayed.

Thus, we have the impression of a state where the individual emotional impulse and the personal intellectual act of the individual are too weak to manifest themselves separately, and must necessarily await confirmation by similar repetition on the part of others. Let us remember how many of these phenomena of dependence are included in the normal constitution of human society, how little originality and personal courage there is in it, and how much each individual is at the mercy of the attitudes of the mass soul, manifested in racial characteristics, class prejudices, public opinion, etc. Riddle suggestive influence grows if we recognize that this influence comes not only from the leader, but also from each individual on every other individual, and we reproach ourselves for unilaterally highlighting the attitude towards the leader, undeservedly relegating another factor of mutual suggestion to the background. By learning humility in this way, we will listen to another voice that promises us an explanation on simpler grounds. I quote this explanation from W. Trotter’s clever book on the herd instinct and my only regret is that it did not completely escape the antipathy that resulted from the last great war. Trotter traces the mental phenomena observed among the masses to the herd instinct, which is innate to humans just like other species of animals. Biologically, this gregariousness is an analogy and, as it were, a continuation of multicellularity, and in the spirit of the theory of libido, a further expression of the tendency of all homogeneous living beings to unite into ever larger unities.

An individual feels incomplete if he is alone. Already the fear of a small child is a manifestation of the herd instinct. Contradicting the herd is tantamount to separation from it, and therefore contradiction is timidly avoided. But the herd rejects everything new and unusual. The herd instinct - according to Trotter - is something primary, further indecomposable.

Trotter indicates a number of primary urges (or instincts), which he considers primary: the instinct of self-affirmation, nutrition, sexual and carnal knowledge. The latter is often in opposition to other instincts. Consciousness of guilt and a sense of duty are characteristic qualities of a gregarious animal. According to Trotter, the repressive forces discovered by psychoanalysis in the “I” and the resistance that the doctor encounters during psychoanalytic treatment also come from the herd instinct. The meaning of speech was based on the ability to use it in the herd for the purpose of mutual understanding; the identification of individuals with each other is largely based on it.

While Le Bon described mainly characteristic fluid mass formations, and Mac Dougall described stable public entities, Trotter concentrated his interest on the most common associations in which a person lives, and gave their psychological justification. Trotter does not have to look for the origin of the herd instinct, since he defines it as primary and not amenable to further decomposition. His remark that Boris Sidis derives the herd instinct from suggestibility is, fortunately for the bliss, unnecessary. This explanation follows a well-known unsatisfactory template; a reversal of this thesis, i.e., that suggestibility is a product of the herd instinct, seems to me much more convincing.

However, with even more right than others, one can object to Troper that he takes little account of the role of a leader in the masses; we are inclined to the opposite judgment, namely, that the essence of the mass without taking into account the leader is inaccessible to understanding. For the leader, the herd instinct leaves no place at all, the leader only accidentally joins the mass, and this is connected with the fact that from this instinct there is no path to the need for God; the flock lacks a shepherd. But Trogger’s theory can also be undermined psychologically, that is, it can at least be proven that the herd instinct is not indivisible, not exemplary in the sense that the instinct of self-preservation and the sexual instinct are reconciled.

What later manifests itself in society as corporate spirit, etc., does not thereby deny its origin from initial envy. No one should encroach on the nomination, everyone should be equal to the other and have equal possession of property. Social justice means that you deny yourself a lot, so that others have to deny themselves this too, or, what is the same thing, they would not be able to claim rights to it. This demand for equality is the root of social conscience and a sense of duty. In an unexpected way, this requirement is found in syphilitics in their fear of infection, which we were able to understand with the help of psychoanalysis. The fear of these unfortunates corresponds to their violent resistance to the unconscious desire to spread their infection to others, so why should they be infected and lose so much, and not others? The same thing lies at the heart of the beautiful parable of Solomon's judgment. If one woman's child dies, let the other not have a child. According to this desire, the victim is known. Social feeling is based on changing initially hostile feelings into a connection of a positive direction, which is in the nature of identification. Since it was possible to trace this process, this change is carried out, apparently, under the influence of a tender connection common to all with a person standing outside the mass. Our analysis of identification does not seem exhaustive to us, but for our present intention it is enough to return to one feature - to the insistent demand for an equation. In discussing both artificial masses - the church and the army - we have already heard about their premise, that all should be equally loved by one person - the leader. But let’s not forget, the requirement of equality of the masses applies only to the participants of the masses, but not to the leader. All members of the mass need to be equal among themselves, but they all want one person to have power over themselves. Many equals, who can identify with each other, and one and only one, superior to them all - this is the situation realized in a viable mass. So, Trotter’s statement: man is a herd animal, we dare to correct in the sense that he is rather an animal of the horde, an individual led by the leader of the horde.

The term “herd mentality” is not scientific. This is a figurative expression. People use it to describe the behavior of others when they behave like animals in a herd. What is herd feeling? What does the 5% law say and what are the features of crowd psychology?

Crowd psychology or what is herd feeling?

Science knows the concept of “crowd psychology”. It explains what the herd feeling is and how it manifests itself, namely:

A crowd of people is more aggressive than an individual;
The crowd is easily susceptible to emotion and suggestion;
The crowd is not able to assess the situation with a “cold” mind;
The crowd does not reason or ask questions;
The crowd is malleable, it is easy to push it to a mass event (riot, rally, protest, criticism, condemnation);
The crowd does not accept individuality;
The crowd acts at the direction of the leader, without thinking or weighing its own actions.

This is inexplicable, but sometimes even intellectually developed people are subject to “herd mentality.” In an exaggerated way, it happens like this: once at a protest, a person chants slogans with those around him, and when left alone, he thinks and understands that his own “I” does not want to express protests, condemn and demand changes.

Or seeing a crowd of people running in an unknown direction, a person joins them, without understanding why. Subconsciously, he believes that since everyone is running, that means I should too. In this state, people are capable of finding themselves in a completely unfamiliar area, and then “biting their elbows”, wondering how to get home.

Manifestations of herd feelings are well remembered by people who found themselves in queues in the USSR. A man stood for hours for a thing that he, in general, did not need. They did this because “other people take it, so I need it too.”

Submission to the energy of the crowd is a direct path to failure, loss of time, false aspirations and even illness. The pattern of development of the disease is simple, and older people are especially susceptible to this. Someone tells an elderly man that the main thieves sit in government bodies. Old man does not have the opportunity to verify this personally, and he blindly believes the speaking “well-wisher”. As a result, a person thinks about it with increasing negativity. Having succumbed to suggestion, he becomes nervous, he is filled with anger, and negative emotions may well lead to a heart attack.

Alcoholism is also an example of a herd mentality. Why does a devotee become a drinker when he finds himself in the company of drinkers? The reason is clear: when others drink, it is difficult to resist; the energy of the drinkers absorbs individual beliefs. They also become smokers and drug addicts “for company.”

Herd mentality and the law of five percent

In psychology there is the concept of “auto-synchronization”. It manifests itself like this: if 5% of the members of a society perform a specific action, the remaining members will also repeat it. If you spook 5% of the horses in a field, the entire herd will bolt. If 5% of pigeons fly, the whole flock will fly up.

This is also typical for human society. Scientists from England conducted an experiment. Several people were invited into a large room. Of these, 5% were instructed to move along a specific trajectory, the rest were told that they could move in any direction. As a result of the experiment, all the people in the room unconsciously moved along a given trajectory. The theory of five percent can be confirmed by everyone. After attending a concert with a group of friends, start clapping at the moment you see fit. The whole room will eventually repeat after you.

Launching auto-synchronization is possible in a team where people are not aware of their own actions and do not think about the purpose and reason. If the level of self-control is low, there is no need to tell everyone what to do - 5% of people in society will start this process.

The Law of Five Percent is actively used by marketers. Starting a rumor that soon there will be no specific type of product left on the shelves. 5% of people will believe this and rush to buy up the supposed shortage. By their own behavior they will trigger mass panic and in the next couple of days there will really be no goods left.

What are the benefits of herd mentality?

Man is a social being. Life without other people is unnatural for a person. Despite the fact that humans have evolved far from animals, we are no different from primates when it comes to collective consciousness. One of these phenomena is the herd feeling.

The everyday idea of ​​herd feeling is negative, which is also, in general, a manifestation of the herd instinct. People tend not to have their own opinions, but to completely trust the statements of an authoritative person or group of people. People generally do not require confirmation or justification. This feature is actively manipulated by means mass media, marketers, politicians and public figures.

Once psychologists reported that herd mentality is not good, people believed it without thinking about the evidence. People take advantage of the convenient opportunity to repeat other people's thoughts, although the manifestations of herd feelings are not clear-cut.

What are the advantages of the herd instinct? Of course, an aggressive crowd of people, when everyone around them acts as a single organism, without thinking or asking questions, is rather an extreme manifestation of the herd instinct. But there is still a positive component in the herd feeling. Let’s say that the vast majority of reasonable people will not travel along a dangerous road if they have been warned about it. The herd feeling in such cases saves lives and helps to take profitable actions.

In order not to fall into the trap of crowd energy and become a victim of herd mentality, you need to learn and remain calm in critical situations. The crowd can both save and destroy. By showing awareness and a “cold” mind, you can avoid many negative impacts from outside.