Social Psychological Explanations Of Aggression

Social learning theory

Deindividuation theory

Production of behaviour

1. We learn by direct experience - Skinner's principles of operant conditioning (reward)

Observation

2. We learn by vicarious experience - e.g. seeing a role model behave aggressively and imitating the behaviour (especially if rewarded_

3. We learn from a child's Aggressive Role Models - e.g. carers, authority figures, celebs and similar individuals

+ SLT can explain aggressive behaviour in the absence of direct reinforcement unlike operant conditioning theory

- Although Bandura et al (1963) apps behaved more aggressively after observing mode, at no point were children directly rewarded for action

Consequently the concept of vicarious learning is necessary to explain these findings

- This theory can explain individual differences in aggressive behaviour between and within individuals

- The culture of violence theory for example proposes that in large societies some subcultures develop norms that sanction violence to a greater degree than a dominant culture

Some cultures may emphasise + model non-aggressive behaviour, producing individuals that show low levels of aggression. Diffs w/in individuals can be related to selective reinforcement and context-deponent learning

People respond diff in diff situations bc they observed agg is rewarded in some situations + not others

1. Approaches/Nature vs Nurture

- bio exps may be better as they argue case for nature rather than nurture.

- high levels of male hormone testosterone have been cited as primary causal agent in aggressive behaviour

- these cases together w/other bio exps cast doubt on agg being purely a learned behaviour

- SLT however point to societies that exhibit no agg behaviour as power evidence of dominant role played by learning thus supporting nurture side

2. Ethical issues in SLT research

- Ethical issues make it difficult to test SLT experimentally bc exposing kids to agg behaviour w/knowledge that they may reproduce it in their own behaviour raises ethical issues concerning need to protect pps from psych and phys harm

- thus difficult to test exp hypotheses about SLT + difficult to establish scientific credibility

3. Cultural bias

- much of research is carried out in Western societies + emphasise role of media in causing aggressive behaviour

- problem if these theories are then generalised cross-culturally

ALTHOUGH

- can be argued as strength as its able to explain diff levels of agg in diff cultures

- e.g. among !Kung San people of Kalahari desert agg is comparatively rare as parents don't use physical punishment + agg is devalued by society as whole

Bandura et al (1963) - bobo doll study

Bandura and Walters (1963)

Williams (1985)

Charlton et al (2000)

Conducted v famous exp involving kids watching film of adult model kicking + punching bobo doll

Some kids just saw agg behaviour, some saw it being rewarded + some saw model being punished

After watching film, kids = observed playing w/toys (incl bobo) & behaviour was observed + recorded

Bandura found those kids who either saw just agg or saw model being rewarded were most likely to imitate the behaviour

Those who saw the model being punished were least likely to imitate the agg behaviour

Conclusion:

Bandura's research supports idea agg is learned through process of SL bc it demos how agg role models have directly influenced likelihood of child imitating their agg acts

Found that children who saw the model being rewarded for aggressive acts showed a high level of aggression in their own play.

Those who saw model punished showed a low level of agg in their play while those in no-reward, no punishment group were somewhere between these two levels of aggression

Bandura called this type of learning vicarious learning - children were learning about likely consequences of actions + then adjusting their subsequent behaviour accordingly

Found the level of verbal and physical agg among children in a remote Canadian community increased after the intro of TV, again suggesting media to be an influential source of imitative aggression

- demonstrates SLT as effective explanation of aggressive behaviour as it shows that agg TV does directly influence agg levels through observational learning

Assessed level of agg in children on island of St Helena before + after intro of satellite TV in 1995

- levels of agg among children were initially low + remained so after TV was introduced suggesting that exposure to modelled agg on TV does necessary lead to a rise in imitative agg

1. Zimbardo distinguished between individuated behaviour and deindividuated behaviour

---individuated = rational, conforms to acceptable social standards + don't normally act aggressively due to soc norms inhibiting such behaviour)

---deindividuated = based on primitive urges, not conforming to soc norms leading to agg acts, larger the crowd the more faceless as we have greater anonymity

2. Deindividuation is more likely to occur when: its dark, person is wearing uniform/costume, person is in crowd, person is under influence of drugs or alcohol

3. Diener's deindividuation theory suggests it occurs when self-awareness is blocked by environmental events; people feel diff (e.g. caught up in present + less able to consider consequences + perception becomes distorted)

4. Factors critical for deindividuated state: strong feelings of group membership, increased levels of arousal, + focus on external rather than internal events, anonymity

5. Prentice-Dunn + Rogers (1982) modified Diener's theory to distinguish between public self awareness + private self awareness

1. Zimbardo's Hoods study (1969)

2. Watson's Cross-Cultural study (1973)

3. Johnson and Downing

4. Postmes and Spears' meta analysis

5. Prentice-Dunn (1960)

Female students to investigate role of deindivid in agg behaviour

Half were allocated in deindividuated condition + wore bulky lab coats, hoods hiding faces and spoken to in groups of 4 + never referred to by name

Other half in individuated condition + wore normal clothes, given name tags + introduced to each other by name

All apps asked to give electric shocks to confederate

During exp confederate could be seen + pretended to be in extreme discomfort

Findings:

Deindividuated group gave 2x as many shocks as individuated group + was concluded that deindividuated people more likely to indulge in agg behaviour

Conclusion

suggests relationship between anonymity and aggression levels

Watson examined anthropological records to find out how many people from diff cultures prepared themselves for warfare

He found some cultures adopted a form of ritual covering before going to fight

Watson divided cultures into those who were brutal + cruel to enemies and those who weren't

Findings:

13 cultures who were prone to torture or mutilate their opponents, 12 adopted disguises + so deemed deindividuated

Only 3 of the less cruel cultures were categorised as deindividuated

Conclusion:

Shows a strong association between wearing some form of disguise and aggression toward enemy

In one condition they put pps in KKK costumes

In second condition in nurse costumes

Findings:

- those dressed as members of KKK administered more shocks than pps in nurse costume

- Nurses gave less shocks than controls

- felt more responsible for person receiving them bc of outfit

Conclusion:

Shows uniforms can go both ways (either pro-soc or anti-soc)

Meta analysis of 60 studies on deindividuation + found no consistent findings to support major claims regarding the impact of deindividuation

They suggest that behaviour change of individuals in large groups has more to do with group norms than anything else

Found that deindividuation could lead to either pro-social or antisocial behaviour depending on situational factors

- when pro-soc environmental cues were present (i.e. pro-soc model) deindividuated participants performed significantly more altruistic acts and significantly fewer anti-social acts compared to a control group

Strength:

1. Research support

Zimbardo's hood's study

2. Further research evidence support

Watson's cross-cultural study

Weakness:

1. Lack of support for deindividuation

Postmes and Spears'

2. Deinviduation link with pro-social behaviour

Prentice-Dunn (1960)

1. Determinism

2. Practical applications

- for example, can be applied to prison uniforms e.g. allowing them to wear their own clothes

3. Gender bias

Canaveral et al (1970) found male + female groups respond diff under deindividuation conditions reflecting a gender bias in this theory

- an increase in agg was obtained only in the all-male groups

Diener et al (1973) found greater disinhibition of agg in males

Thus evidence indicates males may be more prone to disinhibition of agg behaviour when deindividuated

1. Aggression is the result of the situation or environment

2. Aggression is the result of the dispositions or personalities of the individuals

1. Aggression in Educational settings - students + teachers at all academic levels are victims of physical assault, verbal threat and vandalism of property

2. Aggression in healthcare settings

3. Aggression in the police

4. Aggression in prisons

Deprivation model (situational)

Importation model (dispositional)

1. Dep model refers to the prisoners experiencing a lack of human needs which is highly frustrating + may lead to aggressive reactions

2. Prisoners are deprived of:

- freedoms: prisoners aren't trusted to live in free world, they have to ask before they eat, sleep, shower, interact

- control: prisoners have now power + few choices to make; prisoners often told what to do but not informed reasons why

- goods and services: inmates don't have the 'stuff' we expect in free world; this deprivation can bring sense of failure to those inside

3. Lack of female companionship leads to many opportunities for homosexual behaviour and can result in anxieties for the prisoner

As result of all these deprivations, its likely the prisoner will express their frustration through violence and aggression - usually toward staff

1. It says agg occurs bc of characteristics that members bring w/them

2. Subcultures = created w/in prison such as Convict subcultures: prisoners influenced by deprivation prior to being imprisoned + bring values of that subculture inside w/them

3. Cheeseman (2003) said men in prison have a certain way of behaving + then apply that behaviour to their new institutional setting

4. Another personal characteristic found to be of importance amongst inmates = drug/alcohol dependency

5. Canadian study by Mills, Kroner and Weekes (1998) found inmates who had higher level of alcohol dependency = associated w/greater levels of aggression

Other institutions:

1. An institution that people generally volunteer to join might attract people who are aggressive by nature (i.e. army)

2. They may see army as outlet for aggressive behaviour

Therefore, its the expression of personalities of those who join an institution that leads to agg, rather than temp change due to situation they find themselves in

Situational

1. Jiang % Fisher-Giorlando (2002)

2. Johnston (1991)

3. McCorkie et al (1995)

4. Poole & Regoli (1983)

Dispositional

5. DeLisi (2004)

(you can also refer to Jiang & Fisher-Giorlando (2002) and Poole & Regoli (1983))

Studied 431 male prison records in southern states of USA and found that the deprivation model was most likely to explain inmate violence TOWARD STAFF

- prisoners w/most restrictive regimes had the highest incidence of violence towards staff

-however this model can only explain aggression towards staff as the IMPORTATION model was most likely to explain inmate violence towards other inmates, as gang cultures persisted inside the prisons

Prison overcrowding leads to aggression, due to the increased competition of resources and the tendency to adopt violent defensive behaviours, either individually or through the formation of prison gangs w/extreme beliefs

One of the largest studies into deprivation model

Failed to support its major assumptions

Sample in this study included 371 state prisons in US + found little evidence to support the connection between violence + living conditions

Also point out that levels of stress associated w/imprisonment are generally consistent

- whereas outbreaks of violence (i.e. prison riots) are not

They claim serious violence is more a consequence of the management of prisons rather than general deprivation they endure

Among juvenile offenders in four different institutions , pre-institutional violence was the best predictor of inmate aggression

- regardless of the particular features of the institution

SUPPORT FOR IMPORTATION MODEL

Analysed records of 831 male inmates sampled from South Western USA

There was small but signif relationship between gang membership + prison aggression

- maybe subcultural values had been imported into prisons by gang members

Much of the research is correlational and therefore a direct causal link btw dispositional actors and institutional agg cannot be assumed

Research is culturally biased as it was carried out in US prisons + thus only applicable to those type of institutions

A weakness of this model is that it doesn't account for situational factors such as the fact that inmates might be frustrated by the lack of freedom, choice and family relationships. This model doesn't take into account factors like racism, which could act as a trigger for violent behaviour

1. Real world applications

2. Problems of investigation (methodological issues)

- difficult to establish cause and effect bc we cannot separate dispositional and situational factors in a prison environment

3. Determinism

4. Approaches - biological (nature v nurture)

- more universal theory of aggression