Aggression AO3

Neural and Hormonal Explanation 

Support for the neural approach to aggression is that there are case studies to support the role of the amygdala. Sumer et al conducted an MRI scan on a patient exhibiting abnormally high levels of aggression and discovered there to be a tumour pressing on her amygdala. This is because the tumour was causing her amygdala to become more active, sending more signals to the hypothalamus and therefore making her more aggressive. However, it must be noted that case studies are focused on specific instances for certain individuals. It would be inaccurate to generalise the effect of the amygdala on aggression to all individuals as these findings may not represent the wider population. The girl in Sumer’s study may have had other damages to brain which may have caused her to act more aggressively, therefore amplifying the amygdala's influence in aggression. 

Despite this, Mpakopoulou further supported this by conducting an evaluation of studies on patients who had undergone an amygdalotomy. He found that these individuals had lowered aggression ranging from 33%-100% post-surgery. This is because the amygdala was no longer able to send signals to the hypothalamus. However, not all patients’ aggressive behaviours had been completely eradicated – suggesting that there are indeed other factors which may influence aggression. This implies that the neuronal approach is flawed and more studies on other influences must be accounted for to draw a more accurate conclusion on the causes of aggression. 

A further support for the neuronal approach is given by Molly Crocket. She discovered that those who had been issued a drug which increased serotonin were more likely to act aggressively than PPTs who were given a drug which reduced serotonin. Serotonin is known to be an inhibitory neurotransmitter in the amygdala. This supports the neuronal explanation, as it suggests that the higher levels of serotonin inhibited her amygdala from sending signals to her hypothalamus. However, Crocket’s study lacks mundane realism as aggression was measured through an artificial money-split task. It can be argued that this is not an accurate measure of how PPTs would act given a real-life scenario, so is therefore not a plausible way to investigate aggression. This suggests more studies must be conducted in more realistic environments to draw more valid conclusions on the role of neurones on aggression. 

A support for the role of testosterone in aggression was through a study conducted by Dabbs et al. Where he found a positive correlation between inmates who had committed more violent crimes and their higher levels of testosterone. This implies that higher levels of testosterone are linked to causing more aggression. This is further supported by studies showing that men are more aggressive than women, as men biologically have more testosterone. However, Dabbs’s study was merely correlational so a certain cause-and-effect relationship cannot be established. Other factors such as upbringing may have increased their levels of stress, leading to their more violent crimes. This suggests that studies investigating the hormonal approach may exaggerate the role of hormones, so must take environmental influences into consideration. 

Ethological Explanation 

• Evidence for FAPs > Tinbergen > sticklebacks only reacted to red circle > red circle is feature of other male sticklebacks (sign stimulus), aggression is a FAP > other factors may have caused fish to be aggressive like repeated exposure to stimuli, stress > strong support as he is able to isolate specific triggers 

• Evidence against ritualistic behaviours > Jane Goodall > Chimpanzees > kill even when not provoked > not all ritualistic > can't generalise to humans 

• Support for genetic basis > Twin studies such as Christiansen and gene studies from brunner > support the idea that aggression is biologically determined 

• Cultural variations > Nisbett > south more aggressive than north usa > suggests there are cultural differences, ethological doesn't account for environmental factors 

Evolutionary Explanation 

• Studies to support different types of jealousy > Buss > Men more afraid of sexual infidelity, Cuckoldry and findings similar across cultures > HOWEVER some men still emotionally jealous so refutes > Questionnaire was hypothetical 

• Ignores the role of the social norms > Prinz > Looked at social norms for boys and girls > Boys more likely to be aggressive than girls > Social norms play crucial role > Girls more likely to be verbally aggressive, refutes as evolutionary states that girls aren't adapted to be aggressive 

• Ignores cultural differences > Thomas > Kung people, aggression looked down upon > Since come cultures are less aggressive, aggression may not be adaptive > May suffer from researcher bias as homicide rates are high 

• Real-world application > Ellis > Bullies bully to seem superior > Can give bullies prosocial tasks the provide them alternative source of status > Viewing bullying as adaptive can lead to effective anti-bullying interventions 

Genetic Factors in Aggression 

• Christiansen > Twins study > Looked at concordance rates for criminal behaviour > MZ – 55%, DZ – 22% > However it assumes that MZ and DZ have same environment but MZ more likely to be treated same > Exaggerates role of genetics 

• Hutchings and Mednick > Denmark Adoptions study > Kids w aggressive parent more likely to be aggressive themselves and since adopted, bio parent only has effect on genetics > However new parents usually similar to bio ones so also suggests genetics are exaggerated  

• Support for MAOA gene importance > Caspi > longitudinal study found that kids with short maoa gene become hyperaggressive > however only kids with harsh upbring became aggressive so even if they had short maoa > interactionist approach would be more ideal 

• Brunner > family study on 5 men > all abnormally aggressive > found mutation in maoa gene in all of them, impaired serotonin metabolism > however study only done on one family can’t generalise > maybe something else specifically wrong in that family > more studies must be done in other families to draw more accurate conclusions 

