A Test of the Emergent Norm Theory of Collective Behavior

Sociological Forum, Vol. 13, No. 2, 1998
A Test of the Emergent Norm Theory of
Collective Behavior
B. E. Aguirre,2,3 Dennis Wenger,4 and Gabriela Vigo5
Objective: The paper uses the timing of evacuation behavior of occupants of
the World Trade Center at the time of the explosion of February 26, 1993, to
ti
test predictions from Emergent Norm Theory.
Method: It uses ordinary least
square multiple regression analysis to examine data from a survey done in the
first week in May 1993 of 415 people who worked at the World Trade Center.
Results: The theory's predictions regarding the additive effects of size of group
and preexisting social relationships on the timing of evacuation are supported.
However, the findings document important and unexpected interaction effects
of these two variables on the effects of perceived threat, resources, and
cooperativeness on the timing of evacuation. Conclusion: The results augment
the theory by showing the continued importance of enduring social relationships
as determinants of collective behavior. Enduring social relationships are not
only useful to differentiate collective behavior from institutionalized behavior
but also specify the dynamics attending the occurrence of collective behavior.
KEY WORDS: disaster; collective behavior; evacuation timing; emergent norm.
INTRODUCTION
Emergent Norm Theory (ENT) posits that nontraditional, collective
behavior emerges from the crucible of a normative crisis (Turner, 1964;
Turner and Killian, 1972/1987). A precipitating event occurs that, depending
upon how the event is collectively interpreted by the participants, creates
a normative crisis. The crisis destroys, neutralizes, or no longer allows the
'The authors would like to acknowledge the helpful comments of Professor Ralph Turner.
Department of Sociology, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843.
3To whom correspondence should be addressed.
4Hazard Reduction and Recovery Center, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843.
'Hazard Reduction and Recovery Center, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843.
301
0884-8971/98/0600-0301$15.00/0 e 1998 Plenum Publishing Corporation
302
Aguirre et al.
traditional normative guidelines to be collectively defined as appropriate
guides for action. The crisis creates a sense of uncertainty and urgency forcing people to act even as they create meaning through symbolic interaction
processes. They interact and create a new, emergent normative structure
that guides their behavior. This new normative structure is explained by
the theory as a product of the milling and keynodng process that the participants undergo as they attempt to define the situation, propose cues for
appropriate action, and try out alternate schemes of social action.
According to ENT, collective behavior occurs as people are forced by
the crisis to abandon their previously established conceptions regarding legitimate ways of acting. In contrast to other theories of collective behavior
such as contagion, ENT assumes the presence of heterogeneous actors with
different backgrounds, perceptual abilities, and motives about what is going
on, what should be done to respond to the crisis, and who should do it.
ENT assumes that collective behavior is not irrational but social, normative
behavior (Tierney, 1980). ENT offers a symbolic interactionist explanation
of collective behavior. It uses concepts such as the "definition of the situation" reminiscent of W. I. Thomas and H. Blumer's earlier contributions
(for a thorough discussion of the symbolic interactionism background of
ENT, see McPhail, 1991:61-102). ENT is often used in the sociology of
disasters. It emphasizes the transformations of the normative structure of
communities impacted by hazards (Gillespie and Perry, 1976).
In the most recent version of ENT (turner and Killian, 1987:9-11; see
also turner, 1996), the emergent norm is defined not as a precise rule guiding collective action but as an emergent revised definition of the situation.
It originates in out-of-the-ordinary "extramundane" social situations in
which people may come to feel their emergent collective behavior is feasible, timely, permissible, necessary, or duty-bound behavior. Their collective action is seen as appropriate.
For this revised version of ENT, the search for a dominant revised
definition of the situation occurs in either of two social contexts, whether
preexisting or emergent social relationships. Thus, social relations are used
in conjunction with norms to identify collective behavior and differentiate
it from conventional behavior. The emergence of social relationships as well
as norms characterizes the "pure" form of collective behavior. There are
"mixed" forms in which one of the two types of emergence take place, and
there is conventional behavior in which neither occur (Weller and Quarantelli, 1973). The present paper tests predictions from this revised version
of the theory. It shows the importance of enduring social relations in instances of collective behavior.
This test focuses on one of the three types of collective behavior identified by ENT, the solidaristic compact acting crowd. It is a collectivity of
Emergent Norm Theory
303
people in close physical proximity and exhibiting a division of labor and a
desire to change its external environment (Turner and Killian,
1972/1987:79-95). We lack information on crowd dynamics that would allow
us to measure the extent to which the mostly work-related groups of persons evacuating as a result of the massive explosion that rocked New York's
World Trade Center on February 26,1973, became solidaristic crowds. Nevertheless, it is plausible to assume that such transformations occurred. The
evacuees were in close physical proximity, were socially bounded and limited by preexisting sociocultural arrangements, experienced the effects of
the explosion and resulting smoke, and had to adjust to it.
The bombing at the World Trade Center (WTC) and the subsequent
evacuation of its buildings created compact crowds that enacted nontraditional and emergent collective behavior and provided us the opportunity
to test predictions derived from ENT These predictions cannot be tested
through the direct observation of norms. Instead, the test depends on the
observation of behavior Tierney, 1980) with known temporal attributes. As
in other instances of social organization, collective behavior in crisis settings
has a normative organization that structures it.
We now turn to the predictions derived from ENT regarding precrisis
and crisis factors that would have influenced the timing of the initiation of
new, nontraditional normative behavior involved in evacuating the WTC
buildings. This is followed by the methods used in this research, the extent
to which the predictions are supported by the findings, and the implications
of the results for the theory.
PREDICTIONS FROM THEORY
The present test's emphasis on ENT does not preclude the possibility
that some of the predictions derived from it can also be derived from other
explanations not included in this test. Rather, our approach to theory testing
is a multiple testing strategy in which a number of complementary hypotheses
are derived from ENT and tested (Brewer and Hunter, 1989:37). The predictions derived from ENT involve both social structure and social interaction.
Social Structure
Size of Group and Social Relationships
The size of collectivities has long being used to differentiate the collective behavior of large collectivities from the dynamics of small group
Aguirrc et al.
304
interaction. Given the nature of the milling process assumed by ENT, people in large groups should take longer to organize and mobilize on the basis
of their emergent social organization than people in smaller groups.
Weller and Quarantelli (1973), while theorizing about the collective
behavior of large collectivities, do not specify the direction of the effects
of social relationships, whether enduring or emergent, on the timing of collective behavior. It is unclear whether enduring preestablished social relations would delay it. Two opposite effects can be anticipated. It is plausible
to argue that people who are detached from others in their groups will
join the collective behavior quicker than those who have preestablished social relationships with others in their group. No social tie holds them to
their groups, and they can act as free agents. It is also plausible to claim
that prior social relationships among participants facilitate communication
among them during the milling process (as they interact to find a solution
to their collective problem) and may facilitate their early collective behavior. This is the case since according to ENT such communication is essential
to normative emergence as well as to people's ability to act concertedly
during a crisis. Enduring social relationships facilitate the sharing of a repertoire of experiences and a common vocabulary that enable people to communicate easier in problematic situations and to mobilize.
Social Interaction
ENT emphasizes the nature of the communication that is occurring
within the milling process in large collectivities. Milling is the concept used
in ENT to describe the social interaction that takes place among participants in a crisis setting as they attempt to define the situation, propose
and adopt new, appropriate norms for behavior, and seek coordinated, collective action to find a solution to shared a problems (Turner and Killian,
1972/1987). From the perspective of the theory, anything that facilitates
communication among the participants in a crisis setting can and often does
facilitate the emergence of new norms structuring collective behavior. However, the theory is unclear about how emergent or enduring social relationships impact the symbolic interaction processes that are hypothesized to
produce the emergent norm. Keeping in mind this absence in ENT, it is
still possible to identify four testable propositions:
1. The greater the search for meaning in the milling process focuses
upon defining the situation as serious, the quicker should be the mobilization of people and the initiation of collective behavior. Similarly, the greater
Emergent Norm Theory
305
the degree of perceived danger, the quicker should be the emergence of
norms and the mobilization of the participants.
2. While not explicitly or systematically addressed by ENT, it is plausible to derive from its treatment of the milling process the prediction
that resources available to groups responding to crises make for more efficient and effective collective response. However, they also have the effect of increasing the complexity of the collective deliberation of the
groups, thus delaying the emergence of crisis norms. The prediction is of
a positive association between the extent of resources available to groups
and the amount of time it takes people in them to begin acting collectively.
3. The greater the extent to which the search for meaning inherent in
the milling process focuses upon proposed cues for emergent action, such
as discussions among people as to what to do, the longer it should take
them to agree on a course of action such as joining the evacuation.
ENT argues that the appearance of unanimity among the participants
in incidents of collective behavior accompanies the emergence of dominant
norms. According to this theory, once a dominant norm emerges group members disagreeing with it keep quiet out of fear of group censure. Their acquiescence with the dominant norm masks disagreements among them
about how to proceed and produce the perception of unanimity typical of
crowds. The prediction is that the presence of opinions among group members about social practices reflecting agreement among them—such as discussions as to what needs to be done and helpful behavior among group
members—typifies social groups in which a dominant definition as to how
to behave has emerged. It should be associated with delayed participation
of the members of these groups in collective behavior.
4. ENT does not consider in any systematic way the impact, on the
emergent norm, of intergroup interaction in instances of collective behavior. Brown and Goldin (1973:150-163) used E. Goffman's dramatist theory
to refer to it as a process of proselitization among groups in a gathering.
Such groups compete in their attempt to impose their collective definition
of the situation on the gathering. Such proselitization is part of the milling
and keynoting that occurs prior to the emergence of the dominant norm.
Thus, the prediction is that people's timing of evacuation behavior is impacted by the presence of other groups nearby that may have alternative
definitions of when to begin to behave collectively. In the present case,
intergroup proselitization takes time and should delay the start of evacuation.
The next section presents the methods used to test these predictions
derived from ENT
306
Aguirre et al.
METHOD
The information comes from a survey done in the first week in May
1993 of people who worked at the World Trade Center (WTC) during the
explosion of February 26, 1993. It is supplemented by field work and a
content analysis of New York Time articles on the incident published during
the first month after the event.
Field Work
In early March 1993, one of the authors went to the WTC and established contact with authorities in it and the City of New York responsible
for disaster response. A subsequent site visit, during the second week in
April and the first week in May, involved six researchers representing the
disciplines of emergency medicine, engineering, and sociology. We interviewed representatives from 43 agencies involved in the incident as well as
23 victims, mostly people who were at or near the garage where the explosion occurred. We used these interviews to prepare some of the questions
used in the survey instrument and to help us interpret the statistical findings.
Survey
The World trade Center is a complex of seven buildings, including six
office structures and the Vista Hotel. The vast majority of the approximately 25,000 tenants reside in one of the two 110 floor towers of the WTC.
The survey focused on the response of those people who were in the towers
at the time of the explosion.
The two towers are large, complex social systems. For purposes of sampling, we thought of them as communities of approximately 13,000 residents. Respondents were selected using a random sample of floors stratified
by height. Initially nine floors were randomly selected in each tower and
690 questionnaires were distributed to management representatives through
the various firms and offices in these floors. These firms representatives
distributed and collected the completed questionnaires.
Three hundred and sixty-three questionnaires (53 percent) were returned. Two hundred and fifty-four questionnaires were from Tower 2 and
109 from lower 1. Subsequently, in an attempt to increase the size of the
sample in Tower 1, additional floors were randomly selected. Eighty-six
questionnaires were distributed; 60.4% were returned. Overall, the total
sample includes 415 respondents. Two hundred and fifty-four respondents
are from Tower 2 and 161 from Tower 1. The response rate in Tower 2 is
307
Emergent Norm Theory
61% and 44% in Tower 1. The overall response rate is 53.4%. Because of
the theoretically derived interest in studying collective behavior processes
specified in ENT, responses from 35 respondents who were alone at the
time of the explosion are dropped from this analysis.
We do not have information on the people who opted not to participate in the study. Our assumption is that an unknown proportion were new
employees who were not present during the explosion and thus could not
answer the questions. Others were on vacation or professional travel and
did not have the time available to answer the questions. Still other nonresponses occurred among employees of companies that, unbeknown to us,
decided to curtail participation in the study. A consequence is that we do
not know the implications, if any, of these nonresponses for the theoretical
conclusions made in this paper.
Variables
The dependent variable, Minutes, (mean = 56, SD = 42) presents the
number of minutes after the explosion (12 PM) that it took the respondents
to join the evacuation (not to exit the buildings). Sixty-eight percent of the
respondents had joined the evacuation during the first hour after the explosion and 91% had done so after two and a half hours. Thirty-three respondents with scores higher than 150 minutes were assigned consecutively
higher scores beginning with 151. In this way we preserved their relative
rankings while leaving most of the distribution of scores undisturbed. This
was done to normalize the distribution of scores in this variable and to
solve the presence of six outliers in the ordinary least squares (OLS) multivariate regression analysis with very high untransformed scores in Minutes.
The following concepts were used to generate predictors of the timing
of the initiation of evacuation: size of the evacuating groups, the scope and
extent of the respondents' social relations, perception of the threat, resources, and measures of social interaction during the crisis.
Large Group is a dichotomous variable, scored one for collectivities of
twenty or more people who collectively moved to a stairway to begin existing the building and zero otherwise. Forty-two percent of the respondents
evacuated in large groups. In comparison to smaller groups in which face
to face interaction is possible, large groups necessitate different processes
of communication, different techniques for coordinating the collective behavior of people in them, and different styles of leadership.
Social Relationship (mean = 8, SD = 3) is an ordinal level variable
ranging from 0 if the respondents did not know anyone in the groups in
308
Agulrre et al.
which they found themselves to 11 if they knew everyone in the groups
very well.
In order to simplify the presentation of the results, both size of evacuating groups and extent of social relations are combined in one multiplicative
term (BIGSOC, mean = 3.3, SD = 4.4, range 0-11). It measures the extent
to which respondents were in large groups and knew everyone in those
groups very well. The OLS regression analysis includes the multiplicative
terms of each of the other predictors (see below) with Bigsoc. This was done
to determine how social relationships and size of evacuating groups will affect the patterns of social interaction involved in the emergence of dominant
norms, in the present case joining the evacuation of the WTC.
This test of ENT uses four measures of the threat as experienced by
the respondents. These include whether they reported that they were in
danger immediately after the explosion (Danger, 1 = no danger whatsoever,
through 11 = life threatening danger, mean = 5.3, SD = 3.2) nothing serious had happened (Serious, 0 = no, 1 = yes, 22%), presence of smoke
in their rooms (Smoke, 1 = no smoke, 4 = thick, dense smoke, mean =
2.17, SD = .92), and injuries (Injured, 0 = no, 1 = yes, 15%).
Measures of resources used in this test are respondents' contact with
formal Rescuers (0 = no, 1 = yes, 65%); knowledge of others on their
floors with emergency medical training (EMT, 0 = no, 1 = yes, 22%); and
respondents' Familiarity with WTC, measuring whether or not they had previous evacuation experience at the WTC and had worked for more than
two years at the WTC. It ranges from one for respondents with no previous
evacuation experience and less than three years of employment, to three
for respondents with evacuation experience and more than two years of
work at the WTC (mean = 2.3, SD = .8).
The test of ENT also includes two indicators of social interaction of
the respondents during the crisis. The first is Cooperativeness. It measures
the extent to which respondents were in groups in which people discussed
what needed to be done and were helpful to others as opposed to self
centered. It ranges from 0 (no one discussed and all were self-centered) to
5 (everybody discussed and were helpful) (mean 3.2, SD = 1.5). The second
taps whether or not respondents received Information and Guidance from
friends, office personnel, and others near them in the aftermath of the explosion. It ranges from 0 to 3 for respondents contacted by people in the
three categories (mean = 1.4, SD = .98).
The number of firms in the floors in which the respondents worked
(Firms, 0 = one, 1 = two or more, 43%) is included in the OLS regression
models as a proxy of the presence of multiple work groups. It is used to
test intergroup proselitizing's hypothesized effect of delaying the initiation
of evacuation.
309
Emergent Norm Theory
Other predictors are included in this test as statistical controls. They
may be associated with the probability of initiating evacuation and the social
relationships and patterns of social interaction of the respondents: the
population of employees of the floors where respondents worked (Size,
mean = 114, SD = 49); the floor number, indicating its location in the
buildings (Floor, mean = 51, SD = 26); and respondents' Age in years
(mean = 37, SD = 9) and gender (Female, 0 = male, 1 = female (56%).
Information available in the survey and not otherwise used in the statistical analysis allowed the imputation of missing values (Anderson et al,
1983) in six variables: Social Relationships = 11 scores assigned; Large
group = 6; Helpful = 16; Previous = 8; Look for Others = 6; Serious =
17. We also used pairwise deletion of cases in order to preserve sample
size. Results are mostly invariant when listwise deletion of cases is used.
Statistics
OLS multiple regression is used to model the timing of the initiation
of the evacuation (the results are replicated when logistic regression is used;
not shown, available upon request). The assumptions of OLS regression
are met. Showing the absence of significant multicollinearity, all tolerance
values of the predictors are above .77, except Floor (.66). Plots of standardized residuals do not show marked deviations from normality. There
are no multivariate outliers in the OLS analyses. Moreover, its DurbinWatson statistic (1.51), a test for sequential correlation of adjacent error
terms, is statistically insignificant.
We do not attempt to exclude variables from the models on the basis
of their degree of statistical significance. Our intent is to use them to test
theoretically derived predictions. Thus, we do not report standardized regression coefficients. The effort is not to show the relative importance of
the predictors. Instead, we report unstandardized partial regression coefficients. The unstandardized regression coefficients have the advantages of
allowing ease of comparison of the same predictors between the two OLS
models we present, a particularly important task since we wish to stress
the impact of interaction terms (with Bigsoc) on the effects of each of the
predictors. They also show the number of minutes before initiation of
evacuation (Minutes) per change in original units of each of the predictors
after controlling for the other predictors in the equations. Finally, by preserving the original scales of the predictors, we allow the calculation of the
impact on the dependent variable of combinations of values in the predictors which we do not perceive as relevant at present.
310
Aguirre et al.
The following pages present a description of the terrorist event that
precipitated the unscheduled and unplanned evacuation of the WTC and
the results of the tests of the predictions.
RESULTS
Description of Event
Evacuation from the WTC buildings, including the two 110 story towers,
began immediately after a van packed with high explosives exploded on the
B-2 level of the underground parking garage at approximately noon time.
The blast created a crater that was approximately 170 feet wide, 180 feet
long, and seven stories deep. The explosion killed six people and injured an
unknown number of others. It ignited fires that produced massive amounts
of thick, black smoke. The smoke entered the ventilation system, stairways,
and elevator shaft of the building, and within 5 minutes, people who were over
40 stories above the garage began experiencing smoke in their work areas.
The explosion destroyed both the primary and backup electrical systems
for the building. As a result, the public address system did not function, there
were no official evacuation orders issued by recognized emergency and building officials, and tenants could not ascertain with ease what had occurred.
Because of the lack of electricity, all 250 elevators in the complex
stalled. More than 25,000 people in the buildings were forced into only
three stairwells and us.ed them as escape routes. These stairways are very
narrow and people had to virtually stand toe-to-toe during evacuation.
Although successful, the evacuation was hindered by the lack of lighting,
very limited means of communication among authorities and among authorities and tenants, thick smoke, the great height that many respondents had
to traverse, and limited number of exit routes. Despite these difficulties, panic
flight did not take place, and more than half of the evacuees had left the
buildings by 3:00 PM. The majority of the respondents joined the evacuation
during the first hour after the explosion. Nevertheless, a sizable minority chose
to remain in the office for varying lengths of time before they evacuated. Within
our sample of respondents who were in their office at the time of the explosion, 30% reported that they initially decided to remain in their offices.
More than half of the respondents were female. The majority were contacted by official rescuers. Their average age was 37. The average respondent
had worked in the Word Trade Center for five and a half year, worked in
one-firm floors with average populations of 114 workers, and in floors high
above the ground (Floor, mean = 52). Thirty-six percent had experienced
Emergent Norm Theory
311
previously an emergency evacuation at the World Trade Center. A minority
of the respondents (15% sustained injuries sometime during the incident.
The 380 respondents were in the presence of others at the time. Many
were in sizable groups of people. Indeed, almost half of the respondents
evacuated in Large Groups of 20 people or more, with whom they interacted as they moved together to the exits. The majority knew the people
around them rather well (Social Relationship, median = 9).
The majority of people near the respondents discussed what needed
to be done (Discuss, median = 4). A great deal of milling occurred. Twentysix percent of the respondents sought information and advice from other
people in the area, 25.5% tried to phone for help and/or information, and
11.3% turned to the media for information. Only 8.7% stated that they
immediately left the building without engaging in any confirmation behavior.
Most respondents (89%) perceived people near them as helpful rather
than self-centered. Respondents described the behavior of others near them
as rational as opposed to irrational (96%), calm as opposed to excited
(60%), cooperative as opposed to competitive (98%), and orderly as opposed to panicked (86%).
A small percentage (12) of the respondents received instructions from
friends (Friend). Fifty-six percent did so from office personnel. Most respondents (73%) Looked for Others, although unfortunately we do not
have information on the identity of those they searched for. The majority
(76%) thought that something serious had occurred (Serious). Indeed, respondents report that very few people continued working as if nothing had
happened (mean of 1.6 in a scale of 1-5).
The explosion created a rather anomic condition for the tenants. Most
respondents knew that something unusual had happened. They felt the explosion or were alerted by a loss of power and loss of their computers and
phone services. However, it simply was not clearly evident to them what
had occurred. As a result, different definitions of the situation were discussed. For example, while 33.7% claimed that they immediately knew that
there had been an explosion, a larger number (40.5%) stated that they did
not know what had occurred.
The majority of the respondents perceived moderate levels of Danger
(median = 5). Analyses indicate that the level of perceived danger was
higher for women than men and increased over the course of their presence
in the buildings in the aftermath of the explosion. Respondents in Tower
1 perceived higher levels of danger than did those in Tower 2. This is also
true of respondents in the lower floors, closer to the site of the explosion.
312
Aguirre et al.
Analysis of the Timing of Initiation of Evacuation Behavior
Two models (see Table I) present the results of the OLS multivariate
regression analyses. The first is an additive effects model that includes the
effects of statistical controls and theoretically specified predictors. The second model also includes the interaction terms of all the predictors with
Bigsoc. It tests the theoretically specified interaction effect of the size of
evacuating group and extent of social relationship on the other predictors
of the timing of evacuation. Results show that it explains more of the variance of the timing of their evacuation.
As shown in Table I, the overall fits of the additive and interactive
models as measured by Rz (the percent of the variance in Minutes explained
by the predictors in the models) are .19 and .30 (p < .000), respectively.
On the average, as shown by the standard error of estimate in the additive
model, predicted Minutes scores will deviate from the actual scores by 38.8
minutes.
A. The result of this test supports the predicted effect of the size of
evacuating groups on lengthening the time of the initiation of evacuation
behavior. Respondents in large groups took 6.7 minutes longer (P = .12)
to initiate their evacuation.
The results also support and clarify the prediction regarding the effects
of Social Relationship. As shown in Table I, the more people respondents
knew in their evacuating groups and the better they knew them the longer
it took them to initiate their evacuation (b = 1.24 minutes, p < .10). The
results of this test support Weller and Quarantelli's (1973) claim regarding
the importance of the effect of preexisting social relationships on collective
behavior. In the present case, such enduring social relationships delayed
the start of evacuation behavior.
The web of social relationships of respondents and members of their
groups worked against the espousal and adoption of norms supporting individual, competitive flight behavior, and for the adoption of cooperative
behavior that delayed their exiting the buildings. People who know others
well tend to concern themselves with their fates. Crowds of known people
inhibit individualistic solutions in favor of a shared norm. These results
support Mawson's (1980) affiliative model of escape behavior rather than
competitive panic models of escape (see Sime, 1983, for an empirical comparison of these two models; contrast it to ENT's claim that emergent
norms occur in solidaristic as well as individualistic crowds in which people
do not help each other).
Bigsoc represents the effect of these two variables on the timing of
evacuation. This multiplicative interaction term is not statistically significant
when included in the additive model (not shown). However, it is highly
313
Emergent Norm Theory
Table I. Timing of the Initiation of Evacuation: Additive
and Interactive Modelsa
Predictors
Large Group
Social Relationship
Additive
6.T
(4.4)C
1.24
(.71)
Bigsoc
Danger
-.99
(.75)
-.76
(5.46)
I
Smoke
I
Injured
-3.87d
(2-4)
10.0*
(5.0)
11.6fc
16.2*
(5.4)
I
Familiarity
(5.4)
-2.6*
(.89)
.63*
(.18)
-8.0
(6.8)
3.1*
(1.2)C
-4.8
(2.8)
.88
(.60)
-18.3*
I
BMT
1.03
(.88)
-13.96*
(5.75)
I
Rescuers
14.5
(11.5)
-17.2*
1'
Serious
Interactive
(6.8)
.58
(1.4)
(6.1)
.60
(1-17)
27.8*
(6.9)
-3.52*
(1.26)
.20
(2.78)
I
3.76
(3.4)C
-1.14
(.69)
Cooperativeness
I
Information and Guidance
1.35
(1.4)
.65
(2.2)
I
Firms
12.4*
(4.6)
I
Population
I
-.12*
(.04)
3.95*
(1/7)
*
-.96*
(.32)
-.70
(2.6)
.49
(.52)
1.33
(5.8)
3.17*
(1.2)
-.18
(.05)
.02*
(.01)
Aguirre et al.
314
Table I. Continued
Predictors
Floor Number
Additive
.32
(.10)
.10
(.13)
.05C
-(.06)
.24
-.86*
(.37)
.18*
(.07)
-18.4*
(5.5)
4.06
(1.06)
I
Age
(.03)
I
Female
-5.74
(4.48)
I
Constant
R2
Standard error
F
P
Interactive
6
39&
.19
38.6
4.75
< .0000
97.4fc
.30
36.8
4.25
< .0000
"Unstandardized regression coefficients rounded to the nearest
hundreth. Standard errors of the is in parentheses.
b
p < .05.
c
p < .10.
*p < .12
"I: interaction with Bigsoc.
statistically and substantively significant in the interactive model (b = -17.2
minutes, p < .05). We now discuss how it affects the effects of the other
predictors of the timing of evacuation.
1. According to ENT, the transformation of people's interpretation of
the meaning of their environment brought about by the crisis is an important determinant of their subsequent behavior. As predicted, if the respondents perceived the situation as serious, they began evacuating somewhat
sooner than if they did not (b = -8 minutes, not significant). The opposite
is true, however, if they were in large groups and if they knew more people
more intimately in these groups (b = 3.1 minutes, p < .05). For them, the
greater the extent to which the search for meaning inherent in the milling
process focused upon defining the situation as a serious crisis demanding
an out-of-the-ordinary response, the longer it took them to mobilize and
initiate their evacuation.
Three other predictors tap elements of the threat experienced by the
respondents and help us elaborate this finding. As shown in Table I, the
greater is the degree of perceived danger generated by the crisis, the quicker
Emergent Norm Theory
315
is the mobilization of respondents. However, this is the case only in the
interactive model (b = -2.6 minutes, p < .05). In it, people who perceived
more danger tended to initiate evacuation earlier. However, the reverse is
true if they were in large evacuating groups and as they knew more people
more thoroughly in these groups (b = .63 minutes, p = .05).
A similar pattern is found when a measure of the smoke entering their
room is used. As predicted, the greater the smoke was the quicker they
began evacuating (b = -4.8 minutes, p < .10). Somewhat the opposite is
true for those in large evacuating groups who knew more people intimately
(b = .88 minutes, but not statistically significant).
Finally, respondents who were injured as a result of the explosion
tended to initiate their evacuation quicker than those who were uninjured
(b = -18.3 minutes, p < .05), and this is true irrespective of the social
context in which they found themselves.
In sum, an enhanced sense of threat as precursor to protective behavior is mediated by the effects of social relationships. These results corroborate N. Johnson and his colleagues' finding about the importance of
pro-social behavior in evacuations. They show that people exposed themselves to great personal risk to try to rescue or otherwise help their friends
and known others.
2. ENT recognizes that the process of symbolic interaction in instances
of collective behavior centers in part on the identification of skills, past
experiences, and other instrumentalities among the participants. These elements of the situation are the resources employed by people to respond
to the challenge they face (McCarthy and Zald, 1997). Their use takes time
and slows down the enactment of collective behavior. We find partial support for this prediction.
The results of this test support the prediction of a positive association
between the extent of resources available to groups in the amount of time
it takes people in them to begin evacuating. Contact with rescuers is characteristically an important source of information, assistance, and other resources for people faced with the need of evacuating. Such contact slowed
down the beginning of evacuation behavior; respondents who came in contact with Rescuers delayed their start of the evacuation (b - 11,6 minutes,
p < .05). This is also the case for respondents who knew others on their
floor with EMT (b = 27.8 minutes, p < .05). However, the opposite is true
(b = -3.52 minutes, p < .05) if they were in large groups and as they knew
more people more thoroughly in these groups. Respondents' Familiarity
with the WTC is not a statistically significant predictor in the additive
model. It facilitates the early start of evacuation of respondents who were
in large groups and knew others well in these evacuating groups (b = 1.14
minutes, p < .10). A possible explanation of these unexpected findings (with
316
Agnirre et al.
EMT and Familiarity) is that large groups of people with enduring social
relationships are able to ascertain and utilize available resources more
quickly and effectively.
3. The results of this test partially support the prediction that the
greater the extent to which the search for meaning inherent in the milling
process focuses upon proposed cues for emergent action (such as discussions among people as to what to do and their helpfulness), the longer it
should take them to agree on a course of action such as joining the evacuation. In support of this prediction, Cooperativeness is positively associated
with the timing of evacuation (b = 3.95 minutes, p < .05). However, it is
negatively associated with it (b = -.96 minutes, p < .05) for respondents
who were in large groups and to the extent that they knew everyone well
in those groups; they tended to join the evacuation earlier than their counterparts. Enduring social relationships and people who are perceived by
the respondents as helpful and engaged in deciding what to do facilitate
early collective behavior such as joining the evacuation.
Contrary to the prediction, whether respondents received Information
and Guidance from friends, office personnel, and others near them in the
aftermath of the explosion is not statistically significantly positively related
to the initiation of evacuation.
4. Results support the prediction from Brown and Goldin's (1973)
elaboration of dramatist theory. Respondents who worked in floors with
more than one firm started their evacuation later than their counterparts
(b = 12.4 minutes, p < .05) in floors with one firm. This is also true for
respondents in larger evacuating groups in which they knew everyone (b
= 3.17 minutes, p < .05).
