Zugl.: Krefeld, Hochsch. Niederrhein, Abt. Mönchengladbach, Diplomarbeit, 2005

Hochsch. Niederrhein, Abt. Mönchengladbach, Diplomarbeit--Krefeld, 2005. / Literaturverz. S. 107 - 108.

No description available.

No description available.

Research indicates that relational aggression, social aggression, and indirect aggression are important predictors and outcomes of social development (Archer & Coyne, 2005). Socially, indirectly, and relationally aggressive behaviors are utilized in order to harm an individual's social status, relationships, and/or social resources (Archer, & Coyne, 2005), but scholars disagree about the extent of the similarities and differences between these subtypes. Previous efforts to understand the distinction between these subtypes of aggression have been limited by how these behaviors have been operationalized and studied. The primary aim of the current study was to develop a self-report measure of these aggressive behaviors for emerging adults by utilizing factor analytic techniques to examine existing and newly created items. A series of five stages was used to code all items into existing theoretical categories of behavior (e.g., social aggression), establish the factor structure of the items, select the best items to measure each factor, test measurement invariance across subgroups (e.g., men and women), ensure strong psychometric properties, and relate the final factor structure to relevant developmental correlates (e.g., depressive symptoms). Three independent samples of emerging adults aged 18 - 29 years (49.51% - 52.33% women; Mage= 25.71 - 26.26) were recruited online through Amazon's Mechanical Turk (sample 1 N = 299; sample 2 N = 299; sample 3 N = 119). Indirect, social, and relational aggression items were selected and adapted from existing self-report measures of these constructs for adults and several new items were created from qualitative interviews with emerging adults. Through a rigorous theoretical, methodological, and statistical approach, the Relational/Social Aggression in Adulthood Measure (RSAAM) was developed. The final factor structure consisted of three factors: Ignoring, Gossip, and Relational Manipulation. The three factors demonstrated measurement invariance across gender and educational groups and strong internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Purely relationally manipulative behaviors were distinct from other, related behaviors (i.e., ignoring, gossip) and were also differentially related to developmental correlates. Findings suggest that it may be advantageous for researchers to move beyond broad theoretical definitions of relational and social aggression and instead focus on the specific aggressive behaviors being enacted.

Research indicates that relational aggression, social aggression, and indirect aggression are important predictors and outcomes of social development (Archer & Coyne, 2005). Socially, indirectly, and relationally aggressive behaviors are utilized in order to harm an individual’s social status, relationships, and/or social resources (Archer, & Coyne, 2005), but scholars disagree about the extent of the similarities and differences between these subtypes. Previous efforts to understand the distinction between these subtypes of aggression have been limited by how these behaviors have been operationalized and studied. The primary aim of the current study was to develop a self-report measure of these aggressive behaviors for emerging adults by utilizing factor analytic techniques to examine existing and newly created items. A series of five stages was used to code all items into existing theoretical categories of behavior (e.g., social aggression), establish the factor structure of the items, select the best items to measure each factor, test measurement invariance across subgroups (e.g., men and women), ensure strong psychometric properties, and relate the final factor structure to relevant developmental correlates (e.g., depressive symptoms). Three independent samples of emerging adults aged 18 – 29 years (49.51% –52.33% women; Mage= 25.71 - 26.26) were recruited online through Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (sample 1 N = 299; sample 2 N = 299; sample 3 N = 119). Indirect, social, and relational aggression items were selected and adapted from existing self-report measures of these constructs for adults and several new items were created from qualitative interviews with emerging adults. Through a rigorous theoretical, methodological, and statistical approach, the Relational/Social Aggression in Adulthood Measure (RSAAM) was developed. The final factor structure consisted of three factors: Ignoring, Gossip, and Relational Manipulation. The three factors demonstrated measurement invariance across gender and educational groups and strong internal consistency and test-retest reliability. Purely relationally manipulative behaviors were distinct from other, related behaviors (i.e., ignoring, gossip) and were also differentially related to developmental correlates. Findings suggest that it may be advantageous for researchers to move beyond broad theoretical definitions of relational and social aggression and instead focus on the specific aggressive behaviors being enacted.

The current study explored the nuanced associations between components of executive functioning (EF) and subtypes of aggression, using a latent variable approach. Participants were racially diverse undergraduate students who completed a self-report of reactive (RA) and proactive aggression (PA), and traditional neuropsychological tasks of EF. The appropriateness of using a nested bifactor model of EF was confirmed, and this bifactor model of EF was used to examine the specific associations between components of EF and RA and PA. Results revealed components of EF are differentially associated with RA and PA, such that impulsive, provoked aggression is associated with lower levels of goal-oriented inhibition and higher levels of flexibility, whereas planned, goal-oriented aggression is associated with higher levels of working memory. Findings from the current study underscore the importance of considering the multidimensional nature of EF as well as aggression when examining their associations with external constructs of interest.

