aggression 1.3

Question 1

how is behaviour learnt according to SLT of aggression?

Answer 1

through observation

watching behaviour of a model

imitating behaviour of a model

Question 2

who does the mode have to be?

Answer 2

can be anyone

doesn’t need to be a parent

Question 3

influencing factors of aggression according to SLT

Answer 3

identification

vicarious reinforcement

Question 4

how is identification an influencing factor?

Answer 4

if they observer identifies with the model they are more likely to imitate

Question 5

how is vicarious reinforcement an influencing factor?

Answer 5

if observed model is rewarded for their behaviour this leads to vicarious reinforcement which means they’re more likely to imitate

Question 6

4 mediational processes

Answer 6

attention

retention/memory

reproduction

motivation

Question 7

attention

Answer 7

more likely to imitate if paying attention

Question 8

memory/retention

Answer 8

more likely to imitate if they have better memory of the event

Question 9

reproduction

Answer 9

need to be able to physically reproduce behaviour

Question 10

motivation

Answer 10

less likely to imitate if lacks motivation

Question 11

how does bandura’s bobo doll study support the social explanation of aggression?

Answer 11

bobo doll studies show that children are more likely to imitate the aggressive behaviour of a model if the model is rewarded

Question 12

how does bandura’s 1977 quasi experiment support the social explanation of aggression?

Answer 12

showed that people living in high crime rate areas display more aggression than those in high crime rate areas

however couldn’t randomly allocate particiants into groups or directly manipulate IV

can’t establish cause and effect - correlational

may have been confounding variables such as stress causing higher aggression

Question 13

how can social explanation of aggression explain cultural differences?

Answer 13

!Kung Society

little opportunity for children to observe aggression, not vicariously reinforced

less aggressive

can’t be explained by explanations that say aggression is genetic

Question 14

how does the social explanation of aggression ignore genetic factors?

Answer 14

christiansen did a twin study on criminal activity

55% concordance rate for MZ twins

22% concordance rate for DZ twins

reductionist

ignores known genetic factors

aggression is potentially more interactionist

Question 15

de-individuation theory

Answer 15

when someone loses awareness of individual identity and responsibility when in a large group

more likely to behave aggressively if in a large group

causes individual to feel less inhibited and behave aggressively

Question 16

what do social norms inhibit?

Answer 16

the desire to be aggressive

Question 17

2 factors affecting de-individuation

Answer 17

size of group

anonymous clothing

Question 18

how the size of the group affects de-individuation

Answer 18

more likely to feel less anonymous in a smaller group

will behave more aggressively in larger group as there is shared responsiblity

Question 19

how anonymous clothing affects de-individuation

Answer 19

anonymous clothing increases likelihood of de-individuation as they are more anonymous

e.g. hoodies

Question 20

how zimbardo’s 1969 study supports de-individuation theory

Answer 20

control group:
name tags
no hoodie
identifiable

experimental group:
hoods covered faces
no name tags

were told they were administering shocks to a participant after pressing a button

those in experimental group gave higher shocks, more aggression

Question 21

how mullen’s study supports de-individuation theory

Answer 21

lynching - when members of a large social group target and kill members of a small social group

found that larger lynchings were more aggressive

analysed newspaper reports of lynchings in US

Question 22

explain how evidence supporting de-individuation theory is inconclusive

Answer 22

prosocial behaviour - when people behave in a helpful way

meta analysis showed that sometimes being in a larger group meant more people were kind

found that de-individuation had only a weak effect on aggression

people in larger groups sometimes acted more aggressively as long as the aggression was justified

Question 23

prosocial behaviour

Answer 23

when people behave in a helpful way

Question 24

explain how there are gender differences in de-individuation theory

Answer 24

one researcher found that groups of male participants there was more de-individuation

can’t account for gender differences

group setting had no effect on female participants

de-individuation can’t explain why women don’t become aggressive

Question 25

frustration

Answer 25

when a person gets upset because they have been prevented from achieving a goal

Question 26

frustration-aggression hypothesis

Answer 26

states that people behave aggressively because they have been blocked from achieving their goals

states all aggression is caused by frustration

Question 27

catharsis

Answer 27

when a person is released from feelings or frustration

Question 28

stages of frustration-aggression hypothesis

Answer 28

frustration

aggression

catharsis

Question 29

displacement

Answer 29

if we feel like we can’t direct our aggression at the person or thing that caused us to feel frustrated, we redirect our aggressive impulse towards someone or something else

Question 30

3 factors that increase aggression according to frustration-aggression hypothesis

Answer 30

proximity to the goal

effectiveness of aggression

justifiability

Question 31

how does ‘proximity to the goal’ increase aggression?

Answer 31

closer we are to the goal, more likely we are to behave aggressively if the goal is blocked

Question 32

how does ‘effectiveness of aggression’ increase aggression?

Answer 32

more effective aggression is for helping us reach a goal, more likely we are to behave aggressively

Question 33

how does ‘justifiability’ increase aggression?

Answer 33

more likely to be aggressive if the frustrating situation blocking their goal isn’t justified

Question 34

how doob and sears’ study supports the frustration-aggression hypothesis

Answer 34

gave participants a frustrating and non-frustrating scenario

asked participants written questions regarding how they would behave in each scenario

self-report questionnaire

angrier in frustrating scenario

Question 35

how pastore’s study supports the frustration-aggression hypothesis

Answer 35

manipulated the scenarios

sometimes they were justified and unjustified

more aggressive when situation was unjustified

e.g. bus drove past them when it was full or bus drove past when it was empty

tested justifiability

Question 36

how the frustration-aggression hypothesis can be applied to real-world scenarios

Answer 36

Prik’s found that Swedish football fans display more aggression when their team is performing worse than expected

goal of team winning was blocked

made them feel aggressive

catharsis

Question 37

how there may be a lack of research support for the frustration-aggression hypothesis

Answer 37

according to FAH, expressing aggression should make a person feel better

bushman (2002)

made all participants angry by getting confederate to criticise an essay they had written

group 1 - hit punching bag while thinking of confederate

group 2 - hit punching bag while thinking about keeping fit

group 3 - no punching bag

questionnaire about how angry they felt

group 1 - should’ve felt least angry

group 3 should’ve felt most angry

bushman found that aggression didn’t lead to catharsis

Question 38

explain how the frustration-aggression hypothesis doesn’t account for gender differences

Answer 38

frustration-aggression hypothesis doesn’t predict that gender will have an effect on aggression

men are more likely to be aggressive than women

frustration-aggression hypothesis suffers from gender bias/beta bias

e.g. biological explanation states men are more aggressive because they have more testosterone