At the recent American Association of Physical Anthropologists meetings in Portland, I sat through an interesting talk about lethal aggression in chimpanzees. The presenter, Michael Wilson from the University of Minnesota, did a good job of laying out a substantial overview of all the data we have on chimpanzee lethal aggression. Bottom line: chimps can be pretty violent, especially males. But exactly why they are violent is not fully understood. Importantly, if one removes the largest and most violent population from the dataset, then no single explanatory pattern emerges. Of course, this fuzzy and interesting conclusion is not what is making the rounds in the twitterverse.
Rather, folks are saying that this is just further evidence that chimpanzees, and their closest relatives (humans), are aggressive by nature. If this is true then domestic abuse, bullying, and warfare are pretty much to be expected: it is just the way we are.
Or not. Let's get our myth busting caps on and think about this; what does it mean to be aggressive by nature? Even more the point, what is aggression and where does it come from?
If humans have evolved as aggressors, if using violence is a core part of our nature, then aggression needs to be a thing (a trait) that can be targeted and shaped by evolutionary processes. There also needs to be evidence that humans (and our primate relatives) regularly rely on aggression, over other types of behavior, to achieve mating and other social successes.
Ok, so what do we know?
Aggression is not a single trait, or an easily described behavioral system. It is not a thing that has evolved as a package, but rather it is a suite of behaviors that has a dynamic and complicated range of expression. Anthropologists, biologists and psychologists note different behaviors and patterns of “aggression” when defending yourself versus when planning an attack, from mothers defending their infants, from predators chasing prey, in fear-induced aggression, in sex-related aggression, and in territorial aggression.
In humans there are no consistent patterns of aggressive behaviors that make men have more luck with women or succeed over other men for status, even though sometimes aggression does play a role. Even when fighting, many of the most effective professionals (such as in boxing and ultimate fighting) are good because of their ability to strategically constrain their aggression.
Ok, but what if aggression is itself a physiological system (part of our body) that has been favored over evolutionary time?
It’s not. Unlike a femur (the long bone in your upper leg) there is no single thing or pattern that we can measure and label as “aggression.” While we know that certain parts of the brain (the prefrontal cortex, the amygdala, the hypothalamus) interact with certain neurotransmitters (serotonin, Monoamine oxidase A (MAOA)) and a range of steroid hormones (like testosterone and other androgens) work together to produce aggressive behavior, we also see that there is no specific physiological or neurological system designed for aggression. Everything involved in the expression of aggression is tied to other systems and its use in behavior is highly contextual.
For example, take Monoamine oxidase A (called the “the warrior gene”). One version of this gene is associated with hyper aggression in males (it is little studied in females). However, expression of this gene is related to childhood stressors and life experience. We see that a slightly larger percentage of men with the “aggressive” version of this gene (compared to those without it), who live through real childhood trauma and social stress are highly violent and have trouble controlling their behavior as adults. But many of those with the “warrior” version of the gene don’t have these problems at all (me, for example). These same kinds of complexities are true for serotonin, testosterone, and the other hormones and neurotransmitters associated with aggression.
There is no consistent system or pattern in the human body or mind that we can point out as the seat or the main actor in aggressive behavior.
Well, what about the other primates and our fossil ancestors; our evolutionary comparisons? We know that common chimpanzees can be highly aggressive, but their sister species, the bonobos, rarely are; and both are equally related to humans. Across the primates you find that within-species violence resulting in death is rare, and not wide-scale. There is also no one dominant or consistent pattern of male aggression tied to mating success across primate species. While aggression is important in the social lives of monkeys and apes (as in humans) it is not the “driver” of social systems.
In the human fossil and archeological record there is no good evidence of intense aggression and warfare until very recently, and it is associated with the advent of permanent settlements, agriculture, and social stratification. Increased social inequality and more complex political and economic systems seem to correlate with more types of aggression and violence in human societies. Interestingly, these scenarios also correlate with larger and more complex peaceful relationships amongst and between peoples.
Humans can, and do, engage in a wide variety of aggression. However, aggression is not our primary “go to” behavior as successful organisms. There is insufficient evidence to argue that we have evolved a suite of specifically aggressive behaviors to succeed in the world. In fact, it is largely our abilities to get along and to negotiate complex social problems, with and without aggression, that make humans one of the most successful species on this planet (a topic for a future blog).
