This ppt will explain the factors that influence people to behave aggressively.

1. DETERMINANTS OF
HUMAN AGGRESSION

2. DETERMINANTS OF
HUMAN AGGRESSION
• Social
• Situational
• Personal

3. SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF AGGRESSION
1. FRUSTRATION
2. PROVOCATION
3. DISPLACED AGGRESSION
4. MEDIA VIOLENCE
5. HEIGHTENED AROUSAL

4. SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF AGGRESSION
1. FRUSTRATION
Drive theories of aggression (Dollard et al., 1939) – Frustration-aggression
hypothesis
Original form – 2 sweeping assertions: (1) Frustration always leads to some form of
aggression and (2) aggression always stems from frustration.
When frustrated, individuals do not always respond with aggression – many
different reactions
Not all aggression stems from frustration – ex., War front
Revised version – Berkowitz (1989, 1993) – frustration is an unpleasant experience,
and it may lead to aggression largely because of this.
Frustration can serve as a powerful determinant of aggression under certain
conditions – especially when it is viewed as illegitimate or unjustified.

5. SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF AGGRESSION
2. DIRECT PROVOCATION
Actions by others that tend to trigger aggression in the recipient, often
because they are perceived as stemming from malicious intent.
3. DISPLACED AGGRESSION
Aggression against someone other than the source of strong initial
provocation (Dollard et al., 1939)
Triggered displaced aggression: a mild triggering event by one person
results in that individual becoming the target of strong displaced
aggression – intense aggression that comes as a real surprise to the
person in question (Marcus-Newhall et al., 2000)

6. SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF AGGRESSION
3. DISPLACED AGGRESSION
Triggered displaced aggression – Research – Pederson, Gonzales and Miller
– Anagram – 2 conditions – Provocation – No Provocation; Received
evaluation from another participant which was either slightly negative or
neutral; Finally participants evaluated assistant on several dimensions
Result – In the no provocation condition – the triggering event produced
little or not aggression; In the provocation condition participants reacted
strongly to the mild triggering event
Contrast effect: participants rated the accomplice who evaluated them in a
neutral manner more favorably when they had previously been provoked by
the experimenter than when they had not been provoked
Cause of triggered displaced aggression – Ruminate – raises sensitivity to
even minor provocations.

7. SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF AGGRESSION
4. EXPOSURE TO MEDIA VIOLENCE
Many of the films contain a great deal of violence – much more than
you are ever likely to see in real life (Reiss & Roth, 1993; Waters et al.,
1993)
Exposure to media violence may indeed be one factor contributing to
high levels of violence in countries where such materials are viewed
by large numbers of persons (Anderson, 1997; Berkowitz, 1993).

8. SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF AGGRESSION
4. EXPOSURE TO MEDIA VIOLENCE
Short-term laboratory experiments, children or adults – viewed either
violent films and television programs or nonviolent ones; then, their
tendency to aggress – higher.
Longitudinal procedures – The more violent films or television
programs participants watched as children, the higher their levels of
aggression as teenagers or adults – for instance, the higher the
likelihood that they have been arrested for violent crimes;
Replicated – appear to hold across cultures – correlational nature –
Results combined with short-term lab expts – strong case for
suggestion – potential cause

9. SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF AGGRESSION
4. EXPOSURE TO MEDIA VIOLENCE - WHY?
1. May learn new ways of aggression – “Copycat crimes”
2. Desensitization effects – individuals become hardened to the pain and
suffering of other persons
3. “Prime” hostile thoughts – these come to mind more readily – repeated
exposure may strengthen such priming effects over time – impact may be
cumulative
Violence “sells”- Bushman (1998) – findings suggest that media violence can
actually backfire – audiences who watch violent programs are significantly
less likely to remember the content of commercials shown during these
programs than are audiences who watch nonviolent programs – Violent
images trigger memories of other violent scenes, and such thoughts distract
viewers from paying attention to commercials.

10. SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF AGGRESSION
5. HEIGHTENED AROUSAL: EMOTION, COGNITION AND AGGRESSION
Under some conditions, heightened arousal – whatever its source – can enhance
aggression in response to provocation, frustration or other factors.
In various expts., arousal stemming from participation in competitive games, vigorous
exercise, some types of music has found to increase subsequent aggression
Explanation – Excitation Transfer Theory (Zillmann, 1983, 1988) – because physiological
arousal tends to dissipate slowly over time, a portion of such arousal may persist as a
person moves from one situation to another;
It further suggests that such effects are most likely to occur when the persons involved are
relatively unaware of the presence of residual arousal – as small elevations in arousal are
difficult to notice (Zillmann, 1994);
Such effects are likely to occur when the persons involved recognize their residual arousal
but attribute it to events occurring in the present situation (Taylor et al., 1991)

11. SOCIAL DETERMINANTS OF AGGRESSION
5. SEXUAL AROUSAL AND AGGRESSION : EMOTIONAL AND COGNITIVE LINKS
Freud suggested that the desire to hurt or be hurt by one’s lover is often a normal part of sexual relations; True
or False? – there is some evidence for important links between merely being exposed to sex-related words and
subsequent aggression.
• There is some evidence – mild sexual arousal can actually reduce overt aggression; higher levels increase
rather than decrease aggression – the relationship – is curvilinear.
• Explanation – mild erotic materials generate positive feelings that inhibit aggression, while more explicit
sexual stimuli generate negative feelings, that can through excitation transfer increase aggression (Zillmann,
1984)
Cognitive links
Priming –specific stimuli may activate schemasor knowledge structures in our minds, and so influence our
thinking and judgements
Mussweiler and Forster (2000) – study - men and women were exposed to either neutral words (ex., clock,
roof) or sex-related words (ex., skin, bed) – then both were given a chance to throw darts at either at a photo
of a human face or at physical objects (ex, vase) – When exposed to sex-related words men threw more darts
at human face (only when the target was a female) – males primed with sex-related words aggressed more
than males primed with neutral words, only against a woman – women showed no such differences.