A2 PSYCHOLOGY - AGGRESSION

A2 PSYCHOLOGY - AGGRESSION

1. BIOLOGICAL

   • 1.NEURAL & HORMONAL MECHANISMS
   • 2.GENETIC FACTORS

2. EVOLUTIONARY

   • 1. JEALOUSY
   • 2.INFIDELITY
   • 3.GROUP DISPLAY
     • i.SPORTS
     • ii.WARFARE

3. SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGICAL

   • 1.SOCIAL LERNING THEORY
     • CHILDREN LEARN THROUGH REWARD AND PUNISHMENT; VICARIOUS REINFORCEMENT (IMMITATION)
     • BANDURA'S ARRRM;ATTENTION, RETENTION,REINFORCEMENT,MOTIVATION.
     • SUPPORT
       • BANDURA ET AL 1961: BOBO DOLL
         • PLUS VARIATONS
         • (-) DEMAND CHARACTERISTICS
         • (-) NO PROCTECTION FROM PSYCHOLOGICAL OR PHYSICAL HARM
         • (+) PROVES IDEA OF IMMITATION
         • (-) LACKS RELIABILITY; CANT BE REPEATED DUE TO ETHICAL ISSUES; LACKS SCIENTIFIC CREDIBILITY
         • (+) SHOWS INFLUENCE OF MEDIA, LIKE BULGER CASE THEREFORE REAL LIFE APPLICATIONS
       • PHILLIPS 1986: SLT ON ADULTS - BOXING MATCH INFLUENCE HOMICIDES
     • STRENGTHS
       • (+) FACE VALIDITY - JAMES BULGER
       • (+) STRONGER THAN OPERANT CONDITIONING EXPLANATION BECAUSE CAN EXPLAIN AGGRO WHERE THERE'S NO DIRECT REINFORCEMENT.
       • (+) CULTURAL DIFFERENCES; KUNG SAN TRIBE - NON AGGR PEOPLE. KIDS NOT ENCOURAGED TO BE AGGRO THEREFORE NOT. PROVES IMMITATION.
     • CHALLENGES
       • (-)DOLLARD 1939: FRUSTRATION HYPOTHESIS, AGGRO CAUSED BY ENVIRONMENTAL CUES
       • (-)RUNICMANN 1966: RELATIVE DEPRIVATION, AGGRO CAUSED BY WHAT YOU HAVE AND WHAT YOU THINK YOU SHOULD HAVE. E.G: RIOTS
   • 2.DEINDIVIDUATION
     • ZIMBARDO FIRST PUT FORWARD THEORY 1969: PEOPLE LOOSE PERSONAL IDENTITY WHEN APART OF ANONYMOUS GROUP. * Deindividuation is a psychological state characterized but lowered self-evaluation and decrease concerns about the evaluation of others, leads to unusual or aggro behaviors, aroused in large groups. * Normal constraints on behavior lost when people lose sense of individuality; crowds, drunk, uniforms & alcohol.
       • (+) REAL LIFE APPLICATION: ZIMBARDO'S STRAMFORD PRISON EXPERIMENT.
     • SUPPORT
       • REHM ET AL 1987: SPORTS TEAMS WITH UNIFORM AND NO-UNIFORM
         • (+) ANONYMITY IS SUPPORTED
       • MULLEN 1986: CONCEPT OF FACELESS CROWD - NEWPAPER CUTTINGS 1899 TO 1946 SHOWED BIGGER THE MOB = MORE SAVAGE THE LYNCHING OF BLACK VICTIM
         • (-) UNRELIABLE - NEWSPAPER IS AIMED AT CERTAIN AUDIENCE THEREFORE POSSIBLE EXAGGERATIONS
       • DIENER 1980 "DEINDIVIDUATION OCCURS WHEN SELF-AWARENESS IS BLOCKED BY ENVIRO EVENTS". CRITICAL FACTORS; 1. INCREASED AROUSAL + EXTERNAL FOCUS + SENSE OF ANONYMITY + STRONG GROUP FEELINGS = REDUCED SELF-AWARENESS = DEINDIVIDUATION
       • PRENTIC-DUNN AND ROGERS 1982: MODIFIED DIENER'S THEORY TO INCLUDE PUBLIC (SOCIAL NORMS) AND PRIVATE SELF-AWARENESS (OWN MORAL CODES)
         • (+) ANONYMITY SHOWN AS IMPORTANT FACTOR
       • MANN'S BAITING CROWD: 21 SUICIDES (10 OF 21 A CROWD GATHERED TO WATCH + BAITING OCCURED)
