Back to Symposium Presentations Summary
S-8.-CROSS-CULTURAL
APPROACHES TO AGGRESSION RESEARCH
Organizers:
Ramirez,
J. Martin
University Complutense Madrid, Spain.
Archer,
John
University of Central Lancashire, UK
Symposium
Abstract
After
a brief report of the conclusions contributed by a pre-conference meeting (the
15th International Colloquium on the Brain and Aggression), which focused
specially on the different methods used in cross-cultural research on human
aggression, this symposium deal s mainly with the following topics: 1)
limitations in the measuring instruments, and analysis of those most suited to
particular contexts, based on serious studies of each culture; 2) sex/gender
differences in physical aggression, with: a) a meta-analysis of 82 studies in
different cultures; b) an ethological study of Mongolian children in European
Russia; and c) a socio-political approach to 'femaleness' stereotypes in
Southern Africa; 3) moral
justification of aggression: a) instrumental beliefs as a way of getting what
one wants or deserves, in USA and France; and b) aggressive acts of different
quality and intensity in different social circumstances, in Findland, Poland,
Spain, USA, Iran, Japan and Southafrica; 4) different cultural mechanisms of
preventing aggression, from an anthropological prospective.
S-8.1.-A
CROSS-CULTURAL PERSPECTIVE ON SEX DIFFERENCES IN AGGRESSION BETWEEN HETEROSEXUAL
PARTNERS
Archer,
J.
University of Central Lancashire, UK.
A
recent meta-analyic review of sex differences in physical aggression to
heterosexual partners, and its physical consequences (Archer, 2000) is outlined,
and discussed in terms of the limitations of its data base. The overall findings
were that women were slightly more likely (d = -.05) than men to use one or more
act of physical aggression, and to use such acts more frequently. Men were more
likely (d = .15) to inflict an injury, and overall 62 per cent of those injured
by a partner were women. These findings partially support previous claims that
different methods of measurement produce conflicting results, but there was also
evidence that the sample was an important moderator of effect size. This finding
is particularly noteworthy because 72 of the 82 studies on which the first
conclusion was based were from the US, and another seven from the UK or Canada.
The studies were also biased towards those involving high school or college
dating couples (N = 42). Similarly, most of the 17 studies yielding injury data
were from the US, and seven involved students in dating relationships. Thus the
conclusions are considerably limited by the available data base, which is biased
towards young dating samples in the US. Cross-cultural surveys of the incidence
of marital violence tend to concentrate on the more serious forms of violent
acts, and tend to be restricted to female victimization. The very few studies of
community samples (in Korea, Nigeria, Japan and India) have all found effect
sizes in the male direction for acts of physical aggression, which contrast with
a more symmetrical pattern in US community samples. Cross-cultural variations
are discussed in terms of two conflicting norms about physical aggression to
partners that operate to different degrees in different cultures. The
feasibility of collecting data from different cultures using standardised
measures is discussed.
S-8.2.-AGGRESSION
AND SOCIAL EQUILIBRIUM IN THE GROUP OF KALMYK PRIMARY SCHOOL CHILDREN
Butovskaya
M.L. and Vorotnokova O.S.
Laboratory of Evolutionary Anthropology, Division of Cultural Anthropology,
Russian State University for the Humanities,
Moscow, Russia.
The
nature of gender differences in aggression is one of the most disputable
problems in research on aggression. It is know that differences between sexed
are expressed very yearly and at the of 2-2,5 boys are already different in some
patterns compared to girls. Socialization for and counter aggression in
different cultures may resulted in different rates of violence (Fry, 1988). The
aim of this study is to analyse the structure of aggressive behaviour in the
group of 6-7 year old primary school children from one of the urban national
schools in Kalmykia (Butovskaya, Guchinova 1998). Kalmyks are Mongolian people
residing in the European part of Russia, nomadic in the past, Buddhists by
religion. The group of 20 (11 boys and 9 girls) were observed daily in
April-Ma,1996. Data were collected by videotyping. Ethological method of focal
child observations was used (12 samples of 5 minutes duration for each child).
All data were collected during free play sessions with out any kind of
interventions from the side of adults. Significant gender differences were found
for contact aggression (actors: boys 22,09 8,54, girls 7,11 3,22, p<0,05;
recipients: boys 19,64 8,38, girls 10,11 7,15, p<0,05). Boys initiated most
aggressive interactions, and boys were most probable objects of aggressive
attacks. Frequencies of non-contact aggression were of comparable rate for
actors, though girls were significantly less frequent recipients in this case
either (boys 11,00 5,29, girls 5,67 2,65, p<0,05). Matrix permutation tests
based on 1000 permutations were applied to demonstrate the high level of
positive correlation between levels of contact aggression and friendly contacts,
both initiated and received (Kendel, =0,259, p<0,001 and =0,306, p<0,001
respectively). No gender differences were found in the level of post-conflict
peacemaking. Post-conflict reunion tendency in this group were 70%, that is
higher, than in Rissian or US group of children studied by the same method
earlier (Verbeek, 1997; Butovskaya, Kozintsev 1999). This study was supported by
RFBR,#99-06-80346 & RFHR, #96-01-00032.
S-8.3.-DIRECT
AND INDIRECT AGGRESSION IN WOMEN: A COMPARISON BETWEEN SOUTH AFRICA AND SPAIN
Theron,
W.H., Matthee, D.D. and Ramirez*, J.M.
Department of Psychology, University of Stellenbosch,
South Africa. *University Complutense of Madrid, Spain
The
proposed comparative study examines direct and indirect aggression as expressed
by 148 South African and 174 Spanish female university students. As part of a
collaborative project on attitudes and beliefs about aggression in Spanish and
South African populations, this study provides the prospect of an enhanced
cross-cultural understanding of aggression, as well as the potentiality of a
clearer delineation of aggression in the South African context. Following recent
trends in the study of female aggression, this investigation involves only
female respondents, in order to avoid the construction of female aggression as a
counterpart of male aggression and the construction of "femaleness" as
a homogenous category. The results will be discussed from a socio-political
stance, with consideration of women's position in dominant social discourses of
aggression. Women's choice of aggressive strategy has traditionally been limited
by social norms and their (dis)position as the so-called weaker sex, thus
requiring them to resort to covert strategies, such as indirect aggression.
Given the changes in socio-political structures, particularly in South Africa
where the empowerment of women has become an incisive issue, the question is
whether this will expand the availability of overt (or direct) aggressive
strategies to women. A further issue that will be taken into account, is that of
gender stereotyping. Although the concept of indirect aggression has been
employed in refuting the myth of the non-aggressive female, it runs the risk of
reifying another myth, namely that of the wily, manipulative female. In
conclusion, this investigation wishes to contribute towards a clarification of
the role of culture in the study of female aggression.
S-8.4.-SOCIAL
REPRESENTATIONS AND AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOUR: CULTURAL OR CROSS-CULTURAL
PERSPECTIVES?
Theron,
W.H. and Painter, D.W.
Department of Psychology, University of Stellenbosch, South Africa.
*Department of Psychology,Rhodes University, South Africa.
The
cross-cultural study of aggression can contribute to South Africa's struggle
with violence, but it can also be confounding. The question should always be
asked: is culture sufficiently conceptualised in a given cross-cultural study of
aggression, and argues that the value of this theoretical model is curbed by
psychology's methodological preoccupations. Restricting the operationalisation
of social representations to a standardised questionnaire (such as the EXPAGG)
reduces the construct in two ways relevant to the eventual understanding of
culture. First, it reduces social representations to individual beliefs about
aggression. Second, these beliefs are predetermined by the questionnaire and not
provided by the people studied. In this way culture is effectively taken out of
the equation: these restrictions make it impossible to address culture as a
shared system of meanings (representations) negotiated between people in a given
context. Along with this, culture is also rendered transparent in another way,
namely by neglecting any reflection on the social representations of aggression
held by psychology as a discipline and informing the construction of instruments
like the EXPAGG. In the light of this critique it is argued that any attempt to
compare across cultures should be built upon a serious study of culture - at
least in illustration of how aggression is represented as an object of
psychology by research subjects and their researchers alike. In a social
representations mould this would mean attending to the actual construction and
use of ideas and theories about aggression in these contexts. The intended
outcome of this critique is not discrediting of cross-cultural work; rather, it
is an attempt to suggest ways that will yield even richer results when
comparisons across cultures are made. It may also provide the groundwork for the
construction of measuring instruments more suited to a particular (specifically
South African) context.
S-8.5.-SOCIAL
REPRESENTATIONS OF AGGRESSION IN US AND FRANCE
Richardson,
D.S., Huguet*, P. and Schwartz, D.
Department of Psychology, Florida Atlantic University, Florida, USA. *Université
Blaise Pascal. FALTA
PAIS
This
study examined instrumental beliefs about and experiences with aggression among
university students from the United States and France. An instrumental view of
aggression is associated with considering harming others as a means of gaining
control or power and of maintaining oneís self-esteem and reputation (Campbell,
1993). Thus the instrumental view suggests that aggression might be an
acceptable way of getting what one wants or deserves. We expected that the
relatively violent social context in the United States would be related to more
instrumental beliefs about aggression, more experience with aggression, and more
organized beliefs about aggression among students from that country. University
students from the United States (n=146) and from France (n=97) indicated the
extent to which they agreed with 20 instrumental statements derived from
Campbellís EXPAGG scale. They also answered a series of questions about their
direct and indirect experience with aggression (i.e., as aggressor, victim,
witness). As expected, students from the United States reported more experience
as aggressors, victims, and witnesses of aggression, and they were more likely
to indicate that they were answering the questions with reference to recent
personal experience with aggression. They also had a more organized concept of
instrumental aggression, as reflected in considerably higher internal
consistency (alphas = .91 vs. .63) among their responses. However, students from
the United States and those from France did not differ in their overall score on
the scale of instrumental beliefs about aggression. Upon closer examination and
further analysis, we discovered that this absence of a difference was due to
French students having more instrumental views on items that associated
aggression with control of self and other, and US students having more
instrumental views on items that dealt with public displays of aggression. That
is, French students were more likely to consider aggression as a means of
controlling other people whereas US students were more likely to value public
displays of aggressive behavior. In sum, we found evidence that the relatively
violent social context in the United States might be related to more experience
with aggression and more organized ideas about such behavior. However, extent to
which individuals accept beliefs about aggression depends on the particular
purpose that aggression might serve.
S-8.6.-DIFFERENCES
AND SIMILARITIES IN MORAL APPROVAL OF AGGRESSIVE ACTS (A CROSS-NATIONAL STUDY)
Ramirez,
J.M., Lagerspetz*, K., Fraçzek**, A., Fujihara***,
T., Musazahdeh****, Z. and
Theron*****, W.H.
University Complutense of Madrid,
Spain. * University of Turku, Finland. ** University of Warsaw, Poland. ***
Kwansei Gakuin University, Japan. **** University
Complutense of Madrid,
Spain-Iran. ***** Universiteit van Stellenbosch, Southafrica.
Along
the last two decades studies on
moral approval of aggressive acts, that follow the original work of
Kirsti Lagerspetz in Finland (Lagerspetz and Westman, 1980), were
conducted in several countries over the world ( Poland: Fraczek,1985; Fraczek,
Ramirez, and Torchalska, 1987; Spain: Ramirez,1991,1993; Japan: Ramirez and
Fujihara, 1997; Japan, USA and Spain: Fujihara, Kohyama, Andreu and Ramirez,
1999; Iran: Musazahdeh, 1999; Southafrica: Theron, in preparation). In the studies
completed in all mentioned countries a
nationally adapted version of the Lagerspetz and Westman
questionnaire applied to university students was used to collect data.
The moral judgement of several aggressive acts of different quality and
intensity have been analyzed in the context of different social circumstances
that may justify them. Although the realized studies are not fully comparative
from a methodological point of view (e.g. different samples, different time of
collecting data, different number of alternatives, etc), comparison of patterns
of moral approval of aggressive acts characteristic for national sample leads to
cognitively interesting conclusions. In
all countries: more drastic forms of aggressive acts (e.g. killing, torture) are
less accepted, while common and not dangerous forms of
such behavior (e.g. hindering, shouting) are relatively more accepted.
Aggressive acts that are socially justified (e.g. in order to protect others, in
self defense) are clearly more accepted that ones with no such justification
(e.g. as an expression of emotions, as a result of
communication difficulties).
However, both in relation to
seriousness as well as to the kind of justification of manifested
aggression there are striking differences among studied countries. Irony is
considered in Poland, Spain, USA as relatively less harmful behavior yet, is
treated as quite serious offense in Finland, Japan and Iran. Aggressive behavior
as a means of punishment has very low acceptance
in Finland, Poland, Spain and USA while relatively high in Japan and
Iran. Thus, it can be concluded
that patterns of
moral approval of various forms of aggressive acts
are only to some extent common in contemporary world, while differences
among countries in these attitudes are culturally bounded. Besides it, a study
done in Finland with people of several professional backgrounds other than
university students (Lagerspetz, Björkqvist, Björkqvist & Lundman,1988)
showed that different groups of people within the same country may have rather
differing attitudes toward aggression.
Fry,
D.P.
Äbo Akademi University, Finland and
University of Arizona, USA
The
prevention of aggression has received scant attention within anthropology. This
paper draws on fieldwork conducted in Finland and among Mexican Zapotecs as well
as on descriptions of conflict found in the worldwide ethnographic literature to
discuss certain recurring preventive measures. It is noted that prevention has
different levels: 1) prevention of aggression in the first place and 2),
following aggression, the prevention of a) escalation among the original actors,
and/or b) the spread of aggression to other individuals. Additionally, the
anthropological descriptions suggest that sometimes prevention of aggression
largely reflects individual decisions and actions, although in other contexts
prevention of aggression entails various group-level phenomena. In fact,
prevention mechanisms might be viewed as running along a continuum from the
individual to the group level. Cross-cultural sources illustrate cultural
variations and also recurring patterns. Specifically, aggression is prevented
via diverse psychocultural mechanisms such as internalization of self-restraint
towards expressing anger, self-restraint towards expressing aggression,
socialized sensitivity toward the emotional state and needs of other persons,
socially institutionalized systems of sharing and reciprocal cooperation, the
use of apology and the showing of remorse, the activities of third parties (such
as ìfriendly peacemakers,î mediators, arbitrators, and so on) to separate
combatants and/or to help them settle a dispute without (further) aggression. It
is concluded that prevention activities are probably much more prevalent than
might be indicated by the dearth of anthropological studies that focus on this
topic. In closing, brief consideration is given to possible benefits of
prevention activities for the individual(s) engaged in such actions.