How social psychological factors influence aggression - Essay Example

How social psychological factors influence aggression How social psychological factors influence aggression Because of the prevalence of aggression within the human experience it is often considered to be a part of the human biological imperatives. However, social research has suggested that aggressive responses are learned rather than innate which allows for the idea that aggression is not a necessary and inevitable set of behaviours that must exist in the human world. Aggression is defined by the way in which one person has an effect on the other, the intention of that effect being some form of harm. The various forms of aggression outline sets of behaviours through which individuals seek to gain something from the action. The types of behaviours that exist, as they are defined through theories of social learning, are developed through observation on the success of those behaviours. This has led to the conclusion by several social scientists that warfare as a social convention is invented, that warfare is a consequence of decisions made rather than through naturally occurring outcomes to instigating factors. In other words, aggression on a large scale is not necessary, but defined as inevitable because the convention is passed down through cultural beliefs about its necessity. Aggressive behaviour is influenced by social psychological behaviours that are passed from one generation to the next through observational learning that is conditioned through the belief that the behaviours will be or will not be successful to achieve goals. According to Hogg and Vaughan (2005), there are a great number of definitions that can be applied to the concept of aggression, but primarily it involves the “intentional infliction of some type of harm on others” (p. 483). Aggression is most often divided into two categories, the first being verbal and the second being physical, but a third type of aggression has emerged called relational aggression in which behaviours affect the relationships through damage in friendships that are caused by harm to acceptance or group inclusion. Relational aggression is similar to, but distinctly different from social aggression and indirect aggression which are socially relevant to relationships. Social aggression occurs when the target of the behaviour is the self-esteem of another and indirect aggression in which the target is not confronted in a direct manner (Moeller, 2001). Three more ways in which to define aggression is through hostile, instrumental, or reactive forms. Hostile aggression is defined through the intention of the aggressor to cause physical harm to the victim. This type of aggression is the most easily recognized type of aggression. Instrumental aggression is a form of aggression in which the behaviours of an individual are conducted with the intention of a nonaggressive goal. This can occur, as an example, when coercion of one form or another is used in order to get money from someone that has not been earned or honestly attained. Reactive aggression occurs in response to some form of instigating factor from the environment. This is a provoked aggression where instrumental aggression is an unprovoked aggression (Moeller, 2001). According to Crisp and Turner (2010) “Social psychologists have argued that we may become aggressive because we feel frustrated in our lives which we cannot resolve and take out our frustrations on an available scapegoat to achieve catharsis” (p. 277). Catharsis is defined by the idea that aggression is a part of the emotional make-up of human beings and must be “drained off” a little at a time in order to assert control over the natural angers and aggressions within the individual. This theory, proposed by Sigmund Freud, suggests that a child must be allowed to reveal his or her aggressions in order to learn to control them. If they are bottled up and suppressed, the aggressions can be released through more inappropriate outlets that what might be socially acceptable. However, studies done by Mallick and McCandless in 1966 showed that children who are allowed to vent their anger in ways that displaced the target of that anger (such as punching a bag or pillow) were more likely to show aggressive behaviour than those not allowed to vent their anger in an aggressive manner. Children who vented their anger were practicing aggression, thus it became a part of their behaviours while those not allowed venting found ways to control their aggressive tendencies (Moeller, 2001). The Behaviourist/Social Learning Theory of aggression involves the emphasis on learning aggressive behaviours in a social context. Aggression is learned through observational learning and through the existence of operant and classical conditioning. Observational learning was observed in a study done by Bandura, Ross and Ross in which a blow up Bobo doll was treated aggressively by an adult model in front of one group of children, while another group saw an adult act non-aggressively and a control group observed no interaction with the doll. The children were then placed in a state of frustration by interruptions to their play and observed for their reactions in relationship to the doll. The group that had been exposed to the adult behaving aggressively tended to mimic the behaviours of the adult after being frustrated while the other two groups did not lean towards aggressive behaviours towards the doll. Thus, aggressive forms of behaviour are learned by observing behaviours that release aggressive feelings, further reinforcing the idea that aggression is a practiced set of behaviours rather than innately born into the human framework (Moeller, 2001). The Social Learning Theory, the theory supported by Bandura, is defined by the belief that aggressive behaviours are learned rather than innately existent. Children who come from homes where hostility is a way in which solutions are found to problems are more likely to use aggression to solve their problems (Ivey, DAndrea, & Ivey, 2011).Learning aggression is defined by the idea of vicarious learning. In vicarious learning, the viewer observes the results of using aggressive behaviour and replicates those behaviours based on the satisfaction that they bring to the model that is observed by the learner. Fry and Bjorkqvist (2005) suggest that vicarious learning is dependent upon four factors: “the degree of similarity between the model situation and the actual situation...the degree of identification between actor and model...the success or failure of the model (vicarious conditioning)...and the amount of exposure to the model situation” (p. 32). The belief that aggression is a learned set of behaviours has led many social scientists to believe that warfare is not a natural event that is destined to exist within the human experience, but that it is a part of learned behaviours. Noted anthropologist Margaret Mead wrote in 1940 that warfare was not a biological necessity, but that it was an invention of the human experience. Both Montagu (1976) and Groebel and Hind (1989) supported similar beliefs about the existence of warfare in the human experience, that the act of war is a part of the development of society, invented rather than a compulsion (Fry & Bjorkqvist, 2005).Understood in these terms, it is clear that war is not a necessary part of the social existence of states. War is a choice made through learned responses to different aggressions from others rather than an inevitable social construct through which society is destroyed and reformed. It was during the Second World War that social psychological theorists began to examine the rational of prejudices against others that lead to aggressions. As different types and categories of people are brought together under mutual situations, it was observed that through understanding different social groups could learn to cooperate and gain respect for one another. As an example, black and white groups of soldiers were officially supposed to be segregated, but in battle that was near impossible to maintain. Soldiers that experienced integrated experiences learned that once placed in equal and human circumstances, especially when under stress, people were just people and categorisation through skin colour had very little meaning. As a result, Gordon Allport developed his ‘contact hypotheses’ in which groups that were brought together under specific types of circumstances could find mutual respect and understanding. The circumstances required for the need of cooperation and common goals in order to find this type of reversal of prejudicial belief systems (Dovidio, 2010). The development of social psychological theories on aggression has shown that aggressive behaviours that are exhibited by individuals and by groups is learned, and thus is not necessary as a part of the human experience. Influences through observational learning creates a set of beliefs about how aggression should be used with vicarious learning paradigms revealing whether or not actions will be successful and setting up aggressive tools through which goals are achieved. Aggressive behaviour, both through individuals and through groups, are decisions that are made based upon modelling, thus war is not a necessary part of the human social dynamic and could, legitimately be ended permanently if new models of behaviour began to take precedence. The influence that social psychology has on aggression is through the passing of methods of aggression from one generation to the next defines the way in which people will respond to different types of stimulus. Aggression is learned, thus does not have to be the way in which problems are resolved. References Crisp, R. J., & Turner, R. N. (2010). Essential social psychology. Los Angeles: SAGE. Dovidio, J. F. (2010). The SAGE handbook of prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination. London: SAGE. Fry D. P & Björkqvist, K. (2005). Cultural variation in conflict resolution: alternatives to violence. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Hogg, M. A., & Vaughan, G. M. (2005). Social psychology. Harlow, England: Pearson. Ivey, M. B., DAndrea, M. J., & Ivey, A. E. (2011). Theories of counseling and psychotherapy: A multicultural perspective. London: SAGE. Moeller, T. G. (2001). Youth aggression and violence: A psychological approach. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Read More