Lecture 2 and 3- Violence and aggression

What is aggression?

‘A behaviour that is intended to harm another person who is motivated to avoid that harm’ (Allen & Anderson, 2017)

What is violence?

Severe form of aggression designed to cause severe physical harm

Aggression has 5 components. What is the first?

Aggression is a behaviour- thoughts of being aggressive or violent are not included. Getting angry or frustrated, having a quick temper, or having hostile attitudes do not meet this definition (but often pre-cursors)

Aggression has 5 components. What is the second?

The behaviour must be deliberate/intentional- e.g. accidentally hitting someone with your car wouldn’t be considered aggressive as it is not deliberate

Aggression has 5 components. What is the third?

The behaviour must aim to harm the recipient(s) in some form- the term ‘harm’ refers to both physical and emotional harm. Attempting to punch someone but missing is aggression as the aim was to hurt them

Aggression has 5 components. What is the fourth?

The aggression must be towards another person- e.g. getting angry and punching the wall when in private would not be regarded as aggression, but the same act done to intimidate someone else would meet the definition. Also by this definition harming an animal wouldn’t count as aggression as it is not a person

Aggression has 5 components. What is the fifth?

The action is aimed at a person who is motivated to avoid the harm- this component is often difficult to discern. However, it therefore exclude self-harm/suicide as aggression

There are many taxonomies for aggression and violence. Give 4 examples

1. Reactive vs proactive

2. Direct vs indirect- more recent interest in indirect aggression (closely tied to social media- much easier to be anonymous)

3. Physical vs verbal- some people may rely on verbal aggression because they lack the ability for physical aggression

4. Domestic violence (inter-partner violence)- coercive, controlling violence, violent resistance, situational couple violence, and separation-instigated violence

What distinguishes proactive and reactive aggression?

Motivation for aggression

What is proactive aggression?

Deliberate and goal-oriented aggression used as a means to achieve a desired outcome e.g. a bully threatening someone to get their lunch money

What are the key traits of proactive aggression?

Planned and calculated, not triggered by provocation, often used to gain power, control, or rewards

What is reactive aggression?

Aggression in response to a perceived threat, frustration or provocation e.g. a child hitting another after being teased

What are the key traits of reactive aggression?

Emotionally driven (anger, fear), unplanned and defensive, triggered by real or imagined (e.g. delusions) insults or threats

How useful is the proactive/reactive distinction?

Many who think we shouldn’t use this distinction, large overlap between them, correlation tends to be at least 0.5. Distinction not ‘binary’- many acts contain a mixture of these attributes

There are many similar distinctions to the proactive/reactive distinction. Give an example

Instrumental (aggression done for gain) vs. hostile (more defensive)

Related but not quite the same thing

What distinguishes direct and indirect aggression?

How the aggression is delivered

What is direct aggression?

Aggression that is openly expressed and targeted directly at the victim- e.g. a student punching another in a fight

What are the key traits of direct aggression?

Visible and confrontational, can be physical (e.g. hitting) or verbal (e.g. insults), the aggressor and victim are clearly identified

What is indirect aggression?

Aggression that is hidden, subtle, or delivered through third parties, often without direct confrontation- e.g. sabotaging someone’s reputation anonymously

What are the key traits of indirect aggression?

Covert and manipulative, often includes social exclusion, gossip or sabotage, the victim may not immediately know who the aggressor is

How is revenge typically categorised?

Ambiguous situation- emotional response but often involves some degree of planning

How is poisoning typically categorised?

Can be considered indirect- not in their face, don’t often know it is happening

How are snipers typically categorised?

Can be considered more direct- still shooting even if it is from a greater distance

Classifying aggression is important, but the real aim of assessment is…?

To understand the ‘why’ of aggression- proactive and reactive aggression differ in their motivations and so this is important (different forms of intervention)

How do we study violence?

• Crime statistics (or other ‘official records’)

• Informants- professionals (parole officer, teachers) or others that know them well

• Laboratory behaviour- e.g. Milgram studies

What are the issues of using crime statistics to study violence?

• Have to wait for people to be violent, can’t manipulate anything

• Homicide is too rare to be useful in many cases

• Don’t see most violent crime (esp. with sexual offending- only about 3% of rapes appear on criminal records), not so much the case with homicide. And some burglaries, for example, may have underlying violent motivation but not recorded as such

What are the issues of using informants to study violence?

• Teachers often used as informants to report on violence in children, more difficult for adults (likely biased responses from partners, friends etc.)

• Ethical issues- what if they say something the police doesn’t know about, have to break confidentiality

What are the issues of using laboratory studies to study violence?

• Difficult to get people to be aggressive in a laboratory

• Often involves deception- can’t tell participants you’re trying to get them to behave aggressively

• Many people doubt the usefulness of these experiments- seen as trivial and not really what goes in the real world

What designs are often used in lab experiments to study aggression?

• Most famous is Milgram’s shock experiments, now often use ‘noise blasts’ or ‘hot sauce’ preparations to look at levels of aggression

• Some studies have ‘provoked’ aggression outside the lab- bump into a student in the corridor and insult them

Who were the participants in Cohen et al.’s (1996) reaction to an ‘insult’ study?

Students divided according to their state of origin- South vs North- testing the idea that Southern states have ‘honour culture’ (acting aggressively to defend your resources)

What was the procedure in Cohen et al.’s (1996) reaction to an ‘insult’ study?

Examined reaction to an ‘insult’- just before the experiment a collaborator bumps into them in the corridor and calls them an ‘asshole’. Looked at levels of testosterone and firmness of handshake during experiment

What did they find in Cohen et al.’s (1996) reaction to an ‘insult’ study?

Doesn’t seem to make much of a difference in those from Northern states, but in Southern states insult seems to make them considerably angry (but is that really aggression? Doesn't seem to fit with the aforementioned definition)

What do Anderson and Bushman (1997) say about laboratory experiments of aggression?

They can test causal propositions (e.g. playing a violent video game increases aggression) and therefore discover theoretical relations among variables that are never sufficiently isolated in the real world

Anderson and Bushman (1997) meta-analysed studies in the real world and in the laboratory. What did they find?

Both types of study show the same patterns for gender, trait aggressiveness, alcohol, media, temperature etc.

What was the procedure in Bartholow and Anderson’s (2002) study looking at the effect of playing violent video games on aggression?

• Two groups (UG students)- one played Mortal Combat and the other played PGA Golf for 10 minutes (involves the same sort of actions but difference in violence)

• Then competed against a confederate on a RT task- participants received a ‘punishment’ of a white noise blast

• For the first half of trials the participant was told that the opponent set the level of their punishment, but this was reversed in the second half

• Confederate was always female

• Told the purpose was to look at the effect of video games on RTs

What was found in Bartholow and Anderson’s (2002) study looking at the effect of playing violent video games on aggression?

Violent video game caused greater aggression and the effect was stronger for men- without this ‘cue to violence’ men were no more aggressive than women (if we accept that blasting someone with an aversive sound is aggression)

What type of aggression is Bartholow and Anderson’s study looking at?

Reactive- they’ve been punished by the confederate and have the chance to get the person back

What happens in the reactive TAP variant (Boccadoro et al., 2021)?

• Participants believe they are competing with an opponent who occasionally provokes them (e.g. by delivering high noise/shock or insulting feedback)

• Task makes provocation the most salient cue and measures retaliatory intensity and latency

• Reactive aggression is operationalised as increased aggressive output immediately following provocation

What happens in the proactive TAP variant (Boccadoro et al., 2021)?

• Same basic interface is reframed so that aggression can be used instrumentally (e.g. to reduce opponent’s future score, gain points or secure rewards)

• Provocation is minimised or absent, the decision to aggress is driven by expected outcomes rather than immediate arousal

• Proactive aggression is operationalised as unprovoked, strategic aggressive choices

Give 2 examples of self-report aggression scales

1. Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire- physical, verbal, anger, hostile scales

2. Reactive-Proactive Questionnaire (Raine et al., 2006)- originally designed for children but more widely used, ‘vandalised something for fun’ (proactive) vs. ‘had temper tantrums’ (reactive)

Give 3 problems of self report for measuring aggression

1. Do we know ourselves?

2. How do we compare to others?

3. Are we willing to be honest?

What is Snowden et al.’s critique of the RPQ?

• Claims many of the items do not measure aggression according to standard definitions

• Claims the two scales are more closely aligned to ‘aggression’ and ‘anger’ than proactive and reactive

• Lack of items that examine indirect aggression

What did Smeijers et al. (2018) find when comparing the RPQ and IPAS?

Reported poor correspondence between the Reactive-Proactive Questionnaire and the Impulsive-Premeditated Aggression Scale in a sample of Dutch forensic psychiatric outpatients, concluding the two self-report taxonomies are not interchangeable for clinical forensic assessment

What does Babcock et al. (2023) argue with respect to domestic violence?

Arguing for it not being a separate category of violence, just a specific victim

Concepts of proactive and reactive aggression may be useful in understanding domestic violence. How does reactive aggression show up in domestic violence?

Many incidents of situational couple violence fit this pattern- conflict escalates during arguments, jealousy episodes, or moments of emotional dysregulation. Research shows that reactive aggression is strongly linked to anger, poor emotional regulation, and threat sensitivity

Concepts of proactive and reactive aggression may be useful in understanding domestic violence. How does proactive aggression show up in domestic violence?

Aligns closely with coercive control, a pattern of domination involving intimidation, surveillance, isolation, and financial or social restriction. Not driven by acute emotional arousal but by a sustained strategy to maintain power over a partner

What does Johnson’s (2008) typology distinguish between? What does this say about domestic violence?

Distinguishes between situational couple violence (largely reactive) and intimate terrorism (largely proactive and controlling), demonstrating that domestic violence is not a single motivational category