Samenvatting
Summary Knowledge Organiser for AQA A-Level Psychology Aggression
- Vak
- Instelling
Full Knowledge Organiser for AQA A-Level Psychology Aggression
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 2 van de 14 pagina's
Voorbeeld 2 van de 14 pagina's
In winkelwagen
In winkelwagen
Verkoper
Volgen
kjakhu05
Ontvangen beoordelingen
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
Social Learning Theory = learning through observing and imitating behaviours seen to be rewardedEVALUATION:
Strengths:
Cultural Differences in Aggression
Bandura and Walters (1963): aggression can’t be explained using traditional learning theory where ---------------
• among the !Kung San of the Kalahari Desert, aggression is comparatively rare
------------------------ only direct experience is responsible for acquisition of new behaviour • this is, in part, due to their child-rearing practiced
• when children argue or fight, parents neither reward nor punish them, but physically separate
• social learning theory (SLT) suggests that we can also learn by observing others
them and try to distract their attention on to other things
• we learn the specifics of aggressive behaviour • parents do not use physical punishment, and aggressive postures are avoided by adults and
devalued by the society as a whole
• we learn by observing models (anyone we can observe) and imitating their behaviour • consequently, the absence of direct reinforcement of aggressive behaviour and the absence of
• features of the model: we are more likely to imitate a model if we identify with them (they are aggressive models means there is little opportunity or motivation for !Kung San children to
similar to ourselves) or we hold them in high regard (we like or respect them) acquire aggressive behaviours through social learning
• vicarious reinforcement: in contrast to behaviourism, we can also learn by observing a model being Research Support for Social Learning Theory
reinforced for their behaviour, or being reinforced through someone else • Gee and Leith (2007): carried out a study of ice hockey players that supports the SLT
• self-efficacy: our expectation of whether we can successfully reproduce a behaviour → analysed penalty records from 200 games of National Hockey League (NHL)
• in contrast to behaviourism, SLT is concerned with the internal cognitive processes associated with → believed that players born in North America would have been exposed to more aggressive
learning models on television when young and less likely to have been punished for their aggressive
play compared to players born in Europe
• Mediational Processes = the internal cognitive processes associated with learning • in line with these beliefs, and the predications of SLT, Gee and Leith found that the players born
→ Attention = we must pay attention to the model’s behaviour in North America were much more likely to be penalised for aggressive play and fighting than
→ Retention = the behaviour must be remembered by the learner players born in other countries
→ Reproduction = we must be capable of performing the behaviour
Limitations:
→ Motivation = we must perceive there to be a need or reward to reproduce the behaviour
Lack of Realism
• early research on social learning theory relied heavily on the sort of experimental study caried
KEY STUDY: BANDURA, ROSS AND ROSS (1961) out by Bandura et al described opposite
• participants were children ranging from 3 - 5 • aggression condition reproduced good deal of • however, are significant methodological problems with the Bobo doll studies
• ½ exposed to adult models interacting physically and verbally aggressive behaviour → e.g. a doll is not a living person, and does not retaliate when hit
aggressively with a life-sized inflatable Bobo doll resembling the model, children in the non- → this raises questions about whether these studies tell us much about the imitation of
and ½ exposed to models that were non- aggressive group exhibited virtually no aggression aggression towards other human beings (who may retaliate)
aggressive towards doll towards doll • Bandura responded by having children watch a film of adult model hitting a live clown
• model displayed physically aggressive and verbally • approximately 1/3 of the children in the aggressive → children proceeded to imitate the same aggressive behaviours they had seen in the film,
aggressive acts towards the doll condition repeated the model’s verbal responses, suggesting imitation of aggressive behaviour is likely towards other humans
• following was exposure to play with while none of the children in the non-aggressive
Explaining Inconsistencies in Aggressive Behaviour
• they were then taken to a room where, among group did
• e.g. a young male may behave aggressively when out with friends, but not respond in the same
other toys, there was a Bobo doll • boys reproduced more imitative physical
way when at school or at work
aggression than girls, but didn’t differ imitation of
• SLT would explain this difference in terms of consequences of acting aggressively in 2 situations
verbal aggression
• out with friends, acts of aggression may be more likely to receive positive consequences,
whereas positive consequences for aggressive behaviour would be less likely at school or at work
• therefore, the expectation of consequences in each situation determines the likelihood of
aggression being used
• as a result, this means that we can predict whether or not aggression is likely in a particular
situation by knowing its likely consequences
, Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis = sees aggression as being the consequence of frustration EVALUATION:
→ ‘any event or stimulus that prevents an individual from attaining some goal and it’s accompanying Strengths:
reinforcing quality’ Real-World Application: Frustration and Mass Killings
• Staub (1996): suggests that mass killings are often rooted in the frustration caused by social and -
Dollard et al (1939): all aggression is the result of frustration ------------------ economic difficulties within a society
• frustration is caused when people are prevented from getting something they want → these frustrations typically lead to scapegoating (e.g. finding someone to blame) and then
• frustration is a necessary condition for aggression, but also contextual factors (such as threat of discrimination and aggression against the group
punishment) could inhibit aggressive behaviour in some situations → following the First World War, many Germans blamed Jews both for the loss of the war and
the severe economic problems that followed
• predicts a cause-effect relationship between frustration, aggression, and catharsis (form of emotional → although ordinary Germans were not directly responsible for the subsequent murders, some
release that is achieved by the person engaging in aggressive behaviour or having aggressive thoughts historians have argued that they condoned the violence towards Jews, seeing them as being
about the target responsible for Germany’s plight
• frustration leads to arousal of an aggressive drive, which then leads to aggressive behaviour • this shows that widespread frustration, particularly when skilfully manipulated by a propaganda
• aggressive urges can be relieved through the production of an aggressive behaviour, which therefore has machine, can have violent consequences for a scapegoated group
a cathartic effect on the individual Real-World Application: Sports Violence
• frustration increases when our motivation to achieve a goal is very strong, when we expect gratification, • Priks (2010): found evidence in a study of violent behaviour among Swedish football fans
and when there is nothing we can do about it → he used teams’ changed position in the league as a measure of frustration and the number of
objects (missiles, fireworks, etc) thrown as a measure of aggression
JUSTIFIED AND UNJUSTIFIED FRUSTRATION: → the study showed that, when a teams performed worse than their fans expected, its
supporters threw more things more things onto the pitch
• Pastore (1952): distinguished between justified and unjustified frustration, arguing that it was -------------
→ a one position drop in the league led to a 5% increase in such unruly behaviour
------- mainly the latter that produces anger and aggression
→ also found that supporters were more likely to fight with opposition supporters when the
→ produced different versions of situations involving justified and unjustified frustration
team performed worse than expected
→ e.g. the bus situation – asked participants how they would feel if they were waiting for a bus that
• these findings suggest that supporters become more aggressive when expectations of good
went by without stopping (unjustified) and if they were waiting for a bus that went by which was
performance are frustrated, thus supporting the frustration-aggression hypothesis
out of service (justified)
→ in this condition (justified frustration) participants expressed much lower levels of anger Limitations:
Lack of Research Support for the Central Claims
DISPLACED AGGRESSION: • early critics claim many predictions made simply had no support, either in research or in real life
Displacement = when people are frustrated, they experience drive to be aggressive towards object of frustration → e.g. the concept of catharsis that aggression reduces arousal so that people are less likely to
• however, because it is often impossible or inappropriate to behave aggressively towards the source of be aggressive has not been supported by research
frustration, and as a result any attempt to be aggressive is inhibited • Bushman (2002): found that aggressive behaviour kept aggressive thoughts and angry feelings ---
• aggression is sometimes displaced from source of frustration on to someone or something else ----------------------- active in memory and made people angrier and more aggressive
• sometimes referred to as ‘kicking the dog’ effect, because a person may have impulse to attack source • Bushman’s research directly contradicts the claims that catharsis reduces aggression
of their frustration, but this is impossible, so they respond by kicking the dog instead Not all Aggression Arises from Frustration
• to experience catharsis, a scapegoat needs to be found • frustration is only one of a large number of aversive events (others include pain, extreme
temperatures, and other noxious stimuli) that can lead to aggression
REVISED FRUSTRATION-AGGRESSION HYPOTHESIS: • Reifman et al (1991): study of baseball games in the US
• frustration creates a readiness for aggression, but does not always lead to aggression → found as temperatures increased, so did the likelihood that pitchers would display aggressive
• whether or not aggression occurs is largely dependent on aggressive cues (or lack of) behaviour towards the batters, with balls often thrown at 90mph direct at the batter’s head
• Berkowitz and LePage (1967): • However, this does offer some support for the revised frustration-aggression hypothesis in that
extreme temperatures, as with frustration, are aversive stimuli that tend to make people angry,
→ confederate give participants electric shocks (to create frustration and anger)
which in turn increases the likelihood of aggression
→ when they could then shock the confederate, they administered more shocks (av. 6.07) when there
were two guns on the table (aggressive cue), than not (av. 4.67)
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper kjakhu05. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor $9.72. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 67474 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen