The relationship between hostile attribution bias and aggression and the mediating effect of anger rumination

Adolescents' involvement in cyberbullying has been a growing public health concern for some time. Cybervictimization and cyberaggression are two phenomena that previous research has often shown to be associated. However, longitudinal research into these associations and also into potential risk factors for these phenomena is less common. Anger rumination is a proven risk factor for aggressive behavior, but the relationship between anger rumination and victimization is not clear. The present longitudinal study investigated the associations between cybervictimization, anger rumination and cyberbullying in a sample of 3017 adolescents (MW1 = 13.15; SD = 1.09; 49% girls) from 7th to 9th grade. The European Cyberbullying Intervention Project Questionnaire and the Anger Rumination Scale were administered in four waves with 6 months intervals over a total period of 18 months. The associations between the variables were analyzed with a cross‐lagged model. We found that: cybervictimization predicted anger rumination and cyberaggression; anger rumination was associated with later increases in both cybervictimization and cyberaggression: but involvement in cyberaggression predicted neither subsequent involvement in cybervictimization, nor in anger rumination. In addition, cybervictimization was found to mediate the association between anger rumination and cyberaggression. This study expands the understanding of the factors associated with cybervictimization and cyberaggression, and its results indicate that intervention programs should focus on boosting self‐control to decrease impulsive behavior and protocols to prevent and intervene in cyberbullying.

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Longitudinal associations between cybervictimization, anger rumination, and cyberaggression

Camacho

Ortega-Ruíz

Romera

2021

“…In sum, previous research has demonstrated the association between vulnerability and hostile intent attributions (e.g., MacLeod, Rutherford, Campbell, Ebsworthy, & Holker, 2002) and hostile intent attributions and aggression (e.g., Orobio de Castro et al, 2002; Quan et al, 2019). However, they did not show whether hostile intent attributions play a role in the relationship between vulnerability and aggression following sexual objectification.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 70%

Sexual objectification increases retaliatory aggression

Poon

Jiang

2020

Two experiments were conducted to investigate whether sexual objectification increases retaliatory aggression serially through increased vulnerability and hostile intent attributions. Female participants were first exposed to the sexual objectification manipulation by receiving compliments from an online male partner (Experiment 1) or imagining a workplace objectification experience (Experiment 2). Afterward, their vulnerability and hostile intent attributions were assessed. Finally, they were given an opportunity to behave aggressively toward the source of objectification. The results of both experiments indicated that, compared with their counterparts in the control conditions, participants in the sexual objectification condition reported higher levels of vulnerability, hostile intent attributions, and aggression. Moreover, vulnerability and hostile intent attributions serially mediated the effect of sexual objectification on aggression. These findings highlight the critical influence of vulnerability and hostile intent attributions in understanding how sexual objectification increases aggression. K E Y W O R D S aggression, antisocial behavior, hostile intent attributions, sexual objectification, vulnerability

“…The RPQ contained 12 items measuring proactive aggression (e.g., “Had fights with others to show who was on top”), and 11 items on reactive aggression (e.g., “Reacted angrily when provoked by others”). The reliability and validity of the Chinese versions of the scale are adequate (Quan et al, 2019; Tuvblad, Dhamija, Berntsen, Raine, & Liu, 2016; Zhang, Jia, Chen, & Zhang, 2014). Cronbach's α in the current sample at Time 1 was .83 (Reactive Scale) and .88 (Proactive Scale), and it was .81 (Reactive Scale) and .88 (Proactive Scale) at Time 2.…”

Section: Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

The longitudinal relationship between angry rumination and reactive–proactive aggression and the moderation effect of consideration of future consequences‐immediate

Wang

Cao

Qin

et al. 2020

Self Cite

The idea that influential factors for two subtypes of aggression (reactive and proactive aggression) should be different is popular, but the common influential factors have not been examined. Such an examination could help understand the influential factors of aggression from the perspective of multiple motivations affecting the development of aggressive motivations over time. The present study argued that angry rumination would be a common influential factor for both reactive and proactive aggression. In addition, consideration of future consequences (CFC) may moderate the longitudinal effect of angry rumination on proactive aggression. Two studies were conducted to test these hypotheses. In Study 1, a cross-lagged analysis with a 6-month interval was employed. A total of 505 undergraduate students (46% males) completed the questionnaires twice. Results indicated that after a 6-month period, angry rumination predicted reactive aggression but not proactive aggression. Furthermore, reactive aggression predicted angry rumination over time. In Study 2, a moderation analysis was performed with another 437 participants (130 males). The results partly supported our hypotheses, indicating that CFC-immediate (CFC-I) moderated the longitudinal effect of angry rumination on proactive aggression. The present results extended prior research regarding the predictors of proactive and reactive aggression and may contribute to a greater understanding of the development of aggressive motivation. In addition, our research suggested that high CFC-I may be an important factor for the motivation change from reactive aggression to proactive aggression.