Aggression
Aggression refers to behavior intended to cause harm or injury to another person or object. In psychology, it is studied in the context of understanding the underlying causes, triggers, and consequences of aggressive behavior. This can include exploring biological, psychological, and social factors that contribute to aggression in individuals and groups.
8 Key excerpts on "Aggression"
eBook - ePubAggression
Individual Differences, Alcohol And Benzodiazepines
- Alyson Bond, Malcolm Lader(Authors)
- 2013(Publication Date)
- Psychology Press(Publisher)
...CHAPTER ONE The psychology of Aggression In this chapter, definitions and theories of aggressive behaviour are discussed. Several factors are important in aggressive behaviour and these are discussed under three broad headings: interpersonal factors, external factors, and individual differences. TERMINOLOGY Aggression is a word that in ordinary language encompasses a wide range of behaviours. However, these sometimes diverse behaviours seem to have a common thread and the aim of a psychological definition is to explain this. There have been many definitions of Aggression. For example, Harre and Lamb (1983, p.13) catalogued more than 250. These various definitions seem to share the idea that Aggression involves inflicting harm or damage but beyond this, there are a number of differences. For example, does the damage have to be inflicted on a living creature or does damage to objects or property also count as Aggression? Does the damage have to be physical as argued by Zillman (1978) or does psychological harm such as saying something hurtful or damaging someone's reputation also constitute an aggressive act? Given that these distinctions may be important, one solution is to define Aggression broadly but then describe different types of Aggression. This approach has been taken by Buss (1961) who said Aggression could be physical or verbal, active or passive, direct or indirect. Combining these factors yields eight types of Aggression altogether. Another issue, perhaps less easily resolved, concerns whether the damage or harm must be inflicted intentionally for the act to be considered aggressive. On the one hand it seems desirable to exclude inflicting harm accidentally, e.g. accidentally hitting someone with an object or saying something tactless without thinking. On the other hand, intentions cannot be observed and it may cause problems to use a definition that rests on unobservable behaviour...
eBook - ePub- Miles Hewstone, Wolfgang Stroebe, Miles Hewstone, Wolfgang Stroebe(Authors)
- 2021(Publication Date)
- BPS Blackwell(Publisher)
...Aggression? DEFINITION AND MEASUREMENT OF AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOUR How do social psychologists define aggressive behaviour and what are their main methods for studying it? Social psychologists study Aggression as a form of social behaviour; that is, behaviour shown by one person or group towards another individual or group. In a widely accepted definition, Baron and Richardson (1994, p. 7) characterized Aggression as ‘any form of behavior directed toward the goal of harming or injuring another living being who is motivated to avoid such treatment’. Broadly speaking, ‘harm’ denotes any form of treatment unwanted by the target person, such as causing physical injury, hurting their feelings, damaging their social relationships by spreading rumours or taking away or destroying cherished possessions. It is important to note that, of course, individuals may act aggressively against themselves up to the point of taking their own life. However, this form of self‐inflicted harm does not represent a form of interpersonal behaviour. Therefore it is outside the focus of the social psychological perspective on Aggression. In terms of distinguishing Aggression from other forms of social behaviour, Baron and Richardson’s (1994) definition has three important implications: 1. Aggressive behaviour is characterized by its underlying motivation (to harm or injure another living being), not by its consequences (whether or not harm or injury actually occurs). This means that a behaviour is regarded as aggressive if it is guided by the intention to harm, even if no damage is done to the target. A shot fired from a gun may miss its target, but if the shot was intended to hit the target, it is nonetheless an instance of Aggression. On the other hand, dentists may cause patients pain when filling a hole in their teeth, but it is not their intention to harm the patient; hence it is not Aggression. 2...
