Toward a reorientation of research on aggression

A number of studies are reported which sustain the importance of individual differences in the study of aggression. Irritability, emotional susceptibility, dissipatio—nrumination, tolerance toward violence, and proneness to guilt feelings provide a better understanding of the various forms of aggression. Prosocial behaviour, emotional instability, and physical and verbal aggression proved to be important indicators to children's more general adjustment. To go beyond the traditional paradigm of research on aggression a structural and interactive—interpersonal analysis of aggression is recommended. Aggression as a unitary phenomenon is called into question. Instead, it is stated that the various facets of aggression find an explanation and acquire meaning within the context of global personality development and functioning.     

Social marking,socio-cognitive conflict and cognitive development

This study is concerned with assessing whether social marking, i.e. the correspondence between the cognitive solution of a task and the social relation expressed in the material, is a mechanism of cognitive progress which depends on specific forms of socio-cognitive conflict or on presence of familiar social relations in the material. In the first experiment 5-6-year-old non-conserver children were selected during a pre-test that comprised three spatial transformation tasks. During the test phase, 56 children worked on spatial transformation tasks with an adult partner in four socially marked conditions in which the correctness of the adult model varied. All subjects were individually post-tested on the same tasks with unmarked content. Results showed that, under the same marked conditions in the test phase, more progress took place, at the post-test phase, when subjects had interacted with an incorrect adult model than when they had interacted with a correct one. In the second experiment the hypothesis of an interaction between the nature of the material and the kind of social interaction was examined by means of a factorial design in which the factors were adult versus child partner and marked versus unmarked material. The procedures in the pre- and post-test phase were carried out in the same way as in Experiment I. In the test phase 61 non-conserver children interacted with partners who presented completely incorrect model. The results of post-test phase indicated that there was a main effect of social marking although findings of a condition in which children interact with another child on unmarked material also have shown a certain amount of progress. The findings are discussed with respect to the psycho-social model of cognitive development.     

Individual differences in the study of human aggression

Excessive concern for simplicity has often led us to underestimate the complexity of aggression. Over the years, several scales related to aggression have been identified and validated both on adults and on children. Ultimately, two main higher order dimensions, emotional responsivity and proneness to aggression, repeatedly emerged in a series of second-order factor analysis. These dimensions are rather similar to two of the big five factors of personality: neuroticism/emotinal stability and hostility/agreeableness, respectively. Several studies corroborate the plausibility of a higher level bidimensional conceptualization of aggression that, while preserving the heuristic validity of looking for more specific constructs of aggression, can link the field of aggression to the field of personality. © 1994 Wiley-Liss, Inc.     

La filosofia e la metodologia della scienza oggi in Italia

---

Philosophy and methodology of science in Italy today

     

Reasoning from inconsistency to consistency

This article presents a theory of how individuals reason from inconsistency to consistency. The theory is based on 3 main principles. First, individuals try to construct a single mental model of a possibility that satisfies a current set of propositions, and if the task is impossible, they infer that the set is inconsistent. Second, when an inconsistency arises from an incontrovertible fact, they retract any singularly dubious proposition or any proposition that is inconsistent with the fact; otherwise, they retract whichever proposition mismatches the fact. A mismatch can arise from a proposition that has only mental models that conflict with the fact or fail to represent it. Third, individuals use their causal knowledge-in the form of models of possibilities-to create explanations of what led to the inconsistency. A computer program implements the theory, and experimental results support each of its principles.