Aggression Flashcards - A Level Psychology AQA

avatar
Created by
Trish

Cards (31)

  • Aggression
    is any act which has the intention to cause either physical or psychological harm to someone
  • Hostile Aggression
    - aggressive behaviours where the primary goal is to inflict harm on someone for its own sake
    - tends to beimpulsive+ motivated by emotion
    - referred to asReactive Aggressionor hot blooded aggression
  • Instrumental Aggression
    - aggressive behaviours which are used as a tool
    - usuallypre-meditated+ less likely to be based on emotion
    - referred to asProactiveor cold-blooded aggression
  • Neural Explanations of Aggression - AO1
    The Limbic System

    - theAmygdala
    - function to regulate how organism assesses + responds to threats + challenges
    - INCREASED amygdala activity -> INCREASED aggression levels

    - theOrbito-frontal cortex
    - part of the brain associated with general behaviour regulation
    - includes suppression/control of aggressive behaviour
    - INCREASED OFC activity -> DECREASED aggression levels

    Role of serotonin
    -serotoninis an inhibitory neurotransmitter which helps regulate mood
    - LOW serotonin levels -> LESS able to regulate aggression
  • Neural Explanations of Aggression - AO3
    +Gospic et al (2011)-> participants played the Ultimatum Game while in an fMRI -> the Proposer offers to split the money with the Responder (participant) -> if offer is rejected neither gets the money -> when rejected increased in amygdala activity -> when participants were givenbenzodiazepine(anti-anxiety medicine) the number of rejections halved + decreased in amygdala activity -> cause + effect relationship between amygdala activity and aggression

    +Coccaro et al (2007)-> participants were shown variety of facial expressions while in fMRI -> participants either healthy control group or experimental group suffering withIntermittent Explosive Disorder(IED) disorder where intense outbursts of aggression -> found IED patient showed increased amygdala and decreased OFC activity when seeing angry faces -> support role of OFC + amygdala -> BUT lacks population validity -> people have disorder

    - biologically reductionist -> could be non-biological causes of aggression -> like growing up witnessing violent abuse at home -> grow up thinking aggressive behaviour is normal -> shows other explanations like the person's environment shaping their behaviours -> is incomplete explanation
  • Hormonal Mechanisms of Aggression - AO1
    -Testosteroneis a hormone produced in testes in males but women produce some as well
    - Testosterone levels higher in men
    - Testosterone involved in regulatingsocial status , dominance + competition
    - HIGHER testosterone = HIGHER aggression
  • Hormonal Mechanisms of Aggression - AO3
    +Dolan et al (2001)-> found positive correlation between testosterone + aggression in 60 violent offenders -> most offenders suffered personality disorders + had history of impulsive violence -> BUT correlation doesn't equal causation -> there could be a 3rd variable causing both more aggression + more testosterone

    +Van Goozen (1997)-> examined transgender people who received hormonal therapy -> found male to female receiving testosterone supplements became less aggressive -> female to male became more aggressive -> shows there's causal role of testosterone for aggression

    - Dual-hormone hypothesis(Carre + Mehta (2011))-> T is associated with aggression but only if there are also LOW levels of stress hormoneCORTISOL-> when cortisol levels are high blocks aggressive effects of T on aggression -> the idea that testosterone is responsible for aggression is oversimplified
  • Genetic Influences on Aggression - AO1
    Twin Study
    - Monozygotic: share 100% DNA + x% shared environment + concordance rate 61%
    - Dizygotic: share 50% DNA + x% shared environment + concordance rate 38%
    -Coccaro et al (1997)-> conducted twin study into aggression levels as physical assault -> found MZ = 50% chance if one twin assaulted the other also had, DZ = 19%

    Adoption Study
    - concordance rate between child and biological parents due to genetics
    - concordance rate between child and adoptive parents due to environment
    -Mednick et al (1987)-> carriers out adoption study on over 1000 Danish adoptees -> found having criminal biological father INCREASED criminality in child -> having criminal biological + adoptive father led to GREATER levels of criminality -> shows environment also influences aggression
  • Genetic Influences on Aggression - AO1
    TheMAOA Gene
    - MAOA = monoamine oxidase A
    - an enzyme which breaks down excess neurotransmitters in synaptic gap -> serotonin, dopamine, noradrenaline
    Alleles:
    - MAOA-H (high activity) = more MAOA = LESS serotonin
    - MAOA-L (low activity) = less MAOA = MORE serotonin =more aggression
    - MAOA-L leads to more serotonin so brain becomesdesensitisedto serotonin -> serotonin downs have usual calming effect -> harder to control aggression

    The Gene + Environment Interaction
    - MAOA-L gene only leads to aggression in individuals who have experienced trauma/violence
  • Genetic Influences on Aggression - AO3
    +Coccaro et al (1997)-> twins study -> found MZ = 50% and DZ = 19% -> supports genetics as MZ is higher since they share 100% of DNA compared to DZ only 50% -> BUT must be environmental factors as MZ isn't 100% its only 50% ->Caspi et al (2002)-> found for children who hadn't suffered abuse the version of MAOA gene had no effect on their anti-social behaviour -> but for children who experienced severe abuse MAOA-L lead to high levels of anti-social behaviour -> sheds light on environment factors

    + study support ->Brunner's Syndromediscovered in Dutch family -> men had below average IQ (85) were very aggressive -> men involved in impulsive aggression: arson/stabbing/rape -> share same rate mutation to MAOA gene which leads them to produce less MAOA so are more aggressive
  • Genetic Influences on Aggression - AO3
    - deterministic -> believe external/internal forces control how someone behaves and they have no control over their own actions -> what about the criminal justice system? -> should they be held accountable for their actions? -> or be exempt from recovering punishment if they have no choice on their aggressive behaviours?
  • Ethological Explanation for Aggression - AO1
    Aggression is adaptive
    - if aggression is innate, it must be adaptive
    - aggression allows members of a species to compete for resources indirectly
    - aggression is a tool used by species to establishdominanceover others -> HIGHER social status = MORE resources + MORE mates

    RitualisticAggression (Lorenz)
    - observed intra-species aggression doesn't lead to serious injury
    - animals use ritualistic displays of aggression tointimidateto settle disputes without life-threatening engagement
    - also suggests infra-species confrontations end withritualistic appeasement displays-> these are innate displays which signal loser has accepted defeat and fighting doesn't need to continue

    Innate Releasing Mechanisms + Fixed Action Patterns
    - Innate Releasing Mechanisms (IRM) is a biological process which once activated by something in the environment (sign stimulus) triggers a sequence of behaviours
    - Fixed Action Patterns (FAP) is a set sequence of innate behaviours which is triggered by an IRM
    - Features of FAP: stereotyped (same behaviour everytime), universal, unaffected by learning, single-purpose

    Tinbergen (1951)
    - during mating season, he presented malestickleback fishwith various models of rival mates
    - wide variety of shapes, some models had red belly some didn't
    - FOUND the sign stimulus was the red belly -> the fish's IRM hardwired them to produce the FAP once the sign stimulus was present -> even with red shaped models the fish displayed the FAP of puffing up and attacking
  • Ethological Explanation for Aggression - AO3
    + Evidence from genetics -> ethological explanation argues aggression is adaptive -> if true, aggression must be innate meaning its linked to genetics ->Coccaro et aldid twins study on physical assault -> found MZ = 50% + DZ = 19% chance that if one twin assaulted the other would to -> if genetic its because evolution is a genetic process

    - cultural differences in aggression -> evidence aggression is more common in some cultures than others -> contradicts ethological explanation because if aggression is instinctive, cultures shouldn't have an impact ->Nesbittlooked into homicides in USA -> found reactive violence was higher insouthernUS states -> because they have aculture of honourwhere allowing insults unchallenged is seen as weak + dishonourable -> therefore, environmental factors can have an impact on aggression not only evolutionary

    - Reductionist ->!Kung San-> tribe generally dislikes aggression + violence -> when young children are angry they are ignored to learn aggression doesn't give any results -> was observed that there were low aggression levels among the adults -> they are not aggressive shows culture is more important than evolution -> BUT children are aggressive despite no role models -> shows aggression must be innate
  • Evolutionary Explanations of Aggression - AO1
    Sexual Jealousy
    - a major motivation for male aggression
    - women are 100% sure a child is theirs they give birth to it
    - men can never be 100% sure because partner could be unfaithful
    - this leads toPaternity Uncertainty

    Cuckoldry
    - occurs when male unknowingly invests resources into offspring which aren't his own
    - from evolutionary standpoint this is a waste of resources because it does nothing to promote the continuation of their own genetic material
    - men who are able to avoid being cuckolded more successfully
    - this provides genetic basis formate retention strategies
  • Evolutionary Explanations of Aggression - AO1
    Mate Retention Strategies
    - any behaviours which are aimed at preventing infidelity these behaviours can be controlling or aggressive
    ->Direct Guardingis any behaviours which are aimed at monitoring/checking on the behaviours of the partner -> e.g. checking phone, and location tracking
    ->Negative Inducementbehaviours intended to induce negative emotions in the partner, to reduce her chance of cheating/leaving -> lovebombing, and threats of self harm/family/children
  • Evolutionary Explanations of Aggression - AO3
    +Shackelford et al (2005)-> studied Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) -> men completed Mate Retention Inventory -> women completed Spouse Influence Report -> found positive correlation between reports -> suggests domestic violence may be tool for mate retention strategies to control their partner and reduce the chance of cuckoldry -> BUT correlation doesn't equal causation -> states sexual jealousy = violence -> but men who are violent may need to be jealous as they causing unhealthy relationship

    - but doesn't explain all forms of domestic violence -> theory doesn't explain male + male aggression in homosexual relationships OR female aggressors in either heterosexual or homosexual relationships -> therefore cuckoldry can't be cognitive cause of aggression
  • Evolutionary Explanations of Aggression - AO3
    - theory is deterministic -> states men have evolved to be aggressive towards female partners -> but what about the criminal justice system? -> theory offers justification and excuses for violence against women as it just being inevitable -> does this excuse men for any punishment for domestic violence?
  • Social Psychological Explanation - Social Learning Theory - AO1
    - people learn aggressive behaviours through observation and imitation of others behaviour

    Meditational Processes
    1.Attention- we need to pay attention to the aggressive behaviour
    2.Retention- we need to remember the aggressive behaviour
    3.Motor Reproduction- we need to believe that we can recreate the aggressive behaviour with the desired outcome
    4.Motivation- we need to be motivated to engage in aggressive behaviour

    Identification
    - people are much more likely to imitate the behaviour of people they identify with (role models)
    - be increases through being similar
    - imitate people with higher status
    - imitate family/friends
    - imitate attractive people

    Vicarious Reinforcement
    - learning by observing the outcome of a models behaviour
    - if model receives reinforcement for their aggressive behaviour we are more likely to imitate in future
    - if model is punished for their aggressive behaviour we are less likely to imitate in the future
  • Social Psychological Explanation - Social Learning Theory - AO3
    + cultural variations in aggression -> !Kung San tribe have very negative attitudes towards aggression -> children don't have aggressive role model to copy -> children will not observe aggressive behaviour as being rewarded -> therefore reducing aggression due to the culture though observation -> BUT young children still show aggressive behaviour despite having no role models -> suggests aggression is innate possibly

    +Bandura et al (1961)-> children observed an adult interacting with a Bobo doll -> condition 1 = adult was aggressive towards the doll -> condition 2 = adult was not aggressive towards the doll -> found children in condition 1 replicated the aggressive behaviours towards the doll whereas children in condition 2 didn't because they had no role model to imitate

    - BUT lacks mundane realism -> Bobo doll are unlikely to be familiar objects -> they may be doing what they think they are expected to do -> they may not copy aggressive acts against other people -> therefore lacking ecological validity

    - ALSO BUT boys were more aggressive than girls -> even thought the model was a woman -> expect girls to become more aggressive as they can identify themselves with the role model as same gender -> therefore there may be a biological factor to aggression not discussed in SLT -> testosterone
  • Social Psychological Explanation - Frustration Aggression Hypothesis - AO1

    Frustrationis a negative angry emotion state which occurs when we are blocked form achieving a goal

    Frustration Aggression Hypothesis (Dollard)
    - FAH is based on the psychodynamic concept ofcatharsis(emotional release)
    - frustration acts as a psychological drive which motivates us to behave aggressively
    - when we do behave aggressively, the drive is satisfied and we feel better (aggression is cathartic)

    Displaced Aggression
    - sometimes we aren't able to behave aggressively towards the source of frustration
    - may be abstract/there may be consequences/morality/may be unavailable
    -Tripartite Model
    - ID (pleasure) = source of aggression
    - Ego (reality) = compromise -> displacement
    - Superego (morality) = inhibition -> don't be aggressive

