Two Explanations of the Behaviour of Crowds

Two explanations for explaining and evaluating the group's behavior When their people are alone, their behavior may be different from the behavior within the group, and sometimes this change in behavior can cause even violence . When thinking that there are people in almost all industries such as work, sports, social life, why is it that this may be a problem, so why do people's behavior change? There are many studies related to the behavior of the crowd and they are usually in the context of consistency.

There are two ways to explain human behavior. One uses nature to explain the behavior and the other uses culture. The question is, which is the best explanation? When human behavior is interpreted as being the same as animal behavior, it means that human behavior behaves in the same way. French cats act like cats in the UK. Do Britons behave like French? British people tend to act as well. They do something similar and wear some sort of clothing. Does anyone in the world act in the same way? Sociologists tend to say "no" and I will use three kinds of evidence to prove this

What is the state of explanation provided when people explain their behavior publicly or when researchers infer the explanation? Among qualitative researchers seeking explanations on general deterministic causes such as this is the aim of analysis induction law, increasingly these qualitative researchers argue that the social world is not affected by law, Some people refuse to identify the possibility of a cause. It is thought that there is a material world. But if human behavior is not like law it will not be confused and it shows regularity that can be determined by careful analysis. How to explain these rules? What kind of causal explanation can be created in qualitative research? What is the meaning of the concept of reason in qualitative context?