Ethological Explanations of Aggression Flashcards
What is ethology
The study of animal behaviours in their natural setting.
The findings are then extrapolated to humans (in terms of characteristics, rituals and behaviours) because we are all subject to the same forces of natural selection. (Darwin)
What did Lorenz believe about the characteristics of aggression
Aggression is an innate, adaptive response
It’s something which has evolved in humans and animals to help them survive for reproduction.
How is aggression passed down.
Darwin’s theory
Aggression is passed to offspring through natural selection in conspecifics
What are the adaptive functions of aggression
1: reduce competition - a defeated animal is rarely killed but is forced to move territory.
2: establishes dominance - provides hierarchies which come with benefits
AO1/AO3: Supporting
Pettit (1988) - dominance hierarchies
observed how aggression in children led to dominance hierarchies - it is adaptive because dominance over others brings benefits (such as getting what you want)
What is the purpose of ritualistic behaviours
ritualistic behaviours are designed to show competitiors who is ‘boss’ in order to deter them from encroaching on intra-species’ competitiors territory
For example; bearing teeth or banging chest (apes)
What did Lorenz conclude about ritualistic aggression
- Fights between conspecies involve little physical damage.
- They consistes of threat displays and ritualistic signalling.
- This aggression is adaptive as it doesn’t injure competitors which means that it doesn’t jepordise species numbers, it only asserts dominance and maintains status/resources
How does a display of ritualistic aggression end
Appeasement displays
This indicates acceptance of defeat and the aim is to inhibit further aggression which could escalate.
AO1/AO3: Weakness
Goodall (2010) - ritualistic aggression
COUNTERPOINT FOR LORENZ RITUALISTIC AGGRESSION
Observed male chimps killing conspecies members of a different community.
The killing occured even when the victims were offering appeasment signals
This challeges the ethological theory proposed by Lorenz and challenges the view that same-species aggression is a harmless ritual.
REDUCES VALIDITY
What are Innate Releasing Mechanisms
built in phisiological processes or structures (e.g. neural networks) which control certain drives.
What is the process of an IRM
1: IRM’s are triggered through environmental stimuli (such as facial expressions)
2: This causes them to release a specific sequence of behaviours known as a Fixed Action Pattern.
what are the 2 types of signals an IRM can have
who are they to?
conspecific: signalled to members of the same species
allospecific: signalled to members of different species
What is a Fixed Action Pattern
A pattern of behaviour triggered by an IRM
AO1
Lea (1984) - Characteristics of a Fixed Action Pattern
Fap’s are relativley:
1: unchanging (stereotyped)
2: universal (they remain constant throughout the species)
3: ballistic (they follow an inevitable course of action which can’t be changed)
What are the characteristics of FAP’s
SUSRUB
1: Stereotypical: they are unchanging
2: Universal: the FAP remains consistent throughout the species
3: Singal Purpose: they only occur in a single, specific scenario
4: Response to specific signal stimulus: …
5: Unaffected by learning: The FAP is not affected by environmental learning
6: Ballistic: One the FAP has been triggered, the inevitable course of action can’t be altered or stopped before completion
AO1/AO3 study: Supporting
Tinenbergen (1951) - IRM’s/FAP’s
Male stickleback fish are very territorial- if another male enters this territory, this serves as the environmental stimulus for the IRM, which actives the FAP.
The specific characteristic that triggers this is the red underbelly that male sticklebacks possess.
Tinenbergen presented a series of models to a male stickleback fish; one accurate represantation model with no red underbelly and other randomly shaped wooden models with a red underside painted on.
FINDINGS
Regardless of shape, the stickleback would only attack (FAP) if the model has a red underbelly.
This proves that the red underbelly serves as the trigger for the IRM and then the FAP.
FURTHER DISCOVERY
Tinenbergen also saw that the FAP was completley unchanging from one encounter to another (stereotypical) and ballistic (it ran it’s full course to completion)
AO3: Weakness
Nisbett (1993) - Cultural Differences
+ what this shows
Nisbett found there was a North South divide in the US for homicide rates, with killings being more common amongst white males in southern states.
- This shows we can’t generalise actions found within the ethological explanation across multiple populations - this is because according to the idea of FAP/IRM if behaviour is innate, it is universal and stereotypical (Lea)
- This research hereby suggests that aggression is caused by different cultural and social factors and can’t be explained using the IRM/FAP model to generalise across human populations.
AO3: Strength
Animal studies to support
The ethological explanation has strong research support (Lorenz + Tinenbergen)
- This demonstrates that aggression can be instinctual and biologically determined in non-humans which according to Darwin this can be generalised because we are subject to the same forces of natural selection
- This thereefore provides explanations for aggressive behaviour and the reliability of these conclusions are strengthened through reserach support.
AO3: Counterpoint to Animal Studies to Support
Overreliance on Animal Studies
P: Overreliance on animal studies can raise questions on the validity of research to support the thoery.
E: This is because humans and animals have behavioural differences due to the due to the structral differences in the human cerebral cortex as well as social factors which contribute to behavioural differences.
E: Animal aggression is often driven by instinct, whereas humans have more variables at play such as social rules and cognitive factors. (for example Lorenz’s ideas of FAP’s and IRM’s suggest that animals have a rigid and automatic (ballistic) reposnse, however humans have a greater capacity for higher order thinking, decision making and moral reasoning which allows for greater control of aggressive impulses.
L: This means aggression in humans can’t always be explained by biological triggers alone as there are many other contributing factors. This thereofre reduces the validity of the ethological explanation as this approach would imply that we can’t extrapolate animal behaviour findings to humans.
AO3: Strength
Evolutionary Value
P: the explanation has evolutionary value as it offers insight into how aggression may have evolved to enhance survival (i.e. it’s adaptive)
E: For example; aggression in animals ensures the survival of the fittest to reproduce thereby promoting the survival of the species.
L: This perspective is useful for understanding aggression from an evolutionary standpoint and displays how aggression serves important functions + why we are aggressive.
AO3: Limitations
Cross Cultural Variations
P: Human aggression veries widely across different cultural and social contexts which is difficult to explain using an ethological perspective.
E: For example, anthropological research has shown certain cultures such as tribes in the amazon who may display higher levels of aggression due to social norms that encourage warfare and conflict
- Other cultures such as the Amish in North America emphasize non violence and conflict resolution.
L: The cultural differences highlight how social learning and environmental influences play a crucial role in shaping human aggression which is an aspect the ethological explanation over looks
AO3: Limitation
ALternate Explanation: SLT
YOU CAN DISCUSS THE SLT FOR A 16 MARKER
P: Human aggression isn’t soley instinctive but can be influenced by cognitive factors such as expectations, beliefs and past experiences
E: Bandura’s SLT emphasizes that humans learn aggression through observation and imitation of others especially when such behaviours are rewarded versus reinforced
E: IN isolation these explanations provide completley opposing expanations that feed into the nature vs nurture debate. We also have research from the SLT produced direclty on humans which is more reliable than extrapolating findings to humans from animals.
L: This means that SLT may provide a better explanation of at least could be used in conjunction with the ethological explanation to explain aggression
