Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Social psychological explanations of aggression - Coggle Diagram
Social psychological explanations of aggression
AO1
The ethological explanation proposes that aggression can be the result of an evolved automatic biological response in the brain
the explanation proposes that animals have a built-in neural structure (a network of neurons) which, when exposed to specific stimuli (signs or releasers), such as facial expressions, will cause the release of an automatic behavioural response.
Social Learning Theory can be used to explain aggression
AO1
Child observes role model behaving aggressively
role model recieves positve consequences for being aggressive - vicarious reinforcement
child expects to receive similar rewards if they also behave aggressively
Child imitates aggressive behaviour
Child also recieves positive reinforcement - direct reinforcement
child grows in confidence about their aggressive behaviour
child resorts to aggression more often
AO1 - research to support Albert Bandura
results showed that children who had observed the aggressive behaviour acted more aggressively when observed, and that boys acted more aggressively that girls.
AO3
There is evidence to support SLT as an explanation of aggression. Aronson (1999) provides support for Social learning theory with evidence from non-violent societies such as the Pygmies of Central Africa, who manage to live in cooperative friendliness.
This is a strength because it shows that learning is integral to the development of behaviour, specifically relating to violence.
Therefore, according to SLT if no aggressive role model exists then aggressive behaviour cannot be learned, which is what is being observed by Aronson, thus supporting SLT as an explanation of aggression.
Frustration aggression hypothesis
AO3
A strength of frustration hypothesis is that it also has reseach to support.
Green (1968) conducted a laboratory experiment where he asked male undergraduate students to undertake a jigsaw puzzle. While they were completing the jigsaw puzzle in the third condition a confederate issued derogatory remarks to the students as they failed to complete the study. P's had the opportunity to give shocks to the confederate if he answered incorrectly on another task. The group of P's who had experienced insults from the confederate gave the highest levels of shocks.
however, a weakness is that there is a suggestion that aggression isn’t always cathartic. For example, Bushman (2002) found participants who vented their anger by repeatedly hitting a punch bag actually became angrier and aggressive rather than less. In fact, they found that doing nothing was more effective at reducing anger than venting anger. This is a weakness because the outcome of this study is very different form that predicted by the frustration-aggression hypothesis, which casts doubt on the validity of a central assumption hypothesis.
AO1
Frustration always leads to aggression and aggression is always the result of frustration
When a person cannot complete a task they can become frustrated which in turn leads to aggression, however when the aggressive act is carried out this reduces the frustration and therefore lowers the aggression
having said this, aggression cannot always be carried out for 3 reasons:
If the source is too powerful
eg a teacher or boss
The cause of frustration may not be present at the time.
In these circumstances, aggression is displaced onto a weaker, available alternative (a younger sibling)
Abstract:
If the source of the aggression is not tangible, eg the economy
Deindividuation Theory
AO1
Deindividuation is ‘the loss of one’s sense of individuality’. It is a process whereby people lose their sense of socialised individual identity and engage in unsociable, often antisocial behaviour.
For example when we become part of a crowd, we lose restraint and have the freedom to behave in ways we wouldn’t ordinarily contemplate. This is because we lose both our self-identity and responsibility for our behaviour.
Therefore, responsibility becomes shared throughout the crowd, so we experience less personal guilt at harmful aggression directed at others, which is why aggression is more likley to occur in crowds
Zimbardo (1969) distinguished between two types of behaviour
induviduated behaviour
rational and conforms to social norms.
deindividuated behaviour: emotional, impulsive and irrational.
Conditions that promote deindividuated behaviour include darkness, drugs, alcohol, uniform, masks/disguises and uniforms. The key thing with all of these factors is that they provide anonymity.
deindividuation creates a greater likelihood of aggression, but not due to anonymity directly, but more the reduced consequences as a result of anonymity.
AO3
Malmouth and Check (1981) conducted a piece of research in North America and they posed the question: ‘Would you rape if you could not be caught?’ 35% of the university students said yes, supporting the theory that deindividuation can increase aggressive behaviour.
Therefore, this supports the deindividuation as people are even prepared to commit outrageous crimes such as rape when there are anonymous.
However some sports such as football are well known for having aggressive crowds, where as other sports such as rugby and cricket still have big crowds but are not as aggressive. This suggests that there must be another factor taking place such as social norms occuring through the learning of SLT.
Therefore, aggression can be explained through cultural factors internalised through the process of social learning.
Gergen et al (1973) conducted a study where 8 P's taken into a dark room and were given no instructions.
They were told that they would never see the P's again, the P's started kissing and cuddling. Therefore, darkness does not always lead to aggression as deindividuation in this study led to P's showing affection such as kissing.