Sex Differences In Aggression Research Articles

Warrior values and social identity

A single evolved psychological mechanism, social identity, may help explain the development of salient sex differences in aggression. Bearing children automatically provides a basis for positive social identity for females. Masculine identity is more problematic, especially where the range of possible cultural roles is small. Ethnohistorical data provides insight into the overlap between masculine values and warrior values.

The origins of aggression sex differences: Evolved dispositions versus social roles

The ultimate causes of sex differences in human aggressive behavior can lie mainly in evolved, inherited mechanisms that differ by sex or mainly in the differing placement of women and men in the social structure. The present commentary contrasts Campbell's evolutionary interpretation of aggression sex differences with a social structural interpretation that encompasses a wider range of phenomena.

Anthropological perspectives on aggression: Sex differences and cultural variation

The purpose of this special issue of Aggressive Behavior is to present various topics and perspectives on the anthropology of aggression and conflict. First, a brief introduction to the articles in this issue is provided. Second, anthropological findings on sex differences in aggression are considered. The cross-cultural pattern is for males to engage in more frequent and more severe physical aggression than females. These observed sex differences are in accordance with the evolutionary concepts of sexual selection and parental investment. Simultaneously, it is clear that a host of proximate cultural influences also affects levels and styles of aggression in both females and males. Anthropological findings related to the indirect aggression concept also are discussed and tentatively related to gender. In the third section of this article, the nature and ramifications of the tremendous cross-cultural variation in aggression are explored. It is clear that nonviolent cultures exist, as do a range of more violent ones. It is also clear, as illustrated in several examples, that aggressive cultures can become dramatically more peaceful, and vice versa. Aggression can be viewed within the broader frame of conflict management; most cultures, in fact, use a variety of mechanisms for dealing with conflict that do not involve aggression. In addition, consideration is given to intracultural variability in aggression, the multidimensionality of aggression, cultural meaning (beliefs) and aggression, and the controversy over actor-based (emic) vs. Observer-based (etic) interpretations of aggression. Aggr. Behav. 24:81–95, 1998. © 1998 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Sex differences in aggression: does social representation mediate form of aggression?

In contrast to the usual pattern of higher male aggression, girls have been shown to exceed boys on frequency measures of indirect aggression. Women also tend to view aggression in terms of an expressive social representation whereby it is seen to result from loss of self-control, in contrast to men who tend to describe it as an instrumental act aimed at exerting control over others. Sixteen items measuring different forms of aggressive behaviour were given to 105 undergraduates together with Expagg, a psychometric measure of social representation of aggression. Factor analysis of the aggression items revealed three scales: direct (verbal and physical), indirect instrumental and indirect expressive aggression. The only aggression scale showing a significant sex difference was indirect expressive aggression on which women scored higher than men. There was also a significant sex difference on Expagg with women showing a more expressive representation of aggression. However the point biserial correlation between sex and indirect expressive aggression was not diminished when expressive representation of aggression was partialled out. It is argued that indirect expressive aggression (involving bitching and avoiding) fails to show a relationship with social representation because it lacks the formal requirements of intentional harm and consequently is not an act of 'aggression'.

Comparison of two aggression inventories

Two recently developed questionnaire measures of aggression, the Aggression Questionnaire [Buss and Perry (1992; Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 63:452–459]; and the Aggression Inventory [Gladue (1991a); Psychological Reports 68:675–684], were administered to a British sample (N=320) of men and women undergraduates. Both questionnaires contain subscales measuring physical and verbal aggression; the other scales of the Aggression Questionnaire measure anger and hostility, and those of the Aggression Inventory measure impulsiveness and avoidance of aggression. The factor structure of scales were assessed using confirmatory factor analysis. The interrelations of the subscales were calculated in both cases: anger was independently related to verbal and physical aggression and to hostility on the Aggression Questionnaire; impulsivity, and verbal and physical aggression were associated on the Aggression Inventory. Sex differences were largest on the two physical subscales, of lesser magnitude but still significantly different for the two verbal subscales, but absent for anger and hostility. This supports the hypothesis that sex differences in aggression are larger for more escalated forms of aggression. The physical and verbal subscales of the two questionnaires were each highly correlated with one another and the impulsive subscale of the Aggression Inventory highly correlated with the anger subscale of the Aggresion Questionnaire. Thus, two aggression questionnaires developed in the US not only produce similar associations between subscales and sex differences among a British undergraduate sample, but also show high correlations between their respective scales. © 1995 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Sex differences in physical, verbal, and indirect aggression: A review of recent research

In the present article, recent research on sex differences in aggressive styles is reviewed. The concept of indirect aggression is particularly presented and discussed. It is argued that it is incorrect, or rather, nonsensical, to claim that males are more aggressive than females. A theory regarding the development of styles of aggressive behavior is presented.

