Towards Aggression De-escalation Training with Virtual Agents: A Computational Model

  • Tibor Bosse
  • Simon Provoost
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8524)


Serious gaming based on Virtual Reality is a promising means for training of aggression de-escalation skills. By enabling trainees to interact with aggressive virtual characters that respond in a realistic manner to different communicative approaches, they can learn to apply the appropriate approach at the right time. To facilitate the development of such a training system, this paper presents a computational model of interpersonal aggression. The model consists of two sub-models, namely an ‘aggressor model’ and a ‘de-escalator model’. In the long term, the former can be used to generate the behaviour of the virtual characters, whereas the latter can be used to analyse the behaviour of the trainee. The functioning of the model is illustrated by a number of simulation runs for characteristic circumstances.


virtual training aggression de-escalation cognitive modelling 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Abraham, M., Flight, S., Roorda, W.: Agressie en geweld tegen werknemers met een publieke taak. In: Onderzoek voor Veilige Publieke Taak 2007 - 2009 - 2011. DSP, Amsterdam (2011) (in Dutch)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Anderson, L.N., Clarke, J.T.: De-escalating verbal aggression in primary care settings. Nurse Pract. 21(10), 95–98,101–102 (1996)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Angie, A.D., Connelly, S., Waples, E.P., Kligyte, V.: The influence of discrete emotions on judgment and decision-making: A meta-analytic review. Cognition & Emotion 25(8), 1393–1422 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berkowitz, L.: Whatever Happened to the Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis? American Behavioral Scientist 21, 691–708 (1978)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bonner, G., McLaughlin, S.: The psychological impact of aggression on nursing staff. Br. J. Nurs. 16(13), 810–814 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bosse, T., Jonker, C.M., van der Meij, L., Treur, J.: A Language and Environment for Analysis of Dynamics by Simulation. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence Tools 16(3), 435–464 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dodge, K.A.: The structure and function of reactive and proactive aggression. In: Pepler, D., Rubin, H. (eds.) The Development and Treatment of Childhood Aggression, pp. 201–218. Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1990)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Graafland, M., Schraagen, J.M., Schijven, M.P.: Systematic review of serious games for medical education and surgical skills training. The British Journal of Surgery 99(10), 1322–1330 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Heuvelink, A., Mioch, T.: FeGA: A cognitive Feedback Generating Agent. In: Proceedings of the Seventh IEEE/WIC/ACM International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology (IAT 2008), pp. 567–572. IEEE Computer Society Press (2008)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hubbard, J.A., Smithmyer, C.M., Ramsden, S.R., Parker, E.H., Flanagan, K.D., Dearing, K.F., Relyea, N., Simons, R.F.: Observational, Physiological, and Self-Report Measures of Children’s Anger: Relations to Reactive versus Proactive Aggression. Child Development 73(4), 1101–1118 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hulst, A., van der Muller, T., Besselink, S., Coetsier, D., Roos, C.: Bloody serious gaming: experiences with job oriented training. In: Proceedings of I/ITSEC 2008, Orlando, Fla, USA, pp. 375–385 (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    James, A., Madeley, R., Dove, A.: Violence and aggression in the emergency department. Emerg. Med. J. 23(6), 431–434 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kim, J., Hill, R.W., Durlach, P., Lane, H.C., Forbell, E., Core, C., Marsella, S., Pynadath, D., Hart, J.: BiLAT: A game-based environment for practicing negotiation in a cultural context. International Journal of AI in Education 19(3), 289–308 (2009)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lazarus, R.S.: From Psychological Stress to the Emotions: A History of Changing Outlooks. Annual Review of Psychology 44, 1–21 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Miller, J.D., Lyna, D.R.: Reactive and proactive aggression: Similarities and differences. Personality and Individual Differences 41(8), 1469–1480 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ministry of the Interior and Kingdom Relations (2008). Handboek agressie en geweld - voorkomen, beperken, afhandelen. Technical Report for the Programme ‘Veilige Publieke Taak’ (April 2008), (in Dutch)
  17. 17.
    Rafaeli, A., Erez, A., Ravid, S., Derfler-Rozin, R., Treister, D.E., Scheyer, R.: When customers exhibit verbal aggression, employees pay cognitive costs. J. Appl. Psychol. 97(5), 931–950 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ritterfeld, U., Cody, M., Vorderer, P. (eds.): Serious Games: Mechanisms and Effects. Routledge, New York (2009)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Provoost, S.: A Computational Model of Aggression De-escalation. M.Sc. Thesis, VU University Amsterdam. (2014),
  20. 20.
    de Vries, R.: Reader Sociale Vaardigheden. Technical Report, Police Academy of the Netherlands, School voor Politiekunde (2011) (in Dutch)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tibor Bosse
    • 1
  • Simon Provoost
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceVU University AmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations