Aggression Flashcards
1
Q
Name the two neural mechanisms in aggression
A
- The limbic system
- The orbitofrontal cortex and serotonin
2
Q
What is the limbic system?
A
Subcortical structures in the brain (including the hypothalamus and amygdala) thought to be closely involved in regulating emotional behaviour such as aggression.
2
Q
Who linked the limbic system to aggression?
A
- Papez and Maclean
3
Q
How is the reactivity of the amygdala related to aggressive behaviour?
A
- The reactivity of the amygdala is a predictor of mammalian aggressive behaviour.
- The more responsive the amygdala,. the more aggressive an individual is.
3
Q
What structures are involved in the limbic system?
A
- Amygdala !
- Hypothalamus
- parts of the hippocampus
4
Q
Who conducted a study linking amygdala (limbic system) to aggression
A
- Gospic et al.
5
Q
Outline Gospic’s study linking the amygdala to aggression
A
-
Procedure:
Some participants were subject to mild provocation based on an ‘ultimatum game’ which involved money offers. Aggressive behaviour was decided as when an offer was rejected, losing the money for both. And this was measured with fMRI.
In addition, a benzodiazepine drug was used before the provocation (to reduce the ANS response) -
Findings
When participants were aggressive, fMRI scans showed a fast and heightened amygdala response.
For those who took benzodiazepine, it 1) decreased the activity of the amygdala and 2) halved the number of money rejections (an aggressive behaviour)
6
Q
What is serotonin’s effect on the brain?
A
Has widespread inhibitory effects, slowing down and calming neuronal activity.
7
Q
How is the orbitofrontal cortex and serotonin linked to aggressive behaviour? (hint: pedro’s fav frank ocean song)
A
- Normal serotonin levels in the OFC reduce the firing of neurones - so there is greater behavioural self control.
- So, therefore, serotonin deficiency in the OFC disrupts this, reducing self control which creates an increase in impulsive behaviour - aggression.
8
Q
Who studied serotonin’s link to aggression?
A
- Virkkunen et at.
9
Q
Outline Virkkunen’s procedure in investigating serotonin and aggression
A
- Virkkunen compared levels of a serotonin breakdown metabolite product in the cerebrospinal fluid of violent impulsive and violent non-impulsive offenders.
- The levels of the breakdown product were significantly lower in impulsive offenders.
10
Q
Evaluate the neural mechanisms of aggression
A
- Other brain structures
One limitation of the limbic system is more recent research outlining that non-limbic brain structures are also involved in aggression.
Limbic structures (such as the amygdala) function together WITH the orbitofrontal cortex, which is NOT part of the limbic system.
The OFC is involved in impulse regulation and inhibition of aggressive behaviour. It has been observed that OFC activity is reduced in those with psychiatric disorders that feature aggression. This reduced activity disrupts the OFCs impulse control function, causing aggressive behaviour.
This illustrates that the neural regulation of aggression is more complex than theories focusing on the amygdala suggests. - Role of serotonin
A strength of including serotonin in neural explanations of aggression is research support involving SSRIs.
Drugs, such as paroxetine, that increase serotonin have been found to also reduce levels of aggressive behaviour. This was outlined in a study where participants were either given a dose of paroxetine or a placebo. The participants then took part in a lab-based game that involved giving and receiving electric shocks in response to provocation (insults). The paroxetine group consistently gave fewer and less intense electric shocks in response to provocation compared to the placebo control group.
This study is evidence of a casual link between serotonin function and aggression.
10
Q
What are the 2 main hormones implicated in aggression?
A
- Testosterone
- Progesterone
11
Q
How is testosterone linked to aggression and why?
A
- Testosterone is linked to aggressive behaviour, observed as men are generally more aggressive than females.
- Men become more aggressive to other men at a time in development (after 20 years of age) which is when testosterone is at it’s peak.
11
Q
What is testosterones role in aggression?
A
Testosterones role in aggression is to regulate social behaviour via its influence on certain brain areas implicated in aggression.
12
Q
What two types of study support the role of testosterone in aggression?
A
- Castration studies in animals
- Violent offender studies
13
Q
Who studied the link between testosterone and aggression?
A
- Dolan et al.
14
Q
Outline how castration studies support aggression and testosterones link
A
- Animal castration studies see that, when removing testes (source of testosterone) aggression is reduced in males of many species.
- In addition, giving testosterone injections to the castrated animals restores aggressive behaviour.
15
Q
Outline Dolan et als violent offender study on testosterone and aggression.
A
- Dolan et al found a positive correlation between testosterone levels and violent offences.
- Dolan found a positive correlation between testosterone and aggression in a sample of 60 offenders in UK maximum security hospitals.
- These men mostly had personality disorders (such as psychopathy) and a history of impulsive violent behaviour.
16
Q
In which way are levels of progesterone associated with aggressive behaviour?
A
- Low progesterone levels are linked to an increased aggression in women.
17
Q
Outline studies linking aggression to progesterone
A
- Study finding a negative correlation between progesterone levels and self-reported aggression.
- Biological evidence from the menstrual cycle observes that the largest fall in progesterone (occurring at menstruation) is accompanied by irritability and increased female aggression.
18
Q
Evaluate hormonal mechanisms in aggression.
A
- Dual-hormone hypothesis
One limitation of testosterones link to aggression is mixed evidence to link testosterone exclusively to human aggression.
A dual-hormone hypothesis was formulated to explain this conflicting evidence. The hypothesis claims that high levels of testosterone lead to aggression, BUT only when levels of cortisol are low. When cortisol is high, testosterones influence on aggression is inhibited. The hormone cortisol plays a central role in the body’s response to chronic stress. Therefore, the combined activity of testosterone AND cortisol may be a better predictor of aggression that either hormone alone. - Animal research
One strength of hormonal mechanisms in aggression is support from research involving animals. A review of studies confirms the role of testosterone. For example, male rhesus macaque monkey observations show an increase in testosterone levels and aggressive behaviour during mating season.
Furthermore with rats, castration studies sees that with a reduction of testosterone, mouse killing behaviour is reduced. For female rats, injecting testosterone increases mouse-killing behaviour.
These findings show the role of testosterone in a range of animal species - referencing to testosterones interaction with aggressive behaviour in mammals.
19
Q
What is included under ‘genetic factors in aggression’ ?
A
- Twin studies
- Adoption studies
- MAOA gene
- Gene-environment interaction
20
Q
What researcher conducted twin studies that contributed to genetic factors in aggression,
A
- COCCARO et al.
21
Q
From twin studies on aggression, what is the accepted heritability of aggression?
A
- Genetic factors account for 50% of variance in aggression (heritability)
22
Q
Outline Coccaro’s twin studies into genetic aggression
A
- Coccaro studied adult male monozygotic and dizygotic twins
The aggressive behaviour in this was defined as direct physical assault. - Coccaro found a concordance rate of 50% of monozygotic twins (who share 100% of the DNA, and 50% both committed direct physical assault), compared to only 19% for DZ twins.
- Corresponding figures for verbal aggression was 28% for MZ and 7% for DZ.
23
Q
How do twin studies contribute to genetic factors for aggression?
A
- MZ twins share 100% of their DNA and DZ twins share 50%
- We would expect to find greater similarities for aggressive behaviour between MZ twins (assuming genetic factors is the most significant influence on aggression).
- MZ and DZ twins are raised in the same environment, but MZ twins have a greater degree of genetic similarities than DZ.
24
Q
What researchers were involved in adoption studies into aggression (genetic factors)
A
- Rhee and Waldman
25
Q
How do adoption studies contribute to genetic factors in aggression?
A
- Adoption studies are based in the ‘nature-nurture’ debate.
- Similarities between an adopted child and their biological parents with aggressive behaviour suggests genetic influences are operating.
- Similarities between an adopted child and their adoptive parents suggests environmental influences are operating.
26
Q
Outline Rhee and Waldman’s adoption study into aggression (genetic factors)
A
- Rhee and Waldman conducted a meta-analysis of adoption studies, looking at direct aggression and anti-social behaviour.
- It was found that genetic influences accounted for 41% of the variance in aggression, which was more or less in line with twin studies findings.
27
Q
What researchers looked at the MAOA gene in aggression?
A
- Lea and Chambers
- Brunner
28
Q
What does the MAOA gene do?
A
- The MAOA gene controls the production of the enzyme MAO-A (monoamine oxidase-A)
- The enzyme regulates the neurotransmitter serotonin - which is involved in impulsive aggression.
29
Q
Distinguish between MAOA and MAO-A
A
- MAOA is the gene that controls production of MAO-A
- MAO-A is an enzyme that regulates serotonin
30
Q
What does MAO-A stand for?
A
Monoamine oxidase-A
31
Q
What variant of the MAOA gene is involved in aggressive behaviour?
A
- MAOA-L (low activity variant)
32
Q
How does the MAOA-L variant affect aggression?
A
- MAOA-L results in low activity in the monoamine oxidase-A enzyme (MAO-A) - which results in MAO-A deficiency.
33
Q
Outline Lea and Chambers research into the MAOA-L gene
A
- Lea and Chambers research outlined that 56% of male Maori possessed the MAOA-L gene variant, compared to 34% of Caucasian males.