Research has linked narcissism to a tendency for becoming aggressive based on the perspective that narcissistic people are more prone to ego-threats and more prone to responding defensively to those ego-threats. Also, recent research has been examining the propensity for aggression to escalate as a means to justify prior aggression. This study examined the relationship between narcissism and escalation in aggression and possible mediators of increased aggression. If highly narcissistic individuals are more vulnerable to ego-threats and in turn justify their actions more, then their aggression might escalate more. To examine this, sixty-seven subjects who completed the Narcissistic Personality Inventory prior to the laboratory session were assigned to two groups using a bug-extermination method (though no bugs were actually killed) developed by Martens and his colleagues (in press). They either killed one or five bugs initially and then conducted a subsequent bug-killing task in which they controlled the number of bugs they killed. As predicted, participants who killed five bugs initially killed more bugs during the subsequent bug-extermination task than those who killed only one bug initially. Contrary to predictions, no effects of or interactions of narcissism with the initial bug-killing manipulation emerged. We did find, however, that a subtype of narcissism, that is superiority, affected the self-paced 20 seconds bug-killing behaviour. The limitations, further directions, and implications of this study are discussed.

Preventing an individual from obtaining a goal may have three effects on him. It may frustrate him, violate an expectancy of goal attainment, and eliminate his freedom to obtain the goal. Three theories, each focusing on a different aspect of the thwarting, offer the hypothesis that aggression is likely to follow thwarting. Frustration and aggression theory predicts that simple frustration will instigate aggression; expectancy theory predicts that the violation of an expectancy resulting from a thwarting will instigate aggression; reactance theory hypothesizes that the elimination of behavioral freedom, which results in the arousal of reactance, may instigate aggressive responses. The present study was performed to test the hypotheses on aggression offered by these three theories. Subjects were told that there were three incentives being offered for participating in the experiment. Some subjects were told that an experimental assistant would assign them an incentive, others were told that they would receive the incentive they had rated most attractive on a pre-measure, and a third group of subjects was informed that they would have their choice of the incentives. The experimental assistant then assigned subjects either the most, second most or least attractive incentive. Subjects' ratings of the assistant served as the measure of aggression. The results supported reactance theory in that when the assignment of incentives by the assistant eliminated subjects' freedom of choice they ex- pressed more aggression than when the assignment did not eliminate the behavioral freedom. Further, when the assignment eliminated freedom, the less attractive the assigned incentive, the greater was the resulting aggression. Some support was found for the hypothesis that a violation of expectancy will result in aggression. When subjects expected to obtain the most attractive incentive and were assigned the least attractive item, they were more aggressive than when they held the same expectancy and received the second most attractive item. However, when their expectancy was violated by receiving the second most attractive incentive, they were not more aggressive than subjects who did not have their expectancy violated. There was no support for the hypothesis that simple frustration is a sufficient condition to instigate aggression. From the results indicating that, regardless of the incentive assigned the subject, there was more aggression exhibited when this assignment eliminated freedom than when the assignment resulted only in a violated expectancy or simple frustration, the speculation was offered that the arousal of reactance may be a necessary condition if a thwarting is to instigate aggression. / This thesis was digitized as part of a project begun in 2014 to increase the number of Duke psychology theses available online. The digitization project was spearheaded by Ciara Healy.

This study examined the joint effects of the quality of teacher-student relationship support (TSRS) and normative levels of classroom aggression on individual aggression in a sample of 687 second-grade children who entered first grade with relatively low reading readiness skills. Using a prospective design, the present study explored the joint effects of teacher-rated TSRS and normative classroom aggression on both teacher- and peer-rated aggression, controlling for levels of baseline aggression. The study also examined the effect of peer-rated TSRS on teacher- and peer-rated aggression. Furthermore, ethnic and sex differences on study variables and on their relationships were examined. Boys were rated by teachers and peers as having higher aggression levels and lower Time 1 and Time 2 TSRS than girls. African American students were rated by teachers and peers as having higher Time 1 and Time 2 aggression levels. African American students were rated by teachers as having lower Time 1 and Time 2 TSRS than Hispanic and White students. Hispanic students had higher peer-rated TSRS than African American students at Time 1. Furthermore, African American and Hispanic students were more likely to be placed in higher aggressive classrooms than were White students. Regression analyses found that, after controlling for baseline aggression, teacher-rated TSRS predicted peer- and teacher-rated aggression. However, neither normative classroom aggression nor the interaction of normative classroom aggression with teacher-rated or peer-rated TSRS predicted teacher-rated aggression. Peer-rated TSRS did not predict teacher-rated or peer-rated aggression. There was no evidence ethnicity moderated the relationships between TSRS and aggression. Study limitations and implications for intervention are also discussed.