If you really want to think deeply about aggression, violence, abuse, warfare, and human nature, have a look at the references below; where everything I’ve stated here is discussed with details, data and explanation. Dive into the actual datasets and debates, and go bust some myths for yourself.
Archer, J. (2009) The nature of human aggression. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 32: 202–208
DeWall, C.N. and Anderson C.A. (2011) The general aggression model. In Shaver, P.R. and Mikulincer, M. Eds. Human Aggression and Violence: causes, manifestations, and consequences. American Psychological Association Pp.15-33
Ferguson, B. ( 2011) Born to live: challenging killer myths. In Sussman, R.W. &Cloninger, R.C. Eds. Origins of Altruism and Cooperation. Developments in Primatology: Progress and Prospects, Volume 36, Part 2, 249-270
Fuentes, A (2012) Race, monogamy, and other lies they told you: busting myths about human nature, Berkeley, University of California Press
Fry, D. (2012) War, Peace, and Human Nature. New York, Oxford University Press.
Hart, D.L. and Sussman, R.W. (2008) Man the hunted: primates, predators, and human evolution. New York: Basic Books
Muller, M. N. and Wrangham, R.W. (2009) Sexual coercion in primates and humans. Harvard University Press
Nelson, R.J. and Trainor, B.C. (2007) Neural mechanism for aggression Nature Reviews Neuroscience 8:536-546
Siegel, A. and Victoroff, J. (2009) Understanding human aggression: New insights from neuroscience. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry 32:209-215
Walker, P.L. (2001) A bioarcheological perspective on the history of violence. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 2001. 30:573–96
1. Moffitt TE, Caspi A, Harrington H, Milne BJ. Males on the life-course-persistent and adolescence-limited antisocial pathways: Follow-up at age 26 years. Dev Psychopathol. 2002;14(1):179–207.[PubMed]
2. Huesmann LR, Eron LD, Lefkowitz MM, Walder LO. The stability of aggression over time and generations. Dev Psych. 1984;20(6):1120–1134.
3. Bushman BJ, Huesmann LR. Short-term and Long-term Effects of Violent Media on Aggression in Children and Adults. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2006;160:348–352.[PubMed]
4. Huesmann LR, Kirwil L. Why observing violence increases the risk of violent behavior in the observer. In: Flannery D, editor. The Cambridge Handbook of Violent Behavior and Aggression. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; in press.
5. Berkowitz L, LePage A. Weapons as aggression-eliciting stimuli. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1967;7:202–7.
6. Bryant J, Zillmann D. Effect of intensification of annoyance through unrelated residual excitation on substantially delayed hostile behavior. J Exp Soc Psychol. 1979;15(5):470–80.
7. Geen RG, O’Neal EC. Activation of cue-elicited aggression by general arousal. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1969;11(3):289–92.[PubMed]
8. Huesmann LR. Imitation and the effects of observing media violence on behavior. In: Hurley S, Chater N, editors. Perspectives on imitation: From neuroscience to social science; Volume 2: Imitation, human development, and culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2005. pp. 257–266.
9. Meltzoff AN, Moore MK. Imitation of facial and manual gestures by human neonates: Resolving the debate about early imitation. In: Muir D, Slater A, editors. Infant Development: The Essential Readings. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers; 2000. pp. 167–81.
10. Rizzolati G, Fadiga L, Gallese V, Fogassi L. Premotor cortex and the recognition of motor actions. Cognitive Brain Res. 1996;3:131–41.[PubMed]
11. Huesmann LR. The role of social information processing and cognitive schema in the acquisition and maintenance of habitual aggressive behavior. In: Geen RG, Donnerstein E, editors. Human aggression: Theories, research, and implications for social policy. New York: Academic Press; 1998. pp. 73–109.
12. Dodge KA. Attributional bias in aggressive children. In: Kendall PC, editor. Advances in Cognitive-Behavioral Research and Therapy. Vol. 4. San Diego, CA: Academic Press; 1985. pp. 73–110.
13. Huesmann LR, Guerra NG. Children’s normative beliefs about aggression and aggressive behavior. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1997;72(2):408–19.[PubMed]
14. Comstock G, Paik H. Television and the American child. San Diego, CA: Academic Press; 1991.
15. Wilson BJ, Kunkel D, Linz D, Potter J, Donnerstein E, et al. Violence in television programming overall: University of California, Santa Barbara study. In: Seawall M, editor. National Television Violence Study. Vol. 1. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1997. pp. 3–184.