    The Weapons Effect - Berkowitz + Anthony
    - demonstrated that frustration may be more likely to lead to aggression if there's cues in environment
    - participants given electric shock by confederates
    - had opportunity to give up to 7 shocks back
    - condition 1 -> gun on table -> 6.07 shocks given
    - condition 2 -> nothing on table -> 4.67 shocks given
    - frustration may prime us to behave aggressively and environmental cues trigger these aggressive behaviours
  • Social Psychological Explanation - Frustration Aggression Hypothesis - AO3
    + research supportGeen (1968)-> participants completed puzzle -> condition 1 = puzzle impossible to solve -> condition 2 = confederate kept interfering -> condition 3 = confederate insulted participant when make mistakes -> condition 4 = control -> participants given chance shock confederate when they made mistakes on different task -> strongest to weakest shock was condition insulted, interfered, impossible to solve, and control -> BUT lacks mundane realism -> puzzle task is unpredictable -> shock isn't meaningful aggression -> no consequence in the study

    - can explain hostile not instrumental aggression -> FAH able to explain why people leash out in reactive anger (hostile) -> but doesn't explain pre-meditated aggression to achieve goals (instrumental) -> shows theory is incomplete -> SLT may be better at explaining instrumental aggression

    - is aggression really cathartic -Bushman (2002)-> found participants who hit a punching bag ended up displaying greater levels of aggression towards confederate who angered them -> compared to participants who did nothing -> contradicts idea that aggression is cathartic as shows frustration maintains aggression not reliefs it
  • Social Psychological Explanation - Deindividuation - AO1

    Le Bon (1895)
    - in a large crowd mob mentality overtakes individuals
    - people lose their sense of individuality and engage in anti-social behaviour

    Deindividualization -Festinger et al
    - occurs when we are less self-evaluative and less concerned about evaluation by others , meaning the usual restrictions on behaviour are removed

    Role of Self-Awareness -Prentice-Dunn + Rogers
    - argued that deindividuation arise due to lack of self-awareness
    1)Privateself-awareness = relates to how we judge our own behaviour -> when in crowd pay more attention to group -> LESS self-judgement = MORE aggression
    2)Publicself-awareness = relates to how we think others will judge our behaviour -> when in crowd we are harder to identify -> LESS judgement from others = MORE aggression

    Deindividuation Factors:
    - uniform
    - group size
    - online
    - darkness
  • Social Psychological Explanation - Den-individuation - AO3
    + research support ->Dodd (1985)-> 229 psychology students from 13 classes asked anonymously:"if you could do anything humanly possible without being held responsible what would you do?"-> found 36% form of anti-social behaviour (aggressive) -> 26% criminal acts -> 9% were pro-social behaviours (help society) -> shows when anonymous more likely to be aggressive -> BUT people wouldn't give prosocial behaviours -> because consequences are positive -> and would be able to do normally

    + research support ->ZimbardoStanford Prison Experiment -> guards were deindividualized -> given guard uniform, reflective sunglasses, batons and etc -> guards became aggressive and abusive to prisoners -> BUT the prisoners also deindividualized -> same uniform, numbers (no names) and etc -> found that prisoners became submissive and not aggressive

    - contradicting research ->Gergen et alDeviance in the dark -> put groups of strangers into small pitch black rooms -> told they could behave however they liked -> found 100% of people touched one another by accident -> 80% reported feeling sexually aroused -> REPEATED PROCEDURE in fully lit room -> found 30% of participants still reported feeling sexually aroused -> therefore shows deindividuation doesn't lead to aggression
  • Institutional Aggression - Aggression in Prisons - AO1
    Dispositional Factors= explanation which highlights the importance of an individuals innate characteristics like personality

    The Importation Model
    - suggests inmates bring their past experiences + innate disposition with them
    - due to biological factors:
    - personality -> psychopathy
    - high testosterone levels + low cortisol levels
    - MAOA-L gene
    - low serotonin
    - due to environmental factors
    - positive reinforcement (from experience)
    - SLT -> aggressive upbringing
    - expected that inmates will continue to engage in aggressive behaviours in prison

    Situational Explanations
    - Frustration Aggression Theory (FAH)
    - blocked from achieving outside goals (lack of freedom)
    - deprived of privacy
    - deprived of quality + choice of food
    - Social Learning Theory (SLT)
    - social status through aggression -> vicarious reinforcement
    - identification with models
    - Deindividuation Theory
    - same uniform
    - personal identity erodes due to lack of freedom

    Deprivation Model-Sykes
    - inmates are deprived of:
    - freedom
    - autonomy (choice)
    - goods + services
    - security/safety
    - heterosexual intimacy
    - these paired with imprisonment lead to frustration which leads to aggression
  • Institutional Aggression - Aggression in Prisons - AO3
    + research support ->Edens et al (2002)-> conducted Psychopathy Checklist - Revised on male sex offenders -> examined prisoner misconduct over 2 years prior to assessment -> found there was a significant relationship between psychopathy + aggression (including physical aggression)

