Aggression Flashcards
What are the psychological explanations of aggression?
SLT
Deindividuation
Frustration aggression hypothesis
Who was SLT developed by
Bandura
What does vicarious reinforcement mean
Watching others be rewarded or punished
What are the 4 meditational processes of SLT
Attention
Retention
Reproduction
Motivation
What needs to occur for someone to imitate an aggressive behaviour
A mental representation of any rewards/punishments must be made
What is the likelihood of a person being aggressive determined by?
(3 things)
Likelihood of reward/punishment
Environmental factors at the same time
How much the person identifies with the role model
Bandura
66 nursery kids
3 conditions
1) video where adult rewarded for hitting doll
2) Adult punished for hitting doll
3) Nothing happened hitting the doll
1. was most aggressive
2. was least aggressive
When 2. were offered a reward to be aggressive, they quickly were
SLT evaluation
Opposed by biology
Christianson (2006) studied the Kung San people of the Kalahari Desert and found aggressive behaviour was very rare in this society. Kung San parents do not use physical punishment and there is no value placed on aggressive behaviour. So there are no cultural norms for aggression and children do not display aggressive behaviour. This study shows the case for social learning being complex, and questions whether social learning theory in relation to aggression may only be applied to western cultures. This demonstrates that an issue of cultural bias may be present in the explanation of social learning theory
It is hard to explain reactive aggression using SLT. Reactive aggression is not premediated or planned, and occurs instantly in response to a trigger. This suggests some aggressive actions may be instinctual, and so are not learned, as the theory would predict.
Philips found daily homicides in America always increased the day after a big boxing match - behaviour imitated
What is deindividuation?
A psychological state characterised by lower self evaluation and low concerns for others opinions
Upon which theory is deindividuation based
Le Bon’s crowd theory - It suggests in a crowd, a collective mind takes over
What factors may increase deindividuation
Anonymity
Altered conscious (drugs/alcohol)
What 2 behaviours did Zimbardo distinguish between
Individuated behaviour - Rational and conform to social standards
Deindividuated behaviour - Doesn’t conform to society. We become faceless and anonymous
What did Prentice-Dunn and Rogers come up with
Private self-awareness - How we pay attention to our own feelings and behaviour (this is reduced in a crowd)
Public self-awareness - How much we care about what other people think of our behaviour. This is also reduced in crowds
Douglas and McGarty
Looked into aggressive behaviour in online chat rooms
Strong correlation between anonymity and trolling
Most aggressive messages sent from those with a hidden identity
Mann
Deindividuation
21 Cases of suicide in America
10/21 involved crowd baiting
Happened more at night, in a large crowd and when further away
Deindividuation evaluation
Dodd (1985) developed a technique to demonstrate deindividuation. He asked 229 undergraduate psychology students: ‘if you could do anything humanly possible with complete assurance that you would not be detected or held responsible, what would you do?’. Three independent raters rated the students’ responses into those that were antisocial or not. The results found that 36% of the responses were antisocial and 26% were criminal (types of responses referring to acts such as ‘robbing a bank’). This research demonstrates the connection between deindividuation as a result of anonymity, and subsequent aggression.
It is, however, very difficult to separate the effects of deindividuation from other explanations of aggression such as social learning. Some sporting events such as football which attracts huge crowds have had a long history of violence and aggression on the pitch and from the fans. Yet sports such as rugby and cricket also attract huge crowds yet have not experienced the problems with anti-social behaviour that football fans have witnessed. This may suggest that rather than deindividuation being responsible for aggressive crowd behaviour, it may be better explained by cultural factors internalised through the process of social learning.
Doesn’t take all types of aggression into account e.g. serial killers who act alone
Johnson & Downing (1979) conducted a laboratory experiment with three conditions. In the first, female participants were dressed in a Ku Klux Klan-type outfit which masked their faces entirely; in the second condition they were dressed as nurses; and in the third they wore their normal clothes. The participants then had to give (fake) electric shocks to a confederate. KKK more shocks than control and nurses less
Who proposed the frustration-aggression hypothesis
Dollard
What does the frustration-aggression hypothesis (Dollard) say about aggression
It is always the result of frustration
What concept is the frustration-aggression hypothesis built on
The psychodynamic concept of catharsis
What are the stages of the frustration-aggression hypothesis
Goal blocked
This is frustrating
This creates an aggressive drive which leads to a frustration behaviour such as a violent fantasy, a verbal outburst of physical violence
This is cathartic as the aggression is satisfied
We feel better
What does the degree of frustration depend on according to the frustration-aggression hypothesis
How much you want to reach the goal
How close you were to achieving it
How far you were set back by the interference
What are the reasons Dollard suggests that aggression may not be directed at the source
The source of aggression may be abstract
May be too powerful
May be unavailable
Geen
Male uni students to complete jig saw
Condition 1 - impossible puzzle
Condition 2 - impossible time limit to complete the puzzle
Condition 3 - Confederate insults participant as they fail puzzle
Condition 4 - control
In the 2nd part of the study, the participant could give the confederate electric shocks
Cond. 3 gave strongest shock
All gave stronger shocks than control
Berkowitz and LePage
Participants given electric shocks creating anger and frustration
Tables turned so participant can shock confederate
Average number of shocks depended on the presence of a weapon
Cons.1 - No weapon - 4.67
Cons.2 - Weapon - 6.07