Aggression
The definition of aggression in psychology and other behavioral and social sciences is the behavior between members of a similar species, whose intention is causing harm or pain. Defensive or predatory behavior that is seen between members of varying species is not categorized under aggression. Aggression in humans can take different forms including mental, physical or verbal aggression. It is essential to distinguish between assertiveness and aggression since many people use the terms interchangeably. Aggression can be divided into two broad categories which are affective and predatory aggression. According to empirical research studies, the two categories of aggression differ physiologically and psychologically. A few research studies indicate that people with low Intelligence Quotient tend to have higher tendencies towards affective aggression while those with high IQ have tendencies toward predatory aggression (Baron & Richardson, 2004).
Moral theories like the non-aggression principle and argumentation ethics have differentiated violence from aggression. Aggression is viewed as the key initiator of violence. Most of the times, defensive and retaliatory forms of violence are not considered aggression due to the fact that they are responsive actions. Despite the fact that human aggression has some aspects that are similar to those of aggression in non-human animals, their form of aggression is more complex. This is due to the influence of factors like morals, culture and the social context. Assessment of aggression in humans can be done by the use of scales like the Modified Overt Aggression Scale, MOAS (Geen & Donnerstein, 1998).
Hence, aggression can be viewed as a form of behavior rather than a motive, an emotion or an attitude. The aggression term is often applicable to negative emotions like anger to motives such as the intentions to cause harm or injury to others, and even to negative attitudes like ethnic or racial prejudice. While all the mentioned factors play a critical role in occurrence of aggression, their presence is not a vital condition for the performance of such actions. For instance, it is not essential for individuals to be angry with others in order to attack them. This implies that aggression occurs both in cold blood and in the heat of intensive emotional arousal. It is also not essential for aggressors to dislike or hate the people they attack. In fact, many people harm persons towards whom they hold positive attitudes. This is especially the case with family violence (Baron, 2004).
Aggression involves an avoidance-motivated recipient. This implies that it can only occur when the victim or recipient is motivated to avoid such treatment. Majority of the times, victims of aggression have the wish of avoiding such unpleasant experiences. However, in a few instances, aggression victims lack the motivation to avoid the consequences. A case related to this is suicide. In this situation, the aggressors serve as their own victims, and by definition, actively seek the injuries produced. It is therefore illogical to classify such actions as aggression. Even if the ultimate goal of the perpetrator is to send a desperate cry for help and not death, he or she still seeks the harm that is experienced. Hence, instances of aggression are not represented by such actions (Tremblay, 2005).
As noted earlier, aggression can be classified into different dimensions including direct-indirect, active-passive and physical-verbal. One distinction that is worth noting is between instrumental and hostile aggression. Hostile aggression is applicable to instances where the key goal that is sought by aggressors is causing suffering to a victim. Hence individuals engaging in hostile aggression are simply seeking injury or harm to persons they attack. Contrary to this, instrumental aggression refers to cases where aggressors attack other persons as a means of attaining other non-injurious goals and not out of a great longing to ensure they are suffering. Such individuals employ aggressive actions as a means of obtaining various rewards rather than causing harm to other individuals as an end in itself (Lorenz, 2002).
Many aggressive actions that may motivate non-injurious goals include maintenance of self-esteem and coercion. In the case of coercion, it is possible to deliver harm with the aim of influencing another person or getting our way. For instance, children would make use of different aversive behaviors like teasing, hitting and refusal to comply so as to control family members. They are of course strengthened when they coerce their victims successfully to do what they want. Similarly, aggression may play the role of reinforcing or maintaining self-esteem if such behavior receives a favorable reaction from others. For example, an individual may seem strong and tough to other people if he attacks someone who has irritates or proved them (Tremblay, 2005).
A good example of instrumental aggression is provided by the behavior of bands of teenaged youth roaming the streets of large towns, looking for opportunities to steal or do other delinquent activities. Such people may find it necessary to turn to violence so as to accomplish the planned delinquent activities. Their key motivation for taking part in such acts is economic gain and not instilling suffering and pain. Additional strength may also be received from acceptance and admiration of their friends (Geen, 1998).