     • GUSTAVE LE BON 1985: CLASSIC CROWD THEORY - IN A CROWD THERE'S ANONYMITY, SUGGESTIBILITY & CONTAGION THEREFORE A 'COLLECTIVE MIND' POSSESSES THE INDIVIDUAL
     • CHALLENGES
       • (-) CANNAVALE ET AL 1970: MALE AND FEMALE RESPOND DIFF TO DEINDIVIDUATION THEREFORE GENDER BIAS. * (-) IF PSYCHOLOGICAL SHOULD APPLY TO ALL
       • (-) EVIDENCE FOR THEORY NOT WHOLLY SUPPORTIVE. POSTEMES AND SPEARS 1998: META ANALYSIS OF 60 STUDIES. INSUFFICIENT SUPPORT FOR REDUCED SELF-AWARENESS INCREASES AGGRO.
   • 3.INSTITUTIONAL
     • i.WITHIN GROUPS (PRISON)
       • IMPORTATION MODEL - IRWIN AND CRESSEY (1962) CLAIM THAT PRISONERS BRING THEIR OWN SOCIAL HISTORIES AND TRAITS WITH THEM INTO PRISON AND THIS INFLUENCES THEIR ADAPTION TO THE PRISON ENVIRONMENT. PRISONERS AREN'T 'BLANK SLATES'
         • ZIMBARDO: "BANALITY OF EVIL" GIVEN CERTAIN CONDITIONS, ORDINARY PEOPLE CAN SUCCUMB TO SOCIAL PRESSURE TO COMMIT ACTS THAT WOULD OTHER WISE BE UNTHINKABLE
         • BUREAU OF JUSTICE STATISTICS 2007 (AMERICA) , ABOUT 70,000 INMATES ARE VICTIMS OF SEXUAL VIOLENCE WHILST BEHIND BARS
         • PRISON VIOLENCE TAKES TWO FORMS; i. AGGRO BETWEEN INMATES/GUARD; OR ii.ABUSE OF INMATES
         • SUPPORT
           • (+) SUPPORTED BY HUFF 1998: GANG MEMBERS IN AMERICAN PRISONS 10 TIMES MORE LIKELY TO COMMIT MURDER AND 3 TIMES MORE LIKELY TO ASSULT SOMEONE IN PUBLIC THAN NON-GANG MEMBERS
           • (+) HARER & STEFFENSMEIER 2006: LOOKED AT 58 PRISONS IN USA - BLACK INMATES HIGHER VIOLENCE BUT LOWER DRUG USE THAN WHITE INMATES. PATTERNS WITH SOCIETY OUTSIDE PRISON THEREFORE SUPPORTS IMPORTATION.
           • (+) FISCHER 2001: ISOLATING KNOWN GANG MEMBERS IN A SPECIAL MANAGEMENT UNIT REDUCES RATES OF SERIOUS ASSULTS BY 50%.
         • CHALLENGES
           • (-) McCORKLE ET AL 1995: IMPORTATION MODEL FAILS TO PROVIDE SUGGESTIONS FOR HOW BEST TO MANAGE AGGRESSIVE PRISONERS AND DOESN'T INTRODUCE STRATEGIES FOR REDUCING PRISON VIOLENCE.
           • (-)DeLISI ET AL 2004: GANG MEMBERS WERE NOT ANY MORE LIKELY TO BE VIOLENT THAN ANY OTHER INMATES IN PRISON.
       • DEPRIVATIONAL MODEL: PRISONER OR PATIENT AGGRO IS THE PRODUCT OF THE STRESSFUL ENVIRONMENT AND OPPRESSIVE CONDITIONS OF THE INSTITUTION ITSELF.
         • SUPPORT
           • (+) McCORKIE ET AL: OVER CROWDING, LACK OF PRIVACY AND LACK OF MEANINGFUL ACTIVITY INFLUENCES PEER VIOLENCE.
           • DOLLARD 1939: FRUSTRATION HYPOTHESIS (see the support for SLT of aggro)
           • (+) DAVID WILSON 2010: LOOKED AT THE ENVIRONMENT OF HMP WOODHILL, IN ENGLAND. HE MADE UNITS; 1. LESS CLAUSTROPHOBIC; 2. GAVE THEM A VIEW OF OUTSIDE; 3. COVERED THE NOISE WITH RADIO MUSIC; 4. TEMPERATURE MADE MORE COOL THAN HOT. REDUCED AGGRO.
         • CHALLENGES
           • (-)NIJMAN ET AL 1999: INCREASED PERSONAL SPACE FAILED TO REDUCE VIOLENCE AMONGST MENTAL PATIENTS.
