| Abstract: | A questionnaire was used to investigate 1) the approval of various kinds of aggressive behaviour under different specified circumstances and 2) the arousal of feelings of aggression in imagined situations. In addition, an attitude test was presented which discriminated between the two highest of Kohlberg's levels of moral reasoning [1969]. The subjects were a very varied group of 83 adults (aged 17–68 years) from municipal evening courses in Finland. Aggression was most approved when it was given altruistic purpose. Self-defense was rated as the second highest justification for aggression. Aggression was found least legitimate when the reasons were emotional (drunk, rage). The justification of some types of aggressive behaviour were dependent on the conditions under which they occurred, whereas others appeared independent. Killing and torture were the most disapproved kinds of aggressive behaviour. Another's attack was the most powerful instigator of feelings of aggression, whereas frustration seemed relatively unimportant. Females approved of emotional expressions of aggression to a greater extent than did males. The moral test did not correlate with approval of aggression in general, but a couple of more specific predictions about the effects of level of moral reasoning on attitudes to socially sanctioned forms of aggression were tentatively confirmed. |
