In order to examine audience effects when viewing filmed violence, male subjects watched an aggressive or a neutral movie either alone, accompanied by a passive confederate (i.e. mere presence of a co-spectator), or an active one (i.e. reacting to the movie). The subsequent behavioural measures of subjects' aggression were collected via a modified aggression apparatus. The usual instigation effect of filmed violence was found. Furthermore, the type of audience also influenced aggression: subjects accompanied by an active confederate during the violent movie displayed their aggressive behaviour most. These findings stress the importance of the social context when filmed violence is viewed. The results are discussed in terms of social facilitation and disinhibition effects. It is suggested that an active audience may promote a reduction of restraints against aggressing by showing the subject that aggression is permissible.

In order to examine audience effects when viewing firmed violence, 5 to 6

No abstract

In order to examine the efects offirmed

Although considerable research indicates that aversive conditions (such as uncomfortably high temperatures) often evoke aggressive inclinations, there is also evidence that people are attracted to those who share their discomfort. In a 2 Â 2 design, female participants in either a hot or comfortable room worked with a nearby partner exposed to the same temperature but whose reactions to the temperature were either the same as, or different from, their feelings about the temperature. The women in a fifth condition had a partner situated in a room with a comfortable temperature . Consistent with Schachter's [1959] social-emotional comparison theory, the highest level of aggression was displayed by the participants in the hot room working with a partner whose emotional reactions were different from their own, whereas their counterparts, also exposed to the high temperature but whose partner's feelings were similar to their own, exhibited the least aggression over all the trials. Aggr. Behav. 32:80-87, 2006.