Breaking the link: Distraction from emotional cues reduces the association between trait disinhibition and reactive physical aggression

Subramani, Olivia S.; Parrott, Dominic J.; Latzman, Robert D.; Washburn, David A.

doi:10.1002/ab.21804

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, this was consistent with the null relation identified between Conscientiousness and laboratory aggression in a recent meta‐analysis (Hyatt et al, 2019). Thus, although the low pole of Conscientiousness (often called Disinhibition) has been linked to self‐reported aggression (Patrick & Drislane, 2015), these relations do not appear to manifest consistently in the context of behavioral aggression in a laboratory paradigm (c.f., Subramani, Parrott, Latzman, & Washburn, 2019). A final discrepancy is the identification of Activity Level (Extraversion) bearing a small, negative relation to CRTT aggression, but null relations for the other facets of Extraversion.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Facet‐level analysis of the relations between personality and laboratory aggression

Hyatt

Chester

Zeichner

et al. 2020

Aggressive Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Multiple reviews and meta‐analyses have identified the low pole of the Five‐Factor Model (FFM) Agreeableness (also called Antagonism) as the primary domain‐level personality correlates of aggression across self‐report and behavioral methodologies. In the current study, we expand on this literature by investigating the relations between FFM facets and aggressive behavior as measured by laboratory competitive reaction time tasks (CRTTs). Across three samples (total N = 639), we conducted weighted mean analyses, multiple regression analyses, and dominance analyses to determine which FFM facets were the strongest predictors of aggression within and across domains. These analyses suggested that facets of Agreeableness were among the strongest consistent predictors of CRTT aggression, including Sympathy (r = −.21) and Cooperation (r = −.14), but facets from other FFM domains also yielded meaningful relations (e.g., Anger from Neuroticism; r = .17). We conclude by discussing these results in the context of controversies surrounding laboratory aggression paradigms and emphasizing the importance of considering small effect sizes in the prediction of societally harmful behavior like aggression.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Facet‐level analysis of the relations between personality and laboratory aggression

Hyatt

Chester

Zeichner

et al. 2020

Aggressive Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Distraction is a clinical tool that effectively reduces aggressive behavior (Gallagher & Parrott, 2011; Giancola & Corman, 2007; Subramani, Parrott, Latzman, & Washburn, 2019). One possibility is that distraction may interrupt the postdecisional accumulation of evidence that decreases confidence in decisions that others are nonthreatening.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Physical Aggression Is Associated With More Effective Postdecisional Processing of Social Threat

Brennan

Baskin‐Sommers

2021

Clinical Psychological Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Physically aggressive individuals are more likely to decide that others are threatening. Yet no research has examined how physically aggressive individuals’ social decisions unfold in real time. Seventy-five incarcerated men completed a task in which they identified the emotions in faces displaying anger (i.e., threat) and happiness (i.e., nonthreat) at low, moderate, or high ambiguity. Participants then rated their confidence in their decisions either immediately or after a delay, and changes in confidence provided an index of postdecisional processing. Physical aggression was associated with stronger differentiation of threatening and nonthreatening faces under moderate ambiguity. Moreover, physical aggression was associated with steeper decreases in confidence over time following decisions that threatening faces were nonthreatening, indicating more extensive postdecisional processing. This pattern of postdecisional processing mediated the association between physical aggression and angry rumination. Findings suggest a role for postdecisional processing in the maintenance of threat-based social decisions in physical aggression.

show abstract

“…According to the I 3 Model (Finkel, 2014), those who are chronically low in inhibition strength (e.g., low trait self-control, high impulsivity) are more likely to aggress following provocation than those with better inhibitory strength. A recent experimental study provides support for this hypothesis (Subramani, Parrott, Latzman, & Washburn, 2018). Within the context of daily relationship functioning, trait negative urgency seems particularly relevant to understanding the ability to exert self-control when arguing with or provoked by partner.…”

Section: Partner Aggression and Self-control Within The I 3 Modelmentioning

confidence: 91%

Does state self‐control depletion predict relationship functioning and partner aggression? An ecological momentary assessment study of community couples

Testa

Derrick

Crane

et al. 2020

Aggressive Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Intimate relationship functioning depends upon the ability to accommodate one's partner and to inhibit retaliatory and aggressive impulses when disagreements arise. However, accommodation and inhibition may be difficult when self-control strength is weak or depleted by prior exertion of self-control. The present study considered whether state self-control depletion prospectively predicts male and female selfreports of anger with partner and arguing with partner. Consistent with the I 3 Model (Finkel, 2014, Adv Exp Soc Psychol, 49, 1-104), we also considered whether the association between elevated anger and arguing (i.e., instigation) and partner aggression was stronger when state self-control (i.e., inhibition) was depleted or among people high in negative urgency. In this ecological momentary assessment (EMA) study, heavy drinking married and cohabiting heterosexual couples (N = 191) responded to three randomly signaled reports each day for 30 days. Depletion predicted anger and arguing with partners both cross-sectionally and prospectively for men and women. However, after controlling for prior levels of anger and arguing, these effects were diminished, and supplemental analyses revealed that anger and arguing with partner predicted subsequent depletion. Anger and arguing were strongly associated with concurrent reports of partner aggression perpetration and victimization (verbal and/or physical). However, neither state self-control depletion nor negative urgency moderated these effects. Overall, results suggest a modest impact of depletion on daily couple functioning as well as a potential cyclical effect of arguing on depletion.

show abstract

Breaking the link: Distraction from emotional cues reduces the association between trait disinhibition and reactive physical aggression

Cited by 6 publications

References 73 publications

Facet‐level analysis of the relations between personality and laboratory aggression

Facet‐level analysis of the relations between personality and laboratory aggression

Physical Aggression Is Associated With More Effective Postdecisional Processing of Social Threat

Does state self‐control depletion predict relationship functioning and partner aggression? An ecological momentary assessment study of community couples

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About