How to enable behaviour modification and understand group dynamics has been a vexing challenge for many students of social science. Several theories have been propounded over the years on how and why there is resistance to change and more critically what are the dynamics of individual behaviour in the group or in a mob. A cursory look at the group dynamics reveals that the behaviour of an individual when alone is quite different than when he becomes a member of a group of mobs. It is as if there has been a complete metamorphosis in his behavioural pattern. Likewise, we notice a tendency to maintain the status quo and resist any change that can bring about newer ways of behaviour or practice. Therefore, the challenge before us is to correctly understand the individual and group dynamics so that we can influence/manipulate and calibrate them to the desired goals. In order to achieve this, I will examine several astounding parallels from the insect world as well as our body cells as I believe that a closer look at them will provide us clues to understand human interactions.
To start with let me make a controversial statement. Mob behaviour is akin to rogue cancer cells and the study of the cancer biosystem will throw light on the mob behaviour due to the most surprising similarities observed. Malignant tumours are complex, dynamic and self-organising biosystems. The collective cell migration that ultimately results in metastasis resembles adaptive and learned behaviour observed in swarms of bees, ants, and fishes. It is as if the cells individually are clueless but in groups, their personality undergoes rapid changes and a collective intelligence or sensing guides them on their destructive journey. A bee or an ant is equally at a loss as an individual but in a group due to the traces of pheromones or wiggle dances or just following the lead of others a group personality emerges. There are many instances when an individual is asked why he behaved so violently in a mob his response is that he got carried away or he did not know what would be the consequences of his action. Therefore, if we need to study behaviour dynamics then we need to study the group dynamics and not focus on the individual. But I am digressing a bit. Let me go back to the malignant cell’s behaviour. In medical science, there is a term called ‘Tumorigenesis’. This means some rogue cancer cells do not follow the protocol of the normal cell, which once its role is over dies, but goes on multiplying in a very rapid fashion and invades other organs of the body. Thus, the rogue cells join hands with other rogue cells and form a collective pattern or army that is very similar to a swarm of bees or a school of fishes. By now we know that ants follow the trail of pheromones left by another ant and that is how they reach the food source. In the same fashion, the rogue malignant cells leave a trail of autocrine/paracrine which bonds with another rogue cell and gets multiplied. This is very similar to a mob or group of people who use Facebook Messenger or WhatsApp as a means of communication to spread rumours or exaggerated stories often resulting in unprecedented violence. (social malignant explosion). This surprising similarity of collective alignment can be seen in the pictures attached. Picture A shows the alignment of Caterpillars. The behaviour of the caterpillar is very similar to the rogue cancer cell. It starts eating its eggshell then it starts devouring the leaves on which it rests. The picture in Figure B represents tumour cell alignment which is strikingly similar to the alignment of caterpillars. Picture C shows the ant's trail from its nest to the food source on the extreme right. Pictures D, C and E again describe the alignment of malignant cells in attack mode. Pictures F, G and H show the collective alignment of the uncontrolled mob, bees and migration of the wildebeests. The feedback process and following the trail left by the other insect, person, and bee are strikingly similar. In such a group dynamics both the accentuation of the information and the decay of the information trail is seen. For example, when the food source is found the ant leaves a strong trail of Pheromone and where it is not located it does not leave a trail thereby signalling the other ant which trail to follow. It is exactly like how a human trail is formed in a thick forest. The path routinely travelled leaves a stronger footmark than the path that is less followed and which gets disappeared as thick foliage and leaves cover it. And the beauty is initially no individual knows which is the right trail that can take him to the main road. The collective signalling and following the trail ultimately develops a collective personality that has its own destructive/ non-destructive ways of behaviour. This is the positive or negative feedback trail that reinforces or destroys the routing. Another dramatic behaviour observed in the malignant cell is the emergence in the pattern of migration of some dominant or leader cells which guide the other cells to follow its destructive path. These leader cells also motivate other passive cells. One can see the evidence of such behaviour in cape buffalo in Masai Mara. In the ants, there are pieces of evidence of a few pathfinder ants that leave strong pheromones for others to follow. We notice a similar pattern in a mob wherein there are few motivators while the majority are passive observers initially. Enthused by the motivation the passive members develop their own propulsion resulting in uncontrolled violence. Again, in such groups, modern communication devices act as virtual pheromones. This is how a reflex and passive action becomes a guided missile with a collective mind of its own.
How do we then, control group behaviour? Again, we can draw surprising insights from the rogue cancer cells as well as the swarm behaviour. Firstly, there is an irreducible minimum number of rogue cells needed that push and guide other passive cells to follow. These leader cells need to be controlled. That will prohibit the emergence of critical density. But as the exact mapping of such cells is not possible due to limitations of imaging doctors use chemotherapy to destroy the group of rogue cells and it's after effects are very well known. In humans, this would imply catching such rogue elements and finishing them by arresting them or killing them in encounters. But as experience tells us these are not very advisable strategies. But there is another and possibly more effective way of addressing these concerns. We now know that the cells receive and transmit signals. Ants leave pheromones as receptors and signals. What if the communication lines between cells, and between ants are broken? Thus, if we are able to monitor and control the information flow of the swarm, the mob, the ants and the bees we could successfully direct them to the desired goal or objective. It is here that the role of an effective nudge can prove to be useful. A properly conceived nudge and removal or controlling of information-sharing devices coupled with identification of lead players, cells etc would produce the desired result. In fact, the very same information-sharing devices can be used to send positive messages or manipulate (in a positive sense) the desired end result. Thus, the combined approach of a proper mix of nudges with deft use of the right information sharing seems the way forward for behaviour modification. That is the lesson one can draw from the study of rogue cancer cells and swarm behaviour.