The subject of human beings frequently engaging in dangerous actions of aggression is hardly open to question. What has long been the subject of serious dispute is the question of why they engage in such activities. Sharply differing views regarding the aggression nature, factors that influence its occurrence and forces from which aggression stems have been proposed. Despite the fact that the opposing theoretical views have taken differing forms, majority of them tend to fall one of the four groups, in which aggression may be attributed mainly to innate disposition or urges, drives that are externally elicited, emotional or cognitive processes and finally, present social situations in combination with previous learning.
The oldest and probably the popularly known theoretical view concerning aggression is the view that such behavior is extensively instinctive in nature. According o this general perspective, aggression occurs due to the fact human beings are constitutionally or genetically programmed for such actions. Early writings indicate that all human behaviors originate either directly or indirectly from the “eros”, the life instinct, whose energy is directed toward preservation, enhancement, and reproduction of life. Within this general context, then aggression was simply viewed as a reaction to thwarting or blocking of libidinal impulses. As such, it was neither a continuously nor automatic unavoidable part of life (Tremblay, 2005).
The nature and origin of aggression gradually adopted a gloomier position. A second major instinct, “thenatos”, the death force, whose energy is directed toward the destruction and ending of life was proposed. It was postulated that all human behavior originated from the complex interplay of the “thenatos” and” eros” instincts as well as the constant tension between them. Due to the strong tension between the preservation and destruction of life, other means serve to direct the energy of “thenatos” outward and away from self. Thus,” thenatos” indirectly results to the expression of aggression towards others (Lorenz, 2002).
Sociobiologists provide a more specific basis for natural selection process than so other evolutionary theorists. Their main argument is that genes endure because they lead to production of adaptive behaviors. This implies that genes are fit to the extent that they contribute to reproductive success, which ensured their continued representation in future generations. Hence according to Sociobiologists, individuals will be relatively likely to contribute to continual survival of others who share their genes, including aggression genes, by engaging in self-sacrificial or altruistic acts. Similarly, people will be more likely to aggress against others who seem different or unrelated to them than taking a chance on harming, and possibly limiting the reproductive success of someone who shares their genes (Tremblay, 2005).
According to the sociobiological point of view, aggressive interactions with competitors are one way through which individuals can enhance their reproductive success in an environment providing limited supply of resources such as mating partners or food. Aggression will only maximize an individual’s fitness when it leads to more benefits than costs. The probable cost of aggression stems from the risk that it may lead to serious damage or death to individuals who must survive to ensure the survival of their existing offspring. An individual’s genetic fitness would not be enhanced if aggressive competition led to the destruction of the individual’s akin. Therefore, Sociobiologists argue that aggressiveness is a way through which individuals try to get their share of resources providing selective benefits (Bonta, 1997).
While various instinct theories of aggression differ greatly in terms of specific detail, they all encompass the same implications. In particular, the suggestion that is integral to each theory is that aggression stems largely from, innate or intrinsic factors. This implies that it is probably not possible to entirely eliminate such reactions. The satisfaction of all material needs, the elimination of all social injustice, or any other positive changes in the human society structure will not prevail in preventing aggressive impulses’ generation and expression. The most that can be attained is a short-term prevention of such behavior or reduction in its intensity when it occurs. According to such theories, then, aggression, in one or more forms, will always be with the human generation. Indeed, aggression is an integral part of the basic human nature. Various criticisms regarding the intrinsic nature of aggression is an indication of other factors influencing emergence or development of aggressive behavior (Tremblay, 2005).
There are other kinds of influences that affect human tendency toward aggression. One of the factors is competition, which has been though to promote aggression and violence. There is a significant psychological literature body suggesting that competition fosters aggression. According to one study, people who competitively played a game portrayed a more aggressive approach compared to those who played in a cooperative manner. Additionally, competitive players made use of killing techniques in order to win. This is contrary to cooperative players who preferred to make use of avoidance techniques to win. This is an indication that the aggressive tendencies of people tend to increase when they are in a competitive frame of mind, even in cases when the aggressions are not focused on a competitor (Bonta, 1997).
