Artikelen – oorzaken en gevolgen van delinquent gedrag
Human aggression. Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2002)
Since World War II, homicide rates have increased rather than decreased in a number of
industrialised countries, most notably the United States.
Basic definitions
Aggression – any behaviour directed toward another individual that is carried out with the proximate
(immediate) intent to cause harm. In addition, the perpetrator must believe that the behaviour will
harm the target and that the target is motivated to avoid the behaviour. When there is no intent to
harm or the target is not motivated to avoid the behaviour, the behaviour is not aggressive.
Violence – aggression that has extreme harm as its goal (e.g., death). All violence is aggression, but
many instances of aggression are not violent.
Hostile vs. instrumental aggression – hostile aggression has been conceived as being impulsive,
thoughtless (i.e., unplanned), driven by anger, having the ultimate motive of harming and occurring
as a reaction to some perceived provocation. Hostile aggression is sometimes called affective,
impulsive or reactive aggression. Instrumental aggression is conceived as a premeditated means of
obtaining some goal other than harming the victim, and being proactive rather than reactive.
Domain specific theories of aggression
Cognitive neoassociation theory
Berkowitz has proposed that aversive events like frustration, provocations, loud noises,
uncomfortable temperatures, and unpleasant odours produce negative affect. This automatically
stimulates various thoughts, memories, expressive motor reactions, and physiological responses
associated with both fight (feelings of anger) and flight tendencies (feelings of fear). Furthermore,
the theory assumes that cues present during an aversive event become associated with the event
and with the cognitive and emotional responses triggered by the event.
In cognitive neoassociation theory, aggressive thoughts, emotions and behavioural tendencies are
linked together in memory (associative memory structure). When a concept is primed or activated,
the activation spreads to related concepts and increases their activation as well.
This theory also includes higher-order cognitive processes, such as appraisals and attributions. If
people are motivated to do so, they might think about how they feel, make causal attributions for
what led them to feel this way, and consider the consequences of acting on their feelings.
Cognitive neoassociation theory not only subsumes the earlier frustration-aggression hypothesis, but
it also provides a causal mechanism for explaining why aversive events increase aggressive
inclinations, i.e. via negative affect.
Social learning theory
According to social learning theories, people acquire aggressive responses the same way they acquire
other complex forms of social behaviour – either by direct experience or by observing others. Social
learning theory is particularly useful in understanding the acquisition of aggressive behaviours and in
explaining instrumental aggression.
Script theory
According to the script theory, children learn aggressive scripts when they observe violence in the
mass media. Scripts define situations and guide behaviour: the person first selects a script to
,represent the situation and then assumes a role in the script. Once a script has been learned, it may
be retrieved at some later time and used as a guide for behaviour. Scripts are sets of particularly
well-rehearsed, highly associated concepts in memory, often involving causal links, goals, and action
plans. Even a few script rehearsals can change a person’s expectations and intentions involving
important social behaviours.
A frequently rehearsed script gains accessibility strength in two ways. Multiple rehearsals create
additional links to other concepts in memory, thus increasing the number of paths by which it can be
activated. They also increase the strength of the links themselves. In other words, the script becomes
chronically accessible.
Excitation transfer theory
Excitation transfer theory notes that physiological arousal dissipates slowly. If two arousing events
are separated by a short amount of time, arousal from the first event may be misattributed to the
second event. If the second event is related to anger, then the additional arousal should make the
person even angrier. The notion also suggests that anger may be extended over long periods of time
if a person has consciously attributed his or her heightened arousal to anger.
Social interaction theory
Social interaction theory interprets aggressive behaviour as social influence behaviour, i.e. an actor
uses coercive actions to produce some change in the target’s behaviour. According to this theory, the
actor is a decision-maker whose choices are directed by the expected rewards, costs, and
probabilities of obtaining different outcomes.
The theory provides an explanation of aggressive acts motivated by higher level (or ultimate) goals. It
provides an excellent way to understand recent findings that aggression is often the result of threats
to high self-esteem, especially to unwarranted high self-esteem (i.e., narcissism).
The general aggression model
A heap of stones is not a house
“Science is built up with fact, as a house is with stone. But a collection of fact is no more a science
than a heap of stones is a house”.
The several current domain-specific theories are the important stones awaiting blueprints, mortar
and a construction crew to build the much more useful house, a general theory of human aggression.
The General Aggression Model (GAM) was designed to integrate existing mini-theories of aggression
into a unified whole.
This general model has at least four advantages over smaller domain theories:
it is more parsimonious than the set of existing mini-theories;
it better explains aggressive acts that are based on multiple motives;
it will aid in the development of more comprehensive interventions designed to treat
individuals who are chronically aggressive; many current treatment attempts fail because
they focus on only one specific type of aggression or use only one mini-theoretical approach
to treatment;
it provides broader insights about child rearing and development issues, thus enabling
parents, teachers, and public policy makers to make better decisions about child-rearing
practices.
Key features include the ideas that knowledge structures (a) develop out of experience; (b) influence
perception at multiple levels, from basic visual patterns to complex behavioural sequences; (c) can
, become automatized with use; (d) can contain (or are linked to) affective states, behavioural
programs, and beliefs; and (e) are used to guide people’s interpretations and behavioural responses
to their social (and physical) environment.
Three particularly relevant subtypes of knowledge structures are (a) perceptual schemata, which are
used to identify phenomena as simple as everyday physical objects (chair, person) or as complex as
social events (personal insult); (b) person schemata, which include beliefs about a particular person
or groups of people; and (c) behavioural scripts, which contain information about how people behave
under varying circumstances.
Knowledge structures include affect in three different ways. First, they contain links to experiential
affect “nodes” or concepts. Second, they include knowledge about affect, such as when a particular
emotion should be experienced. Third, a script may include affect as an action rule.
GAM focuses on the “person in the situation,” called an episode, consisting of one cycle of an
ongoing social interaction. The three main foci concern (a) person and situation inputs; (b) cognitive,
affective, and arousal routes through which these input variables have their impact; and (c)
outcomes of the underlying appraisal and decision processes.
Inputs
Social factors that influence aggressive behaviour can be categorised as features of the situation or
as features of the person in the situation. GAM indicates the types of underlying processes to
examine to see how various inputs lead to aggressive (or nonaggressive) behaviour.
Person factors
Person factors include all the characteristics a person brings to the situation, such as personality
traits, attitudes and genetic predispositions. Stable person factors are largely the result of the
person’s consistent use of schemata, scripts and other knowledge structures. Knowledge structures
also influence what situations a person will selectively seek out and what situations will be avoided,
further contributing to trait-like consistency. Together, person factors comprise an individual’s
preparedness to aggress.
Traits – certain traits predispose individuals to high levels of aggression. Certain types of people who
frequently aggress against others do so in large part because of a susceptibility towards hostile
attribution, perception and expectation biases. Moreover, a type of high self-esteem (and not low
self-esteem) produces high aggression. Specifically, individuals with inflated or unstable self-esteem
(narcissists) are prone to anger and are highly aggressive when their high self-image is threatened.
Sex – the ratio of male to female murderers in the United States is about 10:1. Specific types of
provocation differentially affect male and female aggression. The preferred types of aggression also
differ between sex. Males prefer direct aggression, whereas females prefer indirect aggression.
Beliefs – efficacy related beliefs are particularly important. Those who believe that they can
successfully carry out specific aggressive acts (self-efficacy) and that these acts will produce the
desired outcomes (outcome efficacy) are much more likely to select aggressive behaviours. The
source of such beliefs in children is often the family.
Attitudes – attitudes are general evaluations people hold about themselves, other people, objects
and issues. Positive attitudes towards violence in general also prepare certain individuals for
aggression. More specific positive attitudes about violence against specific groups of people also
increase aggression against those people. Males prone to aggress against women are not generally
aggressive against all people in all situations.
Human aggression. Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2002)
Since World War II, homicide rates have increased rather than decreased in a number of
industrialised countries, most notably the United States.
Basic definitions
Aggression – any behaviour directed toward another individual that is carried out with the proximate
(immediate) intent to cause harm. In addition, the perpetrator must believe that the behaviour will
harm the target and that the target is motivated to avoid the behaviour. When there is no intent to
harm or the target is not motivated to avoid the behaviour, the behaviour is not aggressive.
Violence – aggression that has extreme harm as its goal (e.g., death). All violence is aggression, but
many instances of aggression are not violent.
Hostile vs. instrumental aggression – hostile aggression has been conceived as being impulsive,
thoughtless (i.e., unplanned), driven by anger, having the ultimate motive of harming and occurring
as a reaction to some perceived provocation. Hostile aggression is sometimes called affective,
impulsive or reactive aggression. Instrumental aggression is conceived as a premeditated means of
obtaining some goal other than harming the victim, and being proactive rather than reactive.
Domain specific theories of aggression
Cognitive neoassociation theory
Berkowitz has proposed that aversive events like frustration, provocations, loud noises,
uncomfortable temperatures, and unpleasant odours produce negative affect. This automatically
stimulates various thoughts, memories, expressive motor reactions, and physiological responses
associated with both fight (feelings of anger) and flight tendencies (feelings of fear). Furthermore,
the theory assumes that cues present during an aversive event become associated with the event
and with the cognitive and emotional responses triggered by the event.
In cognitive neoassociation theory, aggressive thoughts, emotions and behavioural tendencies are
linked together in memory (associative memory structure). When a concept is primed or activated,
the activation spreads to related concepts and increases their activation as well.
This theory also includes higher-order cognitive processes, such as appraisals and attributions. If
people are motivated to do so, they might think about how they feel, make causal attributions for
what led them to feel this way, and consider the consequences of acting on their feelings.
Cognitive neoassociation theory not only subsumes the earlier frustration-aggression hypothesis, but
it also provides a causal mechanism for explaining why aversive events increase aggressive
inclinations, i.e. via negative affect.
Social learning theory
According to social learning theories, people acquire aggressive responses the same way they acquire
other complex forms of social behaviour – either by direct experience or by observing others. Social
learning theory is particularly useful in understanding the acquisition of aggressive behaviours and in
explaining instrumental aggression.
Script theory
According to the script theory, children learn aggressive scripts when they observe violence in the
mass media. Scripts define situations and guide behaviour: the person first selects a script to
,represent the situation and then assumes a role in the script. Once a script has been learned, it may
be retrieved at some later time and used as a guide for behaviour. Scripts are sets of particularly
well-rehearsed, highly associated concepts in memory, often involving causal links, goals, and action
plans. Even a few script rehearsals can change a person’s expectations and intentions involving
important social behaviours.
A frequently rehearsed script gains accessibility strength in two ways. Multiple rehearsals create
additional links to other concepts in memory, thus increasing the number of paths by which it can be
activated. They also increase the strength of the links themselves. In other words, the script becomes
chronically accessible.
Excitation transfer theory
Excitation transfer theory notes that physiological arousal dissipates slowly. If two arousing events
are separated by a short amount of time, arousal from the first event may be misattributed to the
second event. If the second event is related to anger, then the additional arousal should make the
person even angrier. The notion also suggests that anger may be extended over long periods of time
if a person has consciously attributed his or her heightened arousal to anger.
Social interaction theory
Social interaction theory interprets aggressive behaviour as social influence behaviour, i.e. an actor
uses coercive actions to produce some change in the target’s behaviour. According to this theory, the
actor is a decision-maker whose choices are directed by the expected rewards, costs, and
probabilities of obtaining different outcomes.
The theory provides an explanation of aggressive acts motivated by higher level (or ultimate) goals. It
provides an excellent way to understand recent findings that aggression is often the result of threats
to high self-esteem, especially to unwarranted high self-esteem (i.e., narcissism).
The general aggression model
A heap of stones is not a house
“Science is built up with fact, as a house is with stone. But a collection of fact is no more a science
than a heap of stones is a house”.
The several current domain-specific theories are the important stones awaiting blueprints, mortar
and a construction crew to build the much more useful house, a general theory of human aggression.
The General Aggression Model (GAM) was designed to integrate existing mini-theories of aggression
into a unified whole.
This general model has at least four advantages over smaller domain theories:
it is more parsimonious than the set of existing mini-theories;
it better explains aggressive acts that are based on multiple motives;
it will aid in the development of more comprehensive interventions designed to treat
individuals who are chronically aggressive; many current treatment attempts fail because
they focus on only one specific type of aggression or use only one mini-theoretical approach
to treatment;
it provides broader insights about child rearing and development issues, thus enabling
parents, teachers, and public policy makers to make better decisions about child-rearing
practices.
Key features include the ideas that knowledge structures (a) develop out of experience; (b) influence
perception at multiple levels, from basic visual patterns to complex behavioural sequences; (c) can
, become automatized with use; (d) can contain (or are linked to) affective states, behavioural
programs, and beliefs; and (e) are used to guide people’s interpretations and behavioural responses
to their social (and physical) environment.
Three particularly relevant subtypes of knowledge structures are (a) perceptual schemata, which are
used to identify phenomena as simple as everyday physical objects (chair, person) or as complex as
social events (personal insult); (b) person schemata, which include beliefs about a particular person
or groups of people; and (c) behavioural scripts, which contain information about how people behave
under varying circumstances.
Knowledge structures include affect in three different ways. First, they contain links to experiential
affect “nodes” or concepts. Second, they include knowledge about affect, such as when a particular
emotion should be experienced. Third, a script may include affect as an action rule.
GAM focuses on the “person in the situation,” called an episode, consisting of one cycle of an
ongoing social interaction. The three main foci concern (a) person and situation inputs; (b) cognitive,
affective, and arousal routes through which these input variables have their impact; and (c)
outcomes of the underlying appraisal and decision processes.
Inputs
Social factors that influence aggressive behaviour can be categorised as features of the situation or
as features of the person in the situation. GAM indicates the types of underlying processes to
examine to see how various inputs lead to aggressive (or nonaggressive) behaviour.
Person factors
Person factors include all the characteristics a person brings to the situation, such as personality
traits, attitudes and genetic predispositions. Stable person factors are largely the result of the
person’s consistent use of schemata, scripts and other knowledge structures. Knowledge structures
also influence what situations a person will selectively seek out and what situations will be avoided,
further contributing to trait-like consistency. Together, person factors comprise an individual’s
preparedness to aggress.
Traits – certain traits predispose individuals to high levels of aggression. Certain types of people who
frequently aggress against others do so in large part because of a susceptibility towards hostile
attribution, perception and expectation biases. Moreover, a type of high self-esteem (and not low
self-esteem) produces high aggression. Specifically, individuals with inflated or unstable self-esteem
(narcissists) are prone to anger and are highly aggressive when their high self-image is threatened.
Sex – the ratio of male to female murderers in the United States is about 10:1. Specific types of
provocation differentially affect male and female aggression. The preferred types of aggression also
differ between sex. Males prefer direct aggression, whereas females prefer indirect aggression.
Beliefs – efficacy related beliefs are particularly important. Those who believe that they can
successfully carry out specific aggressive acts (self-efficacy) and that these acts will produce the
desired outcomes (outcome efficacy) are much more likely to select aggressive behaviours. The
source of such beliefs in children is often the family.
Attitudes – attitudes are general evaluations people hold about themselves, other people, objects
and issues. Positive attitudes towards violence in general also prepare certain individuals for
aggression. More specific positive attitudes about violence against specific groups of people also
increase aggression against those people. Males prone to aggress against women are not generally
aggressive against all people in all situations.
