Individual differences in aggressive responses to attack: Internal-external locus of control and field dependence-independence

Two experiments assessed the effect of individual differences on aggression. In both studies subjects were exposed to opponents in the competitive reaction time task who decreased the intensity of their attack from high to low, remained constantly moderate in their attack, or increased the intensity of their attack from low to high. In the first experiment Internal Locus of Control subjects consistently set high intensity shocks in response to high intensity attack and low shocks in response to mild attack. External subjects showed relatively minor variations in their aggressive responses to varying intensities of attack. In the second experiment field-independent subjects set more intense shocks than field-dependent subjects only in the Decreasing attack condition.     

Attacker's intent and awareness of outcome,impression management,and retaliation

Female Japanese students who were engaged in a calculation task were given electric shocks by a female opponent. The subjects were informed that the opponent had an intent to shock them either severely or mildly. In addition, the opponent's awareness of the outcome of attack was independently manipulated: (1) the subjects received shocks whose intensity corresponded to the opponent's intent, (2) the subjects received shocks whose intensity was inversely proportional to the intensity intended by the opponent and were informed that the opponent did not know about it, or (3) the subjects received reversed shocks as in condition (2), but were further informed that the opponent was well aware of it. An ANOVA of the measure of retaliation in terms of the intensity of shocks delivered to the opponent indicated that (1) the subjects showed more aggression of greater intensity against an opponent who apparently had an aggressive intent than the one who did not, regardless of the actual level of shock intensity; (2) when the severe attack failed, the subjects lowered aggression when the opponent was apparently aware of it as opposed to when she was not; and (3) when the subjects received severe shocks accidentally, they increased aggression when the opponent was apparently aware of it compared to when she was not. These results led us to interpret retaliation as being mediated both by the attribution of intent to the attacker and by self-presentation to the attacker and the experimenter.     

Third party instigation of aggression as a function of attack and vulnerability

Subjects serving as advisors instructed a confederate which shock intensity to deliver to an opponent in a reaction-time competition; subjects could also directly aggress by setting shock for the opponent's partner. Vulnerable subjects (shock electrode on) both instigated less aggression, i.e., suggested that less intense shocks be set, and directly aggressed less frequently than nonvulnerable subjects (no shock electrode). Attacked subjects, those for whom the opponents set shock, both instigated more aggression and more frequently set shock than did nonattacked subjects. The relationship between vulnerability and attack was additive for instigative aggression and multiplicative for direct aggression. Both modes of aggression were significantly influenced by the intensity of provocation from the opponents.     

Withdrawal,matching, withdrawal-matching,and variable-matching strategies in reducing attack-instigated aggression

Several studies have investigated strategies that a participant in dyadic aggression may use to reduce the aggression of the other participant. In one set of these studies the subject is instigated to aggression by an opponent who sets maximum shocks for the subject to receive during the first block of six trials. Following attack-instigation, opponents shift to withdrawal and matching strategies for 18 trials. The withdrawal strategy is an abrupt shift to the lowest levels of shock possible. The matching strategy is the exact matching by an opponent of the shock set by the subject on the previous trial. With these procedures the withdrawal strategy has been the most effective method to reduce aggression. These results led to the suggestion that the effectiveness of the withdrawal strategy may be due to immediate, unambiguous communication by the opponent of his willingness to reduce attack. This hypothesis was tested in the present study by creating a matching condition modified to include immediate, unambiguous communication of willingness to reduce attack. In this withdrawal-matching condition the opponent followed attack with two trials of the lowest levels of shock before shifting to a matching strategy. Although the withdrawal-matching strategy did not lead to shock settings that were significantly lower than the matching strategy, there was evidence that subjects interacting with withdrawal-matching opponents did reduce their shock settings from block 1 to block 4 more rapidly than subjects interacting with matching opponents. A variable matching strategy was also used to provide a more realistic analogy of matching in the mundane world. While subjects with variable-matching opponents also did not set shock levels during blocks 2, 3, and 4 that were significantly lower than the matching strategy, there was evidence that subjects in this condition reduced their shock levels more rapidly than subjects with matching opponents. Although the effects were not as strong as expected, the results do provide some support for the interpretation that the effectiveness of the withdrawal strategy may be due to unambiguous communication of willingness by the opponent to reduce his or her aggression. The effectiveness of the variable-matching strategy was attributed to interrupting the tendency of the subject and his or her opponent to match each other's responses. Consistent with earlier attack-instigated aggression studies, the withdrawal strategy in the present study led to a rapid reduction in aggression.     

Influence of win-loss ratio on performance,satisfaction and preference for opponents

Hypotheses about the preference for opponents in competitive situations, about performance under various win-loss ratios, and about task and opponent satisfaction under various win-loss ratios were tested. A 5 × 5 latin square with four replications and a repeated measure factor of trials was the design used with 20 female college students as subjects. The five different win percents were W₁₀, W₃₀, W₅₀, W₇₀, and W₉₀. A manipulative maze task was used with subjects receiving 20 trials against each of five confederate opponents. Results indicated that (a) when a person knows little or nothing about her ability level she initially prefers to compete with opponents of low ability but with each subsequent contest opponents of higher ability levels are preferred; (b) subjects performed better in the W₅₀ condition; (c) task satisfaction is higher when the percent of wins is equal to or greater than the percent of losses; and (d) opponent satisfaction is greater for opponents who perform equal to or better than the subject.     

Causal attributions for success and failure in relation to expectations of success based upon selective or manipulative control

Subjects worked at a 10-item Anagrams Test. In a manipulative control condition the prior performance of subjects on a set of practice anagrams was controlled so that half of these subjects began the test with high expectations of success and half with low expectations of success As a check on the manipulation, subjects provided ratings of how confident they were that they could pass the test (i e, solve five anagrams or more) In a selective control condition subjects were not given practice items but were subsequently assigned to high versus low expectation groups on the basis of their confidence ratings The difficulty level of the items in the Anagrams Test was manipulated so that half the subjects in each condition passed the test and half failed. Subsequently all subjects were required to rate the degree to which they considered ability (or lack of ability), effort (or lack of effort), task difficulty (easy or hard), and luck (good or bad) were causes of their performance outcome (success or failure). It was found that the expected success was attributed more to ability and less to good luck than was the unexpected success The expected failure was attributed more to lack of ability and less to bad luck than was the unexpected failure There was a greater tendency for subjects to appeal to task difficulty and effort as causes of their performance when they succeeded than when they failed. These results were discussed in terms of a structural balance model of attribution behavior and also in relation to Heider's naive analysis of the causes of action     

Temporal order and tactile patterns

Temporal order judgments (TOJs) were obtained for tactile stimuli presented to subjects' fingerpads. In one set of measurements, pairs of spatial patterns were presented successively to a single fingerpad (same-site condition), to two fingers on the same hand (ipsilateral condition), or to two fingers on opposite hands (bilateral condition). The subjects were instructed to report which one of the two patterns was presented first. TOJs were more accurate in the same-site condition than in either the ipsilateral or the bilateral conditions. In the ipsilateral and bilateral conditions, performance improved when judging which one of two locations received a stimulus first, although performance levels were still lower than in the same-site condition. Increasing the size of the pattern set from which the two patterns to be judged were drawn had only a slight effect on same-site performance and no effect on ipsilateral/bilateral performance; however, changing the nature of the patterns had a considerable effect on same-site performance and a smaller effect on ipsilateral/bilateral performance. Introducing an intensity imbalance between members of the pair of stimuli also had a large effect on same-site TOJs: a less intense stimulus tended to be judged as being presented first. In the bilateral condition, however, there was a small effect in the reverse direction: more intense stimuli tended to be judged as being presented first. The intensity imbalance had no effect in the ipsilateral condition. The results suggest that different mechanisms are responsible for TOJs for patterns presented to the same-site and to separate sites and, furthermore, that separate sites may constitute separate channels for spatial information.     

Effects of a stimulus associated with a victim's pain on later aggression.

Male college students participated in an experiment designed to associate a neutral stimulus with a victim's pain and then to assess the impact of the paired stimulus on their aggression. The subjects were either provoked or not provoked by a confederate's shock evaluation. They then observed a flashing white light that was associated with either their former evaluator's pain or an irrelevant, affectively neutral event. The subjects then administered electric shocks to a different confederate, with whom they had not interacted previously, at the flash of both the familiar white light (the conditioned stimulus) and a novel blue light. Results supported the prediction that provoked subjects would give more intense shocks to the conditioned stimulus when it had been associated with their evaluator's pain. Unprovoked subjects were found to give less intense shocks to the light that had been associated with their evaluator's pain.     

The reduction of attack instigated aggression

Thirty subjects competed with an opponent in a reaction time task to avoid receiving shock. The opponent initially set only the highest possible intensity shock for the subjects. The opponent then adopted one of three strategies to reduce the intensity of shocks set by the subjects. In one condition the opponent set shock intensities which matched those set by the subject. In a second condition the opponent set shocks which were not contingent upon those set by the subject but which were identical to those set by the opponent who matched the subject's settings. The opponent in the third condition suddenly reduced the intensity of his settings and chose only the least intense possible shock for the subject. All three conditions resulted in reduced aggression. This decrement was greatest and most rapid among those subjects who were exposed to a precipitous decrease in the intensity of attack.     

Beyond negotiated outcomes: The hidden costs of anger expression in dyadic negotiation

This paper focuses on the hidden costs of expressing anger in negotiations. Two experimental studies show that an opponent’s expression of anger can elicit both concessionary and retaliatory responses by focal negotiators. In the first study, equal-power negotiators exhibited overt concessionary behaviors when their opponents expressed anger, but also sabotaged their opponents covertly. Feelings of mistreatment mediated the relationship between opponents’ anger expression and focal negotiators’ covert retaliation. In the second study, low-power negotiators made larger concessions when high-power opponents expressed anger, but they retaliated covertly against high-power negotiators. High-power negotiators were overtly demanding (and not concessionary) regardless of whether or not the opponent expressed anger, but also retaliated covertly against low-power opponents who expressed anger. The two studies suggest that the value-claiming advantages of expressed anger need to be weighed against the costs of eliciting (covert) retaliation. We discuss implications of the findings and provide recommendations for future research.     

Objective self-awareness,standards of evaluation,and moral behavior

In a performance setting, subjects were given an opportunity to cheat without fear of detection on puzzle problems. Subjects were led to believe that successful performance was due to ability in some conditions, but to luck in other conditions. In fact, most of the problems were insolvable, so that success was impossible without cheating. Self-awareness was induced in half the subjects by having them sit in front of a mirror and listen to a tape recording of their own voice as they worked on the puzzle problems; the remaining subjects were not exposed to a mirror and listened to a tape of someone else's voice as they worked on the problems. It was predicted that cheating frequency would be higher under ability attribution conditions than under luck attribution conditions, and that this effect of performance attribution would be greater among self-aware subjects than among non-self-aware subjects. Results confirmed these hypotheses. Discussion centered on the differential use of morality and competence standards for behavior when in a state of self-awareness.     

Effects of instructions, biofeedback, reward, and cognitive mediation on the control of heart rate and the application of that control in a stressful situation

Subjects in Phase 1 of this experiment were (a) instructed to try to either increase or decrease their heart rate, (b) with or without the use of biofeedback, and (c) with or without the promise of money for successful performance, whereas no-treatment subjects were given no instructions, no biofeedback, and no promise of reward. Results indicated that (a) when simply instructed to do so, subjects could increase but not decrease their heart rates relative to no treatment controls, (b) the promise of money for good performance aided subjects in increasing but not decreasing heart rate, and (c) biofeedback did not aid subjects in either increasing or decreasing heart rate. Various cognitive strategies employed by subjects in controlling their heart rates are discussed.In Phase 2, subjects in a stress condition were told that they would receive a series of painful electric shocks, whereas subjects in a no stress condition were not told about shocks. All subjects were instructed to try to decrease their heart rates during the “shock” period. Heart rate and self report data revealed that (a) the manipulation was successful in increasing stress, and (b) previous training in decreasing heart rate, with or without biofeedback, did not aid subjects in decreasing their heart rates in the face of the stress.     

Effect of power to harm on retaliative aggression among males and females

The present studies examined the effect of differential power to cause harm to one another on individuals' retaliative responding. Participants with less, equal, or greater power relative to their target set shocks for one another in the context of a reaction-time task. Those in the less power condition consistently set higher shocks for their targets than did participants in greater or equal power conditions. Female participants were less likely than males to use an extreme violent response. The effects of power were seen most clearly when the target was male. Results are discussed in terms of equity considerations in human aggressive interactions.     

Conciliatory strategies and relative power

In an investigation of variations of a conciliatory strategy, 96 subjects, half female and half male, played a modified Prisoner's Dilemma in which their relative power, in terms of control over the other's outcomes, was less than, equal to, or greater than that of a simulated other. After 10 trials on which (s)he was 50% competitive, the other either did or did not send a handwritten note of general intent to be cooperative. In the second block of 10 trials, the other either was 100% cooperative or began with cooperation and stayed with it as long as the subject did not exploit. When the subject did exploit, the other made the competitive choice on the following trial as a form of retaliation, but followed this retaliation by a return to cooperation on the next trial so that there were never two consecutive competitive choices. During this second block, the simulated other always signaled in advance, with an explicit message, which choice (s)he was about to make. In a third block, the other was 100% cooperative in all conditions and sent no messages. As hypothesized, subjects whose power was equal to or less than that of the other were more cooperative in response to conciliation than were subjects whose power was greater than that of the other. Subjects who received the general note of intent were more cooperative than those who did not, but only in the equal and low power conditions. The subjects in the equal power condition who experienced retaliation were more cooperative than those who did not, but those in the unequal conditions tended to react negatively to retaliation. The results were discussed in terms of Osgood's (Peace Research Reviews, 1979, 8(2), 77–92) GRIT strategy and outcome control in interaction.     

The use of strategies and messages to alter aggressive interactions

Male and female college students were instigated to aggression by a confederate's shocks during a preliminary task. The confederate informed half of the treatment subjects of the response strategy which he intended to adopt. The other half received an irrelevant message. All subjects then competed against the confederate, who employed one of the following five response consequence strategies: a) set a maximum shock on all trials; b) set a minimum shock on all trials; c) set shocks identical to the subject's response on the preceding trial; d) set shocks two settings below the subject's response; or e) set shocks two settings above the subject's. The subject's latency to setting a shock, the intensities of the shocks set, the durations of the shock settings, and the subject's reaction times were recorded. When an irrelevant message was delivered, passive responses, well below those of the opponent, resulted in the lowest level of retaliation. In the presence of a relevant message, the match-same strategy emerged as an effective deterrent to aggressive behavior. The results were found to be consistent with predictions derived from an application of the norm of reciprocity and research demonstrating the enhancing effects achieved through the communication of existing contingencies.     

The Machinations of Luck

Luck is at issue when it is a matter of pure chance that a result of significant positive of negative value ensues for someone. Luck differs from fate, which pivots on an individual's condition, and from fortune, which pivots on an individual's talent and effort. It is by luck that you are rich when you win the lottery, by fortune if your wealth comes from talent and hard work, and by fate if you inherit those millions. On this basis luck lies beyond anyone's rational control. With risk (R) as the probability of failure in a chancy situation and the stake (S) as the difference between a favorable and an unfavorable outcome, luck (L) can be measured as the product of these quantities: L = R × S. The condition of humankind in an uncertain world being as it is, luck cannot be eliminated as a key factor of our existence, be it in cognitive, practical, or ethical regards.     

Effect of timing of information about mitigating circumstances on emotional responses to provocation and retaliatory behavior

To determine whether the reduction of retaliatory behavior by knowledge of mitigating circumstances is due to less motivation to retaliate or to an inhibition of motivated retaliation, subjects were provoked by a rude experimenter and informed of mitigating conditions (a) before provocation, (b) after provocation, or (c) not at all. Physiological data revealed that prior knowledge of mitigation prevented pronounced excitatory responses to prococation. In contrast, when mitigating conditions were not known, excitatory responses to provocation were intense. In addition, when mitigating information was supplied after provocation, excitatory responses decayed more rapidly than when no such information was supplied. Retaliatory behavior, as measured in complaints about the rude experimenter, was substantially lower in the condition in which mitigation preceded provocation than in the other two conditions. The retaliatory behavior of subjects who were informed of mitigation after being provoked did not differ significantly from that of subjects who were not informed of mitigation. The findings were interpreted as incompatible with the assumption that under mitigating conditions retaliation is motivated but inhibited and as generally supportive of the proposal that mitigation attenuates the response to provocation. In order to explain the failure of the reception of mitigating information after provocation to reduce retaliatory behavior in spite of the observed facilitation of excitatory decay, it was suggested that when subjects were experiencing high levels of anger, they formed a behavioral disposition to retaliate, which outlasted the state of elevated arousal.     

Do not fear your opponent: suboptimal changes of a prevention strategy when facing stronger opponents

The time spent making a decision and its quality define a widely studied trade-off. Some models suggest that the time spent is set to optimize reward, as verified empirically in simple-decision making experiments. However, in a more complex perspective compromising components of regulation focus, ambitions, fear, risk and social variables, adjustment of the speed-accuracy trade-off may not be optimal. Specifically, regulatory focus theory shows that people can be set in a promotion mode, where focus is on seeking to approach a desired state (to win), or in a prevention mode, focusing to avoid undesired states (not to lose). In promotion, people are eager to take risks increasing speed and decreasing accuracy. In prevention, strategic vigilance increases, decreasing speed and improving accuracy. When time and accuracy have to be compromised, one can ask which of these 2 strategies optimizes reward, leading to optimal performance. This is investigated here in a unique experimental environment. Decision making is studied in rapid-chess (180 s per game), in which the goal of a player is to mate the opponent in a finite amount of time or, alternatively, time-out of the opponent with sufficient material to mate. In different games, players face strong and weak opponents. It was observed that (a) players adopt a more conservative strategy when facing strong opponents, with slower and more accurate moves, and (b) this strategy is suboptimal: Players increase their winning likelihood against strong opponents using the policy they adopt when confronting opponents with similar strength.     

Some personality factors in reaction to aggressive stimuli

A word association test which included aggressive stimuli (weapon names) was given to college students. Those whose responses were relatively high or low in emotionality were asked to participate in a “study of stress reactions to electric shock” When the subject arrived at the laboratory, he and a partner were given tasks to perform The partner, a confederate of the experimenter, gave the subject an unfairly high number of shocks in judging the subject's performance The subject then judged the partner's work, using shock Half the subjects were in the apparently accidental presence of guns when given the chance to retaliate Among low-emotionality subjects, the presence of guns increased the number of shocks given the partner, as Berkowitz and LePage found High-emotionality subjects tended to give the partner longer shocks than low subjects, whether guns were present or not. In contrast to the low subjects, when guns were present, highs tended to give shocks of shorter duration and to report lowered anger, as if the aggressive stimuli had dampened the intensity of their reaction. The results as a whole indicate that the perceptual set for aggressive stimuli and the presence of such stimuli have an interactive effect on aggressive tendencies     

The nature of equity-restoration: Some approval-seeking considerations

Subjects performed a proofreading task and evaluated its difficulty both beforehand and afterwards. They were overpaid or equitably paid by an experimenter who was or was not directly responsible for the level of pay they received, and who they believed would or would not see their post-test ratings. All subjects knew the experimenter would grade their task performance. Consistent with equity theory, overpaid subjects rated the task as having been more difficult than they had expected and did higher quality work than did equitably paid subjects. However, subjects who thought the experimenter would see their ratings (Aware condition) rated it as more difficult and performed more poorly on it than those who thought she would not see them (Unaware condition). Reported task difficulty increased among overpaid subjects under aware conditions, remained stable among overpaid subjects under unaware conditions, and decreased for equitably paid subjects. These findings suggested that what appears to be “equity-restoration” may be a self-presentation strategy designed to win the experimenter's approval, and that task ratings rather than performance will be used for this purpose when they can be communicated to the experimenter. The experimenter's responsibility for the subject's pay had no effect in the present study.