Abstract
The current status of research on aggression has been increasingly criticized and regarded as unsatisfactory. One argument put forward is that empirical results based on the three traditional approaches — drive theory, frustration-aggression theory, and learning theory — provide only an incomplete, vague, and, in part, contradictory description of the topic. Since continuing on these lines would probably prove nonproductive, new perspectives for aggression research seem necessary.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Berkowitz, L. Violence and rule-following behavior. In P. March & A. Campbell (Eds.), Aggression and violence. Oxford: Blackwell Publications, 1982, 90–101.
Deci, E. Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum Press, 1975.
Dodge, K. Social cognition and children’s aggressive behavior. Child Development, 1980, 51, 162–170.
Edmunds, G., & O’Hagan, F. Evaluation of different types of aggressive acts among a variety of male adolescent samples. Journal of Adolescence, 1981, 4, 249–259.
Enzle, M., Hansen, R., & Lowe, C. Causal attribution in the mixed-motive game: Effects of fa-cilitory and inhibitory forces. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1975, 31, 50–54.
Frodi, A., Macaulay, J., & Thome, P. Are women always less aggressive than men? A review of the experimental literature. Psychological Bulletin, 1977, 84, 634–660.
Hafner, A., & Kaplan, A. Hostility content analysis of the Rorschach and the TAT. Journal of Projective Techniques, 1960, 24, 137–143.
Janke, W., & Debus, G. Die Eigenschaftswörterliste (EWL). Göttingen: Hogrefe, 1978.
Jones, E., & Davis, K. From acts to dispositions. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol.2). New York: Academic Press, 1965, 219–266.
Kelley, H. Attribution in social interaction. In E. Jones (Ed.), Attribution: Perceiving the causes of behavior. Morristown, N.J.: General Learning Press, 1971, 1–26.
Kelley, H. The process of causal attribution. American Psychologist, 1973, 28, 107–128.
Kelley, H., & Michela, J. Attribution theory and research. Annual Review of Psychology, 1980, 31, 457–501.
Kornadt, H.-J. Aggressions-Motiv und Aggressions-Hemmung. (2 Bände). Bern: Huber-Verlag, 1982.
Loeber, R. The stability of anti-social and delinquent child behavior: A review. Child Development, 1982, 53, 1431–1446.
Magnusson, D., & Endler, N. (Eds.), Personality at the cross-roads: Current issues in interactional psychology. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 1977.
Merz, F. Geschlechtsunterschiede und ihre Entwicklung. Göttingen: Hogrefe, 1979.
Mummendey, A. When are persons willing to compensate their victims? Paper presented at East-West Meeting of the European Association of Experimental Social Psychology at Bologna, Italy, May 13–16, 1980.
Mummendey, A. Aggressive Interaktionen in der Schule. Unveröffentlichter Forschungsbericht II. Psychologisches Institut der Universität Münster/Westf., 1981.
Mummendey, A. Zum Nutzen des Aggressionsbegriffs für die psychologische Aggressionsforschung. In R. Hilke & W. Kempf (Eds.), Aggression: Naturwissenschaftliche und kulturwissenschaftliche Perspektiven der Aggressionsforschung. Bern: Huber-Verlag, 1982, 317–333. (a).
Mummendey, A. Aggressiv sind immer die anderen — Plädoyer für eine sozialpsychologische Perspektive in der Aggressionsforschung. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie, 1982, 13, 177–193. (b).
Murstein, B. Theory and research in projective techniques (emphasizing the TAT). New York: Wiley, 1963.
Ohbuchi, K. Negativity bias: Its effects in attribution, hostility, and attack-instigated aggression. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1982, 8, 249–259.
Olweus, D. Aggression in the schools: Bullies and whipping boys. Washington, D.C.: Hemisphere, 1978.
Olweus, D. Stability of aggressive reaction patterns in males: A review. Psychological Bulletin, 1979, 86, 852–875.
Rothmund, H. Geschlechtsunterschiede im aggressiven Verhalten. In H. Keller (Ed.), Geschlechtsunterschiede. Weinheim: Beltz-Verlag, 1979, 75–92.
Sachs, L. Angewandte Statistik. Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1974.
Tedeschi, J., Smith, R., & Brown, R. A reinterpretation of research on aggression. Psychological Bulletin, 1974, 81, 540–562.
Zillmann, D., and Cantor, J. Effects of timing of information about mitigating circumstances on emotional responses to provocation and retaliatory behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1976, 12, 38–55.
Zumkley, H. Aggression und Katharsis. Göttingen: Hogrefe, 1978.
Zumkley, H. Der Einfluß unterschiedlicher Absichtsattributionen auf das Aggressionsverhalten und die Aktivierung. Psychologische Beiträge, 1981, 23, 115–128.
Zumkley, H. Kausale Ambiguität: Vorrangigkeit externaler Ursachen? Psychologische Beiträge, 1982, 24, 224–241. (a)
Zumkley, H. Einflüsse von Motiv-Differenzen der Aggressivität bei kausaler Ambiguität. Unpublished manuscript, University of the Saar, Saarbrücken, 1982. (b)
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1984 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Zumkley, H. (1984). Individual Differences and Aggressive Interactions. In: Mummendey, A. (eds) Social Psychology of Aggression. Springer Series in Social Psychology. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48919-8_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48919-8_4
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-48921-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-48919-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive