The social-psychological study, carried out by psychologist Dr John Drury is said to be the first to look at the behaviours of survivors and witnesses during the explosions and immediate aftermath of the 2005 attacks.
Previous studies have concentrated on Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and security preparedness among Londoners.
Sussex University’s Dr Drury and co-authors, Dr Chris Cocking (now at London Metropolitan) and Professor Steve Reicher, gathered accounts from over 90 survivors of the attacks which killed 52 people and injured 700.
Survivors were asked if people panicked. One witness said: “In our carriage, no – or if they did, they panicked inwardly, they didn’t express their panic. I mean there was no screaming in our carriage, I mean people were trying to get out the door but they weren’t trying to get out of the door stupidly.”
The researcher’s key findings were:
– There was no ‘mass panic’ and little selfishness, despite the fact that people felt in danger of death, saw little hope of escape and were mostly among strangers.
– Instead, there was widespread mutual concern, co-operation and helping in the crowd.
– Given the time taken for the emergency services to arrive on the scene, it was the survivors themselves who were the ‘first responders’. They tied tourniquets, constructed makeshift bandages for each other, tried to save each others’ lives and gave emotional support.
– The people interviewed made clear that they felt a strong sense of camaraderie, unity, and togetherness with the rest of the crowd. Their common fate had brought them together and motivated mutual aid.
Another respondent explained their feelings towards a fellow survivor: “I felt a lot of concern really, I felt really sorry for this poor guy that I saw sitting on the seats, this guy that had just lost his leg, I don’t know it’s hard to put it on a scale, I guess probably ten because that’s the worst. You know, that’s the most sorry I have ever felt for anyone.”
Based on this study and on other studies of emergencies like the Hillsborough disaster, Dr Drury and the team said the “collective resilience” that can arise in crowds in emergencies can enhance the chances of survival.
The emergency services also needed to harness this phenomenon, rather than inhibiting it by excluding the crowd from its own self-protection and safety.
Crowds in emergencies should be seen as a “social psychological resource” rather than a problem.
The report’s findings and implications have already been included in recent NATO guidelines on psychosocial care for people affected by disasters and major incidents.
