Ethological Explanation

    Cards (10)

    • ethological explanation
      explanation of aggression that focusses on studies of animal behaviours in their natural habitat to learn about human aggression
    • Lorenz
      Proposed aggression serves as an adaptive function to establish dominance hierarchies
      Also claimed aggression is an instinct all species & individuals have, regardless of learning or experiences
      Aggression often demonstrated in ritualistic behaviours rarely resulting death
    • Aggression as an adaptive function
      Animals become aggressive to defat other animals of same species + claim their territory
      Adaptive - species are then spread out in different areas, reducing the danger of starvation & competition for resources e.g. food, safety, mates
    • Ritualistic aggression
      Animal fights don't always result in damage or death instead involve ritualistic behaviours
      signalling differs in each species e.g. baring teeth, displaying claws, standing tall
      animals also use appeasement e.g. turning away from aggressor to show vulnerability -> injury or death reduces animal population numbers and threatens species' existence
    • Innate Releasing Mechanism (IRM)
      Physiological innate response that occurs when triggered by a stimulus
      E.g. we interpret something as threatening, an IRM occurs in the brain, leading to a FAP, usually aggression
    • Fixed Action Pattern (FAP)
      Sequence of behaviours that occur in response to a stimulus
      E.g. when a dog sees a cat running away from them, they have an instinctive response to chase the cat
      When cat is still, IRM isn't activated
      Lea claims fixed actions patterns are found in all species + innate, rather than learned
    • Weakness - cultural differences in aggression
      if all aggression is the result IRMs, then aggression should be universal rather than culture dependent. Nisbett found there was a higher prevalence of killings amongst white men in the south of America, rather than the north, in response to arguments and provocations. Nisbett concluded the difference was caused by culture and the aggression was a learned behaviour.
      this contrasts with the ethological explanation claiming aggression is an evolved and innate, adaptive behaviour
    • Weakness - research attempts to generalise results from animals to humans
      this is a limitation because human aggression varies with the use of weapons and levels of violence, and there are psychological stressors that affect humans more than animals such as financial pressures. This means the causes of human aggression may not be the same for humans and animals, and the ethological explanation jeopardises its scientific credibility by making generalisations of humans
      however, there are studies that show that human aggression may because by activity in the limbic system as a response to threat or stimuli, which suggests that just like animals, humans do have IRMs which may lead to aggressive behaviours
    • Strength - research support
      Tinbergen aimed to investigate the demonstration of FAPs in male stickleback fish which are known to be territorial during mating season in the presence of other male sticklebacks and all display a red underbelly during this season. The red belly is the stimulus that triggers the IRM leading to the FAP. When Tinbergen presented sticklebacks with wooden models of different shapes, they would behave aggressively if the model had a red underbelly, regardless of whether the shape resembled a stickleback or not. They didn't become aggressive if there was an absence of the red underbelly, even when they were shaped like a stickleback
      this shows there are IRMs in species that lead to aggressive behaviours (FAP)
    • Weakness - criticised for being biologically reduciontist
      assumes all aggression can be explained through innate drives & responses that are triggered by the environment
      this is a limitation because it reduces a complex behaviour that has both physical and psychological elements, down to one level of explanation rather than adopting a holistic view of aggression and acknowledging the role of various factors such as learning and cognitions