- Historically, the Maori’s had a reputation for being ferocious warriors, which led to the MAOA gene being nicknamed the ‘warrior gene’.
34
Q
What was Brunner’s research into the MAOA gene?
A
- Brunner cemented the link between the MAOA-L gene variant and aggression.
- 28 male members of a large Dutch family were studied who were repeatedly involved in impulsively aggressive behaviour such as rape, attempted murder and physical assault.
- These men were found to have abnormally low levels of MAO-A enzymes, and possessed the MAOA-L gene variant, which led to this diagnosis being called ‘Brunner’s syndrome’.
35
Q
What researcher was involved in gene-environment (GxE) interactions (genetic factors in aggression)
A
Frazzetto et al.
36
Q
What is gene-environment interactions in aggression about?
A
- The idea that genes are crucial influences on genetic behaviour, but do not work in isolation.
- For example, MAOA-L is linked to aggressive behaviour in adulthood, but only when combined with early traumatic experiences.
37
Q
Outline Frazzetto’s study into gene-environment interactions for the MAOA-L gene.
A
- Frazzetto et al found an association between higher levels of anti-social behaviour and the MAOA-L variant in adult males. HOWEVER, this was only the case in those who had experienced severe trauma such as sexual or physical abuse within the first 15 years of life.
- Those who had not experienced trauma in the first 15 years of life did not tend to display high aggression in adulthood, even if they possessed the MAOA-L gene variant.
- This is evidence of a gene-environment interaction (diathesis-stress)
38
Q
Evaluate genetic factors in aggression
A
- Research support
One strength for genetic factors is support for the role of MAOA in aggression, even in the converse.
A study was conducted involving male participants with the MAOA-L variant AND the MAOA-H variants, who took part in a money-distributing game.
It was found males with the high activity variant (MAOA-H) were more co-operative and made fewer aggressive moves compared to those with MAOA-L. This finding further cements the relationship between MAOA gene activity and aggression. - Environmental interference counterpoint
A counterpoint to the above ‘money-distributing’ study is that there were aspects found in the investigation that showed non-genetic factors were crucial. It was found participants with the MAOA-L gene variant behaved co-operatively rather than aggressively when informed that others were behaving co-operatively (giving money).
This showed that knowledge of a social norm could partially determine how aggressive or co-operative MAOA-L participants were, regardless of a genetic predisposition to aggression. Therefore genes, in this case, were suppressed by environmental factors (knowing others actions), contributing to the behaviors displayed. - Complex link
One limitation of the MAOA-serotonin-aggression link is that the precise mechanism of what occurs is unclear.
This is seen through conflicting evidence, such as Virkkunnen linking aggression to low serotonin levels, against the idea of MAOA’s operation. The MAOA-L gene causes MAO-A enzyme deficiency which, if following logical course, should lead to higher serotonin. This is because low activity means MAO-A will deactivate serotonin less - leaving more serotonin for synaptic transmission.
In people with the MAOA-L variant, it may be more accurate to say serotonin levels are disrupted rather than higher or lower than normal. This shows that the relationship between the MAOA-L gene, serotonin and aggression is not yet fully understood. - Problems with twin studies.
Another limitation of genetic factors in aggression is that twin studies may lack validity. In every pair of twins, both individuals share the same environment (assuming they were both raised together) However, DZ twins may not share their environments exactly the same. In research assuming they do is called the EQUAL ENVIRONMENT ASSUMPTION.
The EEA may be wrong as one aspect of the environment is the way they are treated by others. MZ twins can be treated very similarly, especially by parents (such as praise for aggression), whereas for DZ twins - they tend to be treated in less similar ways. This means that concordance rates may be inflated by this, so genetic influences on aggression may not be as great as twin studies suggest.
39
Q
What is meant by an ‘ethological explanation’, in terms of aggression.
A
An explanation that seeks to understand the innate behaviour of animals (including humans) by studying them in their natural environments.
40
Q
What is the main argument of the ethological explanation for aggression?
A
The main function of aggression is adaptive, and doesn’t have to be learned due to it being innate - Lorenz.
41
Q
Give and explain two adaptive purposes of aggression.
A
- Benefits species survival:
In a fight the ‘defeated’ animal is rarely killed, but forced to relocate territory elsewhere. This means that members of a species spread over a wider geographical area, reducing competition over resources which aids survival. - To establish dominance hierarchy
Aggression establishes hierarchy, for example, chimpanzees use aggression to climb a social hierarchy. The higher they are on the dominance hierarchy, they gain a special status such as mating rights over females.
