Baron Robert, Richardson Deborah aggression. Baron Robert, Richardson Deborah "aggression" Robert Baron aggression

AGGRESSION AFFECTS THE RECIPIENT TRYING TO AVOID AN ATTACK

Finally, from our definition it is clear that we can talk about aggression only when the recipient or victim seeks to avoid such treatment. In most cases, targets of physical violence involving bodily harm or abusive verbal attacks want to avoid such unpleasant experiences. However, sometimes victims of insults or painful actions do not seek to avoid unpleasant consequences for themselves. Perhaps this is most clearly manifested in certain forms of love play that are sadomasochistic in nature. Here the partners clearly enjoy the resulting suffering, or at least make no effort to avoid or evade specific actions. According to our definition, such an interaction does not contain aggression, since there is no visible motivation on the part of the “victim” to avoid pain.

The same applies to suicide. Here the aggressor acts as his own victim. Therefore, such actions cannot be classified as aggression. Even if the goal of suicide is not death, but a desperate call for help, the suicide still seeks to harm himself. Thus, such actions are not examples of aggression.

1 There are also broader definitions in which aggression is understood as actions that cause damage not only to a person or animal, but also to any inanimate object in general (see, for example, E. Fromm “The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness”). (Approx. scientific editor)

HOSTILE AGGRESSION VS. INSTRUMENTAL AGGRESSION

As we noted, aggression can be presented in the form of a dichotomy (physical - verbal, active - passive, direct - indirect). Concluding the discussion of this topic, let us consider the latest version of the dichotomous division of aggression - hostile and instrumental aggression (Buss, 1961, 1971; Fechbach, 1964, 1970; Hartup, 1974).

The term hostile aggression is applied to those cases of aggression when the main goal of the aggressor is to cause suffering to the victim. People who engage in hostile aggression simply seek to cause harm or harm to those they attack. The concept of instrumental aggression, on the contrary, characterizes cases when aggressors attack other people in pursuit of goals not related to causing harm. In other words, for individuals who exhibit instrumental aggression, causing harm to others is not an end in itself. Rather, they use aggressive actions as a tool to achieve various desires.

The non-harm goals behind many aggressive actions include coercion and self-affirmation. In coercion, harm may be done to influence another person or to “get one's way” (Tedeschi & others, 1974). For example, Patterson observed that children use a variety of negative behaviors such as fist-banging, acting up, and refusing to obey, all in an effort to maintain power over family members. Of course, such behavior is reinforced when little aggressors periodically manage to force their victims to make concessions. Similarly, aggression can serve the purpose of self-affirmation or self-esteem if such behavior receives approval from others. For example, a person may appear “inflexible” and “strong” in his relationships with others if he attacks those who provoke or irritate him.

A striking example of instrumental aggression is the behavior of teenage gangs who wander the streets of large cities in search of an opportunity to snatch the wallet from an unsuspecting passerby, take possession of a wallet, or rip off expensive jewelry from a victim. Violence may also be required when committing theft - for example, in cases where the victim resists. However, the main motivation for such actions is profit rather than causing pain and suffering to the intended victims (Stevens, 1971). Additional reinforcement of aggressive actions in these cases can be admiration for them on the part of friends.

Although many psychologists recognize the existence of different types of aggression (for example, Bandura, 1989; Buss, 1961; Fechbah, 1970; Hartup, 1974; Rule, 1974), everywhere this position is controversial. Thus, according to Bandura, despite differences in goals, both instrumental and hostile aggression are aimed at solving specific problems, and therefore both types can be considered instrumental aggression.

In response to these criticisms, some scholars have proposed different definitions for the two types of aggression. Zillmann (1970) replaced “hostile” and “instrumental” with “stimulus-based” and “impulse-based.” Stimulus-induced aggression refers to actions that

which are undertaken primarily to eliminate an unpleasant situation or reduce its harmful effects (for example, extreme hunger, mistreatment by others). Motive driven aggression refers to actions that are taken primarily to achieve various external benefits.

Dodge and Coie (1987) proposed the terms reactive and proactive. Reactive aggression involves retaliation in response to a perceived threat. Proactive aggression, like instrumental aggression, generates behavior (for example, coercion, influence, intimidation) aimed at obtaining a certain positive result. These scientists conducted a series of studies in which they identified differences between the two types of aggression. The authors found that reactively aggressive elementary school students (boys) tend to exaggerate the aggressiveness of their peers and therefore respond to perceived hostility with aggressive actions. Students who demonstrated proactive aggression did not make similar errors in interpreting the behavior of their peers.

Dodge and Coya's research provided empirical evidence for the existence of two distinct types of aggression. Regardless of the choice of term to designate these different types of aggression, it is clear: there are two types of aggression, motivated by different goals.

OPPOSITE THEORETICAL DIRECTIONS IN DESCRIBING AGGRESSION: INSTINCT, DRIVING OR LEARNING?

That people often engage in dangerous, aggressive acts is hardly up for debate. However, the question of why they take such actions has long been the subject of serious debate. Sharply different views were expressed regarding the causes of aggression, its nature and the factors influencing its manifestations. While there are a variety of conflicting theoretical justifications that have been put forward, most fall into one of the following four categories. Aggression refers primarily to: 1) innate impulses or inclinations; 2) needs activated by external stimuli; 3) cognitive and emotional processes; 4) current social conditions in combination with previous learning.

AGGRESSION AS AN INSTINCTIVE BEHAVIOR: AN INHINED DESIRE FOR DEATH AND DESTRUCTION

The earliest and perhaps best known theoretical position related to aggression is that the behavior is primarily instinctive in nature. According to this fairly common approach, aggression occurs because human beings are genetically or constitutionally “programmed” to act in such a way.

Aggression as instinctive behavior: a psychoanalytic approach

In his early writings, Freud argued that all human behavior stems, directly or indirectly, from eros, the life instinct, whose energy (known as libido) is directed towards the promotion, preservation and reproduction of life. In this general context, aggression was seen simply as a reaction to the blocking or destruction of libidinal impulses. Aggression as such was not interpreted either as an integral, nor as a constant and inevitable part of life.

Having experienced the violence of the First World War, Freud (1920) gradually came to a darker belief about the nature and source of aggression. He suggested the existence of a second basic instinct, thanatos - the death drive, whose energy is aimed at the destruction and cessation of life. He argued that all human behavior is the result of a complex interaction between this instinct and eros and that there is a constant tension between them. Because there is an acute conflict between the preservation of life (i.e. eros) and its destruction (thanatos), other mechanisms (such as displacement) serve the purpose of directing the energy of thanatos outward, away from the Self.

Thus, thanatos indirectly contributes to the fact that aggression is brought out and directed at others. Freud's theory of the interaction of eros and thanatos is shown in Fig. 1.2.

The position about the instinct to strive for death is one of the most controversial in the theory of psychoanalysis. It was actually rejected by many of Freud's students who shared his views on other issues (Fenichel, 1945; Fine, 1978; Hartmann, Kris, & Lowenstein, 1949). Nevertheless, the assertion that aggression originates from innate, instinctive forces generally found support even among these critics.

