a) Describe TWO social psychological theories of Aggression: (12 marks)

The social learning theory is based on the work of Bandura et al. They carried out the
famous bobo doll experiment. This showed that children would imitate the actions of
an aggressive model if the model being observed is rewarded for his/her aggressive
behaviour. Children learn the aggressive behaviour by observing a model, and are
then motivated to repeat the observed acts because they associate with reward.
Bandura also believed that children must be able to form an internal representation. If
they find themselves in the same (or similar) situation in the future, they will associate
this with an aggressive response, and so recreate the behaviour they have previously
observed. If when they use this aggressive behaviour they are successful in getting
what they want, they are then more likely to act aggressively in the future, and believe
that aggression in that situation is the right response for them.

Bandura tried to explain aggression in terms of instinctual drives (meaning we may be

programmed to be aggressive to help survival in some instances). Aggression can also
be a product of learning, which can occur via learning through direct experience or by
observing other around us. A ‘direct experience’ is derived from Skinner’s operant
conditioning. This occurs whereby aggressive acts can bring rewards that can lead to
reinforcement so that the aggressive behaviour is repeated in the future. ‘Learning by
vicarious experience’ is a form of observational learning. The child might deem a
particular aggressive behaviour is acceptable because their role model has
demonstrated it, and imitates it.

Furthermore, the social learning theory is also linked with the media. The media is a
powerful tool that children are exposed to and they might imitate behaviour that they
see. It has been stated that children use ‘television models’ as a source of ‘scripts’ that
act as a guide for their own behaviour.

The second theory is de-individuation. This claims that people will act more
aggressively when they are anonymous (e.g. wearing a uniform). When people are
alone, their behaviour is more obvious to others and they are more easily
recognisable. This means they are less likely to act aggressively because society
frowns on aggressive behaviour, and if they acted like that, they would be punished
and then feel guilty for what they had done. However, if they are in a large crowd
they are less likely to feel inhibited by the threat of recognition, and so are more likely
to behave in an uncivilised, anti-social manner.

There has been research into de-individuation such as Watson investigated 23

different cultures. Those warriors who depersonalised themselves with face paint and
masks were significantly more likely than those with exposed faces to kill, torture or
mutilate captured enemies. Diener et al observed 1300 ‘trick-or-treating’ American
children one Halloween night. When the children were in large groups and
anonymous due to wearing a costume (which prevented identification), they were
more likely to steal money and sweets.
b) Evaluate ONE of the social psychological theories of Aggression mentioned in
part (a): (12 marks)

One of the psychological theories of aggression is the social learning theory, and it
includes several criticisms such as research conducted by Diener has contradicted the
idea that de-individuation always leads to aggressive behaviour being shown. He
found that de-individuation within crowd behaviour can sometimes lead to an increase
in pro-social and helping behaviour. This has been observed in religious rallies and
clear up operations after natural disasters. Furthermore, crowd behaviour can
sometimes be positive and non-aggressive, e.g. a pop concert which is a positive
experience and usually non-violent.

Research has often failed to distinguish between the effects of anonymity of those
who are victims (e.g. a faceless person who is attacked) and the anonymity of the
faceless aggressors (e.g. the mob who are vandalising cars & who are all wearing
masks). Which of these factors is more important for de-individuation to work
efficiently is not clear.

Manstead has commented that being anonymous in most crowd situations does not
reflect real life situations of crowds, as some people are very confident when in a
crowd, and they do not care whether they are anonymous or not (they will still act
aggressively).

De-individuation theory has stated that when we are in a group or crowd, our social
norms and values are undermined. However, contradictory research findings have
suggested that when in a group or crowd, there are strong norms and values that
operate that will have an impact on every individual. Usually this is in the form of
whereby all members must act in a certain way in a group in order to be accepted.

The local group norm are not always anti social or aggressive, some groups might not
agree with acting in an anti social and aggressive manner and one group member
might become an outcast if they did behave in such a way.

Another criticism includes that biological theorists would state that de-individuation
will not be displayed by all groups of people and it depends on personality and
individual differences. For instance, a group of males might be more aggressive rather
than a group of females, due to the factors of the male testosterone. Therefore,
aggression might have nothing to do with de-individuation but linked with the
biological theories.

On the other hand, de-individuation can be supported by the idea of British football
hooliganism, whereby large crowds of male fans can form a large group and begin to
act aggressively; this would agree with the faceless crowd acting in an anti social
way. Marsh conducted research on football hooliganism and found that de-
individuation does seem to operate, but on different levels. Often the crowd of
hooligans are made up of not just one group, but several different groups that have
merged over the course of the day.