eBook - ePub- Miles Hewstone, Wolfgang Stroebe, Klaus Jonas, Miles Hewstone, Wolfgang Stroebe, Klaus Jonas(Authors)
- 2016(Publication Date)
- BPS Blackwell(Publisher)
...Aggression? DEFINITION AND MEASUREMENT OF AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOUR How do social psychologists define aggressive behaviour and what are their main methods for studying it? When social psychologists talk about Aggression, they look at it as a form of social behaviour, that is, behaviour shown by one person or group towards another individual or group. In a widely accepted definition, Baron and Richardson (1994, p. 7) characterized Aggression as ‘any form of behavior directed toward the goal of harming or injuring another living being who is motivated to avoid such treatment.’ Broadly speaking, ‘harm’ denotes any form of treatment unwanted by the target person, such as causing physical injury, hurting their feelings, damaging their social relationships by spreading rumours or taking away or destroying cherished possessions. It is important to add that, of course, individuals may act aggressively against themselves up to the point of taking their own life. However, this form of self-inflicted harm does not represent a form of interpersonal behaviour, and is therefore outside the focus of the social psychological perspective on Aggression adopted in this chapter. In terms of distinguishing Aggression from other forms of social behaviour, Baron and Richardson’s (1994) definition has three important implications: (1) Aggressive behaviour is characterized by its underlying motivation (to harm or injure another living being), not by its consequences (whether or not harm or injury actually occurs). This means that a behaviour is regarded as aggressive if it was guided by the intention to harm, even if no damage was done to the target. A shot fired from a gun may miss its target, but if the shot was intended to hit the target, it is nonetheless an instance of Aggression...
- Paul Seager(Author)
- 2014(Publication Date)
- Teach Yourself(Publisher)
...For example, it would need to include verbal and physical behaviour, direct action leading to Aggression and a failure to act which results in Aggression, direct and indirect Aggression, overt and covert Aggression, Aggression that is unprovoked and that which is retaliative, physical Aggression and psychological Aggression, and so on and so forth. On top of that, there are also cross-cultural issues to consider, such that what might be seen as acceptable behaviour in one culture may be seen as taboo in another: for example, a faction of Australian aborigines see violence as ordinary and necessary, but Western cultures would view it as anti-social and probably illegal (see Spotlight below). Spotlight: Defining Aggression An early attempt to define Aggression comes from Baron (1977) who states that it is ‘any form of behaviour directed toward the goal of harming or injuring another living being who is motivated to avoid such treatment’. A good definition should probably incorporate intent, the expectancy that an action will cause harm, that avoidance of Aggression from the victim’s point of view is preferable, and that any such behaviour is a violation of social norms. It is generally accepted that there are two type of Aggression: 1 Hostile Aggression : In this form, Aggression is usually provoked by pain or upset, and is very emotional. Often it is performed as an end in itself. It might be illustrated by a boyfriend who punches his girlfriend after she yells at him. 2 Instrumental Aggression: This type of Aggression is usually more calculated and has a specific aim...
eBook - ePubGetting Grounded in Social Psychology
The Essential Literature for Beginning Researchers
- Todd D. Nelson, Todd D. Nelson(Authors)
- 2017(Publication Date)
- Psychology Press(Publisher)
...8 Aggression Barbara Krahé Aggression as a Construct in Social Psychology: Definition and Measurement “Aggression” is part of the everyday vocabulary to refer to the behavior of individuals and groups in a wide range of contexts. A Google search with the term “Aggression” in May 2017 yielded more than 71 million entries. But do people mean the same thing when they talk about Aggression, and is the everyday use of the term consistent with the definition adopted by Aggression researchers? Although most people refer to the word Aggression to denote a negative form of social behavior, the term is also often used with a positive meaning to characterize behavior that is assertive and determined, for example in the context of sports or business performance. In contrast to this ambivalence in everyday discourse, social psychologists agree that Aggression is always a negative, antisocial form of behavior. They define Aggression as behavior that is intended to inflict harm on another person (or group of persons), who are motivated to avoid such treatment (Baron & Richardson, 1994). This definition includes two important aspects: the first is the infliction of harm, which is clearly a negative outcome. The second is the intention to harm, which means that Aggression is defined by its underlying motivation, not by its effects. Thus, attacking someone with a knife with the intention to injure him is an act of Aggression, even if the target person manages to fight off the attack and remains unharmed. Similarly, a person who causes harm to someone else by accident, out of carelessness, or because of a mental illness is not considered to have acted aggressively, because there was no intention to harm...
