10 paged paper instructionsmain instruction.pdf 159.docx

10 paged paper instructions/main instruction.pdf
1
599
O n V i o l e n c e
e s s a y o n t h e t h e o r i e s o f v i o l e n c e
The idea here is to engage one of the theories (or literary
treatments) that seek to help us to
understand violence and apply it to a real-world case in the
areas we are examining in the
course.
I . S t r u c t u r a l C o n s i d e r a t i o n s
A . T i t l e
Include two dimensions in your title. The first should be
descriptive language referring to the
paper’s subject matter. And the second should refer to your
main point or argument.
B . I n t r o d u c t i o n
Your introduction should do four things: (a) make it clear why
the study of the act of
violence you have chosen is important, (b) a sense of the chief
intellectual challenge it poses

to theory, (c) a brief statement as to your main finding and (d) a
brief overview of the paper.
C . C o n t e x t
This section is where you will establish the groundwork for
your analysis. You can begin by
locating your act of violent activity within its context. Say
something here regarding (a) the
actors and (b) the essential fact-pattern of the event or case in
question.
D . T h e o r y
In this part of the paper, you can introduce the theory (or
literary treatment) you seek to
examine in terms of (a) its basic assumptions and (b) ways in
which it would seek to account
for the event under consideration.
E . E v a l u a t i o n
Here you will make a determination as to the utility, the value,
of the theory in terms of its
explanatory power or its limitations.
F . C o n c l u s i o n
Restate the main intellectual issue to emerge from the treatment
of the incident and the
theories you have selected. Then, restate what you take to be the
main point to emerge from
your analysis. And, finally, offer some comments as to the
implications of this for the future.

2
I I . T e c h n i c a l C o n s i d e r a t i o n s
A . S o u r c e s
JSTOR will be very important here. So too will be the coverage
from the Times of London,
New York Times and other news services.
B . S t y l e
About the style of the composition, three quick points will
suffice. First, you will not need a
title page, just get right to it (name, course number in upper
right or left, single-spaced).
Second, use only Times New Roman and standard margins. And
third, in addition to your
paper’s title, use section-headings to announce points of
transition in the essay (a single word
or a short phrase that captures the essence of what is coming in
the section).
C . C i t a t i o n s
Please use footnotes after the fashion of the Chicago Manual of
Style. With regard to the
footnotes, remember to put them in Times New Roman and
bring them down to ten-point
font. Also, provide a bibliography.

10 paged paper instructions/readin.pdf
Social–emotional origins of violence: A theory of multiple
killing
Thomas J. Scheff ⁎
Dept of Sociology, UCSB, 3009 Lomita Road, Santa Barbara,
CA, 93105, USA
a b s t r a c ta r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Received 8 November 2008
Received in revised form 8 November 2010
Accepted 4 March 2011
Available online 26 March 2011
Keywords:
Violence
Recursion
Alienation
Unacknowledged shame
Anger
Social–emotional world
This essay outlines a cybernetic theory of violence, supporting
and extending earlier studies, particularly
Gilligan and Websdale. It spells out recursive, interactive
processes of alienation and emotion. The theory
proposes that most violence is caused by the interaction
between alienation and what Gilligan called secret
shame, shame about shame. Recursion need not stop in one
round: there may be no natural limit for the

resultant spirals. A chain reaction of vengefulness, a
shame/anger derivative, can be produced in this way. Two
spirals are described: shame/rage and shame/shame. Studies and
accounts of multiple killings offer
preliminary support. The idea may be applicable to collective
behavior also, such as gratuitous wars.
Websdale's cases of calmly planned familicide seem particularly
relevant to the origins of wars, such as WWI,
in which vengeance seems to have played a major part. It would
appear that the humiliation–revenge cycle is
the most dangerous element in human existence. The last
section offers some tentative first steps toward
decreasing violence. To the extent that the theory proposed here
is true, we face the dilemma of how to
present it to a civilization in which the social–emotional world
is virtually invisible.
© 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Contents
1. How much shame? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 454
2. Case studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 454
3. Shame and violence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 454
4. Isolation and feeling traps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 455
5. Emotion spirals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 456
6. Recursion of emotions and alienation in killers . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 456
7. Alienation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 457
8. Collective violence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 457
9. Media and masses33This section summarizes part of Chapter
6 of Scheff (1994). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 457
10. Response of historians . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 458
11. Remedies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 458
12. Alienated students . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 459
13. Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 459
14. Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 459
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 459
This article describes social–emotional processes leading to
killings, and preliminary steps that might help avoid future
ones.1
Because there is a large amount of background information
about
multiple killers, and several empirical studies, their cases are
used to
illustrate the theory. To suggest the possibility that the theory
may
also apply on a larger scale, some historical materials related to
the
origins of World War I are also included.
The most useful steps toward a general theory of the emotional
causes of violence were suggested by Gilligan (1997), based on
his
experiences with violent men as a prison psychiatrist.

The emotion of shame is the primary or ultimate cause of all
violence… Shame is a necessary but not a sufficient cause of
Aggression and Violent Behavior 16 (2011) 453–460
⁎ Tel.: +1 805 687 6145.
E-mail address: [email protected]
1 This article uses the term multiple killing, rather than spree,
rampage, mass, or
serial killing. I am indebted to Robert Fuller for his comments
on an earlier draft, to
Chris Poulsen for his help with the large literature on multiple
killings, and to Suzanne
Retzinger for her support and encouragement.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . .
1359-1789/$ – see front matter © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights
reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.avb.2011.03.007
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Aggression and Violent Behavior
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2011.03.007
mailto:[email protected]
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2011.03.007
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/13591789
violence, just as the tubercle bacillus is necessary but not
sufficient for the development of tuberculosis. The different
forms

of violence, whether toward individuals or entire populations,
are
motivated (caused) by shame. (pp. 110–111)
[There are three preconditions under which shame leads to
violence.] The first precondition is that the shame is a secret
probably the most carefully guarded secret held by violent
men…
The degree of shame that a man needs to be experiencing in
order
to become homicidal is so intense and so painful that it
threatens
to overwhelm him and bring about the death of the self, cause
him to lose his mind, his soul, or his sacred honor.
The idea that secret shame is the prime cause of violence is very
important, but needs to be elaborated. Normal emotions are
hardly
overwhelming because they are brief and instructive. Fear is a
signal
of imminent danger, but usually comes and goes in a few
seconds, like
other normal emotions. Similarly, normal shame and
embarrassment
are brief signals of actual or potential rejection by other(s).
What kind
of dynamic can result in feeling overwhelmed by painful
emotions to
the point of losing all inhibition? We will return to this question
below, after considering Gilligan's other two conditions.
…The second precondition for violence is met when these men
perceive themselves as having no nonviolent means of warding
off or diminishing their feelings of shame, …such as socially
rewarded economic or cultural achievement, or high social
status,
position, and prestige. (p. 112)

The third precondition …is that the person lacks feelings that
inhibit the violent impulses that are stimulated by shame. The
most important are love and guilt toward others, and fear for the
self. … (p. 113)
Finally, there is a forth issue implied: Since Gilligan worked
only in
male prisons, his perpetrators are all men. As discussed below,
the
majority of multiple killers are men, but there is also a small
minority
of women.
1. How much shame?
The question of conditions in which secret shame leads to
violence
turns out to be important, because it seems reasonable to assume
that
shame, or the anticipation of shame, is virtually omnipresent in
most
people, especially secret shame. The idea that people spend
much of
their time and energy involved in or avoiding shame or
embarrass-
ment, if possible, and managing it if not, was central to much of
the
writing of Erving Goffman (Goffman, 1959). One example:
“…there is no interaction in which participants do not take an
appreciable chance of being slightly embarrassed or a slight
chance
of being deeply humiliated.” (1959, p. 243, emphasis added).
If this sentence is taken literally, it means that shame and/or the
anticipation of shame haunts ALL social interaction. Avoidance

of
shame/embarrassment/humiliation is the driving force behind
Goff-
man's central idea of impression management. Two studies that
suggest a very high frequency of shame-related episodes in
ordinary
life will be discussed below.
The idea that shame issues are a virtually continuous presence
in
human affairs seems odd in modern societies because they
foster the
doctrine of individualism. We are taught that each person is a
sovereign entity, self-reliant, standing alone. This emphasis is
just a
pipedream, since flourishing and even surviving is completely
dependent upon recognition and help from others.
Finally, there is an issue of secret shame that makes trouble, but
no
violence. Many years ago Cressey's (1953), study of persons
jailed for
embezzlement shows that every case involved what he called a
“non-
shareable financial problem,” in Gilligan's terminology, a secret
(see also
Braithwaite, 1989). Similarly, many studies have suggested that
bullying, which usually involves only threats of violence, are
linked to
secret shame (Ahmed, et al., 2001). This essay will propose that
it is not
just secret shame, but endlessly recursive shame that leads to
violence.
2. Case studies

In the US, at least, many of the multiple killers have been
loners
who were harassed and ostracized. Yet most people treated that
way
don't shoot anyone or even make trouble. What could be special
about
the killers? It may be that shame might be the problem.
Although they
use the word rejection, rather than shame, Leary et al's (2003)
review
of school shootings come to a similar conclusion. Again, they
don't use
the term isolation, but it is implied in their analysis.
Before developing the theory further, first some examples are
offered to illustrate the theory. Tyler Peterson was a 19 year old
who
killed six in Crandon, Wisconsin (Oct. 8, 2007 Milwaukee
Journal
Sentinel). He had gone to his on-again, off-again girlfriend's
house in
the middle of the night and instead of patching up their
relationship,
argued with her. One of the persons gathered at her home for a
party
called him a "worthless pig". He went home, got his AR-17
machine
gun, and returned to kill all of the gathering but one. According
to one
of his friends, Peterson had been picked on in high school
because he
was not originally from Crandon, and not an athlete.
Cho Seung-Hui was the 23-year old killer in the spree at
Virginia

Tech in 2007. Like Peterson and all of the other school killers,
he was
an isolated male loner who felt rejected. Many of his written
complaints imply that he was rejecting those that he felt had
rejected
him, a strong indication of shame. There are also plentiful
indications
of isolation. One of his teachers reported, “He was the loneliest
person
I have ever known.” His roommate commented that often he
didn't
respond at all when spoken to, or with only one word.
In Cho's writings, there are many indications of shame and
humiliation. He often mentioned others' disrespect for him and
those
like him. In one instance he referred directly to humiliation:
“Kill
yourselves or you will never know how the dorky kid that [you]
publicly humiliated and spat on will come behind you and slash
your
throats.” (Washington Post, August 29, 2007).
His claim to being publicly humiliated could be either true or
imagined, since there is at this writing no outside support for it.
However, there is such support in the case of Jennifer San
Marcos. She
was the 44-year-old killer in the Goleta, California post office
spree in
2006, killing 7 persons and herself. An investigator who
requested
anonymity spoke with many of Jennifer's co-workers for several
weeks after the spree.
The investigator was surprised to find that with only one
exception,

the 18 co-workers interviewed expressed deep sympathy not
only for
the victims, but also for Jennifer. They all told roughly the
same story.
She was fired because of her mental illness, which had led to
periodic
misbehavior on the job. On the night she was fired after her
latest
outburst, she was handcuffed to a mail cart by the management,
awaiting the arrival of the police. During the extended period of
waiting,
she was in full view of her co-workers, as if she were in stocks.
Because
this part of the story shows management in a bad light, it has
not been
mentioned in the media. Perhaps anyone, mentally ill, or not,
would feel
intense humiliation under these circumstances.
3. Shame and violence
The role of humiliation in multiple killing was suggested by
Gaylin
(2003, p. 60) in his analysis of hatred:
The rampage of an ex-employee at the workplace is often the
product of …a perceived public humiliation, where the “public”
may be only his fellow employees at the post office.
454 T.J. Scheff / Aggression and Violent Behavior 16 (2011)
453–460
Gaylin's statement, made several years before the event, is
nevertheless a telling comment particularly on the Goleta

multiple
killing. In an earlier study, Diamond (1997) also emphasized
shame
and humiliation, stating clearly that workplace violence seems
to be
based equally on management mistreatment and the killers'
shame
dynamics.
I have located three empirical studies that support the shame/
violence hypothesis, and a review of large literature of
empirical
studies (Leary, et al., 2006).The review does not use the word
shame,
but an expression that is its cognate (feeling rejected). Of the
three
studies that employ the word shame, two of them are on a fairly
small
scale, by Brown (2004), and by Thomas (1995).
The third study, Websdale (2010), however, is the largest, most
detailed, and most systematic study so far. He found evidence
of
intense shame in almost all of 211 cases of multiple killings
within
families: one partner kills the other partner, and one or more
child.
This type of murder is a multiple killing, but usually enclosed
within a
single family. (In a few of the cases, however, bystanders were
also
killed.)
All of Websdale's cases except the very early ones contained
many,
many details about each case, obtained not only from media

reports,
but also from police records and in some cases actual interviews
with
persons who knew the family. Most of these sources were
available to
Websdale through the Domestic Violence Fatality Review
movement,
a sizable group judging from the many persons acknowledged
by the
author.
The author patiently sifted through these materials in order to
understand each case separately. Judging from my own
reactions, this
part of his study must have required considerable emotional
fortitude
on his part: a review of highly detailed material from some 150
tragedies, one after another.
Websdale's findings strongly support Gilligan's idea that
violence
is caused by shame. However, in addition, Websdale discovered
that
most of the killings took two seemingly different forms: the
livid
coercive hearts, and the civil reputable hearts. The first type of
violence, a majority of the cases, is clearly parallel to the
common-
sense idea of violence exploding out of rage.
The second type is quite different, involving killers with no
history
of violence whatever, and clearly and quietly premeditated,
some-
times during lengthy periods of time. The idea of a type of
premeditated violence turns out to be quite important in several

ways, but particularly in understanding collective violence.
The theory outlined here, like Gilligan's and Websdale's,
proposes
shame as a causal agent, but also has a social component,
alienation,
equally important. When these two components interact without
limit, the stage is set for either withdrawal or extreme violence.
Fortunately for the survival of the human race, withdrawal
seems to
be by far the most frequent reaction.
4. Isolation and feeling traps
A theory of violence requires a way of explaining the extraordi-
nary, indeed unlimited force and loss of moral and other
inhibitions
that produces violence in our civilization. In this section, two
main
kinds of recursive loops will be considered: a social loop of
rejection/
isolation on the one hand, and a shame loop, a feeling trap
(Lewis,
1971), on the other.
The idea of a rejection/isolation loop is straightforward. Being
or
even just feeling rejected by a group leads toward alienation,
and the
more alienated, the more likely further rejection, a spiral. This
process
is social rather than psychological, although it is related to
shame-
based loops, because rejection and isolation are the basic causes
of
shame.

There is one complexity about isolation that will be considered.
Some multiple killings were committed by two persons, not one.
We
are tempted to say that in these cases, the perpetrators were not
completely isolated, since they at least had each other. This
issue will
be discussed below by considering a second kind of alienation
other
than isolation, engulfment or fusion. It can be argued that the
pairs of
killers were just as alienated as the isolated ones, but in the
engulfed
mode of alienation.
The part played by emotions in violence is more complex. It
seems
to be based on shame, but the kind of shame that goes unnoticed
and
unmentioned. Helen B. Lewis, a psychologist and
psychoanalyst, used
a systematic method (Gottschalk & Glaser, 1969) to locate
emotion
indicators in many transcripts of psychotherapy sessions
(Lewis,
1971). She found that shame/embarrassment was by far the most
frequent emotion, occurring more than all the other emotions
combined. Her findings suggest that shame/embarrassment,
unlike
pride, joy, grief, fear, or anger, was so frequent in the many
sessions
she studied that it almost always seemed to be unnoticed.
In addition to this study, there is another one that suggests that
episodes of unacknowledged shame are frequent occurrences,

yet
don't result in violence. Retzinger (1991) showed that in the
filmed
marital quarrels of four couples, all 16 angry escalations she
found
were preceded by an insult that was not acknowledged. She
showed
that in each instance the insult generated a triple spiral of
shame,
anger and isolation, one spiral between the partners, and one
within
each of them, but there was no violence.
As indicated, Lewis (1971) found that the frequent occurrences
of
shame were virtually never mentioned by patient or therapist.
The
episodes involving other emotions, such as sadness, fear, or
anger,
were often referred to by either patient or therapist or both.
However,
in almost all of the instances of
shame/embarrassment/humiliation,
neither patient nor therapist referred to it. She called the
unmen-
tioned instances "unacknowledged shame."
She went on to note that when shame occurs but is not
acknowledged, it can lead to an intense response, a feeling trap:
one
becomes ashamed of one's feelings in such a way that leads to
further
emotion. Since normal emotions are extremely brief in duration,
Lewis's idea of a feeling trap opens up a whole new area of
exploration. Emotions that persist over time have long been a
puzzle

for researchers, since normal emotions function only as brief
signals.
The particular trap that Lewis described in detail involved
shame/
anger sequences. One can rapidly become angry when ashamed,
and
ashamed that one is angry. She called the result "humiliated
fury". She
found many word-by-word instances of episodes in which
unacknow-
ledged shame was followed by either hostility toward the
therapist or
withdrawal. In her examples of the latter, withdrawal takes a
form that
she called depression. She refers to the shame/anger/withdrawal
sequence as shame and anger “short circuited into depression”
(1971,
p. 431 and passim). In a later chapter (The Role of Shame in
Depression
over the Lifespan, 1987, pp. 29–49), Lewis reviewed many
studies by
other authors using various measures that showed strong
correlations
between shame and depression (Lewis, 1987).
Lewis's references to the kind of shame that leads either to
withdrawal or to anger always involved unacknowledged shame,
a
term quite parallel to Gilligan's secret shame. Neither Gilligan
nor
Lewis, however, sufficiently explained why it is this particular
type of
shame that leads to trouble.
The explanation, as it turns out, is not simple. What their work

implies is that when shame is kept secret, or unacknowledged,
there is
little chance that it will be resolved. How is shame ordinarily
resolved? Although this question is rarely addressed explicitly,
it
seems to me that both authors seem to assume that normal
shame is
resolved through verbal means and through humor. However, in
the
case of intense humiliation, lengthy verbal or at least cognitive
consideration might be needed before any humor can be found
in the
offending incident.
In many of my classes, I have asked student volunteers to tell
the
class about the most embarrassing moment in their lives.
Invariably
some of the volunteers, during the course of their story, become
455T.J. Scheff / Aggression and Violent Behavior 16 (2011)
453–460
convulsed with laughter. Often these same students tell me
afterwards
that the public telling touched not only the embarrassment from
the
particular incident, but also shame from other incidents that
apparently
was also unresolved, a backlog of shame.
It appears that when shame is not resolved, it can build up a
backlog of hidden shame. When there is considerable backlog,
then

any new incident is felt in itself, but also seems to reactivate
the
backlog, making the new incident, even if seemingly trivial,
extremely
painful. Even without the spirals to be described below,
backlogs of
shame can lead to trouble.
The case of John Silber, as described in Milburn and Conrad
(1996),
provides an example of the link between suppressed shame and
anger
in a public setting. Silber is the ex-president of Boston
University, and
was a powerful conservative force in Massachusetts politics.
His
approach to political issues is a prime example of the politics of
rage.
As Milburn and Conrad (1996) suggest, it was an outburst of
rage
during a TV broadcast on the eve of the election that seemed to
cost
him the race when he ran for governor.
In an earlier interview, Silber stated that his sixth grade teacher
laughed at him for wanting to be a veterinarian, since Silber had
a
withered arm. When the interviewer asked him how he felt
about
being laughed at, Silber replied that he wasn't humiliated, it
made him
stronger. This episode can be interpreted to mean that Silber's
rage as
a person and as a politician might have arisen from the
suppression of
shame.

5. Emotion spirals
Lewis' idea of humiliated fury as a feeling trap can be a first
step
toward a theory of the emotional origins of either withdrawal or
extreme violence. Since none of the therapy sessions she
studied
contained physical aggression, she didn't consider the kind of
feeling
traps that could result in violent aggression, on the one hand, or
long
lasting or total withdrawal (as in clinical depression).
Lewis described feeling traps as emotion sequences. The
sequences
described by Lewis involve at most three steps, as in the case of
the
shame/anger sequence short-circuited into depression. It will be
necessary, however, to go beyond three steps, even as far as an
endless spiral. Such a process would be a doomsday machine of
interpersonal and inter-group withdrawal or violence. The
combina-
tion of isolation and denial of shame can lead to self-
perpetuating
loops that generate either complete withdrawal or extreme
violence.
Some emotion sequences may be recursive to the point that
there
is no natural limit to their length and intensity. Blushers
provide an
everyday example: some who blush easily tend to become
embar-
rassed that they are blushing, leading to more intense blushing,
and so

on. The actor Ian Holm reported an extreme instance. During a
live
performance when he forgot his lines, he became embarrassed,
realized he was blushing, which embarrassed him further,
ending up
paralyzed in the fetal position. He had to be carried from the
stage.
This feeling trap would not be a shame/anger spiral, but rather
shame/
shame: being ashamed that you are ashamed, etc.
Recursive shame-based sequences, whether shame about anger,
shame about fear, or shame about shame need not stop after a
few
steps. They can spiral to the extent that they rule out all other
considerations. Collective panics such as those that take place
under
the threat of fire might be caused by shame/fear spirals, one's
own
fear and that of others reflecting back and forth can cause still
more
fear, leading to a triple spiral: a spiral within each person, and a
spiral
between them.
Although Lewis didn't consider the possibility, depression
might
be a result not only of a shame/anger spiral, but also
shame/shame, or
a combination of both. Judging from her own transcriptions,
withdrawal after unacknowledged shame seems to be much more
frequent than hostility toward the therapist.
The less frequent shame/anger spiral, humiliated fury, or a
shame/
shame spiral with the anger hidden, might be basic causes of

violence
to the extent that they result in self-perpetuating loops. A
person or
group caught up both in alienation and in a shame-based spiral
might
become oblivious to all else, whether moral imperatives or
danger to
self or to one's group. Limitless quarrels or withdrawal can be
generated by a triple spiral: shame/anger and/or shame/shame
spirals
within each party, and an isolation spiral between them.
It is conceivable that shame spirals could be a predominant
cause
of violence, with shame/anger playing only a hidden part. This
might
be the case in killings that are carefully and lengthily
premeditated.
Shame spirals and shame/anger spirals could be equally
involved, as
will be discussed below in a consideration of collective
violence.
Perhaps the idea of a spiral of social alienation might be a more
general way of referring to Gilligan's second and third
conditions, the
absence of socially acceptable ways of avoiding shame, such as
high
status, and the inability to feel love, guilt or fear. Feeling
completely
forbidden by other persons/groups can dominate all other
feelings.
6. Recursion of emotions and alienation in killers
It has been suggested that recursive thinking is unique to human

beings, differentiating their mental processes decisively from
other
species (Corballis, 2007). The theory presented here proposes
that
recursion of feelings, feeling about feeling, would also
differentiate
humans from other species, and explain episodes of depression
or
rage of extraordinary intensity and/or duration.
Gilligan's explanation of the way in which secret shame leads to
violence is largely metaphorical, as already indicated:
The degree of shame that a man needs to be experiencing in
order
to become homicidal is so intense and so painful that it
threatens
to overwhelm him and bring about the death of the self, cause
him to lose his mind, his soul, or his sacred honor.
The model of recursive loops explains how laminations and
spirals
of shame could lead to pain so unbearable as to feel like one is
dying,
or losing mind or soul.
The idea of isolation and shame/anger spirals seems to fit most
of
the recorded cases of multiple killing: the killers were not only
isolated but also may have been in unacknowledged shame
states. In
her book Rampage (Newman, 2004), the social scientist
Katherine
Newman analyzed 25 school killings that took place in the U.S.
between 1974 and 2002. The 27 killers all had been
marginalized in

their schools. That is, they had been harassed and ostracized to
the
point that they were completely alienated. Although Newman
did not
often mention shame or shaming, her descriptions suggest that
the
killers may have been in a state of unacknowledged shame prior
to
their rampages.
In another study of school killings, Fast (2008) considered 13
cases, and also suggests isolation (he calls it lack of integration
into
the school social milieu). Like Newman, some of his
terminology (e.g.,
self-hatred) implies shame without naming it explicitly.
A multiple killing that occurred after the publication of
Newman's
book and is not mention in the Fast book, (Santa Barbara News-
Press.
March 25, 2005) suggests both reasons and clues for
unacknowledged
shame and for alienation. At the Red Lake Senior High School,
in
Minnesota, Jeff Weise killed 7 people and himself. He was a
very obese
(6 ft, 250 lbs.) 16-year-old, whose father had committed suicide
ten
years earlier. His mother, driving drunk, was brain damaged in
an
accident in 1999. According to Jeff's online postings, since her
accident, she had been beating him mercilessly, but he never
stood
up to her.

In another posting, he stated “I have friends, but I'm basically a
loner in a group of loners. I've never shared my past with
anyone, and
I've never talked about it with anyone. I'm excluded from
anything
453–460
and everything they do, I'm never invited, I don't even know
why they
consider me a friend or I them…”
This boy seems to have been without a single bond, rejected
continually and relentlessly by everyone around him, including
his
mother and his so-called friends. It is little wonder that his
writing
contains many clear indications of shame; for example, “I really
must
be fucking worthless…”
The Columbine multiple killing has evoked the largest amount
of
research. Larkin (2007), as already mentioned, has described in
detail
the circumstances that led up to the killings. It is quite clear
from his
investigation that the killers, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold,
were quite
isolated from others, but engulfed with each other. In the
writing they
did in secret, it is also clear that they both felt humiliated by
the

treatment they received from the high school cliques that
rejected
them.
7. Alienation
The idea of two types of alienation, mentioned earlier, in
connection with killings done by two persons jointly will be
further
considered here. The founder of family systems theory, Murray
Bowen
(1978), distinguished between two kinds of dysfunctional
relation-
ships, engulfment (fusion) when the bond is too tight, and
isolation,
when it is too loose. In engulfed relationships, one or both
parties
subordinate their own thoughts and feelings to those of the
other(s).
In true solidarity, each party recognizes the sovereignty of the
other,
but balances respect for the other's position with respect for
one's
own, no more and no less.
Elias's (Introduction, l987) discussion of the "I–self"
(isolation), the
"we–self" (engulfment) and the "I–we balance" (true solidarity)
makes
the same point. Elias proposed a three-part typology:
independence
(too much distance), interdependence (a balance between self
and
other), and dependence (too little distance).
Engulfed relationships are alienated because at least one of the

parties gives up vital parts of the self in order to be loyal to the
other
party. That is, one or both parties are alienated from self, in
service to
the other. In this kind of relationship, the kinds of negotiations
that
can be called upon by two independent parties are lost. All of
the pairs
of killers that I have examined seem to have been alienated in
this
mode. One person dominates the other. This was certainly the
case of
Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold in Columbine. Eric completely
dominated Dylan, and Dylan idolized Eric (Larkin, 2007, pp.
144–148).
Clearly a majority of the cases have involved killers who were
male,
but female killers are not unknown. One example was
mentioned above,
the post office employee who killed 6 and herself. A recent
school killer,
Amy Bishop, a neurobiologist at the U. of Alabama, is another
(NY Times,
Feb. 13, 2010). In the U. S., overall women represent only a
small
proportion of killers. Why men? Perhaps men are less likely to
acknowledge shame than women, since most men learn early
that
emotions other than anger are not considered manly.2 The
discussion
below of the difficulties in attracting male students into my
class on
emotions/relationships is relevant.
8. Collective violence

Perhaps multiple killings occur at the collective level also, in
the form
of gratuitous assaults, genocides and wars. The individual and
interpersonal emotion spirals would be the same, but there
would
also be a recursive process between media and people, as
suggested
below.
The origins of World War I can serve as an example. The
differences that divided the countries that fought this
extraordinarily
destructive war might have been negotiated, had there been last-
minute negotiations to avoid war. But there weren't. Historians
have
so far been unable to explain the causes of this war.
My book on the politics of revenge (1994) proposed that social
scientists, have been looking in the wrong places. The basic
cause of the
war, I argued, was not economic or real politic, but
social/emotional. The
German and French people seem to have been caught up in
alienation
and shame spirals. The French defeat by the Germans in 1871
led to
national desire for vengeance. The French leaders plotted a war
for over
40 years, including a secret understanding with Russia for the
purpose
of defeating the Germans. (For a more recent and broader
discussion of
emotions, revenge, and conflict, see Frijda, 2006, Ch. 7)

9. Media and masses3
During this period, the role of mass media in both generating
and
reflecting collective humiliation and anger is quite blatant. The
French
public and its leaders experienced their defeat in the Franco–
Prussian
War (l870-71), and the Treaty of Frankfurt, which ended the
war, as
humiliating (Kennan, 1984; Sontag, 1933; Weber, 1968).
Going against Bismark's warnings (he feared revenge), the
Germans
had annexed two French provinces (Alsace and Lorraine).
Revenge
broughtabout through thereturnof thetwo lost provinces,
revanchisme,
became the central issue in French politics of the whole era.
Leading political figures such as Gambetta and General
Boulanger
talked about revenge openly in their campaigns (Boulanger was
known in the popular press as "General Revenge.") Vengeance
against
Germany was a popular theme in newspapers, magazines, poetry
and
fiction.
Revenge themes were common in the popular literature of the
time. The poetry and novels of that era serve as examples. The
war
poems of Deroulede (1872), Chants du Soldat (Songs of a
Soldier)
were wildly popular. Here is a sample stanza (quoted in
Rutkoff, 1981,

p. l61):
Revenge will come, perhaps slowly
Perhaps with fragility, yet a strength that is sure
For bitterness is already born and force will follow
And cowards only the battle will ignore.
Note that this poem not only appeals to the French to seek
revenge,
but also contains a coercive element. In the last line, anyone
who
might disagree with the poet's sentiments is labeled a coward.
There
are many other instances of appeals to vengeance, honor, and
glory in
the other poems: these are the main themes. By l890 this little
book
had gone through an unprecedented 83 editions, which suggests
that
it had a vast audience.
The extraordinary acclaim that greeted Chants du Soldat
(Soldiers'
Songs) prompted Deroulede to publish further books of similar
thrust,
most of them devoted to military glory, triumph and revenge.
For
example, in 1896 his Poesies Militaires (Military Poetry)
continued in the
same vein (Deroulede, 1896). The following is a representative
stanza:
French blood! – a treasure so august
And hoarded with such jealous care,
To crush oppression's strength unjust,
With all the force of right robust,

And buy us back our honor fair…
2 There are many studies that show men to be much less
involved with emotions
than women. Several books on alexthymia (emotionlessness)
don't discuss gender
directly, but most of the case studies are men. Salminen, et al.
(1999), used an
alexthymia scale. They found evidence for emotionlessness in
almost twice as many
men as women. 3 This section summarizes part of Chapter 6 of
Scheff (1994).
453–460
Although revenge is not mentioned explicitly, the last line
implies
what might be called the honor–insult–revenge cycle (Scheff &
Suzanne, 1991).
Also indicative of open revanchism was the rash of novels about
the
plight of Alsace and Lorraine under German occupation, which
became popular in the l5 years preceding WWI. The best-known
author of this genre, Maurrice Barres, published two: In the
Service of
Germany (Barres, 1905) and Collette Baudoche (Barres, 1909).
These
books, like many others of their ilk, were not works of art, but
"works
of war", to use the phrase of Barres' biographer (Boisdeffre,
1962).

Websdale's idea of a type of multiple killer who not acting in a
fit of
rage, but carefully and with considerable planning seems to be
applicable to wars like WWI. The ruling emotional spiral is not
shame–anger, but shame–shame. A person or a nation can
become so
lost in a spiral of being ashamed that it becomes the dominant
force in
their existence, as it seems to have been in the French nation in
1871–
1914. The violence that results is not because of lost of control,
but of
submerging the inhibitions that prevent killing. In an eerily
prophetic
letter to Ruge in 1843 about nationalism, Marx wrote: “…if a
whole
nation were to feel ashamed it would be like a lion recoiling in
order to
spring.” (Tucker, 1978).
The alienation loops in the case of collective violence are more
complex than those of persons in two different ways. The first
way has
already been mentioned, the loop that develops between the
media
and the public. The second complexity is that a double type of
alienation develops between the contending groups: isolation
between the groups (too far) and engulfment within them (too
close). My earlier study (1994) named this double type of
alienation
bimodal, and proposed that it is a necessary condition for
aggressive
wars, that is wars that don't involve self-defense.
The idea of bimodal alienation has already been discussed with
respect to pairs of multiple killers, suggesting that just as they

were
isolated without, they were engulfed within. This idea might
help
understand the type of multiple killing that Websdale called
civic
respectable, a spouse calmly killing a spouse and one or more of
the
children. In ordinary terms, it seems difficult to understand any
killing, especially a parent who would kill his or her own
children. The
theory presented here suggests the possibility that the civil
reputable
parent who kills is so engulfed with his family, and so isolated
without, that he or she projects his own unbearable emotional
pain on
the family members. If that were the case, the killer would think
that
he or she is helping by ending their pain.
The philosopher of emotions Robert Solomon suggested a
parallel
but much broader idea: “emotionworlds.” For example, he
compares the
loveworld to the angerworld. The loveworld (Solomon, 1981, p.
126) is
“woven around a single relationship, with everything else
pushed to the
periphery…” By contrast, in the angerworld “one defines
oneself in the
role of the ‘offended’ and someone else….as the offender. [It]
is very
much a courtroom world, a world filled with blame and
emotional
litigation…” Perhaps in the shameworld of the civic reputable
killer,
where the family receives nothing but insults and rejections, life

is not
worth living. It may be that Solomon omitted a significant part
of the
motivation: in emotions loops the pain generated can be so
over-
whelming that life seems worthless.
10. Response of historians
With only a few exceptions, the idea of emotional origins of
war
has not been well received by most experts in history and
political
science. It seems to me that they are caught up in the denial of
the
importance of the social–emotional world, assuming that causes
lie in
the material world, and/or in thoughts and beliefs. They share
this
denial with most of the members of modern societies, lay and
expert
alike, as discussed above (see also Scheff, 1990, 1994, 1997,
2006a, b;
Scheff and Suzanne, 1991).
The current Iraq war might also be understood as a multiple
killing
occasioned, at least in part, by humiliation. The motivation of
the
leaders who launched the war is more complex than that, but
even for
them the war can be seen as partly motivated by revenge, and
the use
of revenge to placate the public. Rather than acknowledge the
shame
caused by 9/11 happening on their watch, and apologizing, they

masked it with an attack on a nation that played no part. Like
other
spree killers, most of their victims are mere bystanders.
Perhaps the crucial question is not about the leaders, but the
public. Why have they been so passive about a war that is
obviously
fraudulent, and for which they must pay with their earnings, and
some with their lives? It is possible that the only thing they
have to
gain is continuing to mask their fear, grief, and humiliation with
anger
and violent aggression committed in their name. Needless to
say, this
is only a hypothesis, like all the others proposed here. Given the
current world situation, further exploration and study is
urgently
needed.
The need for public understanding of the part the social–
emotional
world might play in generating violence can be illustrated by
studies
of the motivation of terrorists. Several studies strongly suggest
that
massive experiences of humiliation could be the main
motivation of
terrorists, such as Palestinian suicide-bombers (Strozier, et al.,
2010,
pp. 143–147. See also Lindner, 2001; Stern, 2003; Smith, 2006;
Jones,
2008).
A remark by the then prime minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon,
frames
our dilemma. When asked by a reporter why Palestinians

crossing the
border are kept waiting for so long, he replied: “We want to
humiliate
them” (Reported in a talk by Jones, 2010). Both Helmick, 2004
and
Michalczyk, 2003 suggest that humiliation was an intentional
Israeli
policy. If this was true, it would be fair to say that Israeli policy
was
manufacturing terrorism against Israel.
According to the theory, the humiliation–revenge–counter re-
venge cycle is the most dangerous thing in human existence, far
more
than plutonium. We are in deep trouble because emotional
motives
are invisible to politicians and the public as well. Our job as
social
scientists and as citizens is to try to make the social–emotional
world
visible and as important as the political–economic one.
11. Remedies
If the idea of interacting isolation/rejection and shame/anger
and
shame/shame spirals turns out to be a step in the right direction,
what
kinds of remedies might be possible? For the sake of discussion,
I will
mention two, one concerning emotions, the other, isolation.
The first possible remedy would be to offer classes to children
and
young adults that encourage them to notice and acknowledge
their

emotions. The most effective location would probably be high
schools,
a vale of low grades, cliques and rejection for a substantial part
of the
student body.
In seminars with varying titles, I have taught college freshmen
in
this kind of class for many years. Because my intention was to
help
both male and female students, I noticed early on that if the
seminar
title had the word emotion and/or relationship in it, male
students
wouldn't enroll. So I called it "Communicating." The new title
picked
up a few males, but not nearly enough for gender balance.
Because
this problem touches on central issues, I will describe two
further
steps I took to get male involvement.
After the title change, I took a more drastic step: for
registration, I
divided the class into two, one for men, the other for women.
The trick
is to arrange that the two classes meet at the same time and
place. This
step proved to be effective. It apparently corrects for the
different
amount of interest in the seminar between men and women: a
first
option for many women, but a last option for many men. The
splitting
of class registration keeps places open for the slow-moving
males,

because the fast-moving females cannot take their slots.
453–460
The last problem in the seminar has been keeping the men
involved in the class. Most of them liked it so long as we were
discussing student's real life dialogues. In the language that
students
use, emotions are seldom referred to directly. References that
are
made are usually indirect. For example, there are many
metaphors
that refer to embarrassment, such as “It was an awkward
moment for
me.” As long as the discussion of emotions in the students'
dialogues is
absent or indirect, the men are involved as much as the women.
The
class discussions were linked to learning communication skills
that
both the men and the women appreciated.
However, when women begin to make open references to
emotions, such as anger, grief, fear, or shame/embarrassment,
most
of the men slow down. Although the women are vitally
interested, a
large majority of the men grow silent. Occasionally one of the
more
vocal men complains about what seems to him excessive
attention to
emotions. Most of them just withdraw. What should be done to
get

this group involved again?
The first time a dialogue leads to direct discussion of emotion,
perhaps halfway through the quarter, I gave a five-minute talk
about
“How Emotions are Like Sex” (See, under a different title,
Scheff,
2006a). This sentence alone seems to remove the glaze from
men's
eyes. I say that the major emotions are not only signals, but also
states
of bodily arousal. Each of these states, I continue, has a climax
or
orgasm. For example, crying can be the orgasm for grief. This
tactic has
never failed to bring the recalcitrant men back into discussion.
Presently I am teaching classes with the same goal on the topic:
The Social–Emotional World of Popular Songs. It seems to have
the
same effects as the earlier class, but recruits from a much
broader
group of male student. I believe that these classes are as
beneficial to
men as they are to women.
12. Alienated students
Learning to identify and acknowledge one's emotions is only
half
the problem. The other half concerns the extreme alienation,
especially in high school, of those who get low grades or are not
accepted by mainstream students. One approach would be to
encourage these students to organize their own club, an anti-
clique
clique. Students who feel rejected by mainstream students could

join
forces. Perhaps they could use a name like The Outrider Club,
or some
less revealing title. In the aftermath of the Columbine killings,
there
was much discussion of the Mafia Trenchcoats, but it turned out
to be
a myth. To the extent that such clubs were organized, extreme
isolation of marginal students might be lessened.
A possible effect of the emotion classes might also help in two
different ways, if only indirectly. The mainstream students who
benefit from the class learn to identify and acknowledge their
own
shame and humiliation, as well as other vulnerable emotions,
like
grief and fear. This change might make them more hesitant to
humiliate others. Another way is that students make new friends
in
the class. I know only because it is a question asked in the
official
course evaluation form. From past experience with other
mainstream
courses, and from complaints I hear from students, making new
friends at college seems to be difficult. Many students who
complete
4 years still have friends only from high school.
However, to actually change the atmosphere in schools, many
mainstream students would have to take the classes, a tall order.
I
have been teaching such a class for many years at UCSB; it
always gets
good reviews from students. Yet being quite small (20–30), it
reaches
only a tiny proportion of the student body. The suggestions

made here
are only a first step to what might be a long struggle.
13. Conclusion
This note has described a social–emotional process that might
be
the cause of multiple killings. Killers seem to be persons that
are both
extremely alienated and also have completely suppressed their
experience of shame/embarrassment/humiliation. This
combination
usually leads to withdrawal, but it can also generate a machine
of self-
perpetuating coupling of social isolation and shame and/or
shame/
anger spirals. This process could be the doomsday machine
referred to
above, the social–emotional equivalent of a chain-reaction. If
there is
no intervention, this process can lead to complete withdrawal or
acts
of violent aggression against others and/or self.
Two suggestions were made that might become first steps
toward
decreasing violent aggression. On the one hand, a high school
class
could teach students how to identify and acknowledge their
emotions,
and on the other, encouraging outcast students to form clubs of
their
own, to decrease their extreme isolation. Even if these two steps
in
combination turned out to be effective on a large scale, further

ideas
will be needed.
14. Summary
This essay outlines a causal model of multiple killing, based in
the
social–emotional world: alienation and unacknowledged shame,
spiraling with anger and/or more shame, can result in a
feedback loop
ending in unlimited withdrawal or violence. Because much more
information is available about multiple killers, this approach
may also be
relevant as a first step to understanding all kinds of massive
violence.
References
Ahmed, Eliza, Harris, Nathan, Braithwaite, John, & Braithwaite,
Valerie (2001). Shame
management through reintegration. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Barres, Maurice (1905). Au Service de l'Allemagne. Paris: A.
Fayard.
Barres, Maurice. (1909). Colette Baudoche. Paris: Juven.
Boisdeffre, Pierre (1962). Maurice Barres. Paris: University
Editions.
Bowen, Murray (1978). Family therapy in clinical practice. New
York: Jason Aaronson.
Braithwaite, John (1989). Crime, shame, and reintegration.
Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Brown, J. A. C. (2004). Shame and domestic violence:
Treatment perspectives for

perpetrators from self psychology and affect theory. Sexual and
Relationship
Therapy., 19(1), 39−56.
Corballis, Michael. (2007). The uniqueness of human recursive
thinking. American scientist
95 (pp. 240−248). May-June,.
Cressey, Donald (1953). Other people's money. Glencoe, Ill:
Free Press.
Deroulede, P. (1872). Chants du Soldat. Paris.
Deroulede, P. (1896). Poesies Militare. Paris.
Diamond, Michael A. (1997). Administrative assault: A
contemporary psychoanalytic
view of violence and aggression in the workplace. American
Review of Public
Administration, 27(3), 228−247.
Fast, Jonathan (2008). Ceremonial violence: A psychological
explanation for school
shootings. New York: Overlook Press.
Frijda, Nico (2006). The laws of emotion. Mahwah, N. J.: LEA.
Gaylin, Willard (2003). Hatred. New York: PublicAffairs.
Gilligan, James. (1997). Violence — reflections on a national
epidemic. New York: Vintage
Books.
Goffman, Erving (1959). Presentation of self in everyday life.
New York: Anchor.
Gottschalk, Louis, Winget, C., & Gleser, G. (1969). Manual of
instruction for using the
Gottschalk-Gleser content analysis scales. Berkeley: UC Press.

Helmick, R. G. (2004). Negotiating outside the law: Why Camp
David failed. London: Pluto
Press.
Jones, James W. (2008). Blood that cries out from the earth.
Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Jones, James W. (2010). Shame, humiliation and religious
violence. The shame factor
conference (pp. 24−26). : Lincoln Nebraska October.
Kennan, George. (1984). The fateful alliance. Pantheon: New
York.
Larkin, Ralph W. (2007). Comprehending Columbine.
Philadelphia: Temple University
Press.
Leary, M. R., Kowalski, R. M., Smith, L., & Phillips, S. (2003).
Teasing, rejection, and
violence: Case studies of the school shootings. Aggressive
Behavior, 29, 202−214.
Leary, Mark, Twenge, Jean, & Quinlivan, Erin (2006).
Interpersonal rejection as a
determinant of anger and aggression. Personality and Social
Psychology Review, 10,
111−132.
Lewis, Helen B. (1971). Shame and grief in neurosis. New
York: International Universities
Press.
Lewis, Helen (1987). The role of shame in symptom formation.
Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence

Erlbaum.
Lindner, Evelin (2001). Humiliation as the source of terrorism:
A new paradigm. Peace
Reseach, 33(2), 59−68.
Michalczyk, John. (2003). Different drummers: Daring to make
peace in the MidEast.
(Video).
Milburn, Michael, & Conrad, Sheree (1996). The politics of
denial. Cambridge: MIT Press.
453–460
Newman,
Katherine(2004).Rampage:Thesocialrootsofschoolkillings.NewY
ork:BasicBooks.
Retzinger, Suzanne (1991). Violent emotions. Newbury Park:
Sage.
Rutkoff, P. M. (1981). Revanche and revision. Athens. : Ohio
U. Press.
Salminen, J. K., Saarijärvi, S., Aärelä, E., Toikka, T., &
Kauhanen, J. (1999). Prevalence of
alexithymia and its association with socio-demographic
variables in the general
population of Finland. Journal of Psychosomatic Research,
46(1), 75−82.
Scheff, Thomas (1990). Microsociology: Discourse, emotion,
and social structure. Chicago:
University of Press.

Scheff, Thomas. (1994). Bloody revenge: Emotion, nationalism
and war. : Westview Press
(Reissued by iUniverse 2000).
Scheff, Thomas (1997). Emotions, the social bond, and human
reality: Part/Whole analysis.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Scheff, Thomas (2006a). Goffman unbound: Toward a new
paradigm in social science.
Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.
Scheff, Thomas (2006b). Catharsis and other heresies: A theory
of emotion journal of
social. Evolutionary and Cultural Psychology, 1(3), 98−113.
Scheff, Thomas, & Suzanne, Retzinger. (1991). Emotions and
violence: Shame and rage in
destructive conflicts. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books
(Reissued by iUniverse 2000).
Smith, Dennis (2006). Globalization and the hidden agency.
Cambridge: Polity.
Solomon, Robert (1981). Love: Emotion, myth, and metaphor.
Garden City, N.Y: Anchor
Press/Doubleday.
Sontag, Raymond. (1933). European diplomatic history.
Appleton-Century: New York.
Stern, Jessica (2003). Terror in the name of God. New York:
Ecco Press.
Strozier, Charles, Terman, David, & Jones, James (2010). The
fundamentalist mindset.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Thomas, H. E. (1995). Experiencing a shame response as a
precursor to violence. The
Bulletin of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law,
23(4), 587.
Tucker, R. C. (1978). The Marx-Engels reader. New York:
W.W. Norton.
Weber, E. (1968). The nationalist revival in France, l905–l914.
Berkeley: U. of California
Press.
Websdale, Neil. (2010). Familicidal hearts: The emotional style
of 211 killers. Oxford:
Oxford University Press 8240spree-dec8-10.
453–460
Social–emotional origins of violence: A theory of multiple
killingHow much shame?Case studiesShame and
violenceIsolation and feeling trapsEmotion spiralsRecursion of
emotions and alienation in killersAlienationCollective
violenceMedia and masses33This section summarizes part of
Chapter 6 of Scheff (1994).Response of
historiansRemediesAlienated
studentsConclusionSummaryReferences
10 paged paper instructions/reading.pdf
The General Aggression Model: Theoretical Extensions to
Violence
C. Nathan DeWall
University of Kentucky

Craig A. Anderson
Iowa State University
Brad J. Bushman
The Ohio State University and VU University, Amsterdam
This article discusses the General Aggression Model (GAM),
which provides a com-
prehensive and integrative social– cognitive framework for
understanding aggression
and violence. After providing a brief description of the basic
components of GAM, we
discuss how it can be used to better understand 4 topics related
to phenomena that occur
primarily outside the laboratory and apply to a broad range of
people. Specifically, we
apply GAM to better understand intimate partner violence,
intergroup violence, global
climate change effects on violence, and suicide. We also explain
how the tenets of
GAM can be used to inform interventions aimed at reducing
these forms of violence.
Finally, we show how GAM can explain why people do not
behave violently, such as
in societies where violence is exceedingly rare. Applying GAM
to violent behavior that
occurs outside the laboratory adds to its explanatory power and
enhances the external
validity of its predictions. Because the 4 topics apply to such a
broad range of people,
GAM may have broader influence in fostering understanding of
aggression in these
domains. By increasing our understanding of the causes of
violent behavior, GAM may
help reduce it.

Keywords: General Aggression Model, climate change,
intergroup violence, intimate partner
violence, suicide
Nonviolence leads to the highest ethics, which is the
goal of all evolution. Until we stop harming all other
living beings, we are still savages.
—Thomas A. Edison, American inventor
In the distant past, aggression often was an
adaptive behavior for our ancient ancestors who
lived in small groups. Aggression and related
threat displays played an important role in mate
selection, protection of offspring and other kin,
and survival of the group. As humans became
more social and developed culture, however,
aggression became less adaptive, especially at
the group level. Although one can reasonably
argue that even today, minor forms of aggres-
sion play an adaptive role in socialization and
social control (e.g., Tedeschi & Felson, 1994),
more serious forms of aggression are more mal-
adaptive than adaptive. Aggression breeds ag-
gression, and it seems to cause more problems
than it solves. Even when it works in the short
run, aggression frequently fails in the long run.
So, why are people aggressive today? We could
blame it on our genes, but that is only part of the
story. The purpose of this is article is to explain
how an overarching framework for understanding
aggression and violence —the General Aggres-
sion Model, or GAM for short (see Figure 1)—
can be applied to violence outside the labora-
tory: intimate partner violence, aggression be-

tween groups, global warming effects on vio-
lence, and suicide. We also discuss how GAM
can be applied to interventions aimed at reduc-
This article was published Online First May 30, 2011.
C. Nathan DeWall, Department of Psychology, Univer-
sity of Kentucky; Craig A. Anderson, Center for the Study
of Violence, Department of Psychology, Iowa State Univer-
sity; Brad J. Bushman, School of Communication, The Ohio
State University, Department of Psychology, VU Univer-
sity, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
This research was supported in part by Grant BCS-
1104118 to C. Nathan DeWall and Brad J. Bushman from
the National Science Foundation. The opinions and conclu-
sions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not
necessarily reflect the opinions of the National Science
Foundation.
Correspondence concerning this article should be ad-
dressed to C. Nathan DeWall, Department of Psychology,
University of Kentucky, Kastle Hall 201, Lexington, KY
40506-0044. E-mail: [email protected]
Psychology of Violence © 2011 American Psychological
Association
2011, Vol. 1, No. 3, 245–258 2152-0828/11/$12.00 DOI:
10.1037/a0023842
245
ing these forms of violence and even nonviolent
behavior. Applying GAM to aggression that
occurs outside the laboratory not only adds to its

explanatory power, but it also enhances the ex-
ternal validity of its predictions.
Psychologists have proposed a variety of the-
ories to understand why people sometimes be-
have aggressively. Some examples include frus-
tration–aggression theory (Dollard, Doob,
Miller, Mowrer, & Sears, 1939), socioecologi-
cal models (Heise, 1998), cognitive neoassocia-
tion theory (e.g., Berkowitz, 1989), social learn-
ing theory (e.g., Bandura, 1973; Mischel &
Shoda, 1995), script theory (e.g., Huesmann,
1986), excitation transfer theory (e.g., Zillmann,
1983), and social interaction theory (e.g., Tede-
schi & Felson, 1994). Each theory offers crucial
insight into understanding specific reasons why
people behave aggressively. Yet, these mini-
theories do not provide an overarching frame-
work for understanding human aggression and
violence.
GAM integrates minitheories of aggression
into a single conceptual framework. In so doing,
GAM provides a more parsimonious model of
aggression than other theories do, explains ag-
gression that occurs because of multiple mo-
tives, and offers empirically validated insights
into ways to reduce aggression, including how
to stunt the development of aggressive tenden-
cies over time. It is the only social– cognitive
model that explicitly incorporates biological,
personality development, social processes, ba-
sic cognitive processes (e.g., perception, prim-
ing), short-term and long-term processes, and
decision processes into understanding aggres-

sion. Therefore, GAM offers scholars a frame-
work from which to derive and test hypotheses
regarding aggression, a framework that is more
expansive than any other social– cognitive
model. One major focus of the present article is
to show how GAM can also increase our un-
derstanding of more extreme forms of physical
aggression that occur outside the laboratory—
violent behavior.
GAM emphasizes three critical stages in un-
derstanding a single episodic cycle of aggres-
sion: (1) person and situation inputs, (2) present
internal states (i.e., cognition, arousal, affect,
including brain activity), and (3) outcomes of
appraisal and decision-making processes. A
feedback loop can influence future cycles of
aggression, which can produce a violence esca-
lation cycle (Anderson, Buckley, & Carnagey,
2008; DeWall & Anderson, 2011). Several ar-
ticles provide further insight into these basic
tenets of GAM (Anderson & Bushman, 2002;
DeWall & Anderson, 2011).
Applications of GAM
GAM has received consistent support as a
general model of aggression (for reviews, see
Anderson & Bushman, 2002; DeWall & Ander-
son, 2011). Although it was tested primarily
using laboratory aggression experiments, it can
also be applied to aggression in the “real world”
outside the laboratory. Before we go further,
however, we need to define the terms aggres-
sion and violence. We define aggression as any
behavior intended to harm another person who

does not want to be harmed (e.g., Anderson &
Bushman, 2002; Bushman & Huesmann, 2010).
We define violence as any aggressive act that
has as its goal extreme physical harm, such as
injury or death (e.g., Anderson & Bushman,
2002; Bushman & Huesmann, 2010).
In this section, we include several novel ex-
tensions of how GAM can inform understand-
ing and research investigating intimate partner
violence, intergroup violence, impact of global
climate change on violence, and suicide. We
chose these topics for two reasons. First, each
topic applies to phenomena that occur outside
the laboratory, thereby increasing the explana-
tory potential of GAM and the external validity
of its predictions. Second, each topic relates to
phenomena that occur relatively frequently in
Figure 1. General aggression model.
246 DEWALL, ANDERSON, AND BUSHMAN
the United States and in other countries. Vio-
lence between intimate partners in the United
States occurs at alarmingly high rates, with over
one in five of couples (Schafer, Caetano, &
Clark, 1998) and over one in three college stu-
dents (Straus & Ramirez, 2002) reporting at
least one incident over the past year. Intergroup
violence is also very common. In the 40 years
after the end of World War II, there were
roughly 150 wars and only 26 days of world
peace (defined as the absence of international

war; Sluka, 1992). In terms of global climate
change, the earth is warmer now than it has
been at any time in the past 2,000 years (Parry,
Canziani, Palutikof, van der Linden, & Hanson,
2007). However, people rarely think of the im-
pact of climate change on violence (Anderson &
DeLisi, in press). Suicide also claims the lives
of over a million people each year (World
Health Organization, 2008). Thus, applying
GAM to understand these four topics not only
increases the explanatory power of GAM, but it
also informs consideration regarding phenom-
ena that impact millions of people worldwide.
Intimate Partner Violence (IPV)
Previous research on GAM has focused pri-
marily on aggression between strangers (e.g.,
Anderson & Anderson, 2008, Study 2), but we
believe that GAM can also provide a useful
framework for understanding IPV. As with ag-
gression between strangers, person and situation
factors play a significant role in increasing the
likelihood of IPV. There are dozens, if not hun-
dreds, of personal factors involved, including
trait anger, attachment style, and alcohol abuse
(e.g., Finkel, 2007; Follingstad, Bradley, Helff,
& Laughlin, 2002; Holtzworth-Munroe, Bates,
Smutzler, & Sandin, 1997; Schumacher, Feld-
bau-Kohn, Slep, & Heyman, 2001). Yet, there is
little conceptual organization regarding how
and why risk factors influence IPV, leading
some scholars to suggest that “theory and re-
search on relationship violence remain uncohe-
sive” (Berscheid & Regan, 2005, p. 52).

Attitudes toward violence are also useful in
predicting actual aggression directed toward an
intimate partner. In one recent investigation,
college students who had more positive atti-
tudes toward IPV were more likely to physically
assault and verbally abuse their current roman-
tic partner 14 weeks later (Fincham, Cui,
Braithwaite, & Pasley, 2008). Other research
has shown that people who have permissive
attitudes toward IPV also have the highest per-
petration rates (Cote, Vaillancourt, LeBlanc,
Nagin, & Tremblay, 2006).
Some situational factors that increase aggres-
sion toward strangers also increase IPV, such as
alcohol (e.g., Hove, Parkhill, Neighbors, McCo-
nchie, & Fossos, 2010). Moreover, meta-
analytic findings demonstrate that alcohol
increases both male-to-female and female-to-
male violence (Foran & O’Leary, 2008).
Situations that decrease self-control increase
aggression toward both strangers and intimate
relationship partners (DeWall, Baumeister,
Stillman, & Gailliot, 2007; Finkel, DeWall,
Slotter, Oaten, & Foshee, 2009). For example,
people who are made to feel mentally ex-
hausted, compared with people who are not
made to feel mentally exhausted, make their
romantic partners endure longer painful yoga
poses when the partner insults them (Finkel et
al., 2009, Study 4).
Affect, cognition, and arousal may also be
related to IPV. Currently experienced anger, for
example, is related to more aggressive verbal-

izations among intoxicated maritally violent
men (Eckhardt, 2007). In addition, having hos-
tile cognitive biases toward one’s spouse is as-
sociated with perpetrating more violence
against one’s partner (Fincham, Bradbury,
Arias, Byrne, & Karney, 1997). Relatively little
research has examined the role of arousal in
IPV. In one relevant study, men who showed
diminished sensitivity to their wives’ expres-
sions of happiness (an indicator of reduced
arousal) were more likely to commit IPV com-
pared with men who showed high sensitivity to
their spouse’s emotional expressions (Marshall
& Holtzworth-Munroe, 2010). Future research
is clearly needed on the relationship between
arousal and IPV.
The appraisal and decision-making compo-
nent of GAM is involved in both aggression
toward strangers and toward intimate relation-
ship partners. When people do not have suffi-
cient mental resources to engage in reappraisal
processing, they are more likely to behave ag-
gressively toward their romantic partners (Fin-
kel et al., 2009). When people are mentally
exhausted, they are less likely to control their
aggressive impulses when provoked. Just as ex-
ercising a muscle strengthens it, people who
247SPECIAL ISSUE: GENERAL AGGRESSION MODEL
exercise self-control are buffered from the neg-
ative effects of mental exhaustion on IPV (Fin-
kel et al., 2009, Study 5). The implication is that

the more self-control strength people have, the
more likely they are to carefully consider the
negative ramifications of their actions and to
choose to behave in a more thoughtful, nonag-
gressive manner.
Thus, GAM provides a cohesive understand-
ing regarding situational and personal attributes
that elevate the likelihood of IPV, mechanisms
through which aggressive urges translate into
violent behavior and decision-making processes
that influence whether people succumb to their
aggressive urges or instead engage in thought-
ful, nonaggressive behavior. Commonly used
theoretical models, such as socioecological
models (Heise, 1998) and social learning theory
(Bandura, 1973), provide valuable insight into
the causes of IPV, but they lack crucial compo-
nents that limit their explanatory power. For
example, socioecological models do not exam-
ine the influence of an individual’s knowledge
structures, attitudes, and beliefs on currently
experienced emotions, cognitive processes, and
arousal levels, and their influence on whether
people engage in impulsive or thoughtful ac-
tions toward one’s partner. Instead, socioeco-
logical models seek to understand the causes of
IPV at different levels of analysis (individual,
relationship, community, societal), which estab-
lishes the source of influence but does not offer
clear understanding regarding the role of cur-
rently experienced emotion, cognitive pro-
cesses, or arousal on appraisal and decision-
making processes that influence whether people
perpetrate IPV. Social learning theory offers a
useful framework to understand risk factors for

aggression, but it neglects the importance of
factors that increase the risk for aggression that
are independent of one’s learning history, such
as genetic predispositions known to heighten
the risk for aggression (e.g., monoamine oxi-
dase A gene, serotonin transporter gene; Dolan,
Anderson, & Deakin, 2001; McDermott, Tin-
gley, Cowden, Frazzetto, & Johnson, 2009).
GAM is a biological–social– cognitive model,
which uses both learning history and factors not
associated with one’s learning history to under-
stand why people perpetrate IPV. For these rea-
sons, GAM offers a more comprehensive model
from which to test hypotheses regarding IPV
perpetration.
Intergroup Violence
Most aggression theories attempt to explain
the causes and consequences of aggression be-
tween individuals, leaving open the question of
whether similar processes may be involved in
explaining aggression between groups. GAM
offers a useful framework for understanding
how aggression between groups begins and why
it persists.
Aggression between groups begins as a result
of characteristics that each group brings to a
situation and of environmental features that in-
crease aggression. Groups, like individuals,
tend to have enduring motivations, attitudes,
values, and beliefs that develop out of their
prior history. Indeed, research on the disconti-
nuity effect has consistently shown that individ-
uals have internal states that are heavily influ-

enced by group processes (Insko, Schopler,
Hoyle, Dardis, & Graetz, 1990). Other research
from the attitude literature suggests that expos-
ing people to an in-group member (e.g., a fellow
member of one’s political party) causes people
to express strong attitudes that support their
in-group, whereas exposing people to an out-
group member has the opposite effect (Ledger-
wood & Chaiken, 2007). Within the context of
group aggression, the terrorist group Al Qaeda
believes that an alliance between Christians and
Jews threatens the future of Islam. Most people
living in the United States are Christians (78%;
Newport, 2009), and most people living in Is-
rael are Jews (76%; Central Bureau of Statistics,
2009). As a result, situations that signal a strong
Christian–Jewish alliance, such as activities re-
lated to a coalition between the United States
and Israel, may increase aggressive affect, neg-
ative attitudes, and arousal among members of
Al Qaeda. These internal states may, in turn,
increase the likelihood that members of Al
Qaeda will perpetrate violence against all peo-
ple associated with a U.S.–Israel coalition, even
bystanders and civilians.
GAM’s feedback loop also explains why ag-
gressive retaliations between groups persist.
Once conflict between two groups begins, the
violence escalation cycle is triggered. Group A
experiences Group B’s retaliation, which causes
Group A’s members to have high levels of
aggressive affect, to perceive Group B as hostile
and aggressive, and to experience heightened
arousal. These internal states cause members of

Group A to act impulsively on their immediate
appraisal of Group B as hostile and threatening.
Group B then experiences the impulsively ag-
gressive act from Group A, which sets in mo-
tion the same set of internal states and appraisal
and decision processes that result in an even
more aggressive retaliation (see Figure 2). Both
groups will trade increasingly aggressive retal-
iations back and forth, which can result in the
widespread destruction of human life and prop-
erty. To be sure, the feedback loop can only be
applied to understand ongoing aggressive retal-
iations between groups. If Group A refuses to
respond to Group B’s provocation with aggres-
sive retaliation, then Group A bears no respon-
sibility for any additional aggression provoca-
tion it may experience from Group B.
Thus, GAM offers a parsimonious and ade-
quate perspective for understanding why inter-
group violence begins and persists. Socioeco-
logical models and social learning theory offer
useful insight into why intergroup violence oc-
curs, but they also suffer significant limitations
in terms of the scope of their explanatory
power. From a socioecological perspective, un-
derstanding intergroup violence begins with un-
derstanding the individual within the group,
then understanding that individual’s relation-
ships with others inside and outside the group,
and finally understanding the group’s relation-

ship within society. Although these levels of
analysis provide information regarding risk and
resiliency factors for intergroup violence, they
do not offer much in the way of understanding
how mechanisms through which the influence
of the four-level socioecological model influ-
ences the appraisal and decision process that
ultimately determines whether groups will en-
gage in violent behavior. According to social
learning theory, intergroup violence occurs in
large part because members of a group are ex-
posed to violence that taught them to solve
group conflict through behaving violently. Un-
like GAM, social learning theory does not em-
phasize the importance of personal factors that
enhance or diminish the effect of exposure to
violence on subsequent group violent behavior.
GAM incorporates the best perspectives of
these theoretical models, addresses their limita-
tions, and as a result provides researchers with a
strong theoretical framework from which to un-
derstand intergroup violence.
Global Climate Change and Violence
Global climate change and its wide-ranging
environmental consequences (e.g., flooding,
droughts, desertification, food and water short-
ages) have been recognized by numerous na-
tional, military, and international groups as a
significant risk factor for social disorder, eco-
migration conflicts, and war. Global climate
change influences aggression and violence both
as a proximate situational factor and as a distal
environmental modifier. More specifically,
there appear to be three main ways in which

rapid global climate change (rapid in geological
terms) can increase the risk of violence (Ander-
son & DeLisi, in press). First, there is a direct
effect of heat on aggressive inclinations. This
well-researched line of work has shown that
uncomfortably hot temperatures can increase
physical aggression in laboratory settings and in
real-world violent crime studies (Anderson,
2001). Simply presenting people with words
related to hot temperatures is enough to increase
aggressive thoughts and hostile perceptions
Violence Escalation Cycle
Appropriate
retaliation
B harms A
Inappropriate
over-retaliation
A harms B
Inappropriate
over-retaliation
Appropriate
retaliation
B harms A
retaliation
Appropriate
over-retaliation

Inappropriate
A harms B
B harms A
Intentional
Unjustified
Unintentional
Justified
A harms B
Relatively harmful
j
Relatively mild
Events sevitcepsrep s'Bsevitcepsrep s'A
Figure 2. The violence escalation cycle. N. L. From Vi-
olent evil and the general aggression model, by C. A.
Anderson and N. L. Carnagey, 2004, Chapter in A. Miller
(Ed.) The Social Psychology of Good and Evil (pp. 168 –
192). Copyright 2004 by New York: Guilford Publications.
Reprinted with permission of Guilford Press.
(DeWall & Bushman, 2009). Second, many of
the environmental risk factors known to in-
crease the likelihood of a child growing up to be
an aggression-prone adult will become more

widespread worldwide, especially in regions
likely to experience flooding as a result of sea
level increases, tropical storms, glacial melt,
and regions likely to experience drought and
resulting food and water shortages. Poor pre-
and postnatal nutrition is known to influence a
host of aggression-related competencies and
proneness to violence (e.g., DeLisi, 2005; Liu,
Raine, Venables, & Mednick, 2004). Indeed,
recent molecular genetics studies have found
specific brain chemistry-related Genetic ! En-
vironment interactions (both physical and social
environments) on violent criminality (see An-
derson & DeLisi, in press). Third, historical and
contemporary research shows that rapid climate
change can increase group violence. Specifi-
cally, a growing body of literature supports the
notion that rapid climate change (heating or
cooling) increases civil disorder, political insta-
bility, and war, mostly by creating acute and
recurring resource shortages that lead to ecomi-
gration and violent conflict. Examples include
war in China during 1000 –1900 A.D. (Zhang,
Zhang, Lee, & He, 2007), civil war in sub-
Sahara Africa (Burke, Miguel, Satyanath,
Dykema, & Lobell, 2009), ecomigration and
violence in Bangladesh and India, and violence
associated with the U.S. Dust Bowl and Hurri-
cane Katrina. Similarly, U.S. data reveal a ro-
bust relation between increasingly hot years and
violent crime rates (Anderson, Bushman, &
Groom, 1997; Anderson & DeLisi, in press).
GAM does a better job of explaining the
effects of climate change on violence than other
theories of violence. Whereas socioecological

theories of violence focus primarily on how
people in one’s environment influence violence,
GAM emphasizes the importance of both peo-
ple in one’s environment and changes in the
physical environment itself as relevant to un-
derstanding violence. Likewise, social learning
theory would explain the relationship between
climate change and violence as a function of
observing a greater number of people behaving
violently, thereby ignoring the importance of
changes in the actual environment (irrespective
of the people in the environment) and their
influence on the higher number of people be-
having violently. Thus, GAM is unique in its
ability to account for changes in the environ-
ment that may have implications for increasing
violence, such as increasing ambient tempera-
tures.
Suicide
Why people commit suicide has puzzled so-
cial scientists for centuries. Very few interven-
tions aimed at reducing suicide are successful
(Van Orden et al., 2010). To prevent suicides,
we need to know why they occur. We believe
GAM can offer a powerful framework for un-
derstanding why people commit suicide.
Many of the same person and situation fac-
tors that increase aggression between individu-
als and groups also increase suicide, sometimes
called self-aggression. Alcohol intoxication, for
example, is common among people who die by
suicide (Ohberg, Vuori, & Ojanpera, 1996).

Laboratory research has shown that intoxicated
people inflict more intense shocks on them-
selves compared with sober people (McCloskey
& Berman, 2003). Feeling rejected and lonely is
also robustly associated with aggression toward
others (e.g., DeWall, Twenge, Bushman, Im, &
Williams, 2010; DeWall, Twenge, Gitter, &
Baumeister, 2009) and with suicide (see Van
Orden et al., 2010, for a review). One longitu-
dinal study, for example, found that feelings of
loneliness at age 12–13 predicted higher sui-
cidal risk 30 years later (Rojas & Stenberg,
2010). Just as poor self-control and serotonergic
dysfunction are related to aggression against
other people, they are also reliably associated
with an increased risk for death by suicide (e.g.,
Anisman et al., 2008; Brent et al., 1994; Re-
naud, Berlim, McGirr, Tousignant, & Turecki,
2008).
Affect, cognition, and arousal all play a cru-
cial role in suicidal behavior. People who gen-
erally internalize their anger are also more
likely to attempt suicide, which is the leading
risk factor for suicidal completion (see Van
Orden et al., 2010, for a review). Suicidal ide-
ation refers to thoughts related to ending one’s
life. The more people think about dying by
suicide, the more likely they are to die by sui-
cide (Van Orden, Merrill, & Joiner, 2005). In
addition, diminished arousal to the pain and
distress that are associated with suicidal behav-
ior relate to higher numbers of suicide attempts

(Van Orden, Witte, Gordon, Bender, & Joiner,
2008).
Because most people have a strong fear of
death, they must acquire the ability to inflict
lethal self-injury through repeated exposure to
and habituation to fear-provoking stimuli (Van
Orden et al., 2010). Simply having the desire to
die by suicide is not sufficient to predict who
actually will die by suicide. Recurrent exposure
to frightening and painful situations desensi-
tizes people to pain and increases their risk for
suicide (Nademin et al., 2008). These findings
mirror work in the aggression literature, which
shows that frequent exposure to violent media
desensitizes people to violent images and is
associated with higher aggression toward others
(Anderson et al., 2010; Bartholow, Bushman, &
Sestir, 2006).
For researchers interested in understanding
why people die by suicide, GAM provides a
social– cognitive framework from which rich
and complex hypotheses can be formulated and
tested. Socioecological models of violence may
identify risk factors for suicide, but they do not
elucidate the crucial mechanisms through which
these risk factors heighten the risk for suicide.
Social learning theorists emphasize that expo-
sure to others who commit suicide may heighten
one’s risk for suicide, but they neglect personal
factors (e.g., traits, genetic polymorphisms) that
may exacerbate or buffer people from this risk.

In contrast, suicide researchers can use GAM
to make specific predictions regarding the mod-
erators and mediators of the effects of belong-
ingness and burdensomeness on suicidal behav-
ior. They can also understand how the acquired
ability to inflict lethal self-injury develops, and
whether experiences of lowered belongingness,
which influence physical pain processes (Bor-
sook & MacDonald, 2010; DeWall & Baumeis-
ter, 2006; DeWall, MacDonald, et al., 2010;
Eisenberger, Lieberman, & Williams, 2003),
accelerate the development of people’s ability
to commit suicide. In addition, GAM offers
suicide researchers an extensive toolkit of fac-
tors known to increase aggression against others
(e.g., media violence) that may have a similar
impact on suicidal behavior. Thus, GAM offers
a more comprehensive framework for under-
standing suicidal behavior than existing theoret-
ical models among researchers who wish to
explain why people die by suicide from a so-
cial– cognitive perspective.
Using GAM to Inform Violence Prevention
Programs
GAM suggests that a knowledge structure
approach would be a more useful means of
preventing violence compared with existing
models. Specifically, it suggests that individual
interventions should begin with an assessment
of inappropriate aggressive episodes in the in-
dividual’s life along four dimensions. The first
dimension is how much hostile or agitated af-
fect is present. The second dimension is how
much a specific thought, feeling, or action has

become automatized. The third dimension is
how much the primary (ultimate) goal is harm-
ing the victim versus benefitting the perpetrator.
The fourth dimension is how much the perpe-
trator considers the consequences of commit-
ting the aggressive act. Doing so allows the
model to avoid the problems created by various
artificial dichotomies of aggressive behavior
types, such as the reactive–proactive dichotomy
(Bushman & Anderson, 2001). One then could
tailor the intervention to the specific aspects that
appear most relevant to the individual. A GAM-
directed intervention would be more likely to
capture all of the critical elements. In what
follows, we discuss how GAM can be applied to
violence prevention programs for IPV, inter-
group violence, global climate change-related
violence, and suicide.
IPV
To illustrate the explanatory power of GAM
in shaping effective interventions, consider the
hypothetical scenario of an intervention to re-
duce violence in a man who is referred to a
psychological clinic because he routinely bat-
ters his wife. Although some assessment proto-
cols for preventing IPV involve setting clear-cut
goals and expectations (Sonkin & Liebert,
2003), they do not do so within an overarching
framework that assesses inappropriate aggres-
sive episodes in the individual’s life along the
four dimensions noted above.
A GAM-directed intervention would consist
of five steps. First, an assessment session would

measure how much hostile affect is present in
the man; how much a specific thought, feeling,
or action related to violence against his wife has
been automatized through repetitive exposure
or practice; how much the man’s primary goal is
harming his wife versus benefitting himself
(e.g., feeling a sense of power and control in the
relationship); and how much the man reflects on
the consequences of violently battering his wife.
Second, the therapist would provide the man
with strategies designed to reduce his hostile
affect (e.g., distraction, relaxation) and make
him aware of the specific thoughts, feelings, and
behavior related to his battering behavior that
have become so deeply ingrained in his every-
day life that they occur automatically. Third, the
therapist would give the man strategies de-
signed to increase his thoughtful awareness of
the violent thoughts, feelings, and actions re-
lated to his wife. Fourth, the therapist would
work with the man to reduce his desire to cause
harm to his wife (if that is his primary goal) and
to develop a list of other activities he could use
to feel that he plays an important and valued
role in his marriage. Fifth, the therapist would
provide the man with activities designed to
strengthen his self-regulatory abilities, which
may increase the likelihood that he will engage
in thoughtful decision-making processes when
he has the urge to batter his wife. As noted
earlier, practicing self-regulation reduces IPV

inclinations (Finkel et al., 2009), even when
people practice self-regulation in domains that
are unrelated to violence. Thus, GAM can in-
form IPV programs that can be tailored to spe-
cific aspects that are most relevant to an indi-
vidual.
Intergroup Violence
GAM can also help explain how to stop per-
sistent intergroup violence. Whereas previous
interventions have focused on improving rela-
tionships, increasing care and empathy, and be-
coming cognitively aware of one’s aggressive
urges (Shechtman & Ifargan, 2009), GAM sug-
gests that understanding how to break the vio-
lence escalation cycle may also prove a useful
intervention strategy to reduce intergroup vio-
lence. According to GAM, extinguishing per-
sistent intergroup violence should occur under
the following circumstances. First, Group A
may perceive that the outcome of further ag-
gressive retaliation is sufficiently important and
unsatisfying that they should engage in thought-
ful, as opposed to impulsive, actions toward
Group B. Next, Group B experiences Group A’s
thoughtful response, which should not increase
its aggressive affect, cognition, or arousal. As a
result, Group B does not perceive Group A as
hostile and threatening, leading it to refrain
from further aggressive retaliation. This is an
upward spiral rather than a downward one
(Slater, Henry, Swaim, & Anderson, 2003).
Thus, intergroup violence should stop in the

appraisal and decision process component of
GAM. But, of course, this can occur only if the
thoughtful process results in a decision to de-
escalate. Frequently, in international politics,
this does not happen. In fact, formal political
policies frequently endorse an escalation strat-
egy on the oft-mistaken notion that “if we show
the enemy that their provocations will only hurt
them more, then they will back down.” There
may be cases, however, in which extreme esca-
lation can end a conflict because one or more
parties are simply unable to continue the esca-
lation cycle.
Even in cases of vastly unequal power, how-
ever, “relative” escalation may occur (Anderson
et al., 2008). That is, the weaker side may not be
able to retaliate at the same level as the stronger
side, but it still may retaliate more strongly than
it did before. Indeed, much international terror-
ism has this characteristic.
The Israel–Palestinian conflict offers one ex-
ample of how GAM can help explain how in-
tergroup violence begins, persists—and how it
can end. This intergroup conflict erupted several
decades ago when Jews and Arabs exchanged
violent attacks over a strip of land, alternately
called Israel or Palestine, which Jews claim is
their birthright and Palestinians claim as theirs.
When will the Israeli–Palestinian conflict
end? A GAM-derived intervention would begin
by encouraging citizens from Israel, Palestine,
or both countries to perceive that the outcome of
their country’s retaliation is both important and

unsatisfying. When this occurs, the relenting
country will engage in reappraisal processing
and thoughtful nonviolent action toward the
other country. The opposing country will expe-
rience a thoughtful, as opposed to an impul-
sively aggressive, action from the other country,
which will disrupt the internal states and ap-
praisal and decision processes that usually ac-
company acts from the other group. For this to
happen, of course, major belief systems (knowl-
edge structures) must change and be replaced by
a set of new beliefs, especially beliefs about
each other and about the efficacy of violent
competition versus nonviolent cooperation.
This could be implemented through the use of
advertising and marketing campaigns and
changes in the public opinions and apologies
expressed by political leaders.
Global Climate Change and Violence
To curb the relationship between global cli-
mate change and violence, GAM suggests two
approaches. The first involves four steps de-
signed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and
to reduce or slow climate change. Previous re-
search has shown that people can be motivated
to invest money in a fund to encourage people
to reduce fossil fuel use if doing so can foster a
positive social reputation (Milinski, Semmann,
Krambeck, & Marotzke, 2006). A GAM-

directed intervention would extend this prior
work by changing not only aspects of the social
situation related to fossil fuel use but also mo-
tivating people to change their beliefs regarding
global climate change and its influence on vio-
lence as opposed to other outcomes.
First, widespread programs would attempt to
change people’s beliefs regarding the presence
of global climate change and their attitudes to-
ward activities that would reduce global climate
change. Second, programs would seek to
change aspects of the social situation that may
increase behavior that would reduce global cli-
mate change. For example, organizations and
communities can publicly reward their employ-
ees for using the fewest carbon emissions each
month, which would establish a norm that lim-
iting one’s carbon emissions would be met with
social acceptance and approval. Third, a GAM-
driven intervention would seek to reduce nega-
tive emotions, cognitive processes, or arousal
that people may experience in response to over-
tures to change their behavior to reduce global
climate change. Among people who report that
they do not monitor their carbon emissions be-
cause it increases their anxiety, interventionists
can provide simple and easy solutions aimed at
reducing anxiety or tension associated with
changing their behaviors that reduce global cli-
mate change. Fourth, interventionists would
seek to convince citizens that by not taking
action to reduce global climate change, the re-
sult will have an important and unsatisfying
effect on violence. In so doing, citizens will be
motivated to engage in thoughtful action to en-

gage in behaviors that will reduce global cli-
mate change. By reducing global climate
change, such an intervention provides an effec-
tive means of reducing violence that occurs in
its wake.
The second approach involves directly ad-
dressing the violence-enhancing effects of rapid
climate change. Although the basic heat effect
on aggressive tendencies is likely so subtle and
automatic that it will difficult to short circuit, it
may be that widespread education programs
that inform people about the effects of heat-
induced stress on aggression might well help
some people to refrain from acting on aggres-
sive impulses. More important, international
programs can intervene on behalf of the other
two climate change paths to violence. Well-
mother and well-baby nutrition programs for
the poor; improved birth control and family
planning access and education; and improved
education for all, especially for girls, can reduce
the effects of poverty and climate-change-
induced food and water shortages on the devel-
opment of violence-prone individuals. Simi-
larly, large-scale investment in flood and
drought control and in general environmentally
sensitive economic development in regions that
have subsistence economies can reduce future
resource crises that otherwise are likely to pre-
cipitate ecomigration and war.
Suicide
As noted earlier, suicide prevention programs

10 paged paper instructionsmain instruction.pdf 159.docx

10 paged paper instructionsmain instruction.pdf 159.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to 10 paged paper instructionsmain instruction.pdf 159.docx

Similar to 10 paged paper instructionsmain instruction.pdf 159.docx (18)

More from hyacinthshackley2629

More from hyacinthshackley2629 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

10 paged paper instructionsmain instruction.pdf 159.docx