Aggression Flashcards
Definition of aggression
Behavior that leads to self assertion, angry and destructive behavior causing injury. An act carried out with the intention of harming another person
Define proactive aggression
-Cold blooded
-A planned method of getting what you want
Define reactive aggression
-Hot blooded
-Angry and impulsive, accompanied by physiological arousal
Outline the role of the amygdala in aggression
-Most important structure in terms of aggression
-The amygdala is a key structure for humans and non-humans in terms of assessing and responding to threats in an environment
-The reactivity of the amygdala in humans has proven to be an important predictor of aggressive behavior
-Additionally, if the limbic system malfunctions/becomes damaged, this can raise levels of testosterone, making aggressive behavior more likely
AO1
Evidence for limbic system
-Ultimate game, lab experiment
-Gospic et al
-2 players are asked to divide a given amount of money, the confederate must decide how this money should be divided, while the responder (ppt) may reject or accept the offer
-If the responder accepts the offer, both players receive money
-If the responder rejects, neither of them gets anything
-At the same time, the responders (ppt) had an FMRI scan
-When the responder rejected the unfair offers (an aggressive reaction to social provocation) there was fast and heightened response in the amygdala recorded
-Ppts were given benzodiazepine (drug which reduces arousal in the CNS) before the game
-It halved the number of rejections to ‘unfair offers’ (reduced aggression) and decreased the activity in the amygdala
-THEREFORE SHOWING AN ASSOCIATION BETWEEN REACTIVE AGGRESSION AND AMYGDALA ACTIVITY
Outline the role of serotonin in aggression
-Serotonin has an inhibitory effect on the brain (slows down and dampens neurological functioning)
-Normal levels of serotonin the orbitofrontal cortex are linked to reduced firing of neurons and this is associated with a greater degree of self control
-Decreased levels of serotonin may disturb the mechanisms in OFC
-Reducing self control and leading to an increase in impulsive behavior such as aggression
AO1
Evidence for serotonin affecting aggression
-Virkkunen et al (1994)
-Compared levels of serotonin breakdown product (metabolite called 5-HIAA) in the cerebrospinal fluid of violent impulsive and violent non-impulsive offenders
-The levels were significantly lower in the impulsive offenders (also suffered sleep irregularities)
-Serotonin regulates sleep patterns
-Disturbance of this pattern strongly implies some disruption of serotonin functioning
-Further supporting the role of serotonin in reactive aggression
AO1
Evidence for genetic influence on aggression
In 1977, Christensen conducted a twin study into the contribution of genes in aggression. He measured the concordance rate for criminal activity in both monozygotic and dizygotic twins. He found a concordance rate of 55% for monozygotic twins and 22% for dizygotic twins. Since the rate was higher for monozygotic twins, but not 100%, he concluded that criminal behaviour is partly caused by genetics and partly caused by other factors.
Explain the effect of serotonin on aggression
Serotonin has widespread inhibitory effects on the brain; it slows down and dampens neuronal activity.
MAKES AGGRESSION LESS LIKELY
Outline the role of testosterone in aggression
-Male sex hormone and androgen responsible for the development of masculine features
-It also has a role in regulating social behaviours via its influence on certain areas in the brain implicated in aggression
-There is lots of documented evidence of testosterone being increased in various species which has resulted in increased aggression. Lower test lowers aggressive behaviours
AO1
Testosterone on aggression study
-Dolan et al 2012
-Studies of prison populations
-Found a positive correlation between testosterone levels and aggressive behaviours
-Sample of 60 males (high security prison)
-These males suffered from personality disorders and had history of impulsive violent behaviour
AO3
Outline one strength of the hormonal explanations of aggression
(Supporting research, Berman et al)
One strength of the neural explanations of aggression is that there is supporting research from Berman.
Berman carried out an experiment where he gave ppt’s either a placebo or a drug which increases serotonin. Ppt’s took part in a game whereby they could give electric shocks (due to provocation). Berman found that those who took the drug gave loss shocks than those who took the placebo, indicating that higher levels of serotonin result in lower levels of aggression.
This research clearly demonstrates that a lack of serotonin may directly be linked to increased levels of aggression as increasing serotonin levels can actually reduce aggressive responses. This is in line with what the theory predicts, thus strengthening our acceptance of the neural explanations of aggression.
HOWEVER, a problem is that this research is correlational and therefore we cannot ascertain causality e.g. Low levels—> Increase aggression or vice versa, therefore it is a limited explanation of aggressive behaviour
AO3
Outline one weakness of the hormonal explanations of aggression
(Dual hormone hypothesis)
One weakness of the hormonal explanations of aggression is that the role of testosterone may be overamplified.
For example, Carre and Mehta suggested testosterone cannot work alone in determining aggression, but rather has an antagonistic relationship with the stress hormone cortisol, where increased levels of aggression are associated with increased testosterone levels but only when cortisol is low. Therefore, this implies that different hormones have different predictive values for aggression and are part of a system when developing aggressive behaviour.
Therefore, this weakness acceptance of the hormonal explanation as it lacks detail when referring to other hormones interacting with testosterone to produce aggressive behaviours
AO3
Outline one weakness of the neural explanations of aggression
(Reductionist)
One weakness of the neural explanations of aggression is that it is reductionist as it ignores other brain structures when explaining aggression.
For example, recent studies suggest that the amygdala appears to function alongside the OFC (not part of the limbic system). Cocarro et al found that patients with psychiatric disorders (which often displayed aggression), activity in the OFC was reduced.
Aggressive behaviour may actually better be explained as a connection between both the amygdala’s activity and reduced activity within the OFC, which implies the explanation is limited for only focusing on the role of the amygdala in aggression.
Overall, this is a weakness of the neural explanations because aggression may be far more complex than the explanation suggests
AO3
Outline one weakness of the neural explanations of aggression
(Cause and effect)
Much of the research onto neural/hormonal explanations of aggression is correlational. A strength of this is the avoidance of ethical issues from experimental manipulation e.g. altering a ppts hormonal levels would be extremely unethical
However the main weakness of much of this research means that the findings are still largely inconclusive. We can only see a link between two variables but cant tell what variable caused what result. E.g. increased amygdala activity and aggressive behaviour, but we are unclear on which variable causes the other
Concordance rates for genetic explanations of aggression
Cocarro et al (1997)
Concordance rates (physical assault) = 50% for Mz and 19% for Dz twins
AO3
Problems with twin studies
-Twin share genes but also share environments meaning it is very difficult to ‘detangle’ genetic and environmental influences
-If aggression is purely determined by our genetics then we would expect the concordance rates for Mz twins to be much higher/nearer to 100%
Explain the use of adoption studies in aggression
-Detangle gene/environment interaction
-This is an important method because if we find greater similarity between children and their biological parents then the tole of genetics can be assumed to be a significant factor in determining aggressive behaviour
-If people are more like adoptive parents —> Environment more influential
AO1
Denmark adoption study
-Over 14000 adoptions
-Found that significant numbers of boys with criminal convictions also had fathers (biological) with criminal convictions of violence
-Provides support for genetic link
AO1
Explain the role of the MAOA gene in aggressive behaviour
-Mono amine oxidase A
-Low activity of this gene affects production of the MAOA enzymes
-Leads to MAOA enzyme activity is associated with various forms of aggressive behaviours
-‘Warrior gene’
-Gene is possessed by 56% of Maori men compared with 34% of Caucasian men who possess the gene
-Low activity variant is closely associated with aggressive behaviour
AO1
Research for MAOA gene
(Brunner et al)
-Found 28 men from a large Dutch family who were repeatedly involved in impulsively aggressive violent criminal behaviour such as rape, attempted murder and physical assault.
-These men had abnormally low levels of the enzyme MAOA as well as the faulty MAOA gene
AO1
Research support for MAOA gene
(Stuart et al)
-Studied 97 men from a treatment program for domestic abusers, who had inflicted a form of aggression called intimate partner violence (IPV)
-Men with low activity MAOA gene were found to be the most violent perpetrators of IPV, engaged in the greatest psychological and physical aggression and inflicted the worst injuries on their partners
AO1
Gene environment interaction
(Frazzetto et al)
-Genes don’t function in isolation
-Low activity of MAOA gene is only related to adult aggression when combined with traumatic events
-Frazzetto found an association between high levels of aggression and low activity of MAOA gene in adult males. This was only the case for those that experienced significant trauma before the age of 15.
-Those that didn’t experience abuse but had low activity f MAOA gene did not exhibit particularly high aggression in adult life
AO3
Outline one weakness of the genetic explanations of aggression
(Separating genes from environment)
One weakness of the genetic explanations of aggression is the problem of separating genetic and environmental influences
For example, although the evidence that comes from twin studies does support the idea of genetic link for aggression, the issue is that twins still do share the same environment/rearing and it is not possible to fully separate the two factors
Furthermore, if the trait was purely genetic, concordance rates would be closer to 100% for this shared trait. Therefore it seems that this explanation is reductionist which implies there must be other influences e.g. environmental factors when explaining aggression. Perhaps aggression could better be explained by by gene X environment interactions. For example, Frazetto found that low activity MAOA gene and childhood trauma made aggressive behaviour more likely.
This research therefore weakness the sole genetic explanation but provides further support for the diathesis stress model as an explanation for aggressive behaviour
AO3
Outline one weakness of the genetic explanations for aggression
(Measuring aggression)
One weakness of the genetic explanation of aggression is that some of the supporting research lacks validity.
For example, meta-analysis data from both twin and adoption studies have come from self-report methods, parent/teacher reports (which are both secondary data sources) and some direct observations.
This is problematic because the methods used to study aggression are not reliable. Not only this, self report methods have the issue of social desirability bias as people may be dishonest when speaking about their involvement in aggressive behaviour as it maybe socially sensitive.
This means the overall findings that come from such studies may not be entirely accurate or valid, thus weaking acceptance of the biological explanation of aggression
AO3
Outline one strength of the genetic explanation of aggression + counter
(Supporting research)
One strength of the genetic explanations of aggression is that there is research support for the role of the low activity MAOA gene from animal research.
For example, Cases et al found that when the MAOA gene in the X chromosome of mice was disabled, make mice became highly aggressive. This is what coincides with the genetic explanation of aggression, thus strengthening acceptance of the theory.
However, it is difficult to extrapolate the finings from animals and then apply them to humans. Humans are much more physiologically and cognitively developed than animals and we have a far more developed Pre-frontal cortex than animals. Therefore, we should accept research from animals with caution as they may not be fully applicable to understanding human aggression on a deeper level
AO3
Outline one weakness of the genetic explanations of aggression
(Polygenic)
The role of genetic factors in aggression is a reductionist argument as it appears there may be more than just once gene linked to aggressive behaviour.
For example, Stuart et al studied males who were involved in IPV and found that aggression was not only linked to MAOA gene activity but also the 5HHT serotonin transporter gene.
This research undermines the original explanation which suggests a low activity MAOA gene is solely responsible for aggressive behaviour, as it appears aggression is far more complex and must be explained through multiple genetic factors. Therefore this weakens acceptance of the genetic explanations of aggression as it undermines the role of other genes in aggression.
Limitations of the genetic explanation of aggression
-The environment can also affect how likely someone is to act aggressively
-Not all people who carry the short allele of the MAOA gene display aggressive behaviour
-There are other factors which contribute to aggression.
What role does the hippocampus play in aggression?
It sends information stored in our memory to the amygdala.
What role does the frontal cortex play in aggression?
If the frontal cortex is damaged, then…
It inhibits neurons in the amygdala
-The amygdala keeps sending impulses to the hypothalamus.
-The brain continues to produce aggressive behaviour.
The role of serotonin in aggression
-Serotonin inhibits neurons in the amygdala
-Serotonin inhibits neurons in the amygdala
-Serotonin reduces aggressive behaviour
Sumer et al
Support for role of the amygdala in aggression
Sumer et al conducted a case study of a 14-year-old girl who had begun to display excessive aggression. The researchers carried out a/an MRI scan which showed a tumour on the girl’s amygdala, causing it to be more active and send more nerve impulses to the hypothalamus. This increased her aggression.
AO1 research
Mpakopoulou’s study into the role of the amygdala in aggression
-Before the amygdalotomy, the patients had excessive activity in their amygdala
-Before the surgery, the patients were displaying high levels of aggression
-The amygdalotomies reduced aggression in the patients by 33-100%
AO3
Weakness of research into the role of the amygdala in aggression
While some studies have found that a damaged amygdala is associated with a decrease in aggression, others have reported an increase in aggression.
This suggests that the role of the amygdala might differ depending on the sub-region of the amygdala and the role of the amygdala may be more complicated than first thought.
AO1
Outline the ethological explanations of aggression
-Ethology refers to the study of an animal in its natural setting
-Suggests aggression is an instinct, it occurs in all members of species WITHOUT NEED FOR LEARNING
-Aggression is required for survival
-Aggression is adaptive meaning it aid survival in the animal kingdom
-Any species that is aggressive can reproduce and pass on genes to their offspring
-Aggression allows a species to survive because a ‘defeated’ species is rarely killed but rather is forces to establish territory elsewhere
-This means that members of a species spread out over a wider area and have to discover resources in a different place which reduces competition pressure and possibility of starvation
Function 2:
-Aggression helps us establish dominance hierarchies, thereby giving access to territory, resources and mates
-Aggression would then be naturally selected
Explain ritualistic aggression
-Lorenz’s early observation of fights between animals of the same species showed very little physical damage was done
-Most aggressive encounters consisted mainly of a period of ritualistic signals: Threat displays and appeasement gestures
-Such ritualistic behaviours are adaptive because if every aggressive encounter ended with death, it could threaten the existence of the species
-Threat displays are intended to make the opponent back down and are the last step before the animal either fights, submits or leaves
AO1
Outline the Innate releasing mechanism (IRM)
-Network of neurons in the brain which responds to threats in the environment in the form of aggression/aggressive behaviour
-An environmental stimulus (e.g. facial expression) triggers the IRM which then ‘releases’ a specific sequence of behaviours
-This behavioural sequence is called a fixed action pattern (FAP). FAP has 6 main stages:
1) Stereotyped - Relatively unchanged sequence of behaviours
2) Universal - The same behaviours found in every individual
3) Unaffected by learning - The same for every individual regardless of experience
4) Ballistic - Once the behaviour is triggered it follows an inevitable course
5) Single purpose - behaviours occur in a specific situation and no other
6) Responsive - A response to a specific sign stimulus from a member of the same species
AO1
Research Into fixed action patterns (FAP) and Innate releasing mechanism (IRM)
(Tinbergen et al)
-Sticklebacks are highly territorial and aggressive (develop a red spot on their underbellies due to mating season itself)
-If another male enters their territory, FAP is shown. The ‘sign’ stimulus that triggers the innate releasing mechanism is the sight of the red spot
-Tinbergen presented the sticklebacks with a series of wooden models of different shapes.
-Regardless of shape, if the wooden model had a red spot then the stickleback would aggressively display behaviours and even attack it, but if there was no red spot. there was no aggression
-Tinbergen also found that these aggressive FAP’s were unchanging from one encounter to another. Once triggered, the FAP always ran its course to completion
AO3
Outline one weakness of the Ethological explanations of aggression
(Generalisability)
One weakness of the Ethological explanations of aggression is that it is not entirely valid to make generalisations from animal to human aggression without evidence.
For example, Lorenz and Tinbergen assumed that the behaviour thy observed in birds and fish must also be the same for humans. Therefore, aggression must be instinctive and innate in humans too.
This suggests we should be extremely cautious about making generalisations, especially to a behaviour (such as warfare) which is extremely complex and the outcome of many interacting influences, including things like; learning personality factors and power. Humans are more emotionally complex than animals, which isn’t accounted for these explanations. Therefore this weakens acceptance overall because it may not be appropriate to apply animal aggression to human aggression.
AO3
Outline one weakness of the Ethological explanations of aggression
(MAP’s instead of FAP’s)
One weakness of the ethological explanations is that behaviours may have more environmental influence than was first suggested.
This is confirmed by the fact ethologists increasingly accept that FAP’s are flexible and the term isn’t used as it once was, being gradually replaced by modal action patterns (MAP’s). It has been found that the duration of each aggressive behaviour varies from one individual to another. Research suggests there are small differences between the members of the same species in relation to aggression suggesting they are not fixed as Lorenz suggested.
The flexibility of FAP’s may imply that aggressive behaviour can be learned or area at least affected by environmental learning, thus weakening acceptance of the ethological explanations as they dont account for this learning aspect
AO3
Outline one weakness of the Ethological explanations of aggression
(Aggression is not always self limiting)
One weakness of the ethological explanations of aggression is that aggression is not always self limiting like the theory always suggests.
For example, aggression does lead to harmful behaviour within a species. Male chimpanzees in one group set about strategically killing all members of another group of chimpanzees, doing so in a co-ordinated and pre-meditated fashion. Violence continued despite signs of appeasement and defencelessness. This is strong evidence to go against the ethological explanations which suggest aggression is adaptive as a mechanism to promote survival, therefore weakening our acceptance of the ethological explanations when explaining aggression
One limitation of twin studies is that…
They assume that the environment will have the same impact on the behaviour of both monozygotic and dizygotic twins.
AO3
Outline one strength of the Ethological explanations of aggression
(Supporting research)
There is supporting research for the innate basis of aggression in humans and non-human animals. For example, the existence of the ‘innate releasing mechanism’ linked to aggression and threat detection in humans/animals is the limbic system (amygdala reacts to threatening stimuli and predicts aggressive behaviour). This supports a central prediction of the ethological explanations: aggression is genetic and physiological.
Such research supports the genetic and physiological basis of aggression that ethologists predicts, thus supporting the notion that aggression is biologically predetermined, thus strengthening acceptance overall
AO1
Outline Hutchings and Mednick’s adoption study into aggression, including their findings
(Adoption study)
In 1975, Hutching and Mednick looked at a large sample of adopted boys, who all displayed criminal behaviour. They compared these children to a similar group of adopted children who didn’t display criminal behaviour. Then, for both groups of children, the researchers investigated how many of them had biological parents who displayed criminal behaviour.
They found that the children who’d displayed criminal behaviour were significantly more likely to have biological parents who displayed criminal behaviour than the children who didn’t display criminal behaviour.
AO1
Evolutionary explanations for aggression in men
-Men fear physical infidelity more because it may lead to raising a child that isnt theirs
-More likely to engage in physical aggression
-Promoting a competitor’s genes, and wasting their resources on a child which isnt theirs, this goes against ones own evolution. Could lead to cuckoldry as men are never entirely sure if they are the father of the child.
-If a man senses sexual infidelity, it triggers an alarm which evokes envy
-Males have developed mate retention strategies; direct guarding and negative inducement. Direct guarding: Ensuring women cant cheat and Negative inducement: making or acting on physical threats
AO1
Evolutionary explanations for aggression in women
-Women fear emotional infidelity from their partners
-Women need to find a father who is willing to invest his resources, time and care
-If a father is emotionally attached to someone else, there is a fear he will spend his resources, protection and time on them
-This loss can effect her child’s survival chances and therefore causes jealously
AO1
Research for Evolutionary explanations
(Wilson and Daly) + (Correlation study of IPV and retention strategies)
WILSON AND DALY:
-Self report method
-Women who report mate retention strategies from their partners were two times as likely to have suffered physical violence at the hands of their partner
-Indicates mate retention strategies involve physical violence and aggression
Studies of IPV in couples found a strong positive correlation between men’s report of their mate retention strategies and a women’s report of their partner’s physical violence
AO1
Bullying
-Bullying is a power imbalance in which a stronger individual uses aggression repeatedly against a weaker person
-Male aggression —> dominance power —> over other males is advantageous
-Increases access to females and reduces threats from other males. It suggests dominance, acquisition of resources, strength wards off potential rivals, thus increasing chances of genes being passed onto next generation. Reproductive success indicates that aggression was naturally selected
-In women, bullying behaviour helps secure a partner’s fidelity which means the partner continues to provide resources for future offspring, again such behaviour would be naturally selected because it enhanced the women’s reproductive success
AO3
Outline one strength of the Evolutionary explanations of aggression
(Research support)
Self report studies have found that primary cause of physical aggression was extreme jealousy from the husband.
The research supports that aggression is an adaptive trait as aggression is motivated by fear and cuckoldry and potential of wasting time and resources. This is what coincides with the evolutionary explanations of aggression. Aggressive traits have evolved to ensure and promote a males chances of passing on his own genes and not somebody else’s. Therefore the supporting research strengthens acceptance of the evolutionary explanations.
AO3
Outline one weakness of the Evolutionary explanations of aggression
(Ignores the the role of environment on aggression)
One weakness is that the theory ignores the the role of environment on aggression
For example, Prinz argued that gender differences in aggression are caused by differences in the way that girls and boys are taught by parents. E.g. Research found that boys are more likely to be hit when they are disciplines by their parents and girls are more likely to be given an explanation to why what they did is wrong, meaning later on in life, boys deem fit to use more physical violence as aggression compared to women. Girls are taught by social norms that it is not fitting of them to use physical violence
This may explain gender differences in aggression better than the evolutionary explanation, and the evolutionary explanation ignores this, thus weakening acceptance of the evolutionary explanations of aggression
AO3
Outline one weakness of the Evolutionary explanations of aggression
(Invalid research)
One limitation of much of the research support is based on self report methods which are mostly correlational. For example, the supporting research into IPV used a self report questionnaire to gather data.
This is a limitation because the ppts may not have accurate data due to social desirability and reconstructive memory or because the area is socially sensitive. Furthermore the data is correlational which suggests we cant establish cause and effect between the two variables.
Therefore this weakens our acceptance of the evolutionary explanations because the supporting research may be inaccurate and its cant help us establish causal relationships.
AO3
Outline one weakness of the evolutionary explanation of aggression
(Alpha bias)
A second limitation of the evolutionary explanation of aggression is that it can be accused of alpha gender bias; the explanation overexaggerates the differences in aggression between men and women, stating that men are all aggressive and jealous, whereas women are not aggressive.
AO3
Outline one weakness of the Evolutionary explanations of aggression
(Cultural differences)
One weakness of the evolutionary explanations of aggression is that it may be cultural differences which challenge the notion that aggression is a universal trait
For example, the Kung San people discourage aggression and those who use it lose status and reputation in their culture. Conversely, the Yanomamo in Venezuela use aggression to gain status in their structured society.
The fact that these two different groups have such different experiences, attitudes and views regarding aggression, indicates the behaviour may not be universal, contrary to evolutionary theory.
This suggests that aggression is in part socially learnt and the evolutionary approach suggests to explain how social customs can override innate influences
AO3
Outline one strength of the Evolutionary explanations of aggression
(Gender differences)
One strength of the evolutionary explanation of aggression is that it can explain different types of aggression strategies between males and females
The purpose for both males and females is the same, to ensure their fidelity
However, the theory explains the differences between the two genders. It suggests males and females have adapted the methods in which they use aggression each to suit their own evolutionary needs and ultimate survival
Therefore this suggests the theory is detailed in explaining these differences, thus strengthening our acceptance of it to explain aggression.
AO3
Outline one strength of the Evolutionary explanations of aggression
(Buss et al supporting research)
+COUNTER
One strength of the theory is that there is supporting research.
For example Buss et al found that 51% of males feared sexual infidelity more than emotional infidelity compared to only 22% of women fearing sexual infidelity more than emotional infidelity. The theory suggests men fear sexual infidelity more than women as it would mean they are wasting their resources on a competitor’s offspring, weakening the chances of promoting their own offspring. Therefore, this supporting research coincides with the theory, thus indicating the key concepts of the theory are valid, strengthening acceptance of the evolutionary explanations of aggression.
HOWEVER,
The study used a questionnaire to gather data hence the results may lack validity, because the questionnaire might not measure what the participants would feel in real life.
Furthermore, a massive 49% reported they would be more upset by emotional infidelity compared to sexual infidelity. This further weakens acceptance of the explanations as this doesn’t support the evolutionary explanations of aggression
AO1
Social psychological explanations of aggression: Frustration aggression model
-Dollard said that aggression is always a consequence of frustration
-It is a psychodynamic explanation —> CATHARSIS
-Frustration builds which leads to aggression via the release of the frustration
-There are ‘drives’ such as hunger and thirst which lead us to engage in aggressive behaviours in order to reduce our aggressive drives
-External factors govern our drives. When working towards goals, anything that blocks our efforts to reach it will lead to frustration. Frustration then arouses an aggressive drive which is only relieved by aggressive behaviour
-Aggression is displaced onto an alternative object, to one which caused the frustration as it may be unavailable, abstract or the cause may be to powerful
AO1
Research into Frustration aggression model
Male Uni students were given the task of completing a jigsaw puzzle. Frustration was manipulated in one of 3 ways:
-Puzzle was impossible to complete
-Ppts couldn’t complete puzzle because confederate kept interfering
-A confederate insulted ppts
The final part of the study involved giving electric shocks to a confederate when they made a mistake
-All 3 ‘frustrated groups’ gave higher shocks than a non-frustrated control group
-The insulted ppts gave the strongest shocks of any of the groups, followed by the impossible group
Three factors that affect the likelihood of a person behaving aggressively when they feel frustrated…
First, the proximity of the goal
Second, the effectiveness of aggression
Third, whether the frustrating scenario is justifiable
AO1
Outline the frustration-aggression hypothesis.
The frustration-aggression hypothesis was set out in 1939 by Dollard et al. According to the frustration-aggression hypothesis, all aggression is caused by frustration, the negative feeling people experience when they are blocked from achieving their goals. Furthermore, after a person behaves aggressively, they experience catharsis and their negative feelings are relieved. If, however, a person feels like they cannot direct their aggression at the person or thing which caused their frustration, then they displace it towards something or somebody else. Three factors determine the likelihood that frustration will result in aggression: firstly, the frustrated person’s proximity to their goal; secondly, the effectiveness of aggression; and thirdly, the justifiability of the frustrating scenario.
AO1
Outline the role of environmental cues - Berkowitz reformation of Dollard’s theory
-Dollard’s frustration aggression model has been questioned on the basis that there are times when aggression doesn’t seem to have been triggered by frustration
-Frustration produces anger which may be converted into aggression if there is an environmental stimuli present (which has an aggressive cue)
-A ppt was made to be angry (receiving a number of electric shocks from a confederate)
-In the environment where it was either an aggressive cue (gun) or a passive cue (badminton racquet). Ppts got the opportunity to shock the confederate back.
-Ppts were more likely to exhibit aggression (give a higher number of shocks) if they had aggressive cues in the environment than if there was a passive cue. Called weapons effect. AGGRESSIVE CUES IN THE ENVIRONMENT STIMULATE AGGRESSION
AO3
Outline one strength of the frustration aggression model
(Research support)
+ Counter
One strength of the theory is that there is research support from Newhall who conducted a meta analysis of 49 studies of ‘displaced aggression’
Ppts who were provoked but unable to retaliate against the source of their frustration were significantly more likely to behave aggressively against an innocent ppt who were not provoked. The researchers that displaced aggression is a key part of the original explanation supporting a central concept of the FA hypothesis and it links to aggressive drive reduction. This effect has been demonstrated in the lab studies of aggression supporting one of the key prediction of the theory
HOWEVER, it was lab research which doesn’t inform us about aggression in the real world, thus weakening acceptance of the theory as it may not be generalisable to real life scenarios, and may only be the case inside an artificially controlled laboratory setting, where the IV is manipulated
AO3
Outline one weakness of the frustration aggression model
(Catharsis)
One weakness of the theory is that there is research evidence that aggression is not always cathartic, as the theory suggests. This undermines the central prediction of the theory
For example, research found that ppts who vented their anger by hitting a punchbag became more angry and aggressive, rather than less aggressive
This indicates that aggression may not actually be a ‘cathartic release’ as the theory suggests and instead acting on the aggressive drive can build aggression instead, contradicting one of the main principles of the frustration aggression hypothesis
Hence, this casts doubt on the validity of a central assumption of the hypothesis, thus weakening acceptance of the theory
AO3
Outline one weakness of the frustration aggression model
(Effects of justified and unjustified aggression)
One weakness of the model is that the theory is lacking detail
For example, Dil and Anderson showed ppts a paper-folding task but frustrated them by making it difficult to follow either because the experimenter was in a hurry to meet his girlfriend (unjustified) or because his boss told him to be quick (justified)
They found that ppts who experienced unjustified frustration produced most aggression (negative judgements of the experimenter). Justified frustration produced less aggression but more than the control condition (absence of frustration)
This finding shows that some forms of frustration can create more aggression than others - a serious challenge to the validity of the original hypothesis
AO1
Research into deindividuation, Dodd
-Asked ppts ‘If you could do anything possible with complete assurance you wouldn’t be held accountable, what would you do?’
-Findings:
-36% antisocial behaviour
-26% were criminal acts
-Some students said rape, murder and assassination of political figures
-Only 9% were prosocial behaviours
This supports the notion that if we believe we are deindividuated then we will act in an antisocial/aggressive way, as predicted by the theory
AO1
Deindividuation
-When we act aggressive or antisocial because we become difficult to identify for some reason
-In groups, people loose their personal identity and take the identity of the social group
-We are not usually aggressive as we try to fit in and be accepted as aggression is frowned upon in society
-Individuated state usually produces behaviour which is rational and normative
-A deindividuated state usually produces behaviour which is emotional, impulsive and irrational. Deindividuated people are antinormative and disinhibited
-When we lose self awareness we stop monitoring and regulating our own behaviour, we ignore social norms
-In a crows, we feel anonymous because there is less fear of retribution as we are small and unidentifiable
AO1
Anonymity and self awareness
Private self awareness —> Concerns how we pay attention to our own feelings
-This is reduced when we are part of a crowd
Public self awareness —> Refers to how much we care about what others think about us / our behaviour —> Reduced in crowds
-Anonymity —> Less likely to be judged by others
AO3
Outline one strength of deindividuation as an explanation for aggression
(Trolling, RWA)
One strength of this explanation is that there is real world application
For example, research which looked at aggressive online behaviour in chatrooms found a strong correlation between anonymity and ‘trolling’. Most aggressive messages were sent by those who had their identity hidden. This indicates there is a link between anonymity, deindividuation and aggressive behaviour. More relevant today die to use of social media. This is a strength of the theory as the core notion can be seen in a real life scenario, thus strengthening acceptance of the theory
AO3
Outline one weakness of deindividuation as an explanation for aggression
(Contrary evidence)
One weakness of the theory is that it has been refuted by contradicting evidence
Researchers put strangers in a darkened room and told them to what they wanted, they soon started kissing and touching each other.
This study was replicated with ppts told they would be face to face with each other afterwards, touching and kissing was reduced.
Despite guarantee of anonymity creating the conditions for deindividuation, aggressive behaviour wasn’t the outcome of the study. Therefore, this undermines one of the key predictions of the theory as aggressive and antisocial behaviours may not always be the only outcome when people are deindividuated
AO3
Outline one strength of deindividuation as an explanation for aggression
(Xbox)
A second strength of the theory is that the theory can be applied to real life scenarios such as online gaming platforms such as Xbox.
Such online gaming platforms reduce personal identity e.g. using name tags / handles to identify them. This can potentially explain why aggressive behaviour in online gaming is seen. Real life applications confirm the relevance of deindividuation concepts to aggression as anonymity creates conditions of deindividuation and reductions in self awareness, as seen in online gaming platforms. Therefore this real life application allows us to see the theory materializing in real life scenarios, thus strengthening acceptance of deindividuation as an explanation of aggression
AO3
Outline weakness of deindividuation as an explanation for aggression
(Doesn’t always lead to aggression)
One weakness of the theory is that deindividuation doesn’t always lead to aggression.
Research found that when female ppts gave (fake) shocks to a confederate, either wearing KKK outfits and masks, dressed as nurses or wearing their own clothes. Masked ppts gave more intense shocks and ‘nurses’ gave fewer at lower levels. Nurses were more compassionate towards victims, in line with the prosocial role associated with a nurses uniform.
This indicates both aggression and prosocial behaviour are potential outcomes of de-individuation (not just aggression). Environmental cues in the situation also determine which is most likely to occur. This is a weakness of the original explanation as it suggests that deindividuation and its affect on human behaviour is more complex than the original theory suggests, thus weakening acceptance of the theory as it may be lacking detail
AO1
Outline the dispositional factors influencing aggression, importation model of aggression in institutions
-Prisoners are aggressive to begin with due to personal factors e.g. biological factors like damage to the limbic system, carrying the short allele of the MAOA gene, biological factors like increased testosterone, environmental factors like cramped prison conditions.
-Prisoners bring in a ‘subculture’ typical of criminality
-This includes their beliefs, values, norms, attitudes, gender, race class and upbringing
-Prisoners seek positions of power within the system and they are more likely to resort to aggression to negotiate their way through the prison environment
-Inmates use aggression to establish dominance / power to access resources
-Mental health of prisoners can lead to higher levels of aggression
-Those who were in gangs prior to prison are more likely to be aggressive as it is a social norm in a gang to use aggression
AO1
Research supporting dispositional factors. Mears et al. found a…
Conducted a longitudinal study looking a children in gangs. At adulthood, they looked at the ppts who ended up in prison and measured their level of aggression
Found a positive correlation between gang membership and belief in the ‘Code of the streets’ lead to higher levels of aggression in prison
AO3
Outline one strength of the importation model of aggression
(Support for the Importation Model: Kane & Janus)
One strength of the theory is that there is supporting research from Kane and Janus
For example, Kane and Janus investigated the behaviour of prisoners in a prison and also measured their personal characteristics. They found that the prisoners had a past history of violence, low levels of education, unemployment. This indicates that they were aggressive due to their personal characteristics, which they had ‘imported’. This supporting research provides support for the core principles of the importation theory and dispositional explanation as a whole, thus strengthening acceptance of the theory.
Outline one dispositional explanation of institutional aggression and two studies which support it. [6 marks]
The importation model, a dispositional explanation of institutional aggression developed by Irwin and Cressey, says that aggression in prisons is caused by the violent personality of the prisoners, which they carry into the prison. For instance, prisoners might be predisposed to violence by personal characteristics such as their gender, biological risk factors, their personality, and aggressive role models.
One study which supports the importation model was conducted by Mears et al. Mears et al conducted a longitudinal study looking at children from poor areas where there were a lot of gangs, to see which children joined gangs. At adulthood, Mears et al looked at the participants who had ended up in prison, and measured their level of violence. Mears found that the prisoners who had joined gangs and believed in a code of the streets (social norms which reward violence) were more likely to behave aggressively in prison.
A second study which supports the importation model, by Kane and Janus, investigated the behaviour of prisoners in a prison and also measured their personal characteristics. They found that the level of violence of the prisoners was associated with low levels of education, unemployment and a past history of violence
Explain why women have not evolved to be aggressive, according to the evolutionary explanation of aggression
Cavewomen didn’t face much competition for cavemen, so they did not need to be aggressive to each other. They were more inclined to protecting their offspring. This means they have not evolved to be aggressive, unlike men. In fact, cavewomen were more likely to select more aggressive cavemen, because they can provide the resources that they need to protect their babies.
Situational factors that can cause institutional aggression:
Deprivation
Security
Goods
Relationships
Autonomy
Overcrowding
Temperature or heat
Noise
What were the evolutionary advantages of aggression for cavemen?
prevents infidelity, helps them gain dominance over other men, gives them access to resources like food and women
AO3
Outline one strength of the SLT explanation for aggression
(Research support from Bandura 1977)
+COUNTER
One strength of the SLT explanation for aggression is that there is supporting research from Bandura’s 1977 study
Bandura conducted a quasi experiment where he gathered ppts from low crime and high crime rate areas and investigated their levels of aggression. He found that those who lived in higher crime rate areas displayed higher levels of aggression compared to those in low crime areas. This is a strength because it validates the key principles of SLT, observation and imitation of aggressive role models will result in aggression from others. This indicates the theory has high internal validity, thus strengthening acceptance of the theory.
HOWEVER, this was a quasi experiment which means 2 things. Firstly, the researcher has no control over the IV, meaning Bandura couldn’t randomly assign ppts to groups. Furthermore, Bandura had no control over confounding variables which may have influenced the ppts. E.g. Those in higher crime rate areas were probably living in poverty and were stressed out, which could have led to higher levels of aggression, rather than it being due to the area in which the ppts were loving, thus indicating we cant establish a causal relationship and this research shows us a correlation at best, thus weakening acceptance of the theory
AO3
Outline one strength of SLT explanation for aggression
(Cultural differences)
A second strength of the theory is that it can explain cultural differences in aggression. If a person grows up in a society where people are rewarded for aggression, they are more likely to become aggressive than if they grow up in a society where aggression is frowned upon. According to social learning theory, we should expect children growing up in the !Kung society (where aggression is frowned upon and children rarely observe aggressive behaviour) to be less aggressive than children in the Western world, and this turns out to be true. These differences cant be explained by the biological and evolutionary explanations which say aggression is innate. Therefore this strengthens our acceptance of SLT as an explanation for aggression
AO3
Outline one weakness of SLT explanation for aggression
(Ignores genes)
One weakness is that it ignores biological factors such as genes. For example, research found that concordance rates for Mz twins was around 50% but for Dz twins this was only 22%.
Moreover, other research found that children who displayed criminal behaviour were more likely to have parents who displayed criminal behaviour. Both these studies indicate that genes have a large role to play in whether we are aggressive or not.
This suggests that there is a genetic basis in aggression, however this is completely ignored by SLT, indicating it is reductionist for reducing behaviour down to observation and imitation of aggressive role models, and ignoring the role of other factors such as the MAOA gene, thus weakening acceptance of the theory
Perhaps it would be better to use an interactionist approach which accounts for both biological and environmental factors.