42
Q
What did Pettit et al study in aggression?
A
The ethological explanation with establishing dominance hierarchy in young children
43
Q
Who studied aggression and social hierarchy in children?
A
Pettit et al.
44
Q
Outline Pettit et als study on ethological aggression in children
A
- Pettit et al found aggression to establish a dominance hierarchy can occur in humans.
- He studied groups of young children and observed how aggression played a role in developing dominance hierarchies.
This would be adaptive (and naturally selected) because dominance over others brings benefits such as access to resources.
45
Q
Define ritualistic aggression
A
Aggressive behaviour carried out in a set order.
46
Q
Who observed ritualistic aggression (ethological)
A
Lorenz
47
Q
What did Lorenz observe in ritualistic aggression.
A
- Fights between animals of the same species often produced little physical damage
- Most aggressive behaviour consisted of prolonged periods of ritualistic signalling (such as displaying claws and teeth).
- Intra-specific aggressive confrontations end with ritual appeasement displays - indicating acceptance of defeat. This inhibits any more aggression from the victor whilst preventing any further damage to the loser.
(For example, wolves expose their jugular)
48
Q
Why is ritualistic aggression ethological?
A
- It is adaptive as if every aggressive encounter ended with death of a combatant, it could threaten the existence of the species.
49
Q
What is an innate releasing mechanism?
A
An inbuilt biological structure or process (for example a network of neurones, or circuit in the brain).
These structures or processes are activated by an external stimulus, triggering the IRM to ‘release’ a specific sequence of behaviors (FIXED ACTION PATTERN)
50
Q
What is a fixed action pattern?
A
A sequence of stereotyped preprogrammed behaviors triggered by an innate releasing mechanism.
51
Q
According to Lea, what are the 6 features of a FIXED ACTION PATTERN
A
- Stereotyped (unchanging sequence of behaviors)
- Universal (same behaviour in every individual of the species)
- Unaffected by learning (same regardless of experience)
- ‘Ballistic’ (it follows an inevitable course and cannot be altered before completion)
- Single-purpose (only occurs in specific situations)
- A response to an identifiable, specific sign stimulus (or, if it involves intra-specific communication it is called a releaser, rather than a sign stimulus)
52
Q
Who studied fixed action patterns in male stickleback fish?
A
Tinbergen
53
Q
Outline Tinbergen’s research into IRM and FAP.
A
-
Procedure
Male sticklebacks are highly territorial in spring mating season, and they will develop a red spot on their underbelly. If another male enters their territory, a sequence of highly stereotyped aggressive behaviors is initiated (FAP). The sign stimulus (particular feature of a stimulus) that triggers the IRM is the sight of the red spot.
Tinbergen presented male sticklebacks with a series of wooden models, one a realistic model without a red spot and others which were random shapes with red spots. -
Findings
Regardless of shape, if the model had a red spot the male stickleback would aggressively display or even attack it.
If there was no red spot, there was no aggression even when the model looked highly realistic. It was also found that these aggressive FAPs were unchanging from one encounter to the other. Once triggered, the FAP always ran its course to completion without any further stimulus (ballistic).
54
Q
Evaluate ethological explanations of aggression.
A
- Research support.
One strength of the ethological explanation in aggression is evidence to support it’s central claims.
A study on monkeys looked at FAPs as part of ethology. Infant monkeys were isolated from their mothers to avoid learnt behaviors. The isolated monkeys were presented photographs of other monkeys displaying either threatening or non-threatening poses. It was found that the monkeys displayed defensive poses only to the threatening photographs, despite never learning it.
This suggests monkeys are born with innate sets of behaviors (FAP) that are triggered when shown aggression. - Cultural differences in aggression.
A limitation to the ethological explanation of aggression is evidence that aggressive behaviour differs culturally, when intra-specific to humans and even within the same country.
It was found that a type of homicide involving reactive aggression was more common in white men from the Southern states compared to white men in the Northern states. Reactive aggression is a response to threats or insults from someone else. It was concluded that this difference stems from a Southern ‘culture of honor’ which is less present in the North, hence their lower reactive homicide rates. This means aggressive behaviour cam come from a learned social norm rather than universal instinct. To conclude, culture appears to have potential to override innate predispositions, which is hard to explain ethologically. - Evidence against ritualistic aggression.
One limitation of the ethological explanation is that intra-specific aggression is not just ritualistic.
Jane Goodall observed a 4 year war in which male chimps from one community killed all the the members of another systematically. On some occasions, a victim would be held down by rival chimps while others hit it in prolonged attacks.
