Social-cognitive influences on change in aggression over time.

Egan, Susan K.; Monson, Thomas C.; Perry, David G.

doi:10.1037/0012-1649.34.5.996

Cited by 76 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Nonetheless, it is possible that children with high theory of mind skills may be less prone to deliberately use aggressive behavior to dominate or humiliate others if they have experienced themselves the anguish such behavior can cause for the victim. In line with this notion, children's expectation that their aggression would cause pain and suffering in the victim was related to a decrease in the use of bullying behavior in early adolescent boys who were themselves victimized by their peers (Egan et al 1998). It remains to be seen whether peer victimization moderates the putative positive link between theory of mind and proactive aggression in young children.…”

Section: Peer Victimization Experiences As a Potential Moderator Of Tmentioning

confidence: 85%

Interactive Links Between Theory of Mind, Peer Victimization, and Reactive and Proactive Aggression

Renouf

Brendgen

Séguin

et al. 2010

J Abnorm Child Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated the relation between theory of mind and reactive and proactive aggression, respectively, as well as the moderating role of peer victimization in this context. The 574 participants were drawn from a longitudinal study of twins. Theory of mind was assessed before school entry, when participants were 5 years old. Reactive and proactive aggression as well as peer victimization were assessed a year later in kindergarten. Results from multilevel regression CIHR Author Manuscript CIHR Author Manuscript CIHR Author Manuscriptanalyses revealed that low theory of mind was related to a high level of reactive aggression, but only in children who experienced average to high levels of peer victimization. In contrast, a high theory of mind was related to a high level of proactive aggression. Again, this relation was especially pronounced in children who experienced high levels of peer victimization. These findings challenge the social skills deficit view of aggression and provide support for a multidimensional perspective of aggressive behavior. KeywordsTheory of mind; Reactive and proactive aggression; Peer victimizationIn the study of aggressive behavior a fundamental distinction is made between reactive aggression and proactive aggression, which refer to two different underlying functions of aggression (Day, Bream and Paul 1992;Dodge and Coie 1987;Schwartz et al. 1998).Reactive aggression is defined as a retaliatory response to a real or perceived threat or provocation. It is associated with the frustration theory of aggression (Berkowitz 1989) and is accompanied by an activation of the autonomous system (Hubbard et al. 2002). In contrast, proactive aggression is considered a non-provoked behavior that is motivated by the desire for personal gains or the domination of others (Vitaro and Brendgen 2005). As an organized and planned behavior, proactive aggression is related to the anticipation of a positive outcome of the aggressive behavior (Dodge et al. 1997). Although studies usually report a high correlation between reactive and proactive aggression (mean r=0.68; Card and Little 2006), factor analyses and meta-analyses provide clear evidence for the validity of the distinction between the two functions of aggression (Card and Little 2006;Crick and Dodge 1996;McAuliffe et al. 2007;Poulin and Boivin 2000;Vitaro et al. 1998). As will be discussed in more detail below, evidence also suggests that these two functions of aggressive behavior are differentially related to social cognitive skills, particularly with respect to the decoding of social stimuli (Crick and Dodge 1996;Dodge et al. 1997;Dodge and Coie 1987;Hubbard et al. 2001;Schippel et al. 2003). The present study examines a specific and as yet unstudied aspect of decoding-related social cognitive skills, namely theory of mind, in relation to proactive and reactive aggression. The Role of Theory of Mind in Social BehaviorTheory of mind implies the capacity to attribute mental states to the self and to others in order to explain and predic...

show abstract

Section: Peer Victimization Experiences As a Potential Moderator Of Tmentioning

confidence: 85%

Interactive Links Between Theory of Mind, Peer Victimization, and Reactive and Proactive Aggression

Renouf

Brendgen

Séguin

et al. 2010

J Abnorm Child Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Information processing biases or deficits that are acquired as a possible consequence of community violence exposure (Schwartz and Proctor, 2000;Shahinfar, Kupersmidt, and Matza, 2001) might be intensified by participation in these aggressive exchanges. High-conflict dyadic relationships can provide children with ample opportunities for reinforcement of problematic social-cognitive styles (Egan, Monson, and Perry, 1998).…”

Section: Implications Of Our Findingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mutual Antipathies in the Peer Group as a Moderating Factor in the Association Between Community Violence Exposure and Psychosocial Maladjustment

Schwartz

Hopmeyer-Gorman

Toblin

et al. 2003

New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…O'Connell et al, 1999) or dissonance theory (e.g. Egan et al, 1999) to enrole the importance of peer contribution of what increasingly identifies as a matter of social context and social interaction, rather than an arena for individualistic approaches.…”

Section: Social Rejectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In such a social environment, bullies can more selectively choose a low status victim (Perry, Perry, & Boldizar, 1990), which faces more difficulties to escape its role (Pellegrini & Bartini, 2000;Egan & Perry, 1999;Salmivalli, 2001) and is more likely to be subject to scapegoating and increased rejection, if peers do not manage to stop the bully's attacks within a short period (DeRosier, Cillessen, Dodge, & Coie, 1994).…”

Section: Differential Social Dynamics In Primary and Secondary Schoolmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bullying roles in changing contexts: The stability of victim and bully roles from primary to secondary school

Schäfer¹,

Korn

Brodbeck

et al. 2005

International Journal of Behavioral Development

133

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study was conducted to predict bullying roles over a six years time period and across contexts differing in the degree of peer hierarchies. Out of two representative data sets from primary (N = 1525) and secondary school (N = 2958), 282 children (156 boys; 126 girls) were followed up longitudinally. Self reports on bullying experiences and peer reports about social status were assessed by a structured individual interview (in primary school) and by questionnaire given classwise (in secondary school). Risk analyses showed, that only a bully role in primary school yields a risk to be sustained in secondary school. However, victims in primary school classes with a more pronounced degree of hierarchical structuring proved stable in their role while the victim role was unstable from primary school classes with low hierarchical structuring. This interaction did not apply to bully role stability. Differential characteristics of the victim and the bully role in primary school and secondary school settings are discussed.Keywords: Bullying, stability, social status, primary and secondary school ZusammenfassungDie vorliegende Untersuchung wurde durchgeführt, um Bullyingrollen über einen Zeitraum von sechs Jahren und Kontexte, die sich im Ausmaß der sozialen Strukturierung unterschieden, vorherzusagen. Auf der Grundlage von zwei repräsentativen Datensätzen aus der Grundschule (n= 1525) und der weiterführenden Schule (N= 2958) wurden dazu die Daten von 282 Kinder (156 Jungen, 126 Mädchen) längsschnittlich analysiert. Die Selbstberichte über Bullyingerfahrungen und Mitschülerberichte über den sozialen Status der Kinder wurden in der Grundschule durch ein strukturiertes Interview und in der weiterführenden Schule durch klassenweise Fragebogenerhebung erfasst. Riskikoanalysen zeigen, dass nur die Täterrolle in der Grundschule einen Risikofaktor für eine Täterrolle in der weiterführenden Schule darstellt. Eine Opferrolle war hingegen nur dann stabil, wenn die Opfer in Grundschulklassen mit schon ausgeprägten Dominanzstrukturen viktimisiert wurden, während aus Grundschulklassen mit geringer hierarchischer Strukturierung keine stabile Opferrolle vorhersagbar war. Dieses Interaktionmuster gilt nicht für die Stabilität der Täterrollen. Differentielle Charakteristika der Opferrolle und der Täterrolle in der Grundschule und der weiterführenden Schule werden diskutiert.

show abstract

Social-cognitive influences on change in aggression over time.

Cited by 76 publications

References 30 publications

Interactive Links Between Theory of Mind, Peer Victimization, and Reactive and Proactive Aggression

Interactive Links Between Theory of Mind, Peer Victimization, and Reactive and Proactive Aggression

Mutual Antipathies in the Peer Group as a Moderating Factor in the Association Between Community Violence Exposure and Psychosocial Maladjustment

Bullying roles in changing contexts: The stability of victim and bully roles from primary to secondary school

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About