Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Register here to gain access to SAGE's 500+ Journals Online

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lysak, H.
Right arrow Articles by Dobbs, A. R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Lysak, H.
Right arrow Articles by Dobbs, A. R.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, Vol. 15, No. 2, 233-243 (1989)
DOI: 10.1177/0146167289152010

Conceptions of Aggression

Prototype or Defining Features?

Hanna Lysak

Simon Fraser University

Brendan G. Rule

University of Alberta

Allen R. Dobbs

University of Alberta

According to attributional approaches, the amount of harm perpetrated, norm violation, and intent are criteria for defining aggression and evoking an observer's evaluation of the act. The major purpose of this study was to examine whether these criteria are used to define hostile, prosocial, and accidental aggression in terms of classical defining features or a prototypic view of the concept. Participants made judgments of typicality, blameworthiness, and aggressiveness about acts in stories portraying the three types of aggression. The results supported a classical view, showing that harmful acts characterized by malevolent intent and norm violations were judged as more typical, more aggressive, and more blameworthy than harmful acts lacking either or both of these criteria. Moreover, avoidability and motive acceptability were significant predictors of evaluations (blame) of the aggression. These results have implications for attributional analyses of aggression and suggest the need for a reorientation of emphasis in moral judgment research.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Human RelationsHome page
N. R. Branscombe and D. L. Wann
Role of Identification with a Group, Arousal, Categorization Processes, and Self-Esteem in Sports Spectator Aggression
Human Relations, October 1, 1992; 45(10): 1013 - 1033.
[Abstract] [PDF]