UNIT 3 AGGRESSION (PART C)

UNIT 3 AGGRESSION (PART C)

1. Evolutionary Explanation

   • Infidelity & Jealousy
     • If mans partner is unfaithful, he runs risk of cuckoldry. Sexual jealousy my therefore evolved to prevent infidelity.
       • Buss et al - Males developed mate retention strategies (direct guarding, negative inducement)
         • Wilson et al - in a questionnaire, women who indicated their partners were jealous when talking to other men; twice as likely to experienced violence.
           • 72% needing medical attention.
         • Early signs of a violent man, educating people can reduce women becoming victims of violence.
         • Surveyed 461 men and 560 women all in committed heterosexual relationships. Men answered about use of mate retention, females asked about partners use and violence
           • Positive correlation between men who used mate retention of direct guarding and their use of violence.
             • Women results confirmed this, positive correlation between those had jealous partners and victims of violence.
     • Uxorocide
       • Daly & Wilson - men have evolved different strategies to deter partners from committing adultery.
         • Ranging from vigilance to violence
         • If men can prevent infidelity by providing positive benefits less likely to be violent. But men who are unable, more likely to become jealous and violent leading.
           • Proposed this is an evolutionary adaptation, intended for control rather than death.
       • Shackleford et al challenged Daly & Wilson.
         • Analysing 13,670 uxorocides, found younger women most at risk, as in their reproductive prime.
       • Duntley & Buss - The Evolved Homicide Theory
         • When women is unfaithful, not only does man lose a partner, but another man gains a partner
           • By killing his partner, prevents competitor gaining reproductive advantage over him.
     • Mate Retention
   • Homicide
     • Represents the most extreme form of aggression.
       • Statistics show majority killers are men.
     • Lack of Resources
       • Females are attracted to men with resources, thus increasing murder to eliminate rivals
         • Murder statistics in USA - 43% male and 41% unemployed.
     • Loss of Status
       • Key reason for male-male killing through the defence of status within social groups.
         • Possible explanation - humans evolved in small groups, loss of status could led to problems for survival and reproduction.
           • This behaviour is obviously maladaptive in the modern world, but such mechanisms may still operate and be triggered by such events
     • Sexual Jealousy
       • Due to the link between infidelity and cuckoldry with men being biggest victim of murders.
       • 8 studies involving 'love triangles' found 92% of murders involved males killing males, only 8% female to female
         • Methodological problem - relatively small sample
     • IDA
       • GENDER BIAS
         • Most studies of infidelity focus mainly on men
           • Women have found to engage in aggression as well
             • Archer suggest women initiate aggression as often as men, family conflict studies found equal rates between sexes
       • SOCIAL DESIRABILITY
         • Shackleford research conducted using surveys - sensitive topic, answers may not be truthful; responding to make them look favourable.
           • Invalidating results
       • REDUCTIONIST
         • Suggest aggression is down to evolved responses and genes, over simplifying human behaviour
           • Ignores role of cognitive factors, role of free will and ability for conscious to override such behaviour.
   • Evolutionary psychologists argue reproductive challenges can explain aggressive behaviour
     • Men never 100% he is father of own children unless prevents her having other relationships.
       • This can explain sexual jealousy.
   • Limitation - fails to explain why some males react differently
     • Buss & Shackleford - some may use violence, some avoid issue (drunk) or even leave relationship completely

2. Group Display

   • Power-Threat Hypothesis - Blalock
     • When minority group begins to gain power, status & membership. Majority group will intensify to maintain control.
       • Believed to have evolved and be passed on because the advantage of keeping dominant group together, ensure survival.
         • lynching's - fear of political power in the hands of black community, white feared shift in power; less access to resources, jobs, women.
           • Abolition of slavery left many white communities feeling at risk, many turned to lynch law as means of social control.
             • Ridley - Such cooperative group defence of outsiders when one group feels at risk
     • Clark - lynch mobs in Sao Paulo found evidence against PTH
       • Victims mainly afro-caribbean, they posed no threat yet still killed
         • Suggests fear of rising power cannot explain these ritualistic murders.
           • PTH not adequate explanation, reductionist as only one explanation and not complete.
   • Dehumanisation - Hyatt
     • When people are reduced to form that is unrecognisable as humans
     • Hyatt argued that the "hysterical desecration" of black people after killings allowed mob to reduce their victims bodies to bits and bone, not seen as humans.
       • Tolnay & Beck - Years of racist propaganda suggesting black were animalistic had warped minds of white people, making them see black people as animals, easier to kill.
         • By dehumanising victims, lynch mob actions were reassuring and comforting, victims not seen as humans.
     • Rosenberg - Guatemala (South America), lynch mobs common,
       • Although most cases were response to serious crimes, some were for minor offences.
         • Consistent with theory, doused victims in petrol and burned to further violate already dead victim.
     • Mullen - Deindividuation Theory
       • Contradicts both power threat hypothesis and dehumanisation
     • Cassidy et al - Hindu festival Mala crowds up to 50 million people
       • Crowds behaved well and showed pro social behaviour
         • Shows crowd behaviour and collective living can actually promote non aggressive behaviour.
   • IDA
     • Unclear if group behaviour is unconscious and deterministic as theory proposes.
       • Does not account role of free will.
         • Raises ethical how responsible people are for own actions is aggression is evolutionary and non free will
     • No single theory adequately accounts for group aggression, all simply imply cause.
       • Biological factors and personality dispositions are ignored.
     • Whole evolutionary approach can be argued to be incomplete, limited practical application.
     • CULTURAL BIAS
       • Kung San tribe - aggression in negative light and is rare
         • Suggests aggression is learnt rather than evolutionary response,
           • Therefore, such research on theory have low external validity due to lack of generalisation to wider population. Due to cultural influences rather than evolutionary