           • (-) POOLE & REGOLI 1983: BEST INDICATOR OF VIOLENCE AMONGST JUVENILE OFFENDERS WAS PRE-INSTITUTIONAL VIOLENCE REGARDLESS OF SITUATIONAL FACTORS.
     • ii. BETWEEN GROUPS (GENOCIDE)
       • institution can refer to a whole section of society; ethnicity, religion, sexuality or some significant feature. Aggro occurs when there's hostility and tension between institutions.
       • STAUB 1999 - 5 STAGES IN PROCESS OF GENOCIDE; 1) Difficult social conditions 2)Scape goating usually of a less powerful group 3)negative evaluation & dehumanization 4)Moral values and rules become inapplicable therefore killing and violence start 5)Passivity of bystanders & lack of intervention enhances process
       • DEHUMANISATION - important because humans have inbuilt moral code that prevents them killing other humans. target group becomes dehumanized and this changes. E.G: WW2 NAZI PROPA GANDA (JEWS = RATS) & RAWANDA GENOCIDE RTLM RADIO STATION (TUTSI = COCKROACHES)
       • OBEDIENCE TO AUTHORITY contributes to genocide. Milgram thinks Nazi soldiers were mostly forced to obey regardless of personal moral standards. (+) MILGRAMS SHOCK STUDY = FACE VALIDITY
       • SUPPORT
         • (+) O'BRIEN 2003: some see immigrants as 'polluting threats to the social order'.
         • SOCIAL DOMINANCE ORIENTATION (SDO) - is a personality variable which predicts social & political attitudes. HIGH SDO people endorse social hierarchies & inter-group inequality and see world as competitive jungle.
           • (+) ESSES ET AL 2008 - Demonstrated that individuals high in SDO have a tendency to dehumanise out-group members, in particular foreign refugees and asylum seekers. The media can contribute to this by it's representation of immigrants.
         • (+) FACE VALIDITY - During international or civil conflict it's possible that outside intervention (like the UN) can shorten conflict, however it can also cause perpetrators to hasten their genocidal policy before they get caught. E.G: RWANDAN GENOCIDE 800,000 DIED IN 100 DAYS. AVERAGE OF 8,000 DEATHS A DAY.
       • CHALLENGES
         • (-) MANDEL 1998 - Rejects Milgram's obedience to authority as an explanation for Nazi soldiers' and German citizens' actions. MONOCAUSAL he ignores all other factors and doesn't reflect Germany's historical record.
         • (-) GOLDENHAGEN 1996 - Suggested main cause of holocaust was ANTI-SEMITISM that was deep rooted in German people at the time.
     • INTERPERSONAL AGGRO IS DIRECT ACTION AGAINST A SPECIFIC INDIVIDUAL. CAN OCCUR IN GROUPS, PRISON, MENTAL INSTITUTIONS OR THE ARMY.
     • MOTIVATED BY SOCIAL FORCES AND FRUSTRATION RATHER THAN ANGER.
     • DEPRIVATION + IMPORTATION MODEL = INTEGRATION MODEL.
       • WIDELY ACCEPTED AS A BETTER EXPLANATION OF PRISON AGGRO THAN EITHER MODEL SEPRATELY. DEPRIVATION MODEL HELPED TO EXPLAIN VIOLENCE AGAINST STAFF + IMPORTATION BETTER TO EXPLAIN VIOLENCE AGAINST INMATES.