Deindividuation: a Comparative Analysis Between Students from a Chinese Collectivistic Society and a British Individualistic Society
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Line Aagaard Nottingham University Ningbo August 23rd Zx22676 MA International Communication 2017 University of Nottingham Ningbo Deindividuation: A Comparative Analysis Between Students from a Chinese Collectivistic Society and a British Individualistic Society By Line Aagaard MA International Communication 1 Line Aagaard Nottingham University Ningbo August 23rd Zx22676 MA International Communication 2017 Nottingham Deindividuation: A Comparative University Ningbo Analysis Between Students from a MA. International Chinese Collectivistic Society and a Communication British Individualistic Society Studies Author: Line Aagaard zx22676 Supervisor: Leanne Chang Word Count: 15.308 Handed in: Aug. 23rd 2017 A Dissertation Presented in Part Consideration of the Degree of MA International Communication 2 Line Aagaard Nottingham University Ningbo August 23rd Zx22676 MA International Communication 2017 Additional Comments 3 Line Aagaard Nottingham University Ningbo August 23rd Zx22676 MA International Communication 2017 Acknowledgement: The research and experiment conducted in relation to this master thesis would not have been possible without the support and help from volunteer participants who showed patience and willingness in a time were they also were struggling with exams and limited timeframes. I would like to thank my supervisor, Leanna Chang, for whose inputs and encouragement in exploring a topic that was not very straightforward, helped tremendously. Additionally, I send my regards to my closest friends, family and my Nottingham University Ningbo “Campus Family” for their support, patience and discussions they all had in respect to my topic and with me reaching my goal. Fundings: The author received no direct funding for this research. How to Cite this Thesis: Aagaard, Line (2017): “Deindividuation: A Comparative Analysis Between Students from a Chinese Collectivistic Society and a British Individualistic Society”. UNNC, Nottingham University Ningbo China. 4 Line Aagaard Nottingham University Ningbo August 23rd Zx22676 MA International Communication 2017 Table of Content 1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................6 1.1 Structure of the Master Dissertation.......................................................................................................................... 8 2. Literature Review ....................................................................................................................9 2.1 Definitions of Deindividuation...................................................................................................................................... 9 2.2 A Critical Review of Relevant Prior Research ..................................................................................................... 10 2.3 The Influence of Culture: Individualistic & Collectivistic Societies............................................................ 16 3. Research Aim and Objective ..................................................................................................19 4.1 Philosophy of Science .................................................................................................................................................... 21 4.2 Methodology ...................................................................................................................................................................... 22 4.2.1 The Sample Groups................................................................................................................................................ 23 4.2.2 Quantitative Survey............................................................................................................................................... 24 4.2.2.1 Quantitative Survey Findings Relevant for the Experiment ....................................................... 25 4.2.3 The Experiment....................................................................................................................................................... 26 4.2.3.1 The Experiment Design and Conduction............................................................................................. 26 4.2.4 Qualitative Semi-Structure Interview............................................................................................................ 31 5. Findings and Discussion .........................................................................................................33 6. Potential Bias ........................................................................................................................48 6.1 The Survey.......................................................................................................................................................................... 49 6.2 The Experiment................................................................................................................................................................ 50 6.3 The Interviews.................................................................................................................................................................. 51 7. Alternative Approaches & Recommendations for Research ...................................................53 8. Conclusion.............................................................................................................................55 9. Reference List........................................................................................................................57 9.1 Bibliography....................................................................................................................................................................... 57 9.2 Filmography....................................................................................................................................................................... 70 5 Line Aagaard Nottingham University Ningbo August 23rd Zx22676 MA International Communication 2017 1. Introduction It has long been a researched by from multiple scholars (Beamer et al., 2011; Hofstede, 2016; Lustig et al., 2013; Hall & Hall, 1990) that there are distinct cultural differences between Western and Asian countries. If we look into Hofstede’s (2016) research - with his eight dimensions – it is to be indicated that said differences can be measured in terms of different variables, one of the most distinct ones being the individual dimension; where the differences are measured in terms of how individualistic and collectivistic a society’s social norms and values are (Hofstede, 2016). Simultaneously, well renowned research on the matter of deindividuation has emerged since the midst of the last century. Deindivituation is defined as an individual’s usual behaviour being influenced by the general norm and values of the group they are part of. Thus, the individual becomes more prone to indulge in behaviour that they would not otherwise indulge in when not being influenced by a group mentality foreslår for at undgå indulge to gange: Thus the individual becomes prone to change behaviour due to influence by group mentality (Festinger et al., 1952:382) Succinctly, defines deindividuation as the perceived loss of individuality and personal responsibility that can occur when someone participates as part of a group. Ergo, the influence of a group can lead to a decrease in attention to one’s individualistic characteristics, interpersonal differences within the group and a loss of self-awareness that can leads to a rise in anti-normative behaviour. As a tool for future communication adaption, this thesis seeks to investigate if there is a difference in how individuals from an individualistic British society and a collectivistic Chinese society differ in relation to influence brought forth by deindividuation, and who are more innately susceptible, as this has yet to be investigated. It is theorised that collectivistic minded people are more prone to be influenced given their tendencies to strive to maintain the groups’ harmony, ranking the group higher than the individual and conforms easier to the mindset of the group as a unit consciously or subconsciously. Loyalty to a cohesive group is of importance in collectivistic minded people. Thereupon, this thesis will combine the ideas of how collectivistic societies thrives to maintain the status quo and uphold the harmony within the group, juxtaposing this with ideas surrounding individualistic societies, where the mindset is more about one’s own goals, desires and values. Consequently, seek to investigate if there is any significant difference in how each nation is influenced by deindividuation - resulting in the purposed hypothesis: 6 Line Aagaard Nottingham University Ningbo August 23rd Zx22676 MA International Communication 2017 H1: There is a difference between British and Chinese Students in terms of their levels of deindividuation Succinctly, this master dissertation sets out to investigate, through the means of triangulation, i.e., the combined use of surveys, experiments, and interviews, if there is indeed a measurable difference between these societies, its occurrence and explanatory factors that can explain the difference in culture, and perhaps even how and why they are affected differently by deindividuation. It can be argued that understanding deindividuation’s effect on different nationalities can assist in the understanding and modification