Aggression may be viewed as an elicited drive. Given the ambiguity and pessimistic implications of instinct views of aggression, it is unsurprising that they have never attained an extensive acceptance among psychologists. In deed majority of researchers in the field of psychology have largely dismissed the instinctive nature of aggressiveness. A more general suggestion is that aggression originates from drive, which is defined as a non-instinctive motivational force induced by depriving the organism of life-supporting conditions or entities, and that increases in strength with the severity of such deprivation. An organism will take part in behaviors to reduce the state of deprivation. In the case of aggression, drives are viewed as stemming from aversive stimulation and are reduced by aggressive action (Baron, 2004).
Another factor that plays a fundamental role in aggression is culture. Differences in the level of aggression between cultures have been found through empirical cross-cultural studies. One study indicated that physical aggression was more evident in American men compared to Spanish or Japanese men. Moreover, results indicated that Japanese men were more into verbal aggression compared to their Spanish and American counterparts (Tremblay, 2005). Media is another fundamental factor, whereby behaviors like aggression are learnt through watching as well as imitating other people’s behaviors. Considerable evidence indicates that media violence increases the chances of short-term aggression in young people. The difference lies in individual response to violence. The greatest impact is seen in individuals who are already prone to aggressive behavior. There is a significant relationship between the likelihood of committing aggressive acts and time spent watching violence in television. Despite the fact that media violence is linked with the likelihood of short-term aggression, there is no study that provides evidence for a definitive causal mechanism. Rather, media violence may be among the many factors (Tremblay, 2005).
Other factors influencing aggression are situational factors. Alcohol is a good example of such a factor, which leads to impairment of judgment, which makes people less cautious than under normal circumstances. Alcohols also disrupt the process of information processing. A person who is drunk has a greater possibility of viewing an accidental event as purposeful, and may tend to act in an aggressive manner. Another situational factor is discomfort and pain, which may increase aggression. Even an act as simple as placing hands in warm water may result to an aggressive response. A number of studies have implicated hot temperatures among the situational factors leading to aggression. One of the major studies was completed in the course of civil rights movement and results indicated that hotter days recorded more riots compared to cooler days. Children were also found to have higher tendencies towards aggression following taking an examination in a hot classroom (Lorenz, 2002).
Another major cause of aggression is frustration. According to the Frustration aggression theory, when people feel that they are being blocked from achieving a goal, aggression increases. According to one study, what makes a difference is closeness to the goal. Some evidence suggests that aggression may be triggered by the presence of violent objects like guns. There is a possibility of the likelihood of aggressive cognitions increasing due to violence-related stimulus through activation of semantic network. There is a novel proposal that connects military experience to aggression and anger, thereby creating serial killers. A social situation where servicemen learn aggression, murder and violence is provided by the military (Geen, 1998).
A fundamental factor that plays a role in human aggression is gender. It is generally believed that males are traditionally more physically aggressive compared to females. Moreover, men are believed to commit more murders than females. Evidence also shows that males are more likely compared to females to express their aggression in a physical manner. Despite the fact that females have a less likelihood of initiating physical violence, they can employ different non-physical methods to express aggression. The method that females employ to express aggression varies in accordance to culture (Bonta, 1997).
In conclusion, aggression is a verbal or physical behavior intended to cause harm. A traditionally held belief is that of aggression being intrinsic in nature. However, this theory has raised several criticisms from many psychological researchers, implying that there are other additional factors that influence development of aggressive behavior. These influences can be grouped into biological influences such as alcohol and testosterone, psychological influences of aggression such as frustration and social influences. Pain and heat are other factors that may contribute to occurrence of aggressive behavior. Finally observational learning is applicable to aggression. This is especially the case where children and young people develop violent behavior by watching violence is television and other forms of social media.
References
Baron, R. A., & Richardson, D. R. (2004). Human Aggression. NewYork: Springer Publications.
Bonta, B. D. (1997). Cooperation and Competition in Peaceful Societies. Psychological Bulletin ,
Vol. 121 (No. 2), 299-320.
Geen, R. G., & Donnerstein, E. I. (1998). Human aggression: theories, research, and
implications for social policy. California: Elsevier Publication Inc.
Lorenz, K. (2002). On Aggression. London: Routledge Publications.
Tremblay, R. E. (2005). Developmental origins of aggression. NewYork: Guilford Press.
Is this your assignment or some part of it?
We can do it for you! Click to Order!
