social psychological explanations

• frustration aggression hypothesis

  social psychological theory arguing anger, hostility and even violence are always the outcome when we are prevented from achieving our goals
• dollard et al

  formulated frustration aggression hypothesis in 1939

  • frustration is caused when people are prevented from getting what they want
  • frustration always leads to aggression, aggression is always the result of frustration
  • psychodynamic theory of catharsis
• catharsis

  releasing and relieving strong or repressed emotions
• model for FAH

  attempt to achieve goal blocked - frustration experienced - aggressive drive created - aggressive behaviour displayed - catharsis
• expressions of aggression

  1. abstract, cannot physically hurt
  2. risk punishment
  3. unavailable

  aggression isn’t always expressed directly against the source of frustration
• displacement

  anger displaced onto more appropriate target
• sublimation

  anger displaced onto socially acceptable activity like going for a walk
• green FAH 1968

  male uni students

  p’s given jigsaw, frustration level manipulated in three ways

  1. puzzle impossible to solve
  2. confederate making them run out of time
  3. confederate insulting p’s ability

  asked to give electric shocks to a confederate when they made a mistake on a task

  more intense shocks in frustrated group compared to control. insulted groups most intense shock
• FAH - evaluation. bushman

  isn’t always cathartic

  bushman found those who vented anger by hitting a punch bag became angrier and more aggressive rather than less. doing nothing more effective

  contradicting evidence suggesting FAH isn’t complete
• FAH - evaluation. individual differences

  people have different responses to aggression. people may not even respond the same way in the same situation

  displace vs sublimate

  doesn’t offer a complete explanation of human aggression, incomplete
• berkowitz

  frustration creates a readiness for aggression

  presence or aggressive cues make acting upon it more likely

  not nomothetic
• social learning theory

  bandura claims aggression is learned in our species with the mediational processes for observational learning to occur
• slt - vicarious reinforcement

  child seeing another person being rewarded increases likelihood of reproducing behaviour

  expectation of reward > expectation of punishment
• direct reinforcement

  child being positively reinforced increases likelihood of them being aggressive again

  child punished decreases likelihood of them being aggressive again
• self efficacy

  confidence to repeat a behaviour

  increases motivation

  low self efficacy means they will not have the confidence to repeat the behaviour
• slt - evaluation. poulin and boivin

  evidence from real life

  aggressive boys formed lasting friendships with other aggressive boys

  self reinforcing
• slt - evaluation. individual differences

  some cultures do not enforce aggression to discipline children, therefore they do not observe aggressive role models, however aggressive behaviour is still displayed among children

  suggests an innate factor
• deindividuation definition

  the loss of one’s sense of individuality

  people lose their sense of socialised self and engage in unsociable behaviour
• lebon

  deindividuation explains behaviour of individuals in crowds

  when we are identifiable, our behaviours are constrained by social norms

  when we are part of a crowd, we lose this restraint and take on a group identity rather than a personal one

  responsibility is shared so there’s less personal guilt
• individuated behaviour

  rational, conforms to social norms, self monitoring
• deindividuation behaviour

  irrational/emotional/compulsive, lack of self awareness, no self monitoring
• private self awareness

  aggression

  how we pay attention to our own feelings and behaviour

  reduced when part of a crowd

  attention is outwardly focused to the events around us, we become less critical of our self
• public self awareness

  aggression, how much we care what others think

  reduced when part of a crowd

  realisation of anonymity

  we don’t care how others see us
• dodd

  students asked ‘if you could do anything humanly possible with complete assurance you wouldn’t be detected or held responsible, what would you do?’ completely anonymous

  36% antisocial

  26% crime

  9% pro social

  no link would mean even distribution
• zimbardo - deindividuation

  female undergraduates involved in a remake of milgrams shock study

  stooge played role of student and participants teacher

  had lab coats and hoods that covered faces and were always addressed as a group

  2x strength in hooded

  if there wasn't a link between group identity and anonymity and aggression, there wouldnt be a difference of 2x
• evaluation - deindividuation. deiner et al

  observation of 1300 trick or treaters

  wore masks in large groups - more likely to steal money and sweets
• evaluation - deindividuation. gergen

  deviance in the dark

  12 people in normally lit rooms vs complete darkness

  dark room - became physical, 80% sexually aroused

  previous research found aggressive behaviour to be increased in the darkness but this is showing intimacy