Frustration-Aggression 

• Support for frustration > Doobs and sears gave PPTs a hypothetical scenario > frustrating and non-frustrating scenario > PPTs reported theyd be more aggressive in the the frustrating as goal is blocked > however, questionnaire so may not acc reflect how theyd act in a real scenario 

• Support for effect of justifiability > Pastore > PPTs reported that theyd feel less aggressive if frustrating scenario was justified > only used a binary distinction: ‘justified or unjustified’ when in reality lots fall inbetween so responses may not reflect PPTs true feelings 

• Has real-world applications > Priks > Swedish football fans were aggressive to fans of other team when they were doing bad > support for displacement > explains real aggression such as why people are aggressive in sports 

• Evidence against catharsis > Bushman made PPTs angry and put into 3 groups > found that those who were told to think of anger source while being aggressive remained more frustrated than group told to do nothing > expressing doesnt always lead to catharsis and may maintain it instead 

Social Learning Theory 

• Bandura’s bobo doll study > supports role models and vicarious reinforcement 

• Bandura’s crime rates study > Those living in higher crime rate areas more likely to be aggressive > due to observing more crime and aggression around them > however cannot randomly allocate PPTs into groups > can't establish cause and effect as other factors like high poverty may cause more stress therefore aggression 

• Thomas > !Kung society > aggression frowned upon > less likely for children to observe and imitate > However homicide rates are high so studies supporting may not be reliable due to researcher bias 

• Nisbett > south and north usa > cultural differences so must have some form of environmental and social influence  

De-individuation 

• Real world applications such as aggression in institutions > Zimbardo prison > ppts either role of guard or prisoner > guards were given glasses and uniforms and felt deindividuated as they were given anonymity > normal members of public acted violently when separated from their sense of self > this can lead to interventions and better treatment of prisoners 

• Anonymity > Zimbardo had 2 groups (non-anonymous and anonymous) > anonymous were more aggressive > however was measured by issuing electric shock > lacks mundane realism and task cannot be generalised to real life situations as it's not an accurate measure of aggression where there are deeper motivations and extreme moral conflict involved 

• De-individuation doesn't always lead to aggression > deviance in the dark > anonymous college students were more affectionate > inaccurate to say anonymity = aggression 

• Support for group size > Mullen looked at 60 lynching reports, found that larger groups emant more harsh lynchings > however there is alpha bias as it was discovered that group size affects men only so more studies on women should be done 

 

Institutional Aggression 

• Support for gang membership > Mears et al > longitudinal study on children from areas with gang abundance > then looked at those who had ended up in prison > were more aggressive if they joined a gang and believed in code of the streets > longitudinal study provides rich data on dispositional factors > provides opportunity to create rehabilitation programmes 

• McCorkle > conducted correlational study on overcrowding and deprivation > found significant pos cor between violence and situational > however can't establish cause and effect and other factors may be more important which exaggerates effect of situational factors 

• Importation model > Kane and Janus > looked at PPT history of inmates > more aggressive inmates had history of lower education, more poverty > another study collecting data of history and overcrowding showed only dispositional factors were significant, therefore perhaps models like deprivation model are exaggerating 

• Studies which combine both factors show that violence against other prisoners = dispositional, violence against guards = situational, suggests combination of factors responsible and that interactionist approach is better > provides more targeted treatments  

Disinhibition, Desensitisation, Cognitive Priming 

• Support for desensitisation > Krahe et al > Showed PPTs films (violent or non-v) while measuring arousal > Habitual viewers showed less skin conductance > Also more willing to blast white noise to confed > However PPTs may have acted this way due to catharsis, this was not an accurate measure of unprovoked aggression > not all aggression is bc of desensitisation 

• Berkowitz and Alioto > Support for disinhibition > showed PPTs films depicting violence as vengeance > made ppts issue electric shock for longer > people more aggressive when shown as socially acceptable like vengeance > also supported by cartoon studies as children learn from cartoon models > aggression is made socially normative esp since models are not punished  

• Fischer > Support for cognitive priming > Men who listened to music with derogatory lyrics towards women acted more aggressively towards a female confederate and stated more negative qualities about women > Similarly, women who listened to ‘man-hating’ lyrics acted more aggressively towards men > Cognitive priming isn't gender-exclusive, effects both 

• Zendle et al. > Confounding variables in cog prim research > non-violent games less complex > found when complexity reduced in violent games, priming effects of violent games disappeared > supportive findings from studies must be partially due to confounding variables 

Media Influences – Video Games 

• Support from Bartholow and Anderson > made ppts play non-violent or violent game > those who play violent more likely to blast white noise > not accurate measure of aggression 

• Delisi > correlational studies found strong link to point where video games should be risk factor > correlation does not imply causation > other factors 

• Support from social learning theory > Bobo doll > children observe and imitate behaviour on screen had similar results 

• Defining aggression > Aggression defined in different ways e.g. blasting white noise > violence and aggression not the same > studies hard to compare > CP > can do meta-analysis (anderson) > aggression was defined in terms of thoughts feelings and behaviours > more valid