Freud's views on the origins and nature of aggression are extremely pessimistic. This behavior is not only innate, originating from the “built-in” death instinct in a person, but also inevitable, since if the energy of thanatos is not turned outward, it will soon lead to the destruction of the individual himself. The only glimmer of hope lies in the fact that outward expression of the emotions that accompany aggression can discharge destructive energy and thus reduce the likelihood of more dangerous actions occurring. This aspect of Freud's theory (catharsis) has often been interpreted as follows: the performance of expressive actions that are not accompanied by

disorder can be an effective means of preventing more dangerous behavior. However, upon closer acquaintance with Freud's works, arguments against such statements are revealed. Although Freud did not have a clear position on the strength and duration of catharsis, he did tend to believe that this effect was minimal and short-lived in nature. Thus, Freud was less optimistic on this score than later theorists believed.

http://pandia.org/text/78/389/images/image004_74.jpg" width="520" height="528 src=">

One of the most interesting implications of Lorenz's theory is that it can explain the fact that humans, unlike most other living things, have widespread violence against members of their own species. According to Lorenz, in addition to the innate instinct of struggle, all living beings are endowed with the ability to suppress their aspirations; the latter varies depending on their ability to inflict serious damage on their victims. Thus, dangerous predators, for example, lions and tigers, which nature has generously provided with everything necessary for the successful killing of other living beings (agility, huge claws and teeth), have a very strong deterrent that prevents them from attacking their prey.

agents of their own species, while less dangerous creatures - people - have a much weaker restraining principle. When, at the dawn of human history, men and women used their teeth and fists to act aggressively against their fellow tribesmen, the absence of the above-mentioned restrictions was not so terrible. After all, the likelihood that they could seriously injure each other was relatively low. However, technological progress has made possible the emergence of weapons of mass destruction, and in this regard, self-indulgence poses an increasing danger - the survival of man as a species is at risk. Briefly put, Lorenz interpreted the desire of world leaders to expose entire nations to the risk of self-destruction in light of the fact that the human capacity for violence prevails over the innate deterrents that suppress aggressive actions.

Although Lorenz, like Freud, believed that aggression was inevitable, largely a consequence of innate forces, he was more optimistic about the possibility of reducing aggression and controlling such behavior. He believed that engaging in a variety of non-harmful activities could prevent aggressive energy from building up to dangerous levels and thus reduce the likelihood of violent outbursts. It may be a bit of an exaggeration to say that a person's threat of violence can be averted through a thousand other actions (Zillmann, 1979). Lorenz also argued that love and friendship may be incompatible with the expression of open aggression and may block its manifestation.

Hunting hypothesis. Ardrey, a Hollywood screenwriter and "amateur archaeologist" (Munger, 1971), wrote several books that introduced many people to the popular version of evolutionary theory. Ardrey claims that as a result of natural selection, a new species appeared - hunters: “We attacked so as not to starve. We ignored the dangers, otherwise we would have ceased to exist. We have adapted to hunting anatomically and physiologically" (Ardrey, 1970). This hunting “nature” is the basis of human aggressiveness.

Two further inventions, rooted in the human need to “kill to live” (Ardrey, 1976), make participation in social violence and war possible. First, in order to successfully hunt in groups, humans developed a language to communicate that contained concepts such as “friend” and “enemy,” “us” and “them,” which served to justify aggressive actions against others. Second, the advent of long-range weapons such as bows and arrows (instead of clubs and stones) resulted in humans becoming more successful "armed predators." In a conversation with Richard Leakey, a renowned anthropologist, Ardrey elaborated on the significance of the invention of such weapons: “Once we had this offensive thing, killing became so much easier that through violence we became different creatures” (Munger, 1971). So, Ardrey assures that it was the hunting instinct, as a result of natural selection, combined with the development of the brain and the appearance of weapons that strike at a distance, that formed man as a creature that actively attacks representatives of his own species.

Sociobiological approach. Unlike proponents of evolutionary theory, sociobiologists offer a more specific basis for explaining the process of natural selection. Their main argument boils down to the following. The influence of genes is so long-lasting because they provide adaptive behavior, that is, genes are “adapted” to such an extent that they contribute to the success of reproduction, thereby ensuring their persistence in future generations (Barach, 1977). Thus, sociobiologists argue that individuals are more likely to promote the survival of those who share similar genes (i.e., relatives) through altruism and self-sacrifice, and will behave aggressively towards those who are different or unrelated to them. , that is, who is least likely to have common genes. They will take every opportunity to harm them and possibly limit the latter's ability to have offspring with members of their own clan.

According to the sociobiological approach, aggressive interactions with competitors are one of the ways to increase the success of reproduction in an environment with limited resources - a lack of food or marriage partners. Apparently, successful reproduction is more likely if the individual has sufficient food and mates with which to reproduce. However, aggression will increase the genetic fitness of a given individual only if the benefit from it exceeds the effort expended. The potential cost of aggression depends on the risk of death or serious harm to those individuals who must survive to ensure the survival of their offspring. Someone's genetic fitness will not improve if aggressive competition leads to the demise of his lineage. Thus, sociobiologists convince us of the following: aggression is a means by which individuals try to get their share of resources, which, in turn, ensures success (mainly at the genetic level) in natural selection.

Criticism of evolutionary approaches. Although the various evolutionary theories differ from each other in many ways, their criticism is based on similar arguments. The criticism raises questions of evidence, demanding the need to consider other factors that may contribute to aggression or peacefulness; In addition, the problem of defining the concept of “adaptability” arises. First, proponents of the evolutionary approach do not provide direct evidence in favor of the concepts on which their arguments are based. For example, no genes have been found that are directly associated with aggressive behavior. Similarly, Lorenz's notion of aggressive energy was not supported (Zillmann, 1979). Another aspect of the evidence problem is that arguments are based on observations of animal behavior (Johnson, 1972; Tinbergen, 1978). The experience of generalizing observations of those living beings whose brains are more primitive and who are less influenced by social and cultural control than people is also criticized.

Some critics have accused ethologists and sociobiologists of tending to forget the variability of human behavior in their theorizing (Baldwin & Baldwin, 1981; Gold, 1978). Gould (1978) argues that our biological heredity provides the potential basis for a very wide range of behaviors that includes, but is not limited to, aggression and violence.

Why are we supposed to have genes for aggression, dominance, or anger when we know that the brain's extraordinary flexibility allows us to be aggressive or peaceful, dominant or submissive, angry or generous? Violence, sexism, and widespread promiscuity are biological in nature because they represent one subsystem of a wide range of behavior patterns. But peace, equality and kindness are definitely of biological origin. Thus, my critique puts forward the concept of biological potentiality as opposed to the concept of biological determinism - the brain regulates a wide range of human behavior, and it does not have an exclusive predisposition to any one form of behavior...

Finally, the very logic of reasoning about the manifestations of adaptability of any behavior is questionable. For example, sociobiologists admit: if behavior exists, then it must be adaptive. Baldwin & Baldwin (1981) give the example of the adaptive function of acne to illustrate the absurdity of this paradoxical thinking: “Pimples are necessary for a person to take care of his appearance, which, in turn, increases the likelihood of sexual intercourse - hence the inheritance of acne-causing genes.”

Aggression as instinctive behavior: results and conclusions

While the various theories of aggression as an instinct vary greatly in detail, they are all similar in meaning. In particular, the central position for all theories that aggression is a consequence primarily of instinctive, innate factors logically leads to the conclusion that aggressive manifestations are almost impossible to eliminate. Neither the satisfaction of all material needs, nor the elimination of social injustice, nor other positive changes in the structure of human society will be able to prevent the emergence and manifestation of aggressive impulses. The most that can be achieved is to temporarily prevent such manifestations or reduce their intensity. Therefore, according to these theories, aggression in one form or another will always accompany us. Indeed, aggression is an integral part of our human nature.

AGGRESSION AS A DISPLAY OF INCIDENT: MOTIVATION TO CAUSE DAMAGE OR HARM TO OTHERS

Given the existing conceptual vagueness and pessimistic conclusions regarding the idea of ​​aggression as an instinct, it is not surprising that psychologists have never taken this theory seriously. In fact, the idea of ​​spontaneously arising aggressive energy was rejected in its main provisions by the overwhelming majority of researchers in this field. A more common assumption is that aggression originates from drive, defined as “a non-instinctive motivational force resulting from the deprivation of the organism of some essential thing or condition, and increasing as such deprivation increases” (Zillmann, 1983a). In the case of aggression, impulses are considered as derivatives of aversive stimulation and their tension is reduced through aggressive actions.

