Some Myths About Human Behaviour in Emergency Situations

Emergencies are rarely defined by the hazard itself but by how people respond to it. Yet most people and even policymakers operate under false assumptions about human behaviour under stress. These myths distort planning, weaken preparedness, and ultimately cost lives. Understanding what happens when panic meets reality is essential to building effective systems of security and survival.

Myth 1: People Panic Instantly

The most enduring myth is that crowds descend into chaos the moment danger appears. In truth, most people freeze. The normalcy bias delays recognition of threat, causing hesitation at the very moment action is most critical. Panic, when it does occur, often arises later, after delays and confusion have compounded. Effective safety planning must account not for instant hysteria, but for the paralysis of disbelief.

Myth 2: The Crowd Is a Mob

Another misconception is that crowds inevitably behave like mindless mobs. While mob violence can occur, the majority of groups in emergencies display surprising cooperation. People often help strangers, share information, and move in coordinated ways when clear leadership or signals are present. Treating crowds as inherently destructive leads to over-policing and mistrust, when in fact, most emergencies reveal a collective instinct toward order, provided clear guidance exists. Signs, announcements, directions, lighting and uniformed security all speed up emergency evacuations

Myth 3: Training Is Wasted on Ordinary Citizens

Authorities often assume only professionals can handle emergencies. Yet data show that untrained civilians are the first responders in most incidents. Whether pulling survivors from rubble, stopping an active threat, or administering basic aid, ordinary people bridge the gap before official responders arrive. In employment scenarios, often people believe that a paramedic or police officer will be the first in attendance, where statistics in capital cities show that security officers are first responders in over 90% of encounters, and the most common first aid attendee. To dismiss the additional value of training citizens in situational awareness, first aid, or evacuation skills is to ignore the decisive role of individual initiative in survival.

Myth 4: Technology Solves the Human Factor

Surveillance systems, alarms, and advanced communication tools are often touted as the backbone of emergency response. But technology cannot replace human judgment under pressure. Cameras do not intervene, alarms are ignored if routine, and communication systems fail if people are unprepared to act on instructions. Overreliance on technology fosters complacency, while neglecting the need for behavioural training undermines resilience.

Myth 5: Risk Is Evenly Distributed

A common but dangerous assumption is that risk affects all people equally. Vulnerability clusters. Some neighbourhoods face far higher exposure to crime or disasters, and certain groups, such as the elderly or disabled, are disproportionately affected in emergencies. Planning based on the myth of equal risk leaves these populations unprotected while wasting resources elsewhere. Statistical evidence consistently shows uneven patterns of victimization and survival, yet public policy often ignores this fact in favour of broad slogans about “shared safety.”

Myth 6: People Learn from Past Disasters

History suggests otherwise. Communities rebuild on flood plains, repeat the same fire code violations, place tables and chairs in front of emergency exits or ignore rising crime until tragedy strikes again. Memory fades, incentives reward complacency, and the cycle continues. Without institutionalised vigilance and personal responsibility, lessons learned are lessons forgotten.

Emergencies strip away illusions. People do not behave as textbooks or political speeches suggest. They behave according to deep-seated psychological patterns and cultural habits. Effective security policy begins with rejecting myths in favour of reality. Hesitation, cooperation, uneven vulnerability, and the decisive role of individual initiative must be acknowledged. By acknowledging these truths, societies replace symbolic gestures with strategies that actually save lives.

From the author.

The opinions and statements are those of Sam Wilks and do not necessarily represent whom Sam Consults or contracts to. Sam Wilks is a skilled and experienced Security and Risk Consultant with 3 decades of expertise in the fields of Real estate, Security, and the hospitality/gaming industry. Sam has trained over 1,000 entry level security personnel, taught defensive tactics, weapons training and handcuffs to policing personnel and the public. His knowledge and practical experience have made him a valuable asset to many organisations looking to enhance their security measures and provide a safe and secure environment for their clients and staff.