Finally, statistical controls are important predictors of the timing of
evacuation and have unexpected relationships with the extent of preexisting
social relationships in the evacuating groups. Both the size of the population of floors (b = .02 minutes, p < .05) and the location of the floors in
the buildings (b = .05 minutes, p < .05) are statistically significantly related
to delaying the timing of the initiation of evacuation only for respondents
who were in large groups and to the extent that they knew others well in
their groups. Indeed, the additive pattern is for people in floors with large
populations to join the evacuation quickly (b = -.12 minutes, p < .05) and
to delay it with higher location in the buildings (b = .32 minutes, p < .05).
Another pattern occurs with the age and gender of the respondents.
While neither is statistically significant in the additive model, in the interactive model older respondents and female respondents tended to initiate
their evacuation more quickly than younger and male respondents, respectively. However, the opposite is true if they were in large evacuating groups
and to the extent that they knew people well in these groups. We can only
317
Emergent Norm Theory
speculate that such social contexts provided these categories of respondents
(also true for respondents in higher floors, b = .05, p < .10) with a greater
sense of safety, so that they would delay joining the evacuation of their
buildings.
CONCLUSION
We are indebted to the authors and critics of ENT for providing us
with sufficiently clear guidance for the conduct of this test. Without their
work, our own work would not have been possible.
Ours is only one partial test based on one incident. The findings we
report are tentative and should be replicated, hopefully with better data
employing random, representative, and larger samples. It would be preferable to have shorter time delays between the occurrences of the collective
behavior event and the data collection. We do not know to what extent
respondents' recollections of the events may have become imprecise due
to the weeks that had passed between their evacuation behavior and the
collection of the information. Moreover, the present test depends on survey
data that does not fully capture the processual, dynamic emergence of tentative definitions of the situation such as when to evacuate. Despite these
problems, our hope is to qualify and augment elements of ENT's explanation of collective behavior and to contribute to the development of theory
in the field of collective behavior.
ENT is very much centered on people's perception and interpretation
of events and on the milling and keynoting process inherent in instances
of collective behavior. In its support, we have shown that the transformation
of people's interpretation of the relative safety of their environment
brought about by the crisis is an important determinant of their collective
behavior. Moreover, engaging in milling, as reflected in helpful behavior
and discussions about what needed to be done, has the predicted effect of
delaying evacuation behavior. This is also true of the impact on the timing
of evacuation of proselitization between work groups.
Our finding regarding the effect of resources in delaying the initiation
of evacuation also supports a prediction derived from ENT It underscores
the value of recent conceptualization of resources in the social movement
literature for understanding mobilization in instances of collective behavior.
Results also document the validity of Weller and Quarantelli's structuralist argument regarding the occurrence of collective behavior. The extent of preexisting social relationships among respondents impacts the
timing of evacuation behavior and the associated processes of social interaction. Symbolic interaction processes involved in the emergence of domi-
318
Aguirre et al.
nant norms are embedded in these structures and must be understood in
their terms.
Social relationships, whether emergent or enduring, are not only helpful to differentiate collective behavior from institutionalized behavior. Enduring social relationships especify the social interactions that are
associated with the emergence of a dominant norm in an instance of collective behavior, be it risk taking, the use of resources, or cooperativeness.
We have shown that a threat as precursor to protective behavior is mediated
by the effects of the social relationships among the people experiencing it.
It bears repeating that these findings replicate N. Johnson and his colleagues' finding about the importance of enduring social relationships in
eliciting pro-social behavior in crisis evacuations. ENT needs to be expanded so as to incorporate these results in a more specified explanation
of the emergence of dominant norms in specific types of collective behavior.
A renewed emphasis on preexisting social organization would make
ENT a more general theory worthy of a prominent place in the sociological
specialty of collective action/behavior. Such needed theoretical elaboration
would recognize that the emergence or creation of norms in instances of
social interaction is a common occurrence. Consequently, normative emergence cannot be used as the sole differentiating criterion for the identification of collective behavior (Wrong, 1994:50; see also Gusfield,
1994:67-69). "(N)orms grow in unplanned fashion out of ongoing interaction" (Wrong, 1994:49; social relationships create habits among participants
that inform social expectations that have the potential to become new, latent norms guiding behavior.
An appreciation of preexisting social organization would facilitate
studying the linkage of the latent norms that may come to guide collective
behavior and the norms that guide the collective action of social movements
As Wrong recognizes (1994:53), echoing R. E. Park, some latent norms are
adopted by new social actors and continue in operation through time, becoming institutionalized.
These relatively well-known albeit unsolved difficulties in ENT would
require for their resolution and the continued value of a symbolic interaction approach to collective behavior greater emphasis on the sociocultural
context in which instances of collective behavior occur. Fortunately, such
contextual specification is offered in Brown and Goldin's (1973) interpretation of E. Goffman's writings. From this perspective, social situations or
culturally meaningful scenes bringing people together are analytically differentiated from encounters, or episodes of face to face interaction. Both
are differentiated from the precipitating event that provides the topic for
the ensuing symbolic interaction and the emergence of a shared definition
of the situation and consensus for collective action.