Rethinking Sex Differences in Aggression: Aggressive Behavior in the Absence of Social Roles

Two studies investigated the influence of social roles on sex differences in aggression, the first focusing on expectations and the second on behavior In both studies, deindividuation was used to remove the influence of social roles. In Study 1, implicit theories about sex differences in aggression were examined by asking people to predict aggression by males and females in individuated and deindividuated conditions. People expected men to be more aggressive than women but did not show an appreciation of the disinhibiting effects of deindividuation. In Study 2, deindividuation was manipulated in the laboratory to assess its effects in an aggression-eliciting situation. As predicted, men aggressed more than women in the individuated condition, but this difference was eliminated in the deindividuated condition. Subjects' perceptions of their behavior were more consistent with the implicit theories documented in Study I than with how they actually behaved.

Of mice and women: aspects of female aggression

Part 1 The myth of the non-aggressive female: new trends in the study of female aggression, K. Bjorkqvist and P. Niemela biology does not make more aggressive than women, D. Adams the aggressive female rodent - redressing a scientific bias, P. Brain, et al hormones and human aggression, D. Benton. Part 2 The development of female aggressive patterns: the development of direct and indirect aggressive strategies in males and females, K. Bjorkqvist, et al sex differences in aggressive play and toy preference, J. Goldstein differing normative beliefs about aggression for boys and girls, R. Huesmann, et al gender differences in violence - biology and/or socialization?, L.D. Eron changes in patterns of aggressiveness among girls over a decade, V. Viemero patterns of aggressive-hostile behaviour orientation among adolescent boys and girls, A. Frcaczek the path to adulthood for aggressively inclined girls, L. Pulkkinen gender differences in coronary-prone aggression, L. Keltikangas-Jarvinen expressions of aggression in the life stories of aged women, J.E. Ruth and P. Oberg. Part 3 Cultural difference in regard to female aggression: matrifocality and female aggression in margariteno society, H.B. Cook interfemale aggression and resource scarcity in a crosscultural perspective, I.M. Glazer Women are women and are men - how Bellonese women get even, R. Kuschel female aggression among the Zapotec of Oaxaca, Lady Macbeth as a problem for Shakespeare, D. Fry. Part 4 Female aggression and its social settings: sex and violence in Acali - six females and five males isolated on a raft on the Atlantic and the Caribbean for 101 days, S. Genoves sex differences in conflict and aggression in individual and group settings, H.F.M. Lodewijkx the other sex - how are women different? gender, dominance and intimate relations in social interaction, B. Lindfors alcohol and female disinhibition, R. Lindman battling Amazons - responses to female fighters, G.W. Russell. Part 5 The ambivalence of motherhood: the great mother, J. Myyra vicissitudes of mother's hate, P. Niemela vampire and child-saviour motifs in the takes of Isak Dinesen, A. d'Heurle. Part 6 Female aggression in subhuman species: female aggression among the great apes - a psychoanalytical perspective, R. Holmstrom aggression in canine females, J.P. Scogg sex, drugs, and defensive behaviour - implications for animal models of defense, D.C. Blanchard and R.J. Blanchard aspects of aggression, aggressive arousal, and sexual behaviour in female hamsters, M. Potegal. Part contents.

Sex, gender, and difference

Empirical research has demonstrated that women's aggressive behavior is widespread and displays regularities across societies. Until recently, however, discussions about the aggressive behavior of women and gender differences in aggressive behavior have been based largely on data from nonhuman primates, children, or laboratory experiments. Using a unique corpus of naturalistic data on aggressive human interactions both between and among men and women, I explore the complexity of our questions about sex differences in aggression and further illuminate the ways in which men and women may use aggression in human interactions. In this paper I compare the aggressive behavior of men and women in an Australian Aboriginal community. In doing so I argue for the continuing use of a "sex differences" framework for organizing our understanding of gender relations and gender hierarchy. I believe, however, that this form of analysis benefits from, if not requires, a sensitivity to the most taken-for-granted aspects of our gender ideology and a commitment to attend to evidence that challenges our convictions about men and women.

Cognitive Structure Activation: Zealous Enforcement of the Law?

Cognitive Structure Activation: Zealous Enforcement of the Law?

Sexually dimorphic behavior in group-housed rhesus monkeys (Macaca mulatta) at 1 year of age

Although laboratory studies suggest that sex differences expressed by juvenile rhesus monkeys are influenced by their social rearing environment, few studies have examined developmental sex differences under seminatural social conditions. We report sex differences in yearling rhesus macaques (Macaca mulatta) raised in a 69-member social group. Like laboratory-reared animals, males mounted and played more than did females. In contrast to the results of laboratory studies, there were no sex differences in aggression or submission, nor were there any sex differences in grooming or mother-yearling interactions. Yearling females approached and spent more time with adult, nonmother females and with younger infants than did yearling males. These findings suggest that male and female rhesus monkeys engage in juvenile patterns of behavior related to sexually dimorphic adult patterns of social behavior.

Sex differences in behavior of endangered mangabeys (Cercocebus galeritus chrysogaster)

Six adult golden-bellied mangabeys (Cercocebus galeritus chrysogaster) displayed sex differences in aggression, grooming, and vocalization. These sex differences persisted across different current living conditions, time in captivity, rearing conditions, presence of offspring, and active mating conditions. The sex differences are evidently quite robust.

Observer bias in scoring boys' and girls' aggression

In order to examine the possibility that the attribution of more aggression to boys may be in part a function of observer bias, 40 adults were asked in Study 1 to record the degree of aggression in a series of line drawings that showed children interacting. It was found that a significant subset of both males and females recorded more aggression for boys than for girls when they scanned scenes that showed numerous children interacting. When they rated a series of drawings of two children interacting, males rated boys as significantly more aggressive than girls. Study 2 examined 48 adults' responses under one of three instruction conditions. The findings of Study 1 were replicated. Additionally, it was found that some forms of instruction eliminate sex-typed biases while others yield significant biases among both male and female untrained observers. These results are interpreted in light of the literature on schematic processing. Implications pertaining to the socialization of aggression and to research on sex differences in aggression are discussed.

Applicability of olweu' aggression inventory in a sample of chinese primary school children

A sample of Chinese children in Grade 4 (155 boys and 135 girls with an average age of 10.3 years) completed Olweu' Aggression Inventory, an instrument developed for the assessment of aggressive and aggression controlling behavior tendencies in a Western culture. Results indicated that the questionnaire gave quite meaningful information when used with the Chinese children. Two interpretable factors, general aggression and aggression control, were derived; the pattern of factor loadings was essentially the same for boys and girls. The internal consistency reliabilities of the two factor scales were in the 0.80s and 0.70s, respectively. Overall, the findings indicated that there were distinct measurable individual differences among Chinese children in the domain of aggression—in spite of strong societal pressures against aggressive behavior and towards aggression control. However, some results suggested that aggression was a somewhat more global, or less differentiated, phenomenon for the Chinese as compared with the Swedish children. The two main factor scales were related meaningfully to other self report dimensions such as positive attitude to school and negative relations with parents. In all probability, the pattern of findings gave a valid picture of the behavior and attitudes of the Chinese children: By and large they were nonaggressive, well-behaved, ambitious, friendly, prosocial, and exerted strong control over aggressive feelings and behavior tendencies. In possible conflicts with adults, they were likely to take a humble and submissive attitude. These findings agree well with the impressions of Western observers and with what can be expected on the basis of the typical socialization patterns found in the People's Republic of China. Furthermore, quite marked sex differences in aggression were obtained and a partial correlation analysis showed that the higher aggression level of the boys could only to a very limited degree be explained by their lower level of aggression control or inhibitions. Generally, the sex differences in aggression were interpreted to reflect genetic variations in basic predispositions in boys and girls that had been subtly enlarged by more or less clear, sex-linked differences in environmental conditions.

Phylogenetic regression and the problem of extreme aggression*1, *2

Abstract Early and recent views of the concept of phylogenetic regression are summarized. A recently developed theory of phylogenetic regression and progression is discussed in some detail. The role of diminished neocortical control in the regressive process is emphasized. Parallels are drawn at several junctures with Paul MacLean's theory of the triune brain. Once summarized, the phylogenetic regression-progression approach is applied to the problem of extreme aggression and senseless violence. The triune brain, the neuroanatomy of aggression, similarities between chimpanzee and human aggression, sex differences in aggression, ‘pleasure-in-aggression’, and extreme violence in ‘peaceful’ tribes are briefly discussed. It is suggested that some forms of ‘senseless’ human violence may represent phylogenetic regressions to predatory tendencies once normal and typical in our evolutionary forebears.