    - contradictory research ->Kelly et al (2014)-> conducted Structured Clinical Interview on 353 inmates see whether Anti-Social Personality Disorder predicted misconduct in prison -> found no relationship between ASPD and inmate misconduct over 1 year period -> suggest there other factors -> situational factors

    + research support ->Bierie (2011)-> had 1738 staff from 114 prisons to rate their prison based on quality of physical conditions (cleanliness, privacy) -> looked at number of physical assaults which occurred in each prison -> found lower quality conditions were associated with greater number of physical assaults -> therefore supports deprivation model leading to aggression
  • Media Influences on Aggression - AO1
    Disinhibition
    - most people believe aggression + violence is anti-social behaviour that's harmful
    - so we have inhibitions which prevent us from being aggressive
    - butrepeated exposureto aggression in media can lead us to believe aggression is acceptable + beneficial
    - SLT:
    - vicarious reinforcement with money + status + material gains
    - identification with characteristics that are relatable + protagonist

    Desensitisation
    - when we witness aggression actions the sympathetic nervous system becomes active
    - but if we repeatedly view aggression in media we become habituated to the effects
    - so our bodies no longer responds to aggression with anxiety

    Cognitive Priming
    - consumption of violent media provides us with violentscripts-> sequences of aggressive behaviour to use in similar situations
    - if we consume violent media these scripts areprimed(pre-activated) and we are more likely to use the aggressive scripts if we find ourselves in a similar situation
  • Media Influences on Aggression - AO3
    + research support disinhibition ->Greenwood-> found positive correlation between women idealising their favourite female action hero + self reported of aggression -> shows women identified with the female action heroes and were aggressive

    + research support desensitisation ->Krahé et al-> showed 21 participants both violent and non violent film clips -> found participants who generally consumed more violent media showed lower levels of arousal + self reported lower anxiety following violent film clip -> found lower arousal was associated with more aggression through measuring using white noise -> found general consumption of violent media was associated with desensitisation -> associated with more aggression
  • Media Influences on Aggression - AO3
    + support for cognitive priming ->Murray-> showed children violent + non-violent clips in fMRI -> found violent clips activated brain areas associated with emotion, attention and memory (hippocampus) -> supports idea that viewing violent media leads toscriptsbeing stored in memory for later use
  • Media Influences on Aggression - Video Games - AO1
    Why would there be a link between video games + aggression?

    -Disinhibition
    - SLT
    - vicarious reinforcement in games with in game rewards like exp, loot, and kill streaks
    - identification in games with characteristic that are relatable + can make urself in game
    - repeated exposure to aggressive games can lead us to believe aggression is beneficial

    -Desensitisation
    - when normally witness aggression in games, sympathetic nervous system becomes active
    - if we repeatedly view aggression we become habituated to effects and body no longer responds with anxiety

    -Cognitive Priming
    - consumption of violent games provides us with violentscripts- sequence of behaviours to use in similar situations
    - if we consume violent video games, the scripts are primed so we're more likely to use the aggressive scripts if in similar situation

    STUDY -Bartholow + Anderson-> lab experiment on link between video games and violence -> student played violent video game (*Mo
  • Media Influences on Aggression - Video Games - AO1
    STUDY -Bartholow + Anderson-> lab experiment on link between video games and violence -> student played violent video game (Mortal Kombat) or non-violent game (PGA Tournament Golf) for 10 minutes -> then participants completedTaylor Competitive Reaction Time Taskin which they could blast white noise at level of choosing -> found those who played violent game blasted at M=5.97dbcompared to non-violent game M=4.90db
  • Media Influences on Aggression - Video Games - AO3
    + correlational support ->DeLisi et alstudied 227 juvenile offenders with history of serious physical violence -> researchers carried out unstructured interviews -> found strong positive correlation between playing + enjoying violent games + levels of violent behaviour -> BUT correlation doesn't equal causation -> cause and effect isn't clear -> violent people could choose violent games not other way round

    +Willoughby et al-> longitudinal study involving 1492 students most female -> students completed annual survey about video games play and aggression levels every year for 4 years (Grade 9 to 12) -> found playing violent video games increased aggression over time -> BUT sample is all teenagers -> lots of changes -> doesn't mean that adults will change

    - methodological issue ->Barthlow + Andersonlab experiment -> lacks ecological validity -> blasting white noise isn't normal aggressive behaviour -> lacks mundane realism -> spend 10 minutes playing game (too short IV)