Discuss the following theories of aggression: (1) the instinctual view and why it is questioned; (2) the biological view, including biological factors that can influence one's aggressiveness, and why these factors cannot be considered a direct cause of aggression; (3) the frustration-aggression hypothesis; (4) the effects of aversive stimuli and aggressive cues, including the weapons effect; and

Question

(5) the social learning theory and the impact of media violence.

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

Answer will include that (1) some theorists argue we are naturally aggressive creatures, having inherited a "killer instinct" from our animal ancestors. This idea has an intuitive appeal, but many psychologists question it because just labeling a behavior as "instinctive" does not explain it. Also this view does not answer why some individuals or human groups, such as the Arapesh, the Senoi, the Navajo, and the Eskimo show little hostility or aggression and why the vast majority of humans do not kill or harm others. (2) Aggression does have biological roots. Physiological studies have shown that some brain areas are capable of triggering or ending aggressive behavior. Also, researchers have found a relationship between aggression and such physical factors as hypoglycemia (low blood sugar), allergy, alcohol and drug use, and specific brain injuries and diseases. For both men and women, higher levels of the hormone testosterone may be associated with more aggressive behavior. Regardless, none of these biological factors can be considered a direct cause of aggression. Instead, they probably lower the threshold for aggression, making hostile behavior more likely to occur. The fact that we are biologically capable of aggression does not mean that aggression is inevitable. Humans are fully capable of learning to inhibit aggression. For example, American Quakers and Amish, who live in this country's increasingly violent culture, adopt nonviolence as a way of life. (3) Frustration tends to lead to aggression, a relationship known as the frustration-aggression hypothesis. Although the connection is strong, frustration does not always lead to aggression. It may lead to stereotyped responding or to a state of "learned helplessness". Also, aggression can occur in the absence of frustration as illustrated by sports spectators who start fights, throw bottles, and tear down goal posts after their team has won. Frustration probably encourages aggression because it is uncomfortable. (4) Various aversive stimuli, which produce discomfort or displeasure, can heighten hostility and aggression. Examples include insults, high temperatures, pain, and even disgusting scenes or odors. Such stimuli probably raise overall arousal levels so that we become more sensitive to aggression cues. Aversive stimuli also tend to activate ideas, memories, and expressions associated with anger and aggression. Some cues for aggression are internal (angry thoughts), while many are external, such as words, actions, and gestures made by others. Weapons serve as particularly strong cues for aggressive behavior. A prime example of the weapons effect is the fact that murders are more likely to occur in homes in which guns are kept. (5) One of the most widely accepted explanations of aggression is the social learning theory, which holds that we learn to be aggressive by observing aggression in others. This theory combines learning principles with cognitive processes, socialization, and modeling to explain behavior. It predicts that people growing up in nonaggressive cultures will themselves be nonaggressive, while those with aggressive models and heroes will learn aggressive responses. As Albert Bandura showed in his studies of imitation, children may learn new aggressive actions by watching violent or aggressive behavior, or they may learn that violence is "okay.". Media, such as television and video games, may also disinhibit dangerous impulses that viewers already have. Disinhibition results in acting out behavior that normally would be restrained. Another worry about media violence is that it may cause a desensitization (reduced emotional sensitivity) to violent acts. While some evidence suggests that widespread exposure to media violence contributes to aggression, there is disagreement as to the power or pervasiveness of the impact.