Group display as an explanation for aggression

Group display as an explanation for aggression

1. AO1

   • Sport
     • caused by Xenophobia - the fear or hatred of strangers. This is evolutionary adaptive as it aided natural selection and the successful passing on of genes through reproduction.
       • In the EEA, if people did not fear or hate strangers this could lead to unexpected attack, parental uncertainty caused by possible unfaithfulness or the loss of land or resources. Xenophobia is shown in sport through supporters and players as the team fears or hates the opposing team, promoting the group display of aggression.
   • Warfare
     • In the EEA, people involved themselves in war due to adaptive benefits for the individual and their offspring.
       • War carried a lot of risk for those involved; most obviously through death but if successful the benefits far outweighed the risks. Individuals could profit from increased sexual selection; as females are more attracted to braver men, more resources and bigger genetic variation from defeated tribe.

2. AO2

   • Evans and Rowe (2002) looked at 40 matches in continental Europe and suggested that those played between club sides (which had more ethnically diverse players) contained significantly less violence than those matches played between national teams where the supporters were born in that country. This shows how aggression was higher when the supporters had a collective feeling of hatred to their opponent as they were bound behind the support of the country of their birth.
   • Maxwell and Viscek (2009) researched 143 Rugby Union players and found those more likely to be aggressive were rated higher on a professionalism scale. This shows how the more serious players used the sport to gain status and achieved this through the showing of aggression.
   • Kelly and Dunbar (2001) found that females preffered braver men as they showed themselves to be better hunters and could provide more resources. This showed how males would go to war to try and benefit from a wider variety of mates.
   • Fathing (2005) fond that risk taking in males was only an attractive trait if the risk was considered 'brave'. This shows how a male going in to warfare unnecessarily will not instantly gain an increased access to mates and higher status, but would infact have to show bravery.
   • Chagnan (1968) found that the Yahomamo tribe would fight over access to women and the successful warriors have a higher status within the tribe and have better access to mates. Further, most young men in the tribe who have never killed are single showing the significance of showing aggression.
   • This explanation for aggression can be seen as reductionist as there is thee social psychological explantion for group displays of aggression - deindividuation - which explains how people loose public and private self awareness when in a group. This explanation offers a more complex, applicable reason for aggresiion in groups or crowds and is specifically shown at sporting events where fans become part of a group and loose self-awareness.
   • Gender bias - all focused on men, not women, possibly because women not show aggression as much - going to war would be too risky for a women due to their offspring and risk if she died.