Aggression - Lecture Notes PDF

Preview

Summary

Lecture Notes...

Description

Aggression Definitions Causes Instinct Theories Frustration-Aggression Theory Revision of Theory Social Exclusion Excitation Transfer Theory Social Learning Theory Gender and Aggression Catharsis Impact of Exposure to Violence in the Media

Aggression -Aggression: Intentional behavior aimed at causing either physical or psychological pain • Harm & Intent critical -Hostile Aggression: an act of aggression stemming from feelings of anger and aimed at inflicting pain or injury -Instrumental Aggression: aggression as a means to some goal other than causing pain -Aggression is defined as intentional behaviour aimed at causing either physical or psychological pain -two key features of this definition are harm and intent - the behaviour has to be intentional, intended to harm the other person -so this definition excludes accidental harm such as slamming a car door on someone's finger without meaning to -and it also doesn't include cases where the ultimate goal is to help the other person (Ex: a dentist might cause an individual pain, but the intent is to help them not to hurt them) -And also included are actions that are aimed at hurting someone that fail, if the intention to harm is there then it still considered to be aggression -A distinction is often made between two different kinds of aggression -Hostile aggression, which is aggression that stems from feelings of anger and it aimed at inflicting pain or injury -And then there's instrumental aggression, which is aggression as a means to some goal other than causing pain

-Ex: Most murders are the result of angry impulsive outbursts that would be considered hostile aggression whereas an example of instrumental aggression might be attacking someone in order to steal their wallet Causes of Aggression Instinct Theories -Instinctive Behavior = Innate, unlearned behaviour pattern exhibited by all members of a species • Psychoanalytic Approach (Freud) • Human Ethology (Lorenz)

-So let's now consider some theories about the causes of aggression where it comes from -and we'll start by considering instinct theories -and when we're talking about instincts, we're referring to innate, unlearned, behaviour patterns that are exhibited by all members of a species -One approach under this heading is the psychoanalytic approach which is largely based on the theorizing of Freud -Freud believed that aggressive energy has to come out somehow and if it's not allowed to drain, then there will eventually be an explosion -He also believed that humans possess an inherent death instinct called thanatos which involves a desire for self-destruction, to return to an inanimate state -and that the reason we don't all destroy ourselves is that there is a counter-force a life instinct called eros -and that because of the life instinct, we repress the death instinct, or if we can’t we redirect the destructive energy outward toward others! -We act in a destructive manner toward others to avoid her own self destruction -A different approach under this instinct heading is that of human ethology -A key figure in this area is Konrad Lorenz -Ethology is the study of animals in their natural habitat and an important premise is that behaviour is pre-programmed into members of a species to serve adaptive purposes -According to this perspective, aggressive energy is constantly being generated within the nervous system of the organism -and it builds up until it's triggered by an appropriate stimulus -and as part of this there's the notion of releaser cues, which trigger the release of this built-up aggressive energy -and if there is no trigger, the idea is that this energy builds up until it's displaced onto an inappropriate substitute -this perspective also maintains that recognition of appropriate releasers is also innate and hardwired into the system -from this perspective the instinct is adaptive rather than self-destructive

-the idea is that the aggressive instinct has developed because it serves useful functions it has survival value -Ex: One of these is to protect the food supply, the idea is that aggression can help ensure optimal spacing of animals within a given amount of territory -Lorenz came to this conclusion after observing what happened to 2 doves when they were confined to a small cage -while Lorenz was away, one bird pecked the other to death -and what he noted was that in natural setting such a killing would never have occurred because the victim can flee its attacker -so he reasoned from this that fighting between members of a species serves to scatter members, that’s allowing them to make better use of food resources -Another argument here is that aggression serves to enhance natural selection processes through mating of the strongest members of the species -so that the stronger males pass on their genes to subsequent generations Causes of Aggression Instinct Theories • Critiques • No evidence of build up of aggressive energy over time -However these theories are vulnerable to a wide number of criticisms -For one there's no evidence of a buildup of aggressive energy over time -unlike other drives like thirst and hunger we don't see stronger aggression if the organism doesn't aggress for a period of time

Causes of Aggression Instinct Theories • Critiques • No evidence of build up of aggressive energy over time • Evidence of learning “innate” behaviors -As well, there's evidence of learning aggressive behaviour -evidence that aggressive behaviour is modified by the environment runs counter to a hardcore instinct perspective that views aggressive behaviour as purely innate

Kuo (1961) Cat Study • Kittens raised in one of three conditions • Killed mice?

With mouse-killing mothers In isolation

85% 23%

Mouse as companion 17%

-Study: There was a study done by Kuo where kittens were raised in 1 of 3 different conditions -In one they were raised with mouse killing mothers, in another they were raised in isolation, and then a third they were raised with a mouse as a companion -The dependant measure was whether they subsequently killed a mouse when they had an opportunity to Kuo (1961) Cat Study • Kittens raised in one of three conditions • Killed mice?

With mouse-killing mothers In isolation

85% 23%

Mouse as companion 17%

Results: The results clearly indicate that their propensity toward killing a mouse was dependent on the conditions under which they had been raised -with those who had been raised with mouse killing mother's being much more likely to kill the mouse than were those who had been raised under either of the other two comparison conditions -so strong evidence of a learning process taking place -There is a counter argument here though that this doesn't show that aggression isn't instinct, it just shows that it can be modified by early experience Causes of Aggression Instinct Theories • Critiques • No evidence of build up of aggressive energy over time • Evidence of learning “innate” behaviors • Diversity in human aggression -Another critique centres on the diversity that we observe in human aggression -if humans are instinctively aggressive, aggression should take similar forms regardless of cultural influence, but this just isn't the case -we observe quite a lot of variability across different cultures Causes of Aggression Instinct Theories • Critiques • No evidence of build up of aggressive energy over time • Evidence of learning “innate” behaviors • Diversity in human aggression • Circularity -In addition, we have to be careful to avoid falling into the trap of explaining by naming -if we develop the idea of an aggression instinct to explain aggressive behaviour that we see, but the only evidence that we have of the aggressive instinct is the behaviour itself than this is circular -we need evidence for the instinct that is separate from or independent of the behaviour itself Causes of Aggression Instinct Theories • Critiques • No evidence of build up of aggressive energy over time

• Evidence of learning “innate” behaviors • Diversity in human aggression • Circularity Bottom Line (see Aronson): That aggression has endured suggests it has evolved because of survival value But inhibitory mechanisms that allow suppression of aggression have also evolved ———> Behaving aggressively is optional and depends on previous and immediate social experiences and context -In terms of the bottom line here, the fact that aggression has endured suggests that it has evolved because it has survival value -but we also have inhibitory mechanisms that allow suppression of aggression that have also evolved -and behaving aggressively is optional and it depends on previous and immediate social experiences and contexts Causes of Aggression Frustration-Aggression Theory: The theory that frustration – the perception of being prevented from obtaining a goal – will increase the probability of an aggressive response Two postulates: 1. Frustration always leads to some form of aggression 2. Aggression is always the result of frustration -So now let's turn to theories that try to provide an answer to the question of what factors external to the individual increase the likelihood of aggressive responses -what are the important social experiences or aspects of the social context that affect aggression? -one of the earliest and most well-known models looking at this issue was frustration-aggression theory -which was originally formulated by Dollard and colleagues at Yale -there’s two key postulates to this theory, one being that frustration always leads to some form of aggression -so whenever a person is frustrated, they will act aggressively -And the second postulate is that aggression is always the result of frustration -if aggression occurs it's because the person was frustrated -These are pretty bold statements, there was some wiggle room in the initial statement of the theory

-for example it allowed that aggression might be displaced onto sources other than the person or the stimulus that caused the frustration -so usually a safer one that was less likely to retaliate or a more socially acceptable target -But pretty bold statement that essentially frustration and aggression go together and one doesn't happen without the other -Problems were identified with this formulation Causes of Aggression Frustration-Aggression Theory Critiques: 1. Frustration leads to responses other than aggression 2. Not all instances of aggression are caused by frustration -For one, frustration leads to a variety of responses other than aggression in some situations -so for example a person who's frustrated might seek social support, they might withdraw, they might become depressed, -and not all instances of aggression are caused by frustration -for example, we know of the influence of social learning theory -But we do have an understanding of different factors that fuel aggressive behaviour that are broader than just frustration per se -However, it is true that frustration is one important cause of aggressive behaviour -And social psychologists have moved toward specifying what the particular circumstances are under which frustration will lead to aggression Causes of Aggression Frustration-Aggression Theory Revision of Theory (Berkowitz; Cognitive neoassociationist view) • Frustration leads to a readiness for aggression; whether the person actually behaves aggressively depends on cognitive factors

-What we have is a revision of the original theory, sometimes referred to as the cognitive neoassociationist view -and the argument here is that frustration leads to a readiness for aggression -but whether the person actually behaves aggressively depends on cognitive factors, so there's a revision of the original model -cognitive factors include how the person has learned to think about such situations in the past and other influences in the moment

Causes of Aggression • Frustration-Aggression Theory • Revision of Theory (Berkowitz; Cognitive neoassociationist view) • Mitigating Information • Kulik & Brown (1979) Reasons Study • Key Idea: Will not aggress if the person who frustrates us did so for good reason; expectations also matter • Participants phoned for donations • Participants had high or low expectations • Confederate declines for good or poor reason (mitigating information)

-One is mitigating information which can be why a person who has frustrated us, what is the reason for their behaviour -and the idea here is that as a role we're not going to aggress against someone who's frustrated us, if they had good valid reasons for frustrating us, if they had an excuse -Study: In this study by Kulik & Brown, they investigated this idea that the link between being frustrated by someone and being aggressive would depend on the reason for that person's behaviour -they also looked at the influence of another cognitive factor that being expectations -so the participants in the study were given an opportunity to earn money by phoning for donations to a charity -so they were calling to obtain pledges and they worked from prepared lists of names of potential donors -on their first call, they were put through to a confederate who always refused to donate -and what they manipulated was the reason that the person gave for not donating -so the legitimate reason was that they were currently unemployed and they couldn't afford it -the illegitimate reason was that they just didn't feel like it (so that’s the mitigating information) -they also manipulated participant’s expectations, where some participants were led to expect a good response rate (that most people would agree) and others were led to expect that few would agree -So that was another factor that they examined in terms of its influence on aggressive responses -For the dependent measure, the experimenter unobtrusively observed the participants as they were making the calls and looked at how they reacted when they were talking to the confederate who declined to donate -so did they slam down the phone, did they behave in a rude manner, etc. -And they combined all of these observations into an index of aggressiveness

Causes of Aggression • Frustration-Aggression Theory • Revision of Theory (Berkowitz; Cognitive neoassociationist view) • Mitigating Information • Kulik & Brown (1979) Reasons Study • Key Idea: Will not aggress if the person who frustrates us did so for good reason; expectations also matter • Participants phoned for donations • Participants had high or low expectations • Confederate declines for good or poor reason • Results: More aggression (slam phone, rude) when poor reason and when high expectations -What they found was that there was more aggressive behaviour when the confederate gave a poor reason for not donating and also when participants had high expectations, when they were expecting a good rate of response to their request for donations -so what we see here then is the link between being frustrated and being aggressive depends on cognitive factors in the moment, such as the reason the other person has for frustrating us and what we were expecting them to do -just a note here on measuring aggressive behaviour in the lab, so you'll know here their outcome measure was speaking rudely, slamming down the phone -it can be difficult to study aggression in the lab -and researchers have to be creative as best they can -sometimes what's used is leading participants to believe that they can deliver mild shocks to someone else, or in more recent times have the other person have to listen to bursts of noise, or they decide how much hot sauce another person's going to have to consume -and it's always good if such lab studies are complemented by data from field research with real-world measures of aggressive behaviour Causes of Aggression • Frustration-Aggression Theory • Revision of Theory (Berkowitz; Cognitive neoassociationist view) • Aggressive Cues: Items that individuals have learned to associate with aggression • Berkowitz & LePage (1967) Weapon Study • Key Idea: Mere sight of weapon increases aggression • Participants angered (received negative evaluation) or not • See weapon or not (gun vs. badminton racket)

• How many shocks delivered? -So aggressive cues are another cognitive factor that have been incorporated into the revision of the theory -when we talk about aggressive cues were talking about items that individuals have learned to associate with aggression -and the idea here is we've got frustration, which is producing only a readiness to aggress -and whether this frustration turns into an act of aggression depends on aspects of the context which include the presence or absence of aggressive cues -and that when aggressive cues are present, feelings of frustration are more likely to result in outwardly aggressive behaviour -And that was the idea proved in this weapon study by Berkowitz & LePage -they were looking at the idea that the sight of a weapon would increase aggression -so in the study, participants were either angered or not -and this was done by having them receive a negative evaluation from another individual in the study -the evaluation was actually communicated by how many shocks they received from their ostensible partner in the study -so they've got a manipulation in here that's going to create an angered state -And then the question was, so when will this anger be most likely to result in aggressive behaviour, which was participants were given the opportunity to deliver shocks to the other individual -And they manipulated whether in the laboratory situation, there was a weapon visible, whether there was a gun -In the control condition it was a badminton racket instead that was visible on a table in the lab

Berkowitz & LePage (1967) Weapon Study

Angered

Not Angered

Gun

High shocks Low shocks

No Gun

Moderate shocks

Low shocks

Results: We have the situation where there's a gun present in the lab versus not -and then we've got the participants having been angered or not -what we see is there are low levels of shocks when the participants hadn't been angered but when they had been angered, the presence of the gun made a difference and it exacerbated aggressive behaviour -so that when they were angered, in the no gun condition we can still see there's an elevation in aggressive behaviour, but that was even more marked, it was more more of an extreme outcome when it was paired with the presence of a weapon in the lab -so we see that the aggressive cue did enhance aggressive behaviour when participants had been angered Causes of Aggression Frustration-Aggression Theory Revision of Theory (Berkowitz; Cognitive neoassociationist view) • Self-Presentation Concerns -And there are a variety of other factors that affect whether frustration will lead to aggressive behaviour -one of these is self-presentation concerns -so for example, depending on whether individuals think that the other people that are present approve of aggressive behaviour or don’t, that can affect whether they act on feelings of frustration by being aggressive -if they think the audience condones aggression they're more likely to behave in an aggressive way as compared to if they think the audience doesn't approve of aggressive behaviour Social Inclusion/Rejection Concerns Twenge et al. (2001) Social Rejection Study -Key Idea: Social exclusion prompts aggressive behavior -4- to 6-person groups interacted for 15 minutes -Made choices re: future partners -Participants told everyone or no one wanted to work with them again -Then had opportunity to deliver bursts of white noise to another person (a new, previously uninvolved, participant) in the context of a computer game -In terms of possible sources of frustration, one that's been the focus of research that connects with what we've been talking about in terms of individual’s need for inclusion and social acceptance is social rejection -and a set of studies was conducted by Twenge and colleagues, looking at the idea that being excluded by others would lead to aggressive behaviour

-and the way that it worked in this research, was that...