evolutionary explanations of aggression

• cuckoldry is a waste of a male’s resources because it contributes to survival of a rival’s genes and leaves the ‘father’ with fewer resources to invest in his own future offspring. Men in our evolutionary past who could avoid cuckoldry were more reproductively successful so psychological mechanisms evolved to increase anti-cuckoldry behaviours in men. This drives aggressive male retention strategies men use to prevent partners from ‘straying’ which is adaptive in our evolutionary history
• researches identified 2 major mate retention strategies involving aggression which are:

  • direct guarding- a man’s vigilance over a partners behaviour like checking who they’ve been seeing
  • negative inducements- threats of consequences for infidelity like ‘I’ll kill myself if you leave me’
• researchers found women reported male retention strategies in partners were twice as likely to experience physical violence at their hands. 73% of these women required medical attention and 53% said they feared for their lives
• bullying is a power imbalance in which a stronger individual uses aggression repeatedly against a weaker person. Researchers have viewed bullying as a maladaptive behaviour but evolutionary ancestors may have used it to increase chances of survival by creating reproduction opportunities
• in men bullying suggests dominance, acquisition of resources, strength and also wards off potential rivals. These characteristics deliver the ideal combination of access to more females and minimal threat from competing males so aggressive bullying was naturally selected because these males would have reproduction success. It also benefits the bully’s health because other children avoid them so they experience less aggression and stress
• female bullying more often takes place within rather than outside a relationship, and it is a method of controlling a partner. The partner continues to provide resources for future offspring. Such behaviour would be naturally selected because it enhanced the woman’s reproductive success
• One strength is explaining gender differences in uses of aggression. Gender differences could be due to socialisation but some are due to adaptive strategies like physical aggression is not adaptive for a female with offspring. This would put a mother’s own and her offspring’s survival at risk, so a more adaptive strategy is to use verbal aggression to retain a resource providing partner. Therefore such arguments can provide support for the evolutionary approach to explaining aggression
• One limitation is cultural differences in aggressive behaviour. Aggression is not universal like the !Kung San people of Africa have very negative attitudes towards the use of aggression. It is discourages from childhood in boys and girls and is rare because it is linked with loss of status within the community. Therefore since some cultures don’t show aggressiveness, such behaviour may not necessarily be adaptive
• One strength is real-world applications to bullying. Anti-bullying strategies usually address a bully’s deficiencies but bullying is still prevalent so perhaps a better approach is to view bulling as adaptive. Bullies gain advantages from bullying so the ‘meaningful roles’ approach increases the costs of bullying and the rewards of prosocial alternatives. Therefore viewing bullying as an adaptive behaviour may lead to more effective anti-bullying interventions