Describe and compare the major theories of aggression

Describe and compare the major theories of aggression

Aggression has plagued humanity since the advent of time. It is any behavior, quality of anger and resolve towards other people that are carried out with a proximate intention of causing harm. Aggression is a mind’s emotional reaction common to the entire human race, a hostility act that inflicts either emotional or physical pain to an individual. The two types of aggression are instrumental and hostile aggression. Instrumental aggression entails premeditated violent acts with no intent to cause harm but for environmental reward or a more significant purpose. In contrast, hostile aggression involves impulsive and unplanned acts of anger founded of the provocation to achieve satisfaction. The main theoretical perspectives of aggression include; drive, instinct, learning, and cognitive theories. The paper consists of a discussion of the drive theories, the frustration-aggression hypothesis and the general aggression model (GAM).

The instinctive theory implies that aggression is innate to human nature. Charles Darwin developed the first instinct theory of aggression in his work, Origin of Species. The natural selection theory regarded any aggressive behaviour as a human’s adaptation for survival. Research indicates that several species are innately aggressive, but there is an absence of empirical evidence supporting this response in human beings without perceived provocation. For instance, in a study conducted in 1979 by Robert Baron, participants selected to perpetuate pain on a cohort that had previously insulted them while the rest that had a neutral experience caused little or no pain. The survey supported the fact that human beings enjoy inflicting pain according to provocation but not certainly the response is innately automatic.

After the first World War, Sigmund Freud his instinctive theory of aggression. Sigmund’s psychoanalytic theory is founded on two opposing and unique human instincts; Thanatos and Eros. Thanatos explains the need to destroy life while Eros depicts libido’s prerequisite to preserving life. Because of the opposition of the two instincts, defence mechanisms develop to avert the need for life destruction away from self and to other individuals, leading to aggression. Freud further proposed that a cathartic release of destructive energy can reduce the likelihood of aggression to a person or on others. However, Sigmund was ambiguous in the catharsis notion as a way of deterrence to aggressive behaviour. A general aggression model is a theoretical approach that covers all theories of aggression encompassed in current research.

Konrad Lorenz established an ethological method to instinctive aggression, analogous to Darwin and Freud in the logic that aggression is an instinctual result or product of evolution. He further suggested that aggression develops from a fighting instinct created during the evolution course as it promoted species’ survival and distributed over an extensive geographical area. He also indicated that the biological need develops over time and like Sigmund Freud, catharsis is vital for the release of destructive behaviour. Konrad used a hydraulic model to explain the specific internal impulses that result in aggressive behaviour. His theory presumed that aggressive behaviour is unavoidable, and the accumulation of the urges leads to an instinct to fight to release the impulses unless released in a better productive way. Even though these theories support the psychoanalytic approach to therapy, little empirical evidence promotes the claim of innate aggression.

According to Baron (1977), aggressive behaviour stems from the principle that aggression is due to a heightened state of arousal that decreases through overt aggression. The frustration-aggression hypothesis, established by Leonard Doob, O. H. Mowrer, John Dollard, Robert Sears, and Neal Miller in 1939. The theory created a significant impact on behavioural sciences. It states that frustration leads to aggressive behaviour and that catharsis is the decrease of aggressive drive following an aggressive action. Frustration is a hostile emotion that ascends when an individual is blocked or restricted from achieving an objective. The hypothesis is based on two primary themes; frustration always results in some aggressive behaviour, and, aggression ever arises from frustration.

Neal Miller further proposed some revisions in this theory by stating that aggression is among the many behaviours that are caused by frustration. Neal suggested that human beings learn both nonaggressive and aggressive behaviours as a way of reducing frustration. The theory was further revised by Leonard Berkowitz in 1969, thus developing the aggressive-cues approach, closely correlated to classical conditioning. The aggressive-cues theory suggests that aversive stimulus instigates aggression with repeated exposure. Catharsis is a feature applied in the aggressive-cue theory where the aggression is the response to initiated aggressive stimuli.

Dolf Zillman was not satisfied with the previous drive theories; thus, he made a link between aggression and arousal in which the various psychological reactions could be determined through measurements. He suggested that arousal dissipates gradually, in cases that when two arousing instances occur in a short period, the first instance may inappropriately hand over to the second one. If the first instance gets considered as anger, the lingering consequence is anger in the second instance.

The cognitive neoassociation theory, CNT, is an amendment of Berkowitz’s aggressive-cue approach. The CNT emphasizes the cognitive and emotional processes that prompt the connection between aggression and frustration, and the reduction of aggressive cues. The theory further proposes that aversive stimuli result in adverse effects which inevitably stimulate psychological responses associated with ‘fight or flight.’ Aggressive cues are connected to memory, thus leading to a fight or fear response when an individual gets exposed to these events. CNT generates a causal mechanism for aggressive inclinations and aversive events, further illuminating on hostile aggression.

A theory developed by L. Rowell Huesmann and colleagues in 1989 emphasized on observational and scripts learning through mass media. Scripts control situations, and when an individual takes up a role, the text acts as the guide. The scripts assume the role of semantic memory when connected to specific situations and are easily accessible with repeated rehearsal and exposure. This model is applied in the study of violence in media and within the GAM (general aggression model) context.

GAM was proposed by Kristina DeNeve, Craig Anderson, and William Deuser in 1995 to explain the numerous features of aggressive behaviour. The model is also applied to understand aggression and media violence. It was developed to entail all aggression theories as an entity. GAM has four significant advantages; it provides a better explanation to aggressive acts founded on multiple motives, more prudent, helps in developing a significantly broader intervention for chronically aggressive persons, and offers a more comprehensive insight concerning child nurturing and developmental issues. The general theme associated with GAM is situational aspects that are qualified by personal differences. The model has applications to intergroup violence, aggressive behaviour connected to climate change, suicide, and intimate partner violence.

The social learning theory was developed in 1977 by Albert Bandura and was a conclusion of earlier conditioning theories. Bandura posited that individuals learn to act aggressively through imitation. The various experiments conducted identified that children respond aggressively towards a doll after exposure to aggressive model behaviour. Bandura further advanced the theory of vicarious learning, where children inclined to act aggressively when aggression gets rewarded. According to Albert Bandura, observational learning generates a causal correlation between environmental cues and behaviour.

The four primary theoretical perspectives exist in the study of aggression. The earlier theories are; Darwin’s theory of natural selection, Freud’s psychoanalytical, and Lorenz ethological theories. Drive theories significantly impact behavioural sciences, and the cognitive approaches are highly recognized with the advancement of medical technology as better empirical data is ascertainable. These mini-theories get understood under the GAM theoretical framework. Early models established that aggressive behaviour is an innate response, and over time, aggressive behaviour theories have shifted to observational and cognitive approaches to attain empirical evidence.

References