The violence continued even though victims offered appeasement signals. Unlike the ethological prediction, appeasement displays did not inhibit aggressive behaviour from the attackers.
This challenges the ethological view that intra-specific aggression is evolved to be self-limiting and relatively harmless. - FAPs not fixed
Another limitation is that Lorenz’s original view of fixed action patterns are outdated.
Lorenz saw FAPs as innate and unchanging, however it is modernly accepted that FAPs are actually greatly influenced by environmental factors and learning experiences.
For example, aggressive FAPs are made up of several behaviors in a series. The duration of each behaviour varies from one individual to another, even between encounters for the same individuals. As they are now seen as modifiable from experience, many ethologists prefer the term ‘MODAL BEHAVIOUR PATTERN to reflect this.
Therefore, patterns of aggressive behaviour are much more flexible than Lorenz thought.
55
Q
What is an evolutionary explanation?
A
An explanation for aggression based on the idea of natural selection, so any aggressive behaviour that increases chance of survival and ultimately successful reproduction is continued.
56
Q
How is aggression in sexual jealousy explained by the evolutionary explanation?
A
- Sexual jealousy is a major motivator of aggressive behaviour in males because, unlike females, males cannot be sure that their child is their own.
- Paternity uncertainty is a result of a threat of CUCKOLDRY, where a male may raise offspring that is not his own. This is evolutionary as any investment in offspring that does not share genes is a waste of resources.
- It instead contributes to the rivals genes and leaves fewer resources to be expended on future offspring.
- Males who could avoid cuckoldry were more reproductively successful, so aggressive strategies in psychological mechanisms adapted to secure their partners fidelity.
- IT IS ADAPTIVE.
57
Q
Who identified / proposed mate retention strategies?
A
Wilson and Daly.
58
Q
What are the two mate retention strategies?
A
-
Direct guarding
(male vigilance over a partners behaviour such as checking their phone and who they’re with) -
Negative inducements
(issuing dire consequences for infidelity such as threatening suicide).
59
Q
Who studied physical violence and sexual jealousy (as part of evolutionary explanation)
A
Wilson
60
Q
Outline Wilson’s study on physical violence against partners and what it supports
A
- Wilson asked women to report mate retention strategies displayed by their partners, measured in terms of the extent to which they agreed to statements like “He insists on knowing who you are with at all times.”
- Women who did agree with such statements were 2x as likely to have experienced physical violence from their partners.
Of these 73% required medical attention and 53% reported fearing for their lives. - This supports the view that mate retention strategies are linked to physical violence, as part of sexual jealousy.
61
Q
What does the evolutionary explanation believe about bullying.
A
- Bullying is the result of a power imbalance, so a more powerful individual uses deliberate aggression repeatedly against a weaker one.
- Contrary to the view bullying is maladaptive (result of poor socialization or childhood abuse), the evolutionary explanation proposes that ancestors used bullying adaptively.
- Bullying increased their chance of survival through promoting their own health and creating opportunities for reproduction.
62
Q
What researcher was involved with looking at male bullying (evolutionary)?
A
Volk et al.
63
Q
How can male bullying be explained by an evolutionary explanation?
A
- Volk argued that characteristics associated with bullying behaviour are attractive to females. These include: dominance, acquisition of resources and strength.
- Bullying wards of potential rivals, so it is naturally selected for reproductive success. For example, it affects health - seen in adolescent boys who gain a reputation for being tough. With an aggressive reputation, they are less likely to experience aggression due to others avoiding contact with them.
64
Q
How can female bullying be explained by an evolutionary explanation?
A
- In females, bullying usually occurs within a relationship, a method to control a partner.
- Women use it to secure fidelity, so the partner will continue to provide resources for future offspring. So, it is naturally selected, enhancing reproductive success.
65
Q
Evaluate evolutionary explanations of aggression.
A
- Gender differences.
A strength of the evolutionary theory of aggression is that it offers explanation as to why males and females differ in their use of aggression. There is excess research that shows gender differences in aggression - with some being explained by socialization, however, some can be explained in terms of adaptation.
For example, it is argued (in a females case), it is not adaptive to be physically aggressive as it can jeopardize the survival of her and her offspring. So, a more adaptive strategy is verbal aggression to retain a partner and the resources provided. This explains why women tend to display verbal rather than physical aggression. Therefore, such arguments can provide support for an evolutionary basis of aggression. - Cultural differences
One limitation is that there are substantial cultural differences in aggression, which challenges the universality claimed as part of the evolutionary explanation. In some cultures, aggression appears to be relatively non-existent - for example in the !Kung San people in Botswana. The !Kung San tribe were studied by anthropologists who found that they have a negative attitude towards use of aggression. Aggressive behaviour in this tribe is discouraged from childhood in both males and females, so aggressive acts are therefore rare. Those who use aggression face status and reputation being diminished. This means that cultural and social norms can CONSTRAIN aggressive behaviour. Therefore, since some cultures do not display aggressiveness, such behaviour may not necessarily be adaptive. - Counterpoint to !Kung San
In contrast to the previous point, there is speculation at how ‘harmless’ the !Kung San are with aggression. Even with a culture of shunning aggression, it has been pointed out that the homicide rate is surprisingly high for those considered peaceful. These contradictions in findings may be a result of observer bias, so the observer is biased towards their own agenda and expectations, and also mislead by the particular sample of people observed. These methodological issues means that observation by outsiders may not be as valid as pictured. - Real world application
Another strength of the evolutionary explanation is that principles can be used in initiatives to reduce bullying.
Even with the approach of addressing the bully’s perceived deficiencies, bullying is still prevalent. An alternative strategy can be used based on the view that bullying is adaptive. The “Meaningful roles” anti-bullying intervention aims to increase the costs of bullying and rewards of pro-social activity. For example, giving bullies roles and responsibilities in schools provides an alternate source of status. Therefore, viewing bullying as the result of an adaptation in evolution may lead to more effective anti-bullying interventions, being practical.
66
Q
What are the 3 social-psychological explanations of aggression?
A
- The frustration-aggression hypothesis
- Social learning theory
- De-individuation
67
Q
What is meant by a ‘social psychological’ explanation of aggression?
A
Any theory that argues aggression is a result of an interaction between an individuals characteristics and features of the situation in which the behaviour occurs
68
Q
What is meant by the ‘frustration-aggression hypothesis’ ?
A
A social psychological theory that argues that aggression is always the outcome when we are prevented from achieving our goals.
69
Q
Who formulated the ‘frustration-aggression hypothesis’ ?
A
Dollard
70
Q
What did Dollard state about the frustration-aggression hypothesis?
A
‘Frustration always leads to aggression, and aggression is always the result of frustration’
71
Q
Outline the process in the ‘frustration-aggression’ hypothesis
A
- Aggression is a psychological drive, akin to biological drives.
- FRUSTRATION is experienced when our attempts to reach a goal are interfered with by an external factor.
- The goal being blocked creates an aggressive drive - leading to aggressive thoughts and behaviours (violent fantasy or even verbal and physical outburst)
- This removes the negative emotion, called CATHARSIS (psychodynamic).
- The drive created by frustration is satisfied, reducing the drive and making further aggression less likely.
72
Q
What is the outcome in the ‘frustration-aggression hypothesis’ described as?
A
- Cathartic
73
Q
Why is the frustration-aggression hypothesis not always expressed towards the source of frustration? (3 reasons)
A
- Cause may be too powerful
(Individual may risk punishment) - Cause of frustration may be too abstract
(such as economic situation or the government) - Cause may be unavailable at the time.
74
Q
In the frustration-aggression hypothesis, what occurs if it is not expressed to the source?
A
- Aggression is displaced onto an alternative that is not abstract and available.
- This could be an inanimate object or younger sibling, for example.
75
Q
Who investigated the weapon effect in the frustration-aggression hypothesis?
A
Berkowitz
76
Q
What is the ‘weapon-effect’ in the frustration-aggression hypothesis?
A
The idea that, if we become frustrated we still might not behave aggressively. Frustration merely creates a readiness.
- HOWEVER, presence of aggressive cues in the environment make acting upon this much more likely.
- So… cues are an additional element in the frustration-aggression hypothesis.
77
Q
Outline Berkowitz’s study demonstrating the weapon effect (FA hypothesis)
A
- Berkowitz demonstrated the ‘weapon effect’ in a laboratory study.
- Participants were given real electric shocks by confederates, creating anger and frustration.
- The participants later had the opportunity to give fake electric shocks to the confederate.
- The number of shocks was greater when there were two guns on the table compared to a control group with no guns.
- The ‘weapon effect’ here supports Berkowitz’s proposal that presence of aggressive environmental cues stimulates aggression.
78
Q
Who conducted research on the frustration-aggression hypothesis?
A
- Geen
- Berkowitz (weapon effect)
79
Q
Who conducted a study looking at how frustration effects aggression?
A
- Geen
80
Q
Outline Geen’s study on frustration-aggression hypothesis.
A
-
Procedure:
Male university students completed a jigsaw puzzle. Frustration was experimentally manipulated in 3 ways.
1) For some, the puzzle was impossible
2) In the second condition, time ran out as a confederate student kept interfering
3) In the third condition, a confederate insulted the participant as they failed to solve it.
All participants later had the opportunity to give the confederate electric shocks. -
Findings:
The insulted participant group gave the strongest electric shocks, followed by the interfered with group and then the impossible task group. - All 3, however, selected more intense shocks compared to a control group of non-frustrated participants, outlining how frustration can result in aggression.
81
Q
Evaluate the frustration-aggression hypothesis.
A
- Research support
One strength of the FA hypothesis is research support for one of it’s key concepts.
A meta-analysis was conducted on 49 studies of displaced aggression, investigating situations in which aggressive behaviour had to be directed against a ‘human target’ other than the one who caused the frustration. The researchers concluded that displaced aggression is a reliable phenomenon. Frustrated participants who were provoked, yet unable to retaliate directly against the source were significantly more likely to aggress against an innocent party compared to those not provoked.
This shows that frustration can lead to aggression against a weaker or more available target, a notion mentioned in the FA hypothesis. - Role of catharsis
One limitation of the FA hypothesis is research showing aggression may not be cathartic as predicted. It was found, in a study, participants who vented their anger through repeatedly hitting a punchbag actually became more aggressive rather than less. It was observed that doing nothing, in fact, was more effective at reducing aggression than venting. It is, therefore, argued that using venting to reduce anger is likened to ‘using petrol to put out a fire’. It does not appear to work, even for people who believe in it’s value. This research challenges the validity of catharsis as a central assumption in the FA hypothesis. - Complexity in FA link.
Another limitation is that the link between frustration and aggression is more complex than initially predicted. Very early in the development of the FA.h, it became clear that frustration does not always lead to aggression, and aggression can occur without frustration. So, there is nothing ‘automatic’ about the link between them. Someone who is frustrated can behave in different ways, not limited to aggressive behaviour - it can extend to helplessness, anxiousness or determination. Likewise, someone who behaves aggressively may have alternative reasons for it. This suggests that the FA.h is inadequate due to only explaining how aggression arises from specific emotional situations, and not others. - COUNTERPOINT: negative affect
In counterpoint to this, Berkowitz reformulated the initial hypothesis to account for criticism. Berkowitz’s NEGATIVE AFFECT theory argued that frustration is just one of many aversive stimuli that create negative feelings (affect), including loneliness, jealousy and pain. Aggressive behaviour is triggered by these negative feelings rather than frustration specifically.
The outcome of frustration can also be a range of responses in negative affect, including but not limited to aggression. For example, one may feel frustrated at getting a poor grade yet become despaired, anxious or determined in response. Therefore, frustration (negative feelings) can form part of a wider and more comprehensive explanation for what causes aggression.
82
Q
What is meant by social learning theory explanation of aggression
A
A way of explaining aggressive behaviour in terms of both direct and indirect reinforcement from observation
83
Q
What did Bandura acknowledge about direct learning of aggression?
A
- Bandura acknowledged that aggression can be learned directly through principles of operant conditioning which includes positive and negative reinforcement alongside punishment.
- For example: A child learns that snatching a toy off of another child aggressively is rewarding, so direct reinforcement makes the child more likely to behave aggressively again in a similar situation.
84
Q
What did Bandura argue about social learning and aggression?
A
- Aggressive behaviour cannot often be explained by direct forms of learning, especially for humans.
- An indirect mechanism - observational learning - accounts for social learning of most aggressive behaviors.
85
Q
How is observational learning present in aggression for SLT?
A
- Children acquire specific aggressive behaviors through observing aggressive models (parents, siblings, peers, media characters).
86
Q
Why is vicarious reinforcement important following observational learning?
A
- Observation doesn’t mean that the child will necessarily behave aggressively themselves.
- The child needs to observe the consequences of the behaviour to reinforce it.
87
Q
What is the role of vicarious reinforcement for aggression in SLT?
A
- In vicarious reinforcement, if the models aggressive behaviour is rewarded (or not punished), the child learns that aggression can be effective in getting what they want.
- This vicarious reinforcement makes it more likely that the observing child will imitate the models aggressive behavior.
88
Q
What is the opposite of vicarious reinforcement and explain it’s effects on social learning of aggression
A
- **Vicarious punishment
- If a models use of aggression to achieve a goal is punished, an observing child is less likely to imitate that specific behavior.
89
Q
What are mediational processes called in SLT on aggression?
A
Cognitive conditions for social learning
90
Q
What are the four ‘cognitive conditions’ (mediational processes) Bandura identified for learning?
A
- Attention: cognitive requirement that observer must pay attention to the aggression.
- Retention: the observer must remember the models aggressive actions, to form a mental representation of how the behaviour is performed
- Reproduction: the observer must transform the mental representation of aggression into a physical action, and they must appraise their ability to do this
- Motivation: the observer needs a reason to imitate aggressive behaviour, depending on the expectation that it’d be rewarding in a specific situation.
91
Q
What is meant by self-efficacy in relation to SLT and aggression?
A
- The extent to which we believe our actions will be successful in achieving a certain goal
- This grows as a child’s confidence in their ability to be aggressive grows as they learn it can bring rewards.
92
Q
Give an example of self-efficacy in aggression
A
- An observer may watch a child gain a reward from acting aggressively, snatching a toy from another.
- The observer learns they have the motor skills necessary to imitate it and it comes easy to them.
- With a successful outcome of aggressive behaviour, sense of self-efficacy develops.
- The child becomes confident that, because of their aggression being effective in the past, it will continue to be so in the future.
93
Q
What research is used to support SLT and aggression?
A
- Bandura’s bobo doll
94
Q
Outline Bandura’s bobo doll experiment in aggression
A
-
Procedure
Young children observed an adult model assaulting an inflatable toy: ‘bobo doll’.
Aggressive behaviors involved: throwing, kicking and hitting with a mallet which were accompanied by verbal outbursts.
Following this, there was a short period of time in which children were not allowed to play with toys attractive to them, creating a degree of frustration.
They were then taken to a room where there was a bobo doll, as well as other toys including ones the adult model had used. -
Findings
Without instruction, children imitated the behaviour that they had seen the model perform physically and verbally.
The closeness of the imitation was significant in some cases - a virtually direct copy of what the children had observed including specific objects and phrases.
Boys imitated physical assault more than girls, but there was no sex difference in imitating verbal aggression. Boys were also more likely to imitate a same sex model.
There was a control group of children who did not observe an aggressive interaction with the doll, and aggressive behaviour was almost non-existent afterwards in children.
95
Q
Evaluate social learning theory of aggression
A
- Research support (9-12 year old boys)
One strength of SLT is research supporting its socio-psychological explanation of aggression. Psychologists found that aggressive boys between the ages of 9-12 formed friendships with other aggressive boys. There friendships mutually reinforced each boys aggressive behaviour through modelling processes.
For example, the boys observed each other successfully using proactive aggression to get what they wanted from peers, providing reinforcement. This means they experienced frequent exposure to models of physical aggression and to it’s positive consequences. This was perpetuated from the fact that gaining approval from the group was rewarding, which acted as further reinforcement.
These social learning processes made imitation of aggressive behaviour by the boys much more likely, as predicted by SLT. - Counterpoint (9-12 year old boys)
In counterpoint, the study on the young boys DID NOT find similarity between friends for reactive aggression.
Reactive aggression is referred to as ‘hot-blooded aggression’ - which is angry retaliation that occurs in the heat of the moment, not being pre-meditated.
The researchers found that they boys were much less likely to influence each others reactive aggressive outbursts. They observed them, but generally did not imitate them. This was perhaps the consequences of reactive aggression being unpredictable - it may not be rewarding, in contrast to proactive aggression - so this is less reinforcing.
This suggests SLT is limited as it is a relatively weak explanation of reactive aggression, only encompassing one type: proactive aggression. - Real world application
Another strength of SLT explanation is that its principles can help to reduce aggression. Children readily imitate models when they observe rewards for behaviors, which is especially the case when they identify with them. This fact applies to modelling aggressive behaviour. One way to reduce aggression is to provide rewarded ‘non-aggressive models’. The same learning processes that can lead to aggressive behaviour can produce non-aggression, therefore.
For instance, encouraging children to form friendships with children who are rewarded for lack of aggression (and, furthermore presenting them with similar media characters) gives more opportunity to model these non-aggressive behaviors and be reinforced for this.
Therefore, SLT offers practical steps to reduce the development of aggressive behaviour in children. - Biological influences
One limitation of SLT is that it underestimates the influence of biological factors in explaining aggression.
Bandura did, to a certain extent, recognize the role of biology as he accepted that there is an urge to be aggressive that is instinctive in nature.
Despite this, he was equally clear that the form aggression takes is primarily learned and is the outcome of a child’s ‘nurture’.
Against Bandura’s assertion, it is well established that there are many powerful biological factors in aggression such as genetics, evolution, neural and hormonal mechanisms.
SLT barely acknowledges these and certainly doesn’t offer explanation to how they influence aggression, such as the role of mirror neurons in learning.
To conclude, SLT is an incomplete explanation of aggression due to underplaying the role of biological mechanisms and factors behind it.
