The second aspect likely to influence aggression is the notion that our ideas, thoughts and perceptions may directly influence our behavior, in a sense behavior is predetermined and is referred as soft determinism. Thus the schemata guiding the individual’s behavior affects the possibilities of aggressive behavior. The various schemas developed that influence our perception and behavior. In this sense the approach is deterministic as based on the schemas of the mind, human behavior is predetermined. Thus with the assertion of the cognitive perspective humans do not have freewill as it comes to aggression.
In conclusion the cognitive perspective put forward the idea that aggression is learned. Aggression is seen as something under the influence of observations (imitation) and with the way we think (schemata). In a broader sense aggression is caused by a range of adverse stimuli such as frustration, pain or noise- being a trigger of selective information processing enhancing the probability of aggressive behavior. With the assumption that aggression is learned the cognitive approach sees aggression as something, which is uncertain and not inevitable. Thus this approach asserts that humans are nor good or evil inherently. Behavior depends completely on what we have learned.
b) Compare the cognitive explanation of the question with the explanation offered by one other perspective you have studied for this paper.
Behaviorist and Cognitive approach seem to share several similarities when explaining aggression. As the cognitive approach the learning approach also sees aggression as something that can be learnt from the environment. To a certain extent both approaches are deterministic and are thus tied when explaining aggression. Both perspectives see social behavior such as aggression as something that can be learned.
There are different types of aggression. The first being instrumental aggression and the second hostile aggression. Instrumental aggression is linked to the behavioristic explanation of aggression. Where as Hostile aggression is connected with the cognitive explanation of aggressive behavior.
When main assumptions of the behavioristic approach are applied to aggression, instrumental aggression is introduced. According to the behaviorist aggression may be understood through instrumental aggression. Instrumental aggression is defined as aggressive behavior performed to reach a particular goal, as a means to an end. In behavioristic terms instrumental aggression is motivated by positive reinforcement. Cognitive perspective cannot simply accept this type of explanation of aggressive behavior as cognition seeks to understand mediating processes of stimulus response behavior. Thus the cognitive perspective may agree on instrumental aggression but will try to explain what had triggered the aggression due to positive reinforcement.
Hostile aggression is motivated by the desire to express anger and hostile feelings. This desire for expression of hostile feelings can be further linked with frustration. Thus pointing out the frustration aggression hypothesis.
One explanation offered by the cognitive perspective on aggression is the frustration aggression hypothesis. Frustration aggression hypothesis is one of the first explanations for aggression in psychology. Connected with the notion that aggression is an innate response tendency. Frustration has an intuitive appeal, thus limiting the notion of free will with the cognitive explanation. With this lack of free will the cognitive explanation is brought closer to the behavioristic explanation of aggression. Frustration aggression hypothesis is a theory developed by Dollard and Miller asserting that frustration is the sole reason for aggression. Frustration aggression hypothesis aggression to be driven by a desire to overcome frustration, i.e. blockage of a goal-directed activity, increases the likelihood of aggressive behavior. Cognition explains that frustration results in many responses one of which being aggression. Already with the use of the word response frustration aggression hypothesis can be seen related with the learning perspective.
With the behaviorist explanation on aggression it is obvious that direct reinforcement is seen as the trigger of aggression. Learning is defined as behavior through learned experiences. Modelling is another factor affecting the acquisition of aggressive behavior. Modelling is learning through imitation, observing a model being rewarded or punished for his/her behavior. Modeling and imitation was seen in the classic study of Bandura & Ross on children’s imitation of adult models behaving aggressively or non-aggressively.
In conclusion aggression can be explained with many approaches. With behaviorist and cognitive explanations it is evident that what ties these two perspectives is the determinism they both incorporate. The difference between cognitive and behaviouristic is that cognition seeks to explain reactions to aggression-eliciting stimuli and the way in which they pave way for aggressive responses where as behaviorism tends to understand aggressive behavior of an individual dependent upon direct reinforcement as well as observational learning.