Punishment of irritable aggression

Follick, Michael J.; Knutson, John F.

doi:10.1002/1098-2337(1978)4:1<1::aid-ab2480040102>3.0.co;2-n

Cited by 10 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 19 publications

(21 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some have noted that aggression is by no means an inevitable reaction to aversive stimulation (e.g., Bandura, 1973). Whether aggression is exhibited or not seems to depend importantly on such factors as the possibility of escape from the nox-ious stimulus (Azrin, Hutchinson, & Hake, 1966;Williams, 1982), the availability of a suitable target (Berkowitz, 1964(Berkowitz, , 1965, the distance to the target (Bandura, 1973), the afflicted animal's relationship to its potential victim (Ader, 1975), and especially by the animal's past learning history (Baenninger & Ulm, 1969;Follick & Knutson, 1978;Hutchinson, 1973), In other words, given all of these modifying factors, some writers appear to suggest that the phenomenon of aversively stimulated aggression is not especially significant. But let us look at a few of these matters and see what the research actually says about them.…”

Section: Experiments With Animalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Relationships with others affect the open display of aggression at least partly because they influence the chances that an attack will be punished or rewarded. As Follick and Knutson (1978) have shown, animals who have been consistently punished for aggression are not apt to strike at an available victim when they are subjected to electric shocks. On the other hand, the direct reinforcement of the aggressive reaction heightens the strength of the aversively stimulated attacks (Hutchinson, 1973).…”

Section: Experiments With Animalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Aversively stimulated aggression: Some parallels and differences in research with animals and humans.

Berkowitz¹

1983

American Psychologist

156

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On the basis of a review of research with animals and humans, it is argued that a broad range of aversive conditions evoke both flight and fight inclinations. Various factors determine the relative strengths of these dispositions so that the instigation to aggression is not always apparent in overt behavior. Further, it is also maintained that the aversively stimulated aggressive inclination in animals and humans is not only directed toward the diminution of the noxious stimulation, although negative reinforcement of the aggressive reaction can be an important factor in many instances. Some influences, such as classical conditioning, are common to animals and humans, but thought processes are probably more important in affecting human reactions to aversive events. The role of these thought processes is discussed, and it is suggested that Schachter's cognitive theory of emotions, with its emphasis on the self-labeling of feelings, does not apply to aversively stimulated aggression. A neoassociationistic network conception of emotions is favored as an alternative. It is also proposed that the thoughts and memories influencing the emotional experience and behavior can operate at various times in the sequence. The effect of learned helplessness is discussed in connection with this type of aggression. The thesis is also extended to the hostile tendencies often displayed by depressives, and it is suggested that the pain and suffering experienced by depressives contribute to their disposition to aggression.

show abstract

Section: Experiments With Animalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Experiments With Animalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aversively stimulated aggression: Some parallels and differences in research with animals and humans.

Berkowitz¹

1983

American Psychologist

156

118

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The chamber for training subjects was identical t o the one described by Follick and Knutson [1978] for use with restrained targets. The target used during the training of subjects was restrained using the method described by Follick and Knutson [1978]. A leather and Velcro harness held the target t o an aluminum panel that was secured in a corner of the training chamber.…”

Section: Experiments 1 Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Escalation of irritable aggression: Control by consequences and antecedents

1980

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Two experiments demonstrated that rats could be trained in a negative reinforcement paradigm to display a shock‐induced aggressive response on the first shock presented. Later, rats that had been submitted to the negative reinforcement training procedure displayed more shock‐induced aggression than did control groups during a test session that was situationally different from the one used during training. A third experiment demonstrated that noxious antecedent events, if presented with sufficient rapidity, can combine to increase the probability of aggressive behavior. The three experiments together suggest that aversive antecedents and reinforcement contingencies could be involved in the escalation of irritable aggression.

show abstract

Family interaction: A process model of deviancy training

1984

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A model was presented describing the reciprocal influence of disruptions in parent discipline practices on irritable exchanges between the target child and other family members. Disrupted parent discipline and irritable microsocial exchanges within the family were hypothesized to provide a basic training for aggression that generalizes to other settings such that the child is identified by peers, teachers, and parents as physically aggressive. Physical fighting was thought to lead to rejection by the normal peer group, which was hypothesized to feed back to further exacerbate fighting. Multilevel assessment including interview, questionnaires, laboratory studies, and home observations were carried out with the families of 91 preadolescent and adolescent boys. Nine indicators from the assessment battery were used to define the constructs Inept Parental Discipline, Negative Microsocial Exchanges, Physical Fighting, and Poor Peer Relations. Structural equations (LISREL VI) were used to describe the relations among the constructs. The t values for the path coefficients were significant. A chi‐square analysis showed an acceptable fit between the model and the empirical findings. The findings were interpreted as being consistent with the hypothesis that under certain circumstances, family interaction may serve as basic training for aggression. In the present study, interactions with siblings in the home seemed to serve a pivotal role.

show abstract

Punishment of irritable aggression

Cited by 10 publications

References 19 publications

Aversively stimulated aggression: Some parallels and differences in research with animals and humans.

Aversively stimulated aggression: Some parallels and differences in research with animals and humans.

Escalation of irritable aggression: Control by consequences and antecedents

Family interaction: A process model of deviancy training

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About