Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

PSYC132: Social Psychology And Individual Differences > Week 5-Aggression > Flashcards

Week 5-Aggression Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Psychology 101 flashcards GRE® Psychology flashcards AP® Psychology flashcards
1
Q

What is a ‘Type A’ vs ‘Type B’ personality? (Friedman & Rosenman, 1959)

A

-Overactive, achievement oriented competitive (A) VS quiet, easy going, relaxed (B)
-People with Type A personalities tend to be more aggressive (especially in competitive environments)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

What evidence supports type A personalities?

A
  • Type A more aggressive to competitors than those with a Type B personality (Carver & Glass, 1978)
  • Managers who are type A were more in conflict with peers and those who work under them (Baron, 1989)
  • ‘Type A’ personality linked to higher driving anger compared to ‘type B’ personality (Feng et al., 2017)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Is personality a dimension or a category?

A

-Dimension as people may possess traits from either Type A or B rather than have that personality fully
-Outdated research practices and measurement instruments in older research

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Is personality a dimension or a category?

A

-Dimension as people may possess traits from either Type A or B rather than have that personality fully
-Outdated research practices and measurement instruments in older research

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

What is the Big Five?

A

Openess
Conscientousness
Extraversion
Agreeableness
Neuroticism

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

How have personality traits been linked to aggression?

A

*For example, Barlett and Anderson (2012) found that
Openness, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism predicted self
-reported physical aggression and violent behaviours
*Overall, personality traits can be seen as individual dispositions or ‘risk factors’ for aggressive behaviours

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

How can alcohol affect our brain?

A

-effects cortical control where thinking and other cognitive functions are carried out
-Alcohol myopia: narrows our attention to provocative cues in our environment (Giancola et al., 2010)
-Affects emotional processing and increases activity in other more primitive areas e.g., areas that affect breathing, heartbeat

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

What’s the link between alcohol and aggression?

A

-There’s a causal link between alcohol consumption and aggressive behaviour (Bartholow et al., 2003; Bartholow & Heinz, 2006; Giancola, 2003)
-Non-regular alcohol drinkers become more aggressive when they drink (LaPlace et al., 1994)
Alcohol can even affect aggression through priming or placebo:
* Participants who thought they had consumed alcohol more aggressive even if they were given a non-alcohol cocktail (Begue et al., 2009)
* Priming alcohol-related words increased aggression (Pedersen et al, 2014)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Does alcohol always lead to aggression?

A

-Not every alcohol consumer will act aggressively
-Factors such as your expectancy effect when you consume alcohol (Beck & Heinz, 2013) OR cues in the environment (Giancola et al., 2011) are also important

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

What’s disinhibition?

A

A reduction in social rules that stop us from behaving anti-social, immoral, illegally (aka aggressively)
-one of the ways in which alcohol can be associated with aggression

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

How can disinhibition occur in online contexts aka the ‘online disinhibition effect’? (Suler, 2004)

A
  • People often do and say things online that they wouldn’t ordinarily do in the face-to-face world
  • Suler (2004) outlines six factors to explain online disinhibition
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Suler’s (2004) 6 factors: What’s Dissociative anonymity?

A

-Online behaviour can be completely anonymous which can make people behave differently than they do in real life
-separation of offline and online identity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Suler’s (2004) 6 factors: What’s invisibility?

A

-Not feeling seen or heard amplifies the ‘online disinhibition effect’ and gives the courage to do things you wouldn’t normally do
-Online spaces means no eye contact or face-to-face visibility

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Suler’s (2004) 6 factors: What’s Asynchronicity?

A

Emails or words online aren’t always immediately seen after you’ve sent them meaning you don’t have to cope with someone’s immediate response

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Suler’s (2004) 6 factors: What’s Solipsistic introjection

A

-Feeling like you know people who are online merging theirs and your identity together
-You make up conversations with them and feel like you can tell them anything contributing to disinhibited behaviour

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Suler’s (2004) 6 factors: What’s dissociative imagination?

A
  • Feeling that one’s online persona lives in a make-believe dimension
  • Online fiction separated from offline fact
  • Seeing the online world as a game where social rules and norms don’t apply
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Suler’s (2004) 6 factors: What’s Minimisation of authority?

A
  • Online environment can feel as a peer-to-peer relationship
  • Absence of authority figure may make people more willing to speak out and (potentially) misbehave
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

What’s deindividuation?

A

Situational changes that make people lose their identity and
therefore influence the level of aggression exhibited.
* Lowers the perceived likelihood of being punished
* Presence of others (other people won’t see me do it)
* Anonymity (they won’t know who it was)
* Diffusion of responsibility (I’m not
responsible)
* Group size (greater the group, the greater the DoR)
* Collective aggression such as crowd baiting (Mann, 1981)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

What’s Dehumanisation?

A

Thinking of another person as
anonymous, without thoughts feelings or emotions.
* Changes the way the victim is
perceived, as opposed to deindividuation
* Denial of pain suffered by victim
* Provides a justification for violence
* Psychiatric units, prisons
* Torture and abuse in Abu Ghraib prison outside of Baghdad, Iraq; Mass killings in WWII; Rwandan genocide

20
Q

What’s the association between temperature and aggression?

A
  • Studies tracking physical assaults and suicide over time
    typically report highest number of assaults when the weather
    is hot (Cohn & Rotton, 1997; Harries & Stadler, 1983; Maes et al., 1994)
  • Participants responded more aggressively (horn honking) to a
    car blocking the road when temperatures were higher (Kenrick
    & MCFarlane, 1986)
    But, is there a limit to the effect of temperature?
  • Aggression levels out at extreme temperatures
  • Heat interacts with other variables For example, alcohol
21
Q

What’s crowding according to Le Bon (1895)?

A
  • 19th century – century of revolution
  • The crowd is mindless, violent and irrational
  • People feel anonymous in a crowd situation
  • More suggestible to specific
    behaviours
  • Idea that crowd behaviour is contagious
  • “Mad Mob” view
22
Q

How can crowding occur in urban environments: Toronto (Regoeczi, 2003)

A
  • Population density can be linked to crime rate
  • Household density & neighbourhood density correlated
    with feelings of aggression and withdrawal from stranger interactions
23
Q

How can crowding occur in prisons: UK (Lawrence & Andrew, 2004)

A

Feeling crowded = events and protagonists felt more aggressive, aggressors

24
Q

Crowding: are crowds really
‘mindless’?: Reicher (1984)

A
  • St Paul’s Riots, 1980, London
  • Violence against individuals
    and property
  • Police and camera operators
    were only intentional targets
  • Rioters had a shared identity
    which can guide collective behaviour
  • Overall, crowd behaviour is more sophisticated than Le Bon
    suggested
25
Q

What’s the Frustration – Aggression hypothesis:
Dollard et al (1939)

A
  • Theory of contextual influence seeking to address lynching murders in Southern USA in 1930s
  • Aggression is always caused by frustration (i.e. when we can’t achieve certain goals)
  • Aggression directed towards the source of the frustration (retaliatory) or others (displaced)
26
Q

Is frustration a good explanation
for aggression?

A
  • Not clear how frustration leads to aggression
  • Frustration does not always lead to aggression
  • Some forms of aggression are not linked to frustration
27
Q

What’s the social learning theory?

A

Human social behaviour is not innate but learned from
appropriate models
* Learning by direct experience: acquiring behaviour because we were previously rewarded for it (operant conditioning)
* Learning by vicarious experience: acquiring behaviour because another person was rewarded for it
* This means we can learn through observation (modelling and imitation)
* Some models (e.g. parents, siblings) are more appropriate than others

28
Q

SLT: What is the Bobo doll study (Bandura, Ross & Ross, 1963)?

A
  • 4 & 5 year olds
  • Watched a female or male adult play with an inflated Bobo doll
    Four conditions:
  • Live: adult came into the room and was aggressive to the doll
  • Videotape: same as above but video taped
  • Cartoon: model was dressed like a cartoon character
  • Control condition
29
Q

How did Van Schie & Wiegman (1997) investigate the link between video games and aggression in the Netherlands?

A
  • 10 – 14 year olds
  • No relationship between
    computer playing and aggression.
  • Significant negative correlation with pro-social behaviour (game players less likely to be helpful; r =
  • 0.12)
30
Q

How was Cooperation and Competition in peaceful societies investigated? (Bonta, 1997)

A

25 societies examined which were almost completely without violence – either inter-personal or inter-group:
* Chewong – Malay peninsula. No words for quarrelling, fighting, aggression, warfare
* Ifaluk – Micronesia. In 12 months one tiny act of aggression
* Amish, Mennonites, Hutterites – USA & Canada. Hutterites never a recorded murder
* Kadar – India. Crime totally absent according to local police
* Jains – India. Habitual criminality unknown. Competitive and join military.

31
Q

What General themes were there in peaceful societies? (Bonta, 1997)

A
  • Co-operation and group success rather than individual competition and achievement
  • Children cherished to age 3, then ignored
  • Positive interpersonal relations must be constantly re-enforced
  • Competition is associated with aggressiveness and violence
  • Self perpetuating – non-violence leads to non-violence
  • Re-enforced by rituals emphasising co-operation and
    individual humility
32
Q

What are the Honour systems?

A
  • The South of the USA has more homicides than North
  • Particularly in males and amongst people who know each other
  • One possible reason is cultural response to threats against social
    status ‘honour’
  • Minor conflicts can escalate very quickly
33
Q

How did Cohen et al (1996) investigate honour systems?