16. Roberts DF, Foehr UG, Rideout VJ. Generation M: Media in the lives of 8–18 year- olds. Menlo Park, CA: The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation; 2005.
17. Haninger K, Thompson KM. Content and ratings of teen-rated video games. JAMA. 2004;291(7):856–865.[PubMed]
18. Paik H, Comstock G. The effects of television violence on antisocial behavior: A meta-analysis. Commun Res. 1994;21:516–46.ress.
19. Anderson CA, Bushman BJ. Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: A meta- analytic review of the scientific literature. Psych Sci. 2001;12:353–59.[PubMed]
20. Bandura A, Ross D, Ross SA. Imitation of film-mediated aggressive models. J Abnorm Soc Psych. 1963b;67:3–11.[PubMed]
21. Bjorkqvist K. Violent Films, Anxiety, and Aggression. Helsinki: Finnish Society of Sciences and Letters; 1985.
22. Josephson WL. Television violence and children’s aggression: Testing the priming, social script, and disinhibition predictions. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1987;53:882–90.[PubMed]
23. Leyens JP, Parke RD, Camino L, Berkowitz L. Effects of movie violence on aggression in a field setting as a function of group dominance and cohesion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 1975;32:346–360.[PubMed]
24. Irwin AR, Gross AM. Cognitive tempo, violent video games, and aggressive behavior in young boys. J Family Violence. 1995;10:337–50.
25. Bartholow BD, Anderson CA. Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior: Potential sex differences. J Exp Soc Psych. 2002;38:283–90.
26. Anderson CA. Effects of violent movies and trait irritability on hostile feelings and aggressive thoughts. Aggressive Behav. 1997;23:161–78.
27. Anderson CA, Berkowitz L, Donnerstein E, Huesmann LR, Johnson J, Linz D, Malamuth N, Wartella E. The influence of media violence on youth. Psychological Science in the Public Interest. 2003;4(3):81–110.[PubMed]
28. Williams D, Skoric M. Internet fantasy violence: A test of aggression in an online game. Communication Monographs. 2005;72:217–233.
29. Milavsky JR. Quantitative studies in social relations. New York: Academic Press; 1982. Television and aggression: a panel study.
30. Huesmann LR, Lagerspetz K, Eron LD. Intervening variables in the TV violence- aggression relation: Evidence from two countries. Dev Psych. 1984;20:746–75.
31. Huesmann LR, Eron LD, editors. Television and the Aggressive Child: A Cross- National Comparison. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1986.
32. Eron LD, Huesmann LR, Lefkowitz MM, Walder LO. Does television violence cause aggression? Am Psychol. 1972;27:253–63.[PubMed]
33. Huesmann LR, Moise-Titus J, Podolski CL, Eron LD. Longitudinal relations between children’s exposure to TV violence and their aggressive and violent behavior in young adulthood: 1977–1992. Devl Psych. 2003;39:201–21.[PubMed]
34. Huesmann LR, Miller LS. Long-term effects of repeated exposure to media violence in childhood. In: Huesmann LR, editor. Aggressive Behavior: Current Perspectives. New York: Plenum Press; 1994. pp. 153–83.
35. Slater MD, Henry KL, Swaim RC, Anderson LL. Violent media content and aggressiveness in adolescents: A downward spiral model. Commun Res. 2003;30(6):713–36.
36. Bandura A, Ross D, Ross SA. Vicarious reinforcement and imitative learning. J Abnorm Soc Psych. 1963;67:601–07.[PubMed]
37. Berkowitz L, Powers PC. Effects of timing and justification of witnessed aggression on the observers’ punitiveness. J Res Pers. 1979;13:71–80.
38. Leyens JP, Picus S. Identification with the winner of a fight and name mediation: Their differential effects upon subsequent aggressive behavior. Brit J Soc Clin Psych. 1973;12:374–77.[PubMed]
39. Abelson RP. A variance explanation paradox: When a little is a lot. Psych Bull. 1985;97:129–33.
40. Rosenthal R. Media violence, antisocial behavior, and the social consequences of small effects. J Soc Issues. 1986;42(3):141–54.
41. Bushman BJ, Huesmann LR. Effects of televised violence on aggression. In: Singer D, Singer J, editors. Handbook of children and the media. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2001. pp. 223–54.