1 From English aversion - disgust, antipathy. (Approx. scientific editor)

Aggressive drive: frustration and aggression

If you stopped 50 people at random on the street and asked them to name the most important determinants of human aggression, most would likely name a single term: frustration. Since this concept owes its wide distribution to several different sources, including personal experience, it can be reduced to at least two provisions that underlie the theory of aggression formulated by Dollard and others (Dollard & others, 1939). Taken together, these provisions are known as the frustration-aggression theory. Slightly paraphrased, they sound like this:

1. Frustration always leads to aggression in some form.

2. Aggression is always the result of frustration.

It is not assumed that frustration, defined as blocking or interfering with any goal-directed behavior, causes aggression directly; It is believed that it provokes aggression (encourages aggression), which, in turn, facilitates the manifestation or maintains aggressive behavior.

Bandura (1973) pointed out that these statements are extremely attractive partly because of their boldness and partly because of their simplicity. After all, if accepted, the enormously complex form of behavior that is human aggression can be explained in large part with a single intricate stroke of the pen. Therefore, it is not surprising that these formulations have received such wide recognition both among scientists and among the general public. But alas, a careful examination of each of them shows that both of these formulations are too vague.

On the one hand, it is clear that frustrated individuals do not always resort to verbal or physical attacks on others. Rather, they demonstrate the full range of reactions to frustration: from resignation and despondency to active attempts to overcome obstacles in their path. Let's imagine the following case. The student sent his documents to several higher educational institutions, but they were not accepted anywhere. This person is more likely to be discouraged than angry or enraged.

More obvious support for the idea that frustration does not always lead to aggression is provided by the results of many empirical studies (Berkowitz, 1969; Geen & O'Neal, 1976). All of them show the following: although frustration sometimes contributes to aggression, it does not so often. Apparently, frustration causes aggression primarily in people who have acquired the habit of responding to frustration or other aversive stimuli with aggressive behavior. On the other hand, people for whom other

reactions may not behave aggressively when frustrated (Bandura, 1983). We will consider this evidence in Chapter 4 and therefore will not discuss it in detail here. Suffice it to say that after conducting much work on the influence of frustration on aggression, most psychologists believe that the connection between these factors is much less strict than Dollard and his colleagues once assumed.

Taking these considerations into account, Miller (1941), one of the first to formulate the frustration-aggression theory, immediately amended the first of the above provisions: frustration gives rise to various patterns of behavior, and aggression is only one of them. Thus, the strong and tempting in its breadth definition, according to which frustration always leads to aggression, was soon rejected by one of its authors. However, despite this fact, the original expressive formulation still has a surprisingly wide circulation and is often found in the media, in popular discussions about aggression, or in private conversations.

Secondly, the assumption that aggression is always due to frustration also goes too far. When examined in more detail in the following chapters, we will see that there is little doubt that aggression is the result of many factors in addition to frustration. Indeed, aggression can appear (as it often does) in the complete absence of frustrating circumstances. Consider, for example, the actions of a hired killer who kills people he has never seen before. His victims simply did not have the opportunity to frustrate him. It makes sense to attribute this man's aggressive actions to the rewards he receives for killing (money, higher status, satisfaction of sadistic tendencies) rather than to frustration. Or let us imagine the actions of a pilot who, despite being in excellent spirits and the absence of any significant frustrations during the day, bombs and fires at enemy positions, killing not only the enemy, but also civilians. It is obvious that in this case, aggressive actions are highly motivated not so much by frustration as by orders from the command, the expectation of various rewards for a successful operation, and, possibly, a sense of duty or patriotism. In summary, the assumption that all acts of cruelty are the result of blocking or obstructing goal-directed behavior does not stand up to scrutiny.

Some additional aspects of the frustration-aggression theory. While the two frustration-aggression assumptions discussed are central to Dollard and colleagues' theory, they represent only part of the overall theoretical foundation. Some additional aspects of this influential theory are also worth considering. First, as Dollard et al. believed, three factors are crucial in relation to the motivation for aggression: 1) the degree of satisfaction the subject expects from the future achievement of the goal; 2) the strength of the obstacle to achieving the goal; 3) the number of consecutive frustrations. That is, the more the subject anticipates pleasure, the stronger the obstacle and the more responses are blocked, the stronger the impetus for aggressive behavior will be.

new behavior. Dollard et al further suggested that the effects of successive frustrations could be cumulative and would produce aggressive responses greater than either individual. It follows from the above that the influence of frustrating events persists over time, an assumption that is important for some aspects of the theory.

When it became clear that individuals do not always respond with aggression to frustration, Dollard et al turned to factors that inhibit the overt display of aggressive behavior. They concluded that similar behavior does not occur at the same point in time primarily due to the threat of punishment. To quote their own words, “the degree of retardation in any act of aggression varies in direct proportion to the expected severity of the punishment likely to follow from that act.” However, despite the assumption that the threat of punishment has a deterrent effect, it was not considered as a factor weakening the actual impulse to aggression. If an individual is warned against attacking someone who has frustrated him, after being threatened with some kind of punishment, he will still tend to act aggressively. As a result, aggressive actions may occur directed at a completely different person, attacking whom is associated with less punishment. This phenomenon, known as bias, will be discussed in more detail in the next section.

If, as noted above, the threat of punishment only blocks the implementation of aggressive actions and the incentive to such behavior remains largely unchanged, then what factor or factors weaken aggressive motivation? According to Dollard and his co-authors, the answer is to be found in the process of catharsis. Researchers have suggested that all acts of aggression - even hidden from observation, not direct and not associated with causing harm - act as a form of catharsis, reducing the level of motivation for subsequent aggression. Therefore, in the context of their theory, the proposition that a frustrated individual insults another in order to weaken or eliminate his aggressive impulse is completely unnecessary. Even actions such as aggressive fantasies, mild irritation, or punching a table can have a similar effect. In short, unlike Freud, Dollard et al were much more optimistic about the possible benefits of catharsis.

As we have already said, a frustrated individual, who is restrained by fear of punishment from attacking another person who prevents him from achieving his intended goal, may redirect his attacks to other objects. Although the most appropriate or desirable target for releasing a frustrated individual's aggression will be the person who blocked his goal-directed behavior, other people can also serve as targets for aggression.

Miller (1948) proposed a special model to explain the emergence of displaced aggression - that is, those cases when individuals show aggression not towards their frustrators, but towards completely different people. The author suggested that in such cases, the aggressor’s choice of victim is largely determined by three factors: 1) the strength of the incentive to aggression, 2) the strength of factors inhibiting this behavior and 3) the stimulus similarity of each potential victim to the frustrating factor. Moreover, for reasons we will discuss later, Miller believed that barriers to aggression dissipate more quickly than incentives to engage in such behavior as similarity to the frustrating agent increases. Thus, the model predicts that displaced aggression is most likely to be discharged on those targets for which the strength of inhibition is negligible, but which have relatively high stimulus similarity to the frustrator. A concrete example will help explain the nature of these assumptions.

Imagine a student who was frustrated by his professor, Dr. Patricia Payne (say, by not allowing him to take an extra test to correct a low grade in psychology). Since the urge to vent one's anger at Patricia Payne is likely to be very strong in this case and direct attacks are unlikely, a shift in aggression may occur. Now suppose that this student has three potential targets for releasing his displaced aggression: Dr. Teresa Tudor, a history professor; Patty, his little sister, and roommate Norbert Nash. According to Miller's theory, it is the younger sister who is most likely to be attacked. This may happen because she in some respects reminds the student of his frustrator (for example, she is the same gender as the professor, they have the same name), but at the same time this figure is associated with much less power to restrain open attacks. Predictions of this kind, as well as Miller’s theory of displacement during conflict, are presented in the most general form in Fig. 14.

shortcodes" cellpadding="15" cellspacing="10" border="0" width="60%" align="center" style="border: 1px #A7A6B4 solid; margin:20px;">

Social Psychology. Key ideas. R. Baron, D. Byrne, B. Johnson

4th ed. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2003 - 512 p.(Series "Masters of Psychology")

The proposed book is a concise but at the same time comprehensive presentation of the topic, giving an idea of ​​the fundamental knowledge of social psychology and reflecting the current state of science. Living language, an overview of a wide range of socio-psychological and general psychological theories and hypotheses, a wealth of illustrative and experimental material are the undoubted advantages of this textbook. It gives a clear and clear picture of the degree of integration and diversity of the fields of social psychology.

The book is addressed to students and graduate students of university psychology faculties and departments, as well as sociologists, philosophers, conflict experts, political scientists, social workers and teachers.

Format: html/zip

Size: 2.45 MB

/Download file

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction................................................... 8
Chapter 1. Understanding Social Behavior: Introduction...........15
Social Psychology: Working Definition...............18
Origin and development of social psychology........25
How social psychology collects information......31
Features of using this book................48
Conclusions and review...................................51
Key terms...................................52
Chapter 2. Social perception: understanding other people........53
Nonverbal communication: language without words......55
Attribution: understanding the reasons for other people's behavior.... 67
Forming impressions and managing impressions: combining and using social information...81
Connections: Integrating Social Psychology......88
Conclusions and review...................................90
Key terms...................................92
Chapter 3. Social cognition: understanding the social world... 93
Schemes and their influence...................................95
Heuristics: the mind chooses the shortest paths........................100
Potential sources of error: what prevents us from thinking rationally......106
The Interaction of Emotion and Cognition......................118
The Nature of Emotions: A Comparison of Views and Recent Findings......121
Links between Emotion and Cognition: Interesting Findings......123
Connections: Integrating Social Psychology........................129
Conclusions and review...................................130
Key terms...................................133
Chapter 4. “I”...................................................134
Self: personality components.........................135
Self-control and self-efficacy...................149
Gender as a key aspect of personality................................156
Connections: Integration of Social Psychology...................170
Conclusions and review...................................172
Key terms...................................173
Chapter 5. Social attitudes: assessing the social world. ... 174
Formation of social attitudes: how we develop our own views....177
When and how do attitudes influence behavior? ............186
Persuasion: Using Messages to Change Social Attitudes...195
Connections: Integrating Social Psychology........................212
Conclusions and review...................................213
Key terms...................................215
Chapter 6. Prejudice and Discrimination.................................216
The Nature of Prejudice and Discrimination......218
The Origins of Prejudice: Different Perspectives......225
Combating Prejudice: Helpful Techniques......239
Sex Bias: Its Nature and Impact...246
Connections: Integration of Social Psychology........................257
Conclusions and review...................................258
Key terms...................................260
Chapter 7. Interpersonal attraction: friendship, love and relationships.........261
Initial factors of the attraction process...................262
Close Relationships: Friends and Romantic Partners....................................280
Marital relations...................................297
Connections: Integrating Social Psychology........................305
Conclusions and review.............................................307
Key terms...................................309
Chapter 8. Social Influence: Changing Other People's Behavior..................................310
Conformism: Group Influence in Action...................312
Compliance: sometimes asking means receiving.........328
Submission: social influence on demand.........337
Connections: Integrating Social Psychology......347
Conclusions and review...................................348
Key terms...................................350
Chapter 9. Helping and Harming: The Nature of Prosocial Behavior and Aggression 351
The nature of prosocial behavior...................................353
The nature of aggression...................................369
Connections: Integrating Social Psychology......392
Conclusions and review...................................394
Key terms...................................397
Chapter 10. Groups and individuals: the consequences of belonging. . . 398
Groups: their nature and functioning................................399
Groups and task execution.........................406
Group decision making.........................416
Leadership: patterns of influence within a group......426
Connections: Integrating Social Psychology......436
Conclusions and review...................................438
Key terms...................................440
Chapter 11. Application of socio-psychological knowledge in the fields of law, work and health..441
Social psychology and justice...................442
Social psychology and work...................................457
Social psychology and health...................473
Connections: Integrating Social Psychology......491
Conclusions and review...................................493
Key terms...................................495
Subject index...................................496

Page number preceded text on it

Baron R., Richardson D. Aggression. - St. Petersburg: Peter, 2001. - 352 p.: ill. - (Series “Masters of Psychology”).

ISBN 5-887-82294-5

Baron Robert, Richardson Deborah
AGGRESSION
2nd international edition
Series “Masters of Psychology”
Translated from English by S. Melenevskaya, D. Viktorova, S. Shpak

Editor-in-Chief E. Stroganova
Head psychological editor A. Zaitsev
Scientific editor A. Rean
Editors M. Shakhtarina, I. Lunina, V. Popov
Cover artist V. Shimkevich
Proofreaders L. Komarova, G. Yakusheva
The original layout was prepared by M. Shakhtarina

BBK 88.6 UDC 159.9:612.821.3

The book by Robert Baron and Deborah Richardson is the first textbook in Russia on the psychology of aggression. An exhaustive review of theories, a variety of experimental approaches, conclusions and generalizations of the authors represent a significant contribution to the treasury of psychological science. Aggression is one of the key topics that is of keen interest to specialists not only in various fields of psychology, but also sociologists, law enforcement officials, teachers, philosophers - all those who professionally study the nature of human aggressiveness, aggressive behavior, and violence.

© 1994, 1997 by Plenum Press, New York
© Translation into Russian. S. Melenevskaya, D. Viktorova, S. Shpak, 1997
© Publishing house "Peter", 2001
Publishing rights were obtained under an agreement with Plenum Press.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form or by any means without the written permission of the copyright holders.

ISBN 5-887-82294-5
ISBN 0-306-44445-8 (English)

CJSC "Peter Buk" 196105, St. Petersburg, st. Blagodatnaya, 67. License ID No. 01940 dated 06/05/00. Tax benefit - all-Russian product classifier
OK 005-93, volume 2; 95 3000 - books and brochures. Signed for publication on August 17, 2001. Format 70x 100 1/16. Conditional p.l. 28.6. Add. circulation 5000 copies. Order 369.
Printed from ready-made transparencies in the Federal State Unitary Enterprise of the Order of the Red Banner of Labor “Technical Book” of the Ministry of the Russian Federation for Press, Television and Radio Broadcasting and Mass Communications
198005, St. Petersburg, Izmailovsky pr., 29.

Sandra, who even after fifteen years still encourages me to do things that surprise me.
SLAVE.

To all the special people who - each in their own way - helped me understand how important it is to distinguish what force - love or power - drives actions.
D.P.P.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION........................................................ ....................................17
New Chapters: Presenting Key Trends.................................................. 17
Incorporating many new topics: keeping up-to-date.................................................... 18
Incorporation of contemporary research materials: keeping up with scientific progress.................................................... ........................................................ .... 19
Changes in the composition of authors.............................................................. .............. 19
What hasn't changed: what works stays the same.................................... 19
Organization................................................. ................................. 19
Level and volume......................................................... ..............................20
Illustrations........................................................ ................................20
Relevance................................................. ................................20
In conclusion - a request for help................................................... ..........20

PREFACE TO THE RUSSIAN EDITION

Presented in Russian for the first time, the book by American psychologists Robert Baron and Deborah Richardson is one of the most significant achievements of world psychology in the field of studying aggression. Recently, the study of the problem of aggressive human behavior has become perhaps the most popular area of ​​research activity of psychologists around the world. A huge number of articles and books have been written on this topic. International conferences, symposia and seminars on this issue are regularly held in Europe and America. And of course, in this case we are talking not so much about scientific fashion, but about the specific reaction of the psychological community to the unprecedented growth of aggression and violence in the “civilized” twentieth century. And this reaction seems to us quite adequate and timely. It is still difficult to say whether the accumulated amount of various data and the conclusions made on their basis have already transformed into a new quality of knowledge about the phenomenon of aggression, whether we are closer to a new, deeper and more consistent understanding of the essence of aggressive human behavior. One thing is indisputable: all this colossal amount of data obtained in the course of numerous studies on aggression - theoretical and experimental, original and test-reproductive - is in dire need of systematization and generalization. R. Baron and D. Richardson took on this difficult work. We can state with satisfaction that luck was with them, success is obvious.

This fundamental work could rightfully be called “The Psychology of Aggressive Human Behavior.” Of course, aggression is studied not only in psychology: it is studied by biologists, ethologists, sociologists, and lawyers, using their own specific methods and approaches. However, as the eminent twentieth-century philosopher Bertrand Russell noted, the problem of the difference between love and hate is primarily a matter for psychology. I think it's hard to disagree with this. At the very least, psychologists themselves are unlikely to want to challenge this idea. Be that as it may, we can state that today the most impressive results in studying the nature and mechanisms of aggressive human behavior have been achieved in psychological science. Which, in fact, is easy to verify after reading the work of R. Baron and D. Richardson.

But it is quite natural that in this interesting, complex and intensively studied area there are still many unresolved problems, and there are almost more newly arisen questions than answers found. After all, as a rule, when it comes to truly scientific knowledge, one solved question poses a whole series of new ones to the researcher. In the case of aggression, questions begin to arise already when trying to define it. Is aggression exclusively a behavioral characteristic, and, therefore, can and should only an externally expressed action be considered as aggression, or can motives, attitudes, and emotions be aggressive? How does aggression relate to the concept of “intention”? Should we talk about aggression only in relation to situations of interaction between living beings? Can actions be considered aggressive if the recipient does not seek to avoid the attack? Is aggression always evil, or can it be constructive? Some of these questions have already been answered, to one degree or another satisfying most experts, others still remain controversial.

For example, some researchers believe that the term “aggression” is appropriate to use only in cases where the victim seeks to avoid causing physical or moral harm to her. In particular, such a view of the problem implies the exclusion from the number of behavioral manifestations qualified as aggression those specific actions that are performed in the context of sadomasochistic relationships. However, this position seems quite vulnerable. Indeed, regardless of whether we are talking about violence within the framework of ritualized relationships of a sadomasochistic couple (group) or about “ordinary” beating or rape, from the point of view of personality psychology, in both cases we are talking about aggression, and all the differences lie not in the personal-psychological, but in the legal plane. Essentially, in sadomasochistic relationships we are dealing with the response (manifestation) of aggressive impulses, but only in a socially acceptable form. No less difficult is the question of how to qualify the actions of a subject aimed at deliberately causing harm to himself. Should these actions be considered aggression? The answer to this question will also depend on whether the definition of aggression includes such a criterion as the potential victim’s desire to avoid external influences that could cause harm or pose a threat to life. Accordingly, depending on the situation, self-harm or suicide can be qualified either as a manifestation of auto-aggression or as a type of defensive behavioral strategy.

Most experts insist that only behavior that includes intentionally causing harm to living beings can be considered aggression. The introduction of the latter criterion into most existing definitions of aggression seems quite justified. However, there are problems here too. How, say, should breaking dishes during a quarrel be interpreted? Is this not aggression at all (after all, in this case we cannot talk about “causing harm to living beings”) or is it still aggression, for example, if the dishes do not belong to the aggressor himself, but to his victim? The discussed criterion can be accepted, but with one significant clarification: harm (or damage) to a person (or other living creature) can be caused even by causing harm to an inanimate object, if the physical or psychological well-being of its owner or user depends on the condition of this object. There is also a more general point of view, which consists in the fact that in general all actions that are “destructive” in nature are aggression; they all have a common psychological nature, similar motivation and, ultimately, represent a reaction of aggressive impulses to ersatz objects.

Particularly significant attention in the book by R. Baron and D. Richardson is paid to the consideration of the social determinants of aggression. Moreover, they are considered not only in sections specifically devoted to this aspect of the problem of aggression - for example, when presenting the theory of social learning and analyzing the results of empirical research carried out in line with this theory - but also when discussing the frustration theory of aggression and analyzing data confirming this concept or who do not agree with it. The idea of ​​the socio-ontogenetic determination of aggressiveness is supported by numerous results from studies of the process of socialization, social learning and ontogenetic development of the individual. Studies of the process of social learning have shown, in particular, that the specific nature of interpersonal interactions in families from which highly aggressive children emerge leads to a gradual, as if in an expanding spiral, development and consolidation of an aggressive behavioral stereotype, which is reproduced again and again in various situations of interpersonal interaction. . It has been reliably established that ill-treatment of children

child in the family leads not only to the child committing aggressive acts when interacting with other children of the same age, but also to the development of aggressiveness, a tendency to violence and cruelty in adulthood, to the transformation of physical aggression into an individual’s lifestyle. The concept of social learning is also supported by the fact that the real difference between aggressive and non-aggressive children is not that the latter, in a situation of interpersonal conflict, prefer aggressive methods of resolving it, but that aggressive children, unlike non-aggressive children, are deprived of an alternative , since in their behavioral repertoire there are no “scenarios” for constructive resolution of a conflict situation.

In connection with the issue of social determinants of aggression, the book also examines the problem of revenge. Revenge is seen as a response to aggressive influence, as a defensive strategy and as a way to preserve or restore “social face.” It is very important that the authors considered it necessary to specifically dwell on this issue. And this is important not only because the problem under discussion is of high social significance, but also because the issue of the connection between revenge and aggression deserves a special and very thorough discussion. In some concepts, in contrast to those presented in the book, revenge is viewed not as an adaptive defensive strategy, but as a manifestation of destructive aggression (for example, E. Fromm). At the same time, it is believed that the act of revenge does not serve as a defense against a threat, since it is always carried out after the harm has been caused, and therefore revenge is destructive in any case. However, in our opinion, the problem is much deeper, because often causing harm to the offender is not an end in itself for the “avenger”; the true goal of revenge is compensation for the damage caused, neutralization of the destructive consequences of the act of aggression. The fact is that the sphere of human vital interests is extremely wide and in no way can be directly reduced to biological interests. In most cultures, values ​​such as social recognition, respect within the community, and love from loved ones are of paramount importance. If we talk about those cultures where the custom of blood feud has the force of an unwritten law, which is often the only effective way to make an impression, then in this case the refusal to commit an act of retaliation poses the most direct threat to the realization of the above-mentioned vital interest. Moreover, the threat of losing respect, recognition, and becoming an outcast hangs not only over the person who refuses to commit an act of revenge, but also over his entire family, his entire clan.

Is anticipation of such a threat and revenge, as a proactive reaction to this threat, aggression or should this behavior be designated by another concept? Perhaps further research into the phenomenon of revenge will show that delayed aggression in some cases can be of a defensive, benign nature, and in others it can be of a destructive, malignant nature. At the very least, the very concept of “revenge” needs serious clarification.

Perhaps the most difficult thing to agree with is the fairly widespread idea that the basis of all forms of punishment (including officially legalized ones) is the mechanism of destructive revenge. The fact that punishment is applied post factum, some time after the harm has been caused, is not at all proof of its destructive nature. The potential possibility of applying a legally institutionalized punishment to an aggressor performs a socially oriented function, since, being officially, regularly and predictably applied, that is, having a legal nature, punishment is no longer revenge, but plays the role of a preventive mechanism, a means of preventing counter-normative, asocial behavior. Anticipation of legal consequences cannot but influence individual consciousness and requires a person to be more attentive to the possible consequences of his actions, while the absence of a legal idea of ​​punishment weakens this attention. Experiments have shown that the expectation of even such relatively safe consequences of aggressive behavior, such as the simple need to report in writing or orally about the actions committed, reduces the manifestation of aggressiveness, even in group forms of aggression.

A significant advantage of the book by R. Baron and D. Richardson is that its authors do not limit themselves to discussing questions that have already received clear answers, but touch upon the most complex and controversial topics, giving the reader the opportunity to become familiar with a variety of - sometimes diametrically opposed - points of view on the problem . (Compare, for example, the titles of two adjacent sections of the book: “Evidence that frustration facilitates aggression” - “Evidence that frustration does not facilitate aggression.”) Of course, this does not mean that the authors do not have their own point of view. They have their own specific preferences and sympathies associated with the individual characteristics of their theoretical positions, which they formulate quite clearly and are open to criticism. Thanks to all this, the reader gets the opportunity to enter into a free intellectual dialogue and understand his own attitude to the problem and to the positions of all other participants in its discussion.

In the final section of the book, discussing the possibility of establishing control over human aggression and coming to the conclusion that aggression is not an absolutely irrational and uncontrollable spontaneous force, R. Baron and D. Richardson complain that despite such an optimistic conclusion they cannot help the aura of pessimism that envelops them in the book. I think this is a rare case when the authors are seriously mistaken. It seems to us that the book by R. Baron and D. Richardson - unlike many other, truly pessimistic works on aggression - is charged with a healthy dose of optimism and, in a sense, can be called “an optimistic encyclopedia of aggression.”

Corresponding Member of RAO,
Doctor of Psychology,
Professor A. A. Rean,
St. Petersburg State University,
psychology faculty

INTRODUCTION

(REFLECTIONS ON THE FIFTEEN YEAR BREAK BETWEEN TWO EDITIONS)

Fifteen years is not the whole life, but, undoubtedly, a large part of it. Looking back, it is hard to believe that the first edition of Aggression was published in late 1977. Jimmy Carter was President of the United States at the time, the first episode of Star Wars had not yet been filmed, and large soda fountains were still around. Ayatollah Khomeini was not so famous, the term “ozone hole” was unusual, and the acronym AIDS meant little and, of course, did not cause horror among those who accidentally encountered it. Yes, in many ways it was a completely different world.

The past cannot be returned, and it is impossible to shorten the gap between the first and second editions of this book. If extra effort will help to make up for lost time, then we, of course, have done everything possible to improve and expand the book, making many changes to it for this purpose. The most important of them are discussed below.

NEW CHAPTERS: INTRODUCING KEY TRENDS

Perhaps the most important - and certainly the most noticeable - change in this new edition is the inclusion of three new chapters:

Chapter 3. The formation of aggressive behavior.
Chapter 7. Biological bases of aggressive human behavior.
Chapter 8. Aggression in natural conditions.

In recent years, the range of research on human aggression has expanded significantly, and in these chapters we have tried to take this fact into account.

Chapter 3 (“Emergence of Aggressive Behavior”) examines the ways in which individuals internalize aggressive behavior through interactions with family members, peers, and other members of society. It also examines the role of aggressive behavior patterns and cognitive factors in the formation of aggression.

Chapter 7 (“The Biological Basis of Human Aggressive Behavior”) discusses the relationship between potential aggressive behavior and biological factors and the growing interest in the role of the latter in all forms of social behavior. Interesting issues such as the heritability of aggression, the role of sex hormones, and the role of the nervous system in aggressive behavior are discussed. In addition, this chapter examines some of the details of the complex relationship between arousal and aggression.

Chapter 8 (“Aggression in Natural Settings”) reflects the growing interest of researchers in understanding the behavior under study in a variety of non-laboratory (natural) settings. This chapter includes discussions on important and current topics, such as the effects of alcohol and drugs on aggression, sexual violence, the effects of pornography on aggression, and the relationship of aggression to sports.

We believe that each of the chapters mentioned contains important advances in the study of human aggression and, taken together, they significantly expand the scope of this publication.

INCLUDING MANY NEW TOPICS: CONSIDERING MODERN DATA

While the new chapters make the most obvious changes to the content of Aggression, they are only part of the overall picture. New sections have been introduced into chapters that have retained the same names or received similar names. Here is a partial list of new sections and areas of study that appeared in the second edition:

Chapter 1. Aggression: definition and basic theories
Cognitive models of aggressive behavior
Regulators of aggressive behavior

Chapter 2. Methods for the systematic study of aggression
Archival research
Verbal information
Naturalistic observations
Personality scales

Chapter 3. Development of aggressive behavior

Chapter 4. Social determinants of aggression
Emotional and cognitive processes
Revenge as protection
Revenge as a way not to lose your dignity in the eyes of others

Chapter 5. External determinants of aggression
Archival research
Effects of air pollution on aggression

Chapter 6. Individual determinants of aggression: personality, attitudes and gender
Anxiety and aggression: fear of social disapproval
Hostility attribution bias: Attributing bad intentions to others
Irritability and emotional sensitivity: violent reaction to provocation
The root cause of gender differences in aggression: genetics or social roles?

Chapter 7. Biological basis of aggressive human behavior

Chapter 8. Aggression in natural conditions

Chapter 9. Preventive measures and aggression management
Attributions and aggression: as an answer to the question “why?” can influence the course of aggression
Apologies or justifications: why is it beneficial to say “sorry”
Social skills training: how to learn not to create problems for yourself

INCLUSION OF MODERN RESEARCH MATERIALS: KEEPING UP WITH SCIENTIFIC PROGRESS

The theoretical background and research directions discussed in the first edition are retained in many cases. For each issue, updated modern data is provided. More than 25% of the quotes in this book are from books published in 1987 or later.

One of the most important changes concerns the composition of the authors. Deborah Richardson, as my co-author, made a huge contribution to this publication. Despite our shared interest in the topic of human aggression, our theoretical views and research programs are quite different, and this significantly enriches the book. We would like to note that the appearance of our names on the title page in no way corresponds to the contribution made, but merely reflects the historically established order according to which contributing authors are usually mentioned second. We consider ourselves absolutely equal co-authors, and our cooperation - equal in pursuit of a common goal.

WHAT REMAINS UNCHANGED: WHAT WORKS REMAINS IN FORCE

We are pleased to note that the first edition of this book was well received by both students and our professional colleagues. Due to this success, the following features are left unchanged:

ORGANIZATION

We firmly believe that effective communication requires clear organization. Accordingly, considerable attention has been paid to this issue. The material within the chapters is organized clearly and, whenever possible, methodically. The chapters contain important cross-references that point out connections between topics covered in different parts of the book.

LEVEL AND VOLUME

Like the previous one, the second edition is written in such a way that it can be understood by readers who do not have special training in the behavioral sciences, and is also accessible to final year students of a variety of specializations. Since the material is presented in sufficient detail, readers will not only be able to glean a lot from the introduction to each section, but also understand the complexities of studying such a complex topic as human aggression. As for volume, despite the significant increase in the amount of material due to the appearance of three new chapters, in this respect the book differs little from its first edition.

ILLUSTRATIONS

The book includes many graphs and diagrams. All this illustrative material was specially prepared for this publication in such a way as to be accessible to everyone who is not familiar with the principles of illustrating scientific data. And since our own teaching experience suggests that a little humor never hurts, the book also contains several appropriate caricatures.

RELEVANCE

The main purpose of the first edition was to review current knowledge about human aggression. As mentioned above, the new edition maintains the same approach. The main consideration is the following: it is always possible to trace the connection of most new research and theories with earlier ideas, but if modern data is not included in the text, then for some readers they may remain unknown. Therefore, where necessary, we fundamentally considered as many modern discoveries and justifications as possible.

IN CONCLUSION - A REQUEST FOR HELP

We sincerely believe that our efforts to improve the book have been successful. We believe it is more comprehensive and useful than the first edition. However, recognizing that there is no limit to improvement and much can still be improved, we look forward to your feedback. Please accept our assurances that we will carefully analyze all comments, reviews and suggestions and all of them will be taken into account when preparing the next edition. Thank you in advance for your help - we greatly appreciate it.

Robert A. Baron,
Deborah R. Richardson

1 In some Russian-language works on aggression, the author of this book is referred to as R. Baron. (Approx. scientific editor)

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Many generous and talented people helped us in the preparation of this publication. Without being able to list everyone here, we would like to express our gratitude to those whose support has been most significant.

First, we thank the many colleagues who, by discussing their ideas with us, sending us their articles, and responding to questions about the reprint, helped us keep abreast of contemporary ideas about human aggression. And since this book reflects their efforts as much as our own, the significance of their contributions is undeniable.

Second, we express our sincere gratitude to Russell Geen for insightful and constructive comments on an earlier draft of the manuscript. Knowing how busy he is, we deeply appreciate that he took the time to read all the chapters and discuss his experiences with us. Having accepted his comments and suggestions, we are convinced that the book has benefited significantly from this.

Third, we thank Craig Anderson, David Perry, Steve Prentice-Dunn, Sam Snodgrass & Jamed Tedeschi for comments on various chapters. Their help was creative and helpful.

Fourth, we express our gratitude to our publisher, Eliot Werner, for his support, enthusiasm and friendship during the preparation of the project, for his encouragement and good judgment, which we sorely needed. Working with him has been a pleasure and we look forward to continuing it in the future.

Finally, we thank Wendy Gardner for her patience when copiers broke down, magazines got lost, and graphics problems arose. We also thank Susan McDonough for reprinting the seemingly endless list of references.

To all these people and many others we say: “Thank you, thank you, thank you!”

The book is the first textbook in Russia on the psychology of aggression. An exhaustive review of theories, a variety of experimental approaches, conclusions and generalizations of the authors represent a significant contribution to the treasury of psychological science. Aggression is one of the key topics that is of keen interest to specialists not only in various fields of psychology, but also sociologists, law enforcement officials, teachers, philosophers - all those who professionally study the nature of human aggressiveness, aggressive behavior, and violence.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION.17
New chapters: presentation of major trends. 17
Incorporating many new topics: taking modern evidence into account. 18
Incorporating contemporary research materials: keeping pace with scientific progress. 19
Changes in the composition of authors. 19
What hasn't changed: What works stays the same. 19
Organization. 19
Level and volume. 20
Illustrations. 20
Relevance. 20
In conclusion, a request for help. 20
1. AGGRESSION: DEFINITION AND BASIC THEORIES. 22
Aggression: a working definition. 24
Aggression as behavior. 27
Aggression and intent. 27
Aggression as causing damage or insult. 29
Aggression affects living beings. thirty
Aggression affects the recipient trying to avoid an attack. thirty
Hostile aggression as opposed to instrumental aggression. 31
Opposite theoretical directions in the description of aggression: instinct, motivation or learning?. 32
Aggression as an instinctive behavior: an innate desire for death and destruction. 32
Aggression as instinctive behavior: a psychoanalytic approach. 33
Aggression as instinctive behavior: a look at the problem from the perspective of an evolutionary approach. 34
Aggression as instinctive behavior: results and conclusions. 38
Aggression as a manifestation of motivation: motivation to cause damage or harm to others. 38
Aggressive drive: frustration and aggression. 39
Aggressive tendencies: Berkowitz's theory of cues to aggression. 43
Aggressive arousal: Zillmann's theory of arousal transfer. 45
Aggressive urge: final comments. 45
Cognitive models of aggressive behavior. 46
Berkowitz's model of the formation of new cognitive connections.46
Interdependence of cognition and arousal.47
What follows from cognitive models.47
Aggression as an acquired social behavior: direct and vicarious
teaching violence.48
Internalization of aggressive behavior.49
Regulators of aggressive behavior.51
The Social Learning Concept: Some Important Implications52
Summary.53
2. METHODS FOR SYSTEMATIC STUDY OF AGGRESSION. 55
Experimental and non-experimental approaches in research.55
Methods for studying aggressive behavior using surveys.57
Archival research.57
Verbal information.58
Questionnaires.59
Personality scales.61
Evaluation by others.63
Projective methods.64
Conclusion.65
Observation of aggression.66
Field observations.67
Naturalistic observations.67
Car signals.68
Interpersonal confrontations.70
Conclusion.70
Laboratory observations.71
“Game” measures of aggression.72
Measuring verbal aggression: When words (or judgments) hurt. 74
Direct physical aggression: harm without harm.77
Criticisms of laboratory methods for studying aggression.88
Conclusion: How does a researcher choose a method and approach? . 89
Summary.90
3. FORMATION OF AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR. 92
Internalization of aggressive behavior.93
Family relationships.93
Complete and single-parent families.82
Parent-child relationship .94
Relationships with brothers and sisters.94
Family leadership style.95
Punishments.96
Control.96
Other factors.97
Summary.97
Models of family influence.99
Special Note on Punishments.102
Harm that punishments can cause.102
Effective punishments.103
Peer interaction.104
Teaching aggressive actions.104
Aggression and social status.104
Demonstration of aggressive behavior patterns: influence of observed
from aggression.106
Learning by Example: Looking at Other People.107
Becoming a victim of violence.108
Patterns of aggression in the media: the effects of exposure to violence in film and television.109
The influence of cognitive processes on the development of aggression.117
Reading “messages for aggression” in social situations. 117
Interpretation of “messages for aggression”.118
Choice of reaction.120
Reaction score.120
The reaction has been approved and comes into force.121
Stability of aggressive behavior: is it possible, based on knowledge about aggression in childhood, to make a prediction about the level of aggressiveness in adulthood?.122
Summary.123
4. SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF AGGRESSION. 125
Frustration: obstacles on the way to what you want as a prerequisite for aggression.126
Evidence that frustration promotes aggression.126
Evidence that frustration does not promote aggression.128
From frustration to aggression: mediating factors.130
Frustration level: 130
Prompts to aggression.131
Unforeseen frustration.132
Emotional and cognitive processes.133
Final comment.135
Verbal and physical attack: real and apparent provocation
as a prerequisite for aggression.136
Retaliatory aggression.136
Why do people take revenge.138
Revenge as protection.139
Revenge as a way not to lose your dignity in the eyes of others.141
Characteristics of the target of aggression: gender and race of the target as prerequisites for aggression.142
Gender of the object of aggression.142
Race of the target of aggression.144
Incitement from others as a prerequisite for aggression. 147
An order is an order: submission to authority.147
"Bystander" Strikes Back: Presence Effect
and actions of a third party.151
Words and actions of observers.151
Presence and status of outsiders.154
Summary.155
5. EXTERNAL DETERMINANTS OF AGGRESSION. 157
Heat, noise, crowded conditions and polluted air.158
Aggression and heat: the “long, hot summer” is back.158
Laboratory experiments.159
Archival research.163
Laboratory research versus archival research: resolving the contradiction.165
Noise and aggression: the sound of violence? .166
Crowding effects.168
Effects of air pollution on aggression.171
Continuation of the saga about Bill and Diana.173
External messages to aggression as determinants of aggressive behavior. 174
Individual characteristics as invitations to aggression.174
Objects as instigators of aggression: do they force the trigger to be pulled?
at him?.176
Mass media as a source of messages for aggression.178
Prompts to aggression: final remark.181
Self-Awareness: External Reminders of Who We Are and What We Are.182
Summary.186
6. INDIVIDUAL DETERMINANTS OF AGGRESSION: PERSONALITY, ATTITUDES AND GENDER. 188
Personality and aggression: Traits related to violence. 190
Are Personality Traits Really Stable? .191
Personality Traits Related to Aggression in Normals
individuals.192
Anxiety and aggression: fear of social disapproval.193
Hostility Attribution Bias: Attributing bad intentions to others.195
Irritability and emotional sensitivity: violent reaction to provocation.197
Locus of control: Perception of personal control and aggression.199
Pattern of behavior of persons predisposed to coronary diseases and aggression: why can the “A” in type “A” mean aggression? .203
Shame and aggression: from self-rejection to hostility and anger.205
Personality and “normal aggression”: some final thoughts
considerations.207
Abusers: completely out-of-control and overly-controlling aggressors.208
Absolutely uncontrollable aggressors: lack of restraining principles.209
Absolutely out of control aggressors: some assumptions.210
Over-Controlled Aggressors: When Excessive Restraint Becomes Dangerous.211
Excessively self-controlled aggressors, completely uncontrolled aggressors and aggression towards women:
a close enemy strikes again.213
Attitudes, value system and aggression.215
Prejudice and interracial aggression.216
Aggression towards “strangers”: the role of imaginary conflict.217
Value system and aggression: the effect of turning to the internal
to the world.218
Gender and aggression: are men and women really different from each other in this regard? And if this is so, then why? .220
Gender and aggression: men and women as aggressors.221
Gender and aggression: men and women as objects of aggression.222
The root cause of gender differences in aggression: genetics or social roles?.223
Summary.225
7. BIOLOGICAL BASIS OF AGGRESSIVE HUMAN BEHAVIOR. 227
The role of hereditary factors in the formation of aggressive behavior
person.227
Abnormalities caused by sex chromosomes.230
Y chromosome hypothesis.230
X chromosome hypothesis.232
Conclusion.233
Hormones and aggressive behavior.233
Evidence.234
Explanations.236
Conclusion.239
Central nervous system.240
Limbic system.240
Cerebral cortex.241
Interaction between the brain and the environment.243
Excitement and aggression.244
The influence of arousal on aggression.244
Predisposition to excitability, or reactivity.248
The influence of aggression on arousal.250
Conclusion.251
Caveats regarding biological explanations.253
"Distortion of the Truth" .253
"False Expectations" .254
“Fears of biological interference.”254
Summary.254
8. AGGRESSION IN NATURAL CONDITIONS. 256
Drugs.256
Alcohol.257
Models of the impact of alcohol on aggressive behavior.258
Ways to control aggression in a person under the influence of alcohol.260
Marijuana.260
Sexual aggression.261
Characteristics of a Sexual Aggressor.262
Alcohol and sexual aggression.263
The influence of alcohol on aggression towards women.263
The effect of alcohol on sexual arousal.264
Model of the influence of alcohol on sexual aggression.265
The influence of pornography on aggression.266
The influence of eroticism on aggression: promotes or suppresses?.266
Impact on women.270
Effect of intense exposure to pornography.271
The influence of eroticism on attitudes towards women.273
Aggression towards women.274
The nature of the sexual/aggressive image.275
Conclusions.278
Aggression associated with sporting events.278
Spectator aggression.279
Aggression among participants.279
Interpersonal conflict in natural conditions.280
Summary.284
9. PREVENTIVE MEASURES AND MANAGEMENT OF AGGRESSION. 286
Punishment: an effective means of preventing aggression?.288
Fear of punishment: when it “works” and when it doesn’t.289
How angry are potential aggressors?.289
Gaining benefits through aggression.291
The strength and likelihood of fear of possible punishment.292
Real punishment: what does it teach?.293
Punishment and criminal law: possible paradoxes.295
Catharsis: does “losing oneself” really help?.296
Relieving Tension Through Aggressive Actions: When Another's Suffering Leads to a Good Mood.297
Emotional catharsis: some specific conditions.299
Catharsis and behavioral aggression: Does violence today really lead to forgiveness tomorrow?.301
The Impact of Non-Aggressive Behavior Patterns: The Contagious Effect of Restraint.303
The Impact of Non-Aggressive Behavior Models: A Note on Relative Effectiveness.306
Cognitive methods for controlling aggression: attributions, extenuating circumstances and justifications.307
Attributions and aggression: as an answer to the question “why?” may affect
on the course of aggression.308
Mitigating Circumstances: The Interdependence of Emotion and Cognition
in the process of managing aggression.310
Apologies or justifications: why it is beneficial to say “sorry.”314
Inducing incompatible responses: empathy, humor, and mild sexual arousal as a means of preventing human aggression.316
Empathy: responding to the suffering of others.317
Humor and laughter.319
Moderate sexual arousal: does the feeling of arousal generate self-control? .321
Another version of the incompatible reactions hypothesis: industrial conflict.322
Social skills training: how to learn not to create problems for yourself.324
Managing Human Aggression: A Final Call for Optimism.326
Summary.

AGGRESSION AND INTENTION.
In our definition, the term aggression involves actions through which the aggressor intentionally causes harm to his victim. Unfortunately, the introduction of the criterion of intentional causing of damage gives rise to many serious difficulties. First, the question is what do we mean when we say that one person intends to harm another. The usual explanation is that the aggressor voluntarily abused the victim, and this raises many important questions about which philosophical debate continues, and especially among specialists in the philosophy of science (Bergman, 1966).

Second, as many prominent scholars have argued, intentions are personal, hidden plans that are not directly observable (Buss, 1971; Bandura, 1983). They can be judged by the conditions that preceded or followed the acts of aggression in question. Such inferences can be made both by participants in aggressive interactions and by outside observers, who in any case influence the explanation of this intention (Tedeschi, Smith, & Brown, 1974).

Robert A. Baron is Professor of Psychology and Professor of Management at the Lally School of Management at Rensselier Polytechnic Institute.

He received his PhD from the University of Iowa in 1968. Robert is the co-author of the popular textbook Social Psychology (11th edition), published by Allyn and Bacon, and the author of numerous other books and journal articles.

He is widely known in social psychology for his research on aggression and organizational behavior. Robert's interests include stress and social processes, understanding bias, social influence and group processes (especially in online communication), desire for control and stress reduction.

His presentation topics include: “Desirable Control and Dental Stress” (Park City Social Psychology Conference, 1998), “Prototypical Identification of Prejudice” (San Francisco Symposium, 1998), “Power and Arousal” (University of Chicago- Chicago, 2000).

Robert A. Baron is a member of such professional organizations as the American Psychological Association, the Society for Experimental Social Psychology, and the American Psychological Society.

Books (2)

Aggression

Aggression is one of the topics in which knowledge is of keen interest not only to specialists in various fields of psychology, but also to sociologists, law enforcement officials, teachers, and philosophers.

Aggressive behavior is one of the central issues in understanding human nature. The book by Robert Baron and Deborah Richardson is the first textbook in Russia on this topic. An exhaustive review of theories, a variety of experimental approaches, conclusions and generalizations of the authors represent a significant contribution to the treasury of psychological science.

Social Psychology. Key Ideas

The proposed book is a concise but at the same time comprehensive presentation of the topic, giving an idea of ​​the fundamental knowledge of social psychology and reflecting the current state of science. A living language, an overview of a wide range of socio-psychological and general psychological theories and hypotheses, a wealth of illustrative and experimental material are the undoubted advantages of this textbook.
The book is addressed to students and graduate students of university psychology faculties and departments, as well as sociologists, philosophers, conflict experts, political scientists, social workers and teachers.