The Anger-Aggression Bidirectional-Causation (AABC) Model’s Relevance for Dyadic Violence, Revenge and Catharsis

Abstract

CitationKonečni VJ. The anger-aggression bidirectional-causation (AABC) model's relevance for dyadic violence, revenge and catharsis. Review I. ABSTRACTIn this article, the multifaceted theoretical underpinnings of V. J. Konečni's AngerAggression Bidirectional-Causation (AABC) model of interpersonal aggression are described, along with a large body of supporting data, mostly from laboratory experiments. The AABC model's utility in the clarification of several complex issues of long standing in various scholarly domains is discussed, such as: Catharsis and the "cathartic effect"; adaptationist accounts of revenge; and intrafamilial dyadic violence. IV. INTRODUCTIONIn a recent article on family violence, Finkenauer et al 1 invoked a host of distal factors (societal, structural, personality), but failed to address a frequent and potentially crucial proximal cause -the dyadic aggression sequence -of which the main components are provocation, anger, and retaliation. A detailed analysis of the aggression sequence, including the behavioral and physiological consequences of revenge, was, for perhaps understandable reasons, also missing in the recent adaptationist discussion of the revenge and forgiveness systems by McCullough, et al.2 Yet the culmination of numerous aggression-related exchanges between members of a dyad (consisting of a couple, parent and offspring, and other relations), repeated over protracted time periods, may be the particularly deleterious anger-free preemptive strikes. The ingredients of an aggression series, its specific content and form, may be at the core of intrafamilial violence and offer insights regarding the possibilities of treatment tailored for dyads.One purpose of this article is to review the evidence for the arguably key aspect of an aggression sequence, the "cathartic effect" (defined below), within Konečni's 3-5 Anger-Aggression Bidirectional-Causation or (AABC) model. The second purpose is to contribute to, and hopefully extend, the systemic and the adaptationist accounts of provocation, revenge, and their roles in the dynamics of dyadic intrafamilial violence.

The effects of written catharsis on anger relief

“…According to the social cognitive model of aggressive behavior, whether it is catharsis writing or hitting sandbags and other venting activities, it constitutes ruminative attention to anger events, which will amplify the anger experience and behavioral tendency of reactive attacks. The reason is that the thoughts, emotions, and behaviors related to the aggression are a combined network in memory, and the activation of hostile thinking can cause a combination of aggressive thoughts, emotions, and behavioral impulses, which are reinforced repeatedly until finally fixed in the aggressive pattern (Huesmann, 1988;Nolen-Hoeksema et al, 2008;Rusting & Nolen-Hoeksema, 1998). In addition, the results of aggressive behavior and subjective anger were inconsistent in this study, which is manifested in the results that relative to the goal catharsis and control conditions, general catharsis writing significantly increases the individual's level of aggressive behavior but not subjective anger.…”

Ascribing consciousness to artificial intelligence: human-AI interaction and its carry-over effects on human-human interaction

“…Luria’s proposal rests on the assumption that releasing negative emotions on social robots will relieve the user of that emotion. Catharsis literature, however, challenges this assumption: research suggests that catharsis of aggression does not reduce subsequent aggression, but can in fact increase it, providing evidence for practice effects ( Denzler and Förster, 2012 ; Konečni, 2016 ). Catharsis researchers posit that the catharsis of negative behavior and feelings requires subsequent training, learning, and self-development post-catharsis to lead to a reduction of the behavior.…”

“…Recently, people have speculated that artificial intelligence can also have consciousness (e.g., O'Regan, 2012;Yampolskiy, 2018;Chalmers, 2023). Whether that is possible, and how, is still debated (e.g., Koch, 2019). However, it is undeniable that children and adults attribute consciousness to AI through Theory of Mind attributions (Kahn et al, 2012;Broadbent et al, 2013;Eyssel and Pfundmair, 2015;Martini et al, 2016;Tanibe et al, 2017;Świderska and Küster, 2018;Heyselaar and Bosse, 2020;Taylor et al, 2020).…”