A

Ran a study whereby participants needed to walk down a narrow
hallway
* A confederate bumped in to
them (they didn’t know they
were part of the study)
* Looked at how people responded
* Did they respond aggressively?
* How did they respond biologically?

34
Q

How did Cohen and Nisbett (1997) investigate honour systems?

A

Sent letters to potential employers with two different stories
Story 1: to half the employers, the applicant reported that he
had impulsively killed a man who had been having an affair
with his fiancée and then taunted him about it in a crowded bar
Story 2: to the other half, the applicant reported that he had
stolen a car because he needed the money to pay off debts.

  • Employers in the South were more likely to respond in an
    understanding manner to the first story (killing someone out of
    honour) than people in the North
  • Both sets of employers responded negatively to the car theft story as not related to honour
35
Q

Why is there this difference between the North and South of the USA with regard to Honour Systems?

A
  1. Historical issues with levels of policing: There was little law enforcement in the south, so it was necessary to rely on reputation and honour
  2. Origins of settlers in these regions: People in the north
    were farmers, People in the south were cattle herders
36
Q

What traits consist of a collectivist individual?

A
  • Interdependent construal of self
  • Attend to others
  • Rely on others and they rely on you
  • Make less of a distinction between individual and group
    goals
  • Obeys ‘in-group’ authority
  • Distrust out-groups
37
Q

What traits consist of an individualist individual?

A
  • Independent construal of self
  • Assert the self
  • Exchange relationships
  • Promoting own achievements and initiatives
  • Links between members of society are weaker
  • People want to stand out. Being ‘ordinary’ seen as negative
38
Q

How does individualist-collectivism affect aggression?

A
  • All cultures develop methods to regulate conflict and aggression
  • These methods vary across cultures
  • Individualism and collectivism an important variable here
  • This influences what people view as justifiable and peoples’ aggressive behaviours
39
Q

What did Fujihara et al (1999) find asking students from Japan,
Spain and the USA about past aggressive behaviours? (I-C)

A
  • Indirect aggression seen as acceptable in individualistic cultures
  • Direct verbal aggression seen as more justifiable in collectivist cultures
  • Physical aggression seen as more acceptable in individualistic cultures
  • Physical aggression seen as acceptable in collectivist cultures if defending yourself
40
Q

What do individualistic cultures focus on?

A

-Personal desires
-Self-assertiveness is important
-The need to look after yourself

41
Q

What do collectivist cultures focus on?

A

-Confucianism
-Emphasises importance of social harmony, avoidance of conflict and obligation to others
-Aggression viewed as shameful and socially damaging
-Self-assertiveness seen as selfish and antisocial

42
Q

What are the limitations of I-C dimension?

A
  • Independent dimensions (Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005;
    Kağitçibasi, 1994)
  • Not all members of a collectivist society will be collectivist (same for individualistic cultures)
  • Depends on the situation: Are there situations in which you act an individualistic / collectivist nature?
  • Researchers assume participants are either I or C without measuring first
  • Qualitative differences between ‘collectivistic cultures’ (Dien, 1999)
  • Chinese - Authority-orientated orientation
  • Japanese – Peer-group orientated
43
Q

What are In-groups and out-groups?

A
  • In-groups: When a person psychologically identifies being a member (e.g., by interests, gender, occupation,age)
  • Out-groups: When a person does not psychologically identify being a member (e.g., by interests, gender,
    occupation, age)
  • Culture impacts in-group membership and out group treatment
44
Q

What explanation did Tajfel (1978) give about in-groups and out-groups?

A
  • A person chooses an in-group because it maximises positive social identity
  • People are generally ethnocentric
    about in-group
  • One way of improving status within your in-groups is by discriminating towards out-groups
  • Some even actively promote
    aggression towards out-groups (e.g.,sports teams)
45
Q

How does culture influence in-group / out-group?

A
  • Collectivistic cultures more focused on the distinction between out-groups and in-groups (Bell & Chaibong, 2003)
  • Nearly all cultures restrict aggression against in-groups
  • But observed more frequently in collectivist cultures
  • Will try and deescalate conflict within in-groups
  • But indifferent to out-groups
  • Collectivists more aggressive towards out-groups (Brown et al, 1992)
  • If values clash, more likely to be hostile
46
Q

-AggreWhat occurs within collectivism and out-grouping?

A
  • Extreme cases lead to out-casting
  • e.g., Nazis and treatment of Jewish people
  • Most likely when collectivist and other cultural values are present
  • e.g. masculine societies, those high in uncertainty avoidance (e.g., Niedbala & Hohman, 2018)

PSYC132: Social Psychology And Individual Differences (11 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions