Barlett Christopher, Witkower Zachary, Mancini Colin, Saleem Muniba
Department of Psychology, Gettysburg College, Gettysburg, Pennsylvania.
Department of Psychology, University of British Columbia, British Columbia, Canada.
Aggress Behav. 2016 Nov;42(6):555-562. doi: 10.1002/ab.21650. Epub 2016 Mar 10.
In two experimental studies, we examine the extent to which strong or weak mitigating information after a provocation alters aggressive responding. In Study 1, we randomly assigned 215 (108 female) college-aged participants to a strong or weak provocation by having a research assistant talk to the participant about failing a task in a harsh or confused tone. This was followed by a second research assistant giving a strong or weak excuse to the participant regarding the first research assistant's behavior. Then, aggressive behavior was assessed using a researcher rating task. In Study 2, 63 (25 female) college-aged participants interacted with a confederate on the CRT. All participants were strongly provoked by receiving strong noise blasts. After five CRT trials, the confederate delivered weak or strong mitigating information to the participant regarding the noises blasts. The results indicated that: (i) strong provocations are more likely to increase aggression than weak provocations; (ii) strong mitigating information is more likely to decrease aggression than weak mitigating information; and (iii) the varying strength of mitigating information is important in situations involving weak, but not strong provocations: strong mitigating information is more likely than weak mitigating information reduce aggression when provocation is strong, but not when provocation is weak. We discuss the importance of mitigating information in decreasing aggressive behavior and the conditions in which mitigating information is especially likely to be effective. Aggr. Behav. 42:555-562, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
在两项实验研究中，我们考察了挑衅后强烈或微弱的减轻罪责信息在多大程度上改变攻击反应。在研究1中，我们通过让一名研究助理用严厉或困惑的语气与参与者谈论其在一项任务中失败，将215名（108名女性）大学年龄的参与者随机分配到强烈或微弱挑衅组。接着，第二名研究助理就第一名研究助理的行为向参与者给出强烈或微弱的借口。然后，使用研究者评分任务评估攻击行为。在研究2中，63名（25名女性）大学年龄的参与者在认知反应测试（CRT）中与一名同谋进行互动。所有参与者都因受到强烈的噪音冲击而受到强烈挑衅。在进行五次CRT测试后，同谋就噪音冲击向参与者提供微弱或强烈的减轻罪责信息。结果表明：（i）强烈挑衅比微弱挑衅更有可能增加攻击性；（ii）强烈的减轻罪责信息比微弱的减轻罪责信息更有可能减少攻击性；（iii）减轻罪责信息的不同强度在涉及微弱而非强烈挑衅的情况下很重要：当挑衅强烈时，强烈的减轻罪责信息比微弱的减轻罪责信息更有可能减少攻击性，但当挑衅微弱时则不然。我们讨论了减轻罪责信息在减少攻击行为中的重要性以及减轻罪责信息特别可能有效的条件。《攻击行为》42:555 - 562，2016年。© 2016威利期刊公司