eBook - ePubSocial Psychology in Christian Perspective
Exploring the Human Condition
- Angela M. Sabates(Author)
- 2012(Publication Date)
- IVP Academic(Publisher)
...Based on that definition, in the case of suicide where persons aim to die, they are not engaged in an official act of Aggression because they are not trying to avoid it. Similarly, Baron and Richardson note, couples whose lovemaking includes sadomasochist behavior are not acting aggressively because both partners find the behaviors sexually arousing. For this chapter let us consider Aggression to involve behavior, whether verbal, symbolic or physical, that in any way violates the personhood of another (McAfee Brown, 1987). Note that it is of course possible to be aggressive toward nonhuman entities such as animals or inanimate objects. But our focus here is on interpersonal and intergroup Aggression among humans within social relationships. Broadly speaking, most Aggression can be considered a type of antisocial behavior, or behavior that is destructive or not good for the community at large. Social psychologists generally define the term Aggression with a focus on external behaviors that can be observed, but they are also concerned with possible motives, which include various cognitions (e.g., a tendency to interpret hostile intentions in others) as well as attitudes (e.g., dehumanizing the other). Thus, Aggression, like all other social phenomena, is quite a complex construct. Note that the term Aggression, according to the definition noted above, would not include a hurtful act that was not intended to cause harm. Pain that a surgeon “causes” to the patient would not thus be considered Aggression, even if the patient thinks so. Nor would an act that includes some unintended harm be considered an act of Aggression. For example, when I was in an all-girls high school, my senior class was being coached in football by a boys’ high school team for a game with the junior class. While we were in the stands watching a demonstration on the field, one of the boys misthrew a ball into the stands and hit me in the head...
eBook - ePubThe Social Psychology of Aggression
3rd Edition
- Barbara Krahé(Author)
- 2020(Publication Date)
- Routledge(Publisher)
...The sociobiological approach postulates that Aggression has developed as an adaptive form of social behaviour in the process of evolution. Evidence from the field of behaviour genetics suggests that the propensity to act aggressively is at least partly influenced by genetic dispositions. Finally, there is some evidence that hormones, such as testosterone and cortisol, are involved in regulating aggressive behaviour and explaining individual differences in the propensity to engage in Aggression. • Early psychological models also assumed Aggression to be an innate response tendency. Freud’s view of Aggression as an expression of the antagonism of Eros and Thanatos inspired the frustration–Aggression hypothesis, which sees Aggression as driven by the desire to overcome frustration. • Subsequent psychological approaches widened the frustration–Aggression hypothesis into a more general model of negative affect, and highlighted the role of cognitive factors, learning experiences, and decision-making processes in eliciting aggressive responses. According to cognitive neo-associationism and excitation transfer theory, negative affect (caused by a range of aversive stimuli, such as frustration, pain, or noise) is a powerful trigger of selective information processing that enhances the probability of aggressive behaviour. • Social–cognitive approaches refer to the role of aggressive scripts (i.e., generalised knowledge structures of how and when aggressive behaviour may be enacted) and sequential appraisal processes that lead to the choice of an aggressive response. From the perspective of learning theory, Aggression becomes part of an individual’s repertoire through direct reinforcement as well as observational learning and imitation of aggressive models...
eBook - ePub- Peter Ainsworth(Author)
- 2012(Publication Date)
- Willan(Publisher)
...In most cases the provocation leads to physiological arousal but the feeling is more complex than simply getting angry (Frijda, 1994). By contrast the infliction of harm in the form of instrumental Aggression is not necessarily accompanied by any particular emotional state. Whilst the distinction between these two forms of Aggression can be useful there are inevitably some instances in which the two overlap. A similar distinction that has been made is between reactive and proactive Aggression (Crick and Dodge, 1996). The first of these is similar to the notion of affective Aggression discussed above in that it refers to aggressive behaviour that occurs in response to verbal or physical provocation and results in both angry actions and self-defence. By contrast proactive Aggression, as its name implies, refers to Aggression that occurs without any form of initial provocation and involves violence that is committed in order to gain some reward, be it monetary or psychological (e.g. intimidation or respect). The majority of psychological research has been concerned with affective rather than instrumental Aggression. This is unfortunate especially for those involved in law enforcement as some of the Aggression that will be encountered will be of the latter type. We will see in this chapter that a large number of theories have emerged in response to the question of why people commit violent or aggressive acts. As in other areas of psychology, a distinction is often attempted between those factors that lie within the individual him/herself and those that are related to the situational context in which the Aggression occurs. In the former category would be genetic factors, and those pertaining to the background of the individual. In the latter would be the myriad situational factors that may have combined to produce an aggressive outburst...
