Members of a religious sect of robber-stranglers in northern India showed aggression when they strangled more than 2 million people between 1550 and 1850, claiming that they were doing it in the name of the goddess of death Kali, whom they worshipped. But people use the same term “aggression” to describe a persistent salesperson. Social psychologists draw a line between such behavior of a self-confident, energetic and active person and actions that result in harm to others or destruction. In the first case, we are talking about assertiveness, in the second – about aggression. Chapter 5 defined aggression as physical or verbal behavior aimed at harming someone. This definition does not include traffic accidents, actions performed by a dentist during treatment and causing pain to a patient, as well as accidental collisions of passers-by with each other on sidewalks and pedestrian paths. It includes assault, direct insults, and even spreading gossip. To assess the level of aggression of an individual, researchers usually suggest that the latter decide what harm he is capable of causing to another person, for example, what an electric shock intended for another should be. “The things we do to each other are the strangest, most unpredictable, and most incomprehensible of all the phenomena we are forced to co–exist with. There is nothing in nature more dangerous to humanity than humanity itself. Lewis Thomas, 1981” Two types of aggression can be summed up under the above definition of aggression. Animals are characterized by social aggression, which is characterized by bouts of rage, and silent aggression; this is what a predator demonstrates when sneaking up on its prey. Different parts of the brain are “responsible” for these types of aggression. As for humans, psychologists distinguish the following types of aggression – “hostile” and “instrumental”. The source of personal aggression is anger, and its ultimate goal is to cause harm. If harming is not an end in itself, but only a means to achieve some other goal, then we are dealing with synstrumental aggression. In 1990, political leaders justified the Gulf War by saying that their goal was not the barbaric extermination of 100,000 Iraqis, but the liberation of Kuwait. We can say that hostile aggression is “hot”, and instrumental aggression is “cold”. Most murders are the result of hostility. About half are the consequences of quarrels, the rest are the consequences of love triangles or fights started by people intoxicated with alcohol or drugs (Ash, 1999). Such murders are impulsive and occur as a result of emotional outbursts; this explains why the introduction of the death penalty has not led to a decrease in the number of such crimes, according to data from 110 countries (Costanzo, 1998; Wilkes, 1987). However, some murders are manifestations of instrumental aggression. Since 1919, Chicago gangsters have committed more than 1,000 murders, and most of them are the result of cold calculation. Aggression manifests itself in two forms: in the form of hostile aggression, which is generated by emotions such as anger and the intention to cause harm, and in the form of instrumental aggression, which is only a means to achieve some other goal. There are three general theories of aggression. The theory of instinctive aggression is traditionally associated with the names of Sigmund Freud and Konrad Lorenz, who believed that aggressive energy accumulates in a person like water accumulates in a dam. Although this theory has not been experimentally confirmed, an individual’s aggressiveness nevertheless depends on biological factors such as heredity, blood chemistry, and brain structure. According to another theory, anger and hostility are the consequences of frustration. In the presence of aggressive agents, such anger can provoke aggressive actions. Frustration is not a consequence of deprivation per se, but a consequence of the gap between expectations and real achievements. According to the theory of social learning, aggressive behavior is the result of learning. From our own experience and observing the successes of others, we sometimes become convinced that aggression can bring useful results. Social learning of aggression occurs under the influence of family, subculture, and the media. An aversive experience is not only frustration, but also discomfort, physical pain, and personal insults, both by action and word. Arousal, regardless of what exactly is its source – physical activity or sexual stimulation – can transform into anger under the influence of external circumstances. Television shows many examples of aggressive behavior. As for the visual perception of violent scenes, the conclusions of the authors of correlational and experimental studies coincide.: it 1) somewhat enhances aggressive behavior, especially in agitated individuals, and 2) makes viewers less sensitive to violence and distorts their perception of reality. Both of these conclusions correspond to those that were made based on the study of the influence of “hardcore porn”, which can increase male aggression against women and distort their understanding of a woman’s attitude to sexual violence. There are a lot of aggressive actions on the conscience of various groups. Group aggression is provoked by the same factors that provoke individual aggression. Due to the “blurring” of responsibility and the polarization of actions, groups react even more aggressively than individuals.

Contrary to what the theory of catharsis asserts, frequent aggression enhances rather than weakens its subsequent manifestations. The approach based on social learning suggests that aggression can be controlled if the factors contributing to it are neutralized – aversive stimulation is weakened, patterns of non-aggressive behavior are promoted and rewarded for it and people are encouraged to take actions incompatible with aggression. Source: Myers D. “Social Psychology” Photo: in-w.ru