Gender, dominance and stress

The issue of sex differences in aggression was recast into a dominance—stress framework and examined using an experimental design. College students participated in dominance episodes during which behavior and physiological indicators of stress were monitored. The results indicate that both males and females find encounters with people of the same sex more stress-producing than encounters with opposite-sex individuals. While males seem to be more stressed by same-sex challenges than women, the differences are small. Men did not differ from women in the tendency to engage in dominance behavior in same-sex groups. Moreover, the dominance behavior was as stressful to men as it was to women. Awareness that one's status is under attack was found, however, to have very different effects on men and women. Males who recognized the threat exhibited more stress than those who did not. Women who were aware of the threat, on the other hand, were stressed far less—suggesting that men and women respond differently to explicit dominance episodes than to those that are more subtle. There was no sex difference in the stress associated with winning and losing.

Toward a situational analysis of gender differences in aggression

The present study explored the notion that frustration in situations congruent with traditional sex roles will elicit higher levels of aggression from both women and men than will frustration in sex-role incongruent situations. In a 2×2 design, female and male undergraduates read a “feminine” or “masculine” vignette describing an individual prevented by a classmate from practicing for an examination in dance or body-building exercises. Subjects in gender-congruent conditions perceived the examination as more important and advocated more aggressive responses than did subjects in gender-incongruent conditions. Males were significantly more aggressive than females only in the masculine situation; in the feminine situation, this difference was reduced or eliminated. The implications of these results for the interpretation of apparent sex differences in aggression are discussed.

Sex differences in the aggressive behaviour of schoolchildren

An observational study was carried out to investigate whether sex differences in aggression, found in pre-school children in free-play situations, would also be found at older ages in the classroom. Equal numbers of boys and girls, aged 6 and 11 years, were observed individually in their school classrooms for eight 5 min periods, carried out over several weeks. At 11 years of age, boys showed more physical aggression than girls, a finding which resulted from a few boys showing higher scores than the remaining boys and the girls; girls showed more verbal aggression. These sex differences were not found at 6 years of age. At both ages, there was a higher proportion of same-sex than opposite-sex encounters. These results are discussed in terms of the generality of sex differences in aggression, the possibility of a sex difference in the form of aggressive acts, and the sex of the recipient of aggression.

On the Biological Basis of Sex Differences in Aggression

The prevalence of aggression as a predominantly male behavior pattern has often been noted. The nature and perceived extent of sex differences in aggression have recently revived interest in speculation that such differences are attributable to factors inherent in the biological basis of sex differentiation. This paper will critically examine the empirical and theoretical basis for Maccoby and Jacklin's contention that males are biologically predisposed toward aggressive behavior. The literature to be examined includes: (1) cross-cultural studies of children's behavior, (2) the behavior of nonhuman primates, (3) sex hormones and aggression, and (4) early learning influences in child development. Contrary to Maccoby and Jacklin's assertions, these first 3 research traditions are found to indicate no biological predisposition toward aggression in human males. Furthermore, the pattern of existing evidence suggests that the gender-dimorphic nature of aggression is reliably observable in children's spontaneous behavior only after the age of 5 years. This finding presents great difficulty for the biological theory as proposed by Maccoby and Jacklin. Suggestions are presented for an interactional theory of the etiology of observed sex differences in adult aggression.

On the Biological Basis of Sex Differences in Aggression

The prevalence of aggression as a predominantly male behavior pattern has often been noted. The nature and perceived extent of sex differences in aggression have recently revived interest in speculation that such differences are attributable to factors inherent in the biological basis of sex differentiation. This paper will critically examine the empirical and theoretical basis for Maccoby and Jacklin's contention that males are biologically predisposed toward aggressive behavior. The literature to be examined includes: (1) cross-cultural studies of children's behavior, (2) the behavior of nonhuman primates, (3) sex hormones and aggression, and (4) early learning influences in child development. Contrary to Maccoby and Jacklin's assertions, these first 3 research traditions are found to indicate no biological predisposition toward aggression in human males. Furthermore, the pattern of existing evidence suggests that the gender-dimorphic nature of aggression is reliably observable in children's spontaneous behavior only after the age of 5 years. This finding presents great difficulty for the biological theory as proposed by Maccoby and Jacklin. Suggestions are presented for an interactional theory of the etiology of observed sex differences in adult aggression.