College aantekeningen
Collective Violence Lecture notes + readings
- Instelling
- Universiteit Leiden (UL)
Notes of all the lectures including summaries of the mandatory readings.
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 4 van de 72 pagina's
Voorbeeld 4 van de 72 pagina's
In winkelwagengesponsord bericht van onze partner
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
Collective ViolenceLecture 1: Welcome and Introductions
Definitions:
Collective violence is a violent form of collective behaviour engaged in by large numbers of people
[...]. Collective violence can be placed on a continuum, with one extreme involving the spontaneous
behaviour of people who react to situations they perceive as uncertain or threatening. Riots and
random youth gang fights are examples of spontaneous collective violence. At the other extreme are
the organised forms of collective violence. These include coups, rebellions, revolutions, terrorism, and
war. - Encylopedia Brittanice
Collective violence may be defined as: the instrumental use of violence by people who identify
themselves as members of a group [...] against another group or set of individuals, in order to achieve
political, economic or social objectives. - WHO (2002)
Instrumental vs Symbolic
- Instrumental vs Symbolic/Moral/Performative
- Instrumental violence = goal-oriented
- Symbolic/Performative = violence is a goal in itself, it is meant to make some point
- In reality, distinction often difficult to make
- CV nearly always has at least some symbolic element
Shared elements of definitions
1. Groups & group membership
2. Response to threat/conflict
Questions surrounding definitions
- CV = Violence that a group engages in collectively (e.g. riot)
- AND violence by one or a few people on behalf of a group (e.g. terrorism)
- NOT violence where a victim is targeted based on group membership (e.g. hate crime)
A broad phenomenon
- Where is the cut-off?
- Sliding scale vs discrete ‘types’
- “Full and complete” definitions hard to establish…
- How to resolve?
- Fully explain a specific case
- Identify shared characteristics across types
What this course will (not) focus on
- Phenomenon-level
- Identify shared features
- Individual level & group level processes
- We will not discuss political forms of violence (e.g. wars)
- We will focus on perpetrator groups
1
,For the purposes of this course … Collective Violence is violence engaged in by groups to achieve a
practical; social; political aim. The “group” is broadly defined, and can mean either spontaneous
groups (crowds) or pre-existing groups, or indeed individuals who act on behalf of groups.
“Layers” of collective violence
1. Individual: why an individual joins a violence group
2. Intra-group: processes within the group that contribute to CV
3. Inter-group: dynamics between groups that contribute to CV
Theories of Violence (Zahn et al., 2004):
- Mixed picture!
- Field in development (now, as in 2004)
- Especially in the case of CV
Theories of Collective Violence have lagged far behind psychological, interpersonal and even
structural theories of violence. - Zahn et al. 2004, p. 253
Disciplinary perspectives
- Criminology; Sociology; (Social) Psychology
Main distinction
- What is Violence?
- Criminology: A type of Crime or Transgression
- Sociology: A consequence of (unfair) social organisation
- Social Psych: A type of Social Behaviour
Criminology:
- Violence as type of Crime (Tittle, 2009)
- When discussing CV - focus on the violence element
- The event itself (step- by-step analysis; stages of riots)
- Weapons used?
- Intervention/Prevention
Sociology:
- Focus on structural, societal, ‘macro’ processes
- e.g. which social conditions contribute to collective violence?
- e.g. How should social institutions deal with collective violence?
- When talking about Violence
- as a (problematic) outcome of macro-level social relationships
- When talking about Collective Violence
- focus on the collective element
Social psychology:
- Violence as a type of (extreme) Social Behaviour
- In between Psychology and Sociology
- Focus on interaction between the individual and the social environment
- Focus on collective in the sense of groups, more than institutions
- Focus on violence?
- No - instead conflict, aggression, prejudice, discrimination
- Key topics
- Dynamics within and between groups
2
, - How individuals perceive and act out those dynamics
General overview
- Putting the Collective in Collective Violence
- Sociology (big social structures)
- Social Psychology (groups)
- Putting the Violence into Collective Violence
- Criminology
Studying collective violence
- The scientific method relies on using data to build theory, and then test/validate that theory
- BUT, studying CV in this way is difficult
The Scientific Method
- Real cases of collective violence are often analysed retrospectively/descriptively
- But that is not enough!
- In hindsight, you are always right - you can tailor the theory to fit the observation
- We need (at some point) to work predictively
Quantitative:
- The one with the numbers
- Deductive: start with the theory & hypotheses, then evaluate if the data ‘fits’ (using statistics)
- Experiment, Survey
Qualitative:
- The one without the numbers
- Inductive: start with the data & theory arises from that
- Interview, Narrative
Both:
- Observation, Text
Collective Violence: Good vs Evil
- Is humanity truly good or evil?
- Neither! (or actually: both)
- People are social
Readings:
Belavadi, S., Rinella, M.J., Hogg, M.A. (2020). When social identity-defining groups become
violent (Chapter 2). In Ireland et al (eds). Handbook of collective violence (2020).
In the context of collective violence, the orchestration of acts of violence against an out-group hinges on a series
of psychological and social processes. Leaders play a pivotal role in mobilizing in-group members against an
identified out-group by promoting narratives and ideologies that delegitimize and dehumanize the out-group.
These narratives serve to create specific images of the in-group relative to the out-group, which help to justify
and facilitate violence and extreme behaviors against the perceived enemy.
Dehumanization is a critical element in this process, involving the denial of uniquely human characteristics to
out-group members. It often takes two forms: animalistic dehumanization and mechanistic dehumanization. The
former portrays the out-group as less civilized, lacking secondary human emotions, and being more akin to
animals. This portrayal has historical associations with colonial narratives characterizing natives as savages and
3
, is common in contexts of genocide and ethnic violence. Mechanistic dehumanization, on the other hand, treats
the out-group as lacking in human essence, similar to machines or robots, with high competence but low
warmth. Mechanistic dehumanization is typically observed in competitive intergroup contexts rather than in
contexts of collective violence.
Delegitimization is another facet of this process. By delegitimizing the out-group, in-group members can justify
atrocities against them, effectively placing the out-group outside the bounds of justice, fairness, and the moral
community. This ideology creates a moral imperative for in-group members to rid the world of such violators,
portraying their actions as noble and morally required.
Collective victimhood narratives further contribute to escalating intergroup tensions. These narratives arise
when groups define themselves and shape their identities around victimhood experiences. Such narratives result
in a shared sense of the in-group as the sole sufferer and the target of unjust and immoral harm, while the rival
out-group is portrayed as evil wrongdoers who violate the norms of human society by causing suffering and
harm. This shared sense of victimhood intensifies intergroup divisions and hatred, as in-group members view
the most harmless actions of the out-group as threatening to their group and its members.
Leaders in these groups often assume a totalitarian role and are particularly attractive as guides and torchbearers
when group members experience heightened uncertainty and a profound need for direction. In such
circumstances, leaders can employ strategic rhetoric to provoke self-uncertainty among their followers,
encouraging them to identify more strongly with the group.
Collective violence is further facilitated as groups move higher along a metaphorical "staircase of hate,"
progressing toward the justification of violence and harmful acts against the out-group. At the upper stages of
this hierarchy, violent acts are framed as just, noble, and in-group protective, while the enemy is psychologically
distanced through moral exclusion, dehumanization, or delegitimization. Ridding the world of the evil out-group
and preserving the closely attached in-group becomes a perceived moral and even noble obligation.
In summary, the orchestration of collective violence against an out-group is a complex interplay of
psychological and social factors. Leaders play a crucial role in promoting ideologies that delegitimize and
dehumanize the out-group, making violence seem justifiable and morally obligatory. The process involves a
gradual escalation of intergroup divisions, where collective victimhood narratives intensify hatred and hostility,
creating an environment conducive to acts of violence.
Zahn, H.H., Brownstein, M.A., Jackson, S.L. (2004). Violence: from theory to research. Pages 252
-257
The article explores the five criteria that define a good theory in the context of violence research. These criteria
are:
Parsimony: A good theory should be concise and straightforward, offering clear explanations without
unnecessary complexity. Some theories achieve this by using only a few explanatory variables to clarify a broad
range of information. Others are more intricate, potentially causing confusion. Parsimony is essential in making
a theory effective.
Originality: An effective theory of violence should introduce new ideas that advance the understanding of
violent behavior. Original theories bring novel variables and concepts into the discussion, broadening the scope
of analysis. For instance, feminist theories raise issues like patriarchy and hierarchy, which may not be
considered in earlier theories.
Testability: A good theory must be empirically testable to be useful. Researchers often rely on empirical
support to evaluate the validity of a theory. The article points out that only a few of the theories in the book have
substantial empirical backing, with Akers and Silverman's social learning theory and Bursik's social
4
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper yvankaverberne. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €7,49. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 72042 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen