Search

The purpose of this longitudinal study was to examine the relationship specificity of aggressogenic thought-behavior processes and to investigate the role of self-esteem in translating or inhibiting aggressogenic thought into aggression toward personally liked and disliked targets. Participants (186 Finnish boys and girls; 11-12 years old at Time 1) completed measures twice over a 1-year interval. We assessed children's attributions of hostility, relational goals, expectations of anger, and self-efficacy at Time 1 as well as aggression, at both time points, toward their previously identified liked and disliked peers. Our results mostly supported our hypothesis that cognitions guide behavior mainly within the relationship context. Moreover, high self-esteem potentiated cognition-behavior links toward children's own liked peer but inhibited the actualization of aggressogenic thought toward children's disliked peer. These findings highlight the importance of taking a Person X Situation approach when studying cognition-behavior processes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 4 studies, the authors examined the hypothesis that relative to primed autonomy motivation, primed control would increase enjoyment of hostile (compared with nonhostile) humor as assessed by self-reported enjoyment and aversiveness and by nonverbal behavior. Results confirmed the hypothesis. Furthermore, initial state hostility moderated the effect such that high-hostility participants who were primed with control motivation especially enjoyed hostile humor. The 2 final studies showed that the effect was mediated by implicit aggression such that me combination of high initial state hostility and control priming led to implicit aggression, which in turn resulted in hostile humor enjoyment. Results are interpreted in terms of the effects of autonomy versus control motivation on intrapersonal self-regulatory processes, which influence interpersonal functioning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Given the high costs of aggression, why have people evolved to act aggressively? Comparative biologists have frequently observed links between aggression, status, and mating in nonhuman animals. In this series of experiments, the authors examined the effects of status, competition, and mating motives on men's and women's aggression. For men, status motives increased direct aggression (face-to-face confrontation). Men's aggression was also boosted by mating motives, but only when observers were other men. For women, both status and mating motives increased indirect aggression (e.g., socially excluding the perpetrator). Although neither status nor mating motives increased women's direct aggression, women did become more directly aggressive when motivated to compete for scarce resources. These context- and sex-specific effects on human aggression contribute to a broader understanding of the functional nature of aggressive behavior. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prior research has confirmed a casual path between social rejection and aggression, but there has been no clear explanation of why social rejection causes aggression. A series of experiments tested the hypothesis that social exclusion increases the inclination to perceive neutral information as hostile, which has implications for aggression. Compared to accepted and control participants, socially excluded participants were more likely to rate aggressive and ambiguous words as similar (Experiment 1a), to complete word fragments with aggressive words (Experiment 1b), and to rate the ambiguous actions of another person as hostile (Experiments 2-4). This hostile cognitive bias among excluded people was related to their aggressive treatment of others who were not involved in the exclusion experience (Experiments 2 and 3) and others with whom participants had no previous contact (Experiment 4). These findings provide a first step in resolving the mystery of why social exclusion produces aggression. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]