319
Emergent Norm Theory
We hope to have shown that the often heard argument by the critics
that ENT could not generate testable hypotheses is incorrect. The rebirth
of ENT is needed. Due to a number of reasons often unrelated to its scientific value, the last two decades or so has seen its relative popularity
decline vis a vis the various variants of the resource mobilization approach
to collective action (Aguirre, 1994; Killian, 1994; Aguirre and Quarantelli,
1983). The hoped-for reconsideration of ENT seems timely. New emphases
on culture, collective memory, symbols the mass media, to name a few in
the study of social movements, as well as the dramatic, seemingly unorganized, and unexpected transformations in Eastern European countries beginning in 1989, provide a more propitious intellectual context for it.
REFERENCES
Aguirre, B. E.
1994 "Collective behavior and social movement theory." In R, R. Dynes and K.
J. Tierney (eds.), Disasters, Collective
Behavior, and Social Organization:
257-272. Newark: University of Delaware Press.
Aguirre, B. E. and E. L. Quarantelli
1983 "Methodological, ideological and conceptual theoretical criticisms of the
field of collective behavior: A critical
evaluation and implications for future
studies." Sociological Focus 16:195216.
Anderson, A., A. Basilevsky, and
D. P. J. Hum
1983 "Missing data: A review of the literature." In Handbook of Survey Research: 415-494. New York: Academic
Press.
Brewer, John and A. Hunter
1989 Multimethod Approach. A Synthesis
of Styles. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage,
Brown, Michael and Amy Goldin
1973 Collective Behavior: A Review and
Reinterpretation of the Literature. Pacific Palisades, CA: Goodyear Publishing Company.
Gillespie, David F. and Ronald W. Perry
1976 "An integrated systems and emergent
norm approach to mass emergencies."
Mass Emergencies 1:303-312.
Gusfield, J. R.
1994 "The reflexivity of social movements:
Collective behavior and mass society
theory revisited." In Enrique Larana,
Hank Johnston and J. R. Gusfield
(eds.), New Social Movements. From
Ideology to Identity: 58-79. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
Johnson, Norris
1987 "Panic at 'The Who Concert Stampede': An empirical assessment." Social Problems 34:362-373.
Johnson, Norris and W. E. Feinberg
1994 "The emergence of competitive flight
from the Beverly Hills Super Club
fire." Unpublished manuscript presented at the ASA Annual Meetings,
Los Angeles, CA.
Johnston, D. M. and N. R. Johnson
1988 "Role extension in disaster: Employee
behavior at the Beverly Hills Club
fire." Sociological Focus 22:39-51.
Killian, Lewis M.
1994 "Are social movements irrational or
are they collective behavior?" In R. R.
Dynes and K. J. Tierney (eds.), Disasters, Collective Behavior, and Social
Organization: 273-280. Newark: University of Delaware Press.
Kreps, Gary
1983 "The organization of disaster response: Core concepts and processes."
International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters 1:439-464.
1985 "Disaster and the social order." Sociological Theory 3:49-65.
McCarthy John and Mayer Zald
1997 "Resource mobilization and social
movements: A partial theory."In S. M.
Buechler and F. K. Cylke, Jr. (eds.),
320
Social Movements: Perspectives and
Issues: 149-171. California: Mayfield
Publishing Company.
McPhail, Clark
1991 The Myth of the Madding Crowd.
New York: Aldine.
Mintz, Alexander
1951 "Nonadaptive group behavior." The
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 46:150-159.
Mawson, Anthony R.
1980 "Is the concept of panic useful for scientific purposes?" In Second International Seminar on Human Behaviour
in Fire Emergencies 208-211. Washington DC: National Bureau of Standards.
Moscovici, Serge
1994 "Three concepts: Minority, conflict,
and behavioral style." In S. Moscovici,
A. Mucchi-Faina, and A. Maass (eds.),
Minority Influence: 233-251. Chicago,
IL: Nelson-Hall Publishers.
Norusis, Marjja
1994 SPSS. SPSS Advanced Statistics, 6.1.
Chicago, IL: SPSS, Inc.
Sime, Jonathan D.
1980 "The concept of panic." In D. Canter
(eds.), Fires and Human Behavior: 6381. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
1983 "Affiliative behaviour during escape to
building exists." Journal of Environmental Psychology 3:21-41.
"Original publication date.
Aguirre et al.
Sorensen, John H.
1991 "When shall we leave? Factors affecting the timing of evacuation departures." International Journal of Mass
Emergencies and Disasters 9:153-166.
Tierney, K.
1980 "Emergent norm theory as theory: An
analysis and critique of Turner's formulation." In M. D. Pugh (ed.), Collective Behavior: A Source Book:
42-53. St. Paul, MN: West Publishing
Company.
Turner, Ralph
1964 "Collective behavior." In R. E. L.
Paris (ed.), Handbook of Modern Sociology: 382-425. Chicago, IL: Rand
McNally.
1996 "Normative emergence in collective
behavior and action." Mobilization
1:1-14.
Turner, Ralph and Lewis Killian
1987 Collective Behavior. (1972*) Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Weller, Jack and E. L. Quarantelli
1973 "Neglected characteristics of collective
behavior." American Journal of Sociology 79:665-685.
Wrong, Dennis
1994 The Problem of Order. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.