Department of Psychological Sciences, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn, Melbourne, Australia.
Centre for Forensic Behavioural Science, Swinburne University of Technology, Alphington, Melbourne, Australia.
Aggress Behav. 2023 Mar;49(2):141-153. doi: 10.1002/ab.22061. Epub 2022 Nov 21.
Experiencing a thought about harming or injuring another person is commonly reported by the general population. Aggressive intrusive thoughts (AITs) and aggressive scripts are two constructs commonly used to define the experience of thinking about harming another person. However, they are generally investigated separately and with two significantly different population groups; respectively, individuals with obsessive-compulsive disorder and people with a history of violent behavior. AITs and aggressive scripts are assumed to have very different implications for violence risk assessment, but conceptual overlap and an absence of empirical research renders this assumption premature. Using a battery of self-report measures, this study aimed to investigate the differential predictors of AITs and aggressive script rehearsal in a nonclinical sample. Additionally, using regression analyses, the predictors of self-reported aggressive behavior were explored in a sample of 412 adults (73% females; M = 31.96 years, SD = 11.02). Violence-supportive beliefs and frequency of anger rumination predicted the frequency of aggressive script rehearsal, and aggressive script rehearsal, anger rumination, and violence-supportive beliefs predicted a history of aggressive behavior. In contrast, obsessive beliefs were predictive of AITs, and only AITs were related to ego-dystonicity. Both AITs and aggressive script rehearsal were related to the use of thought control strategies. These findings support the contributions that maladaptive beliefs have in the experience of aggressive scripts and AITs. Beliefs about violence, a history of aggressive behavior, and ego-dystonicity appear to differentiate aggressive scripts from AITs.
一般人群常报告体验到伤害他人的想法。攻击性侵入性思维(AITs)和攻击性脚本是两个常用于定义伤害他人想法体验的结构。然而,它们通常是分开研究的,且针对两个显著不同的人群群体;分别是强迫症患者和有暴力行为史的人。人们假设 AITs 和攻击性脚本对暴力风险评估有非常不同的影响,但概念上的重叠和缺乏实证研究使得这一假设还不成熟。本研究使用一系列自我报告的测量方法,旨在调查非临床样本中 AITs 和攻击性脚本排练的不同预测因素。此外,在一个包含 412 名成年人的样本(73%为女性;M = 31.96 岁,SD = 11.02)中,使用回归分析探讨了自我报告的攻击行为的预测因素。支持暴力的信念和愤怒反刍的频率预测了攻击性脚本排练的频率,攻击性脚本排练、愤怒反刍和支持暴力的信念预测了有攻击性行为的历史。相比之下,强迫性信念预测了 AITs,只有 AITs 与自我意识有关。攻击性脚本排练和 AITs 都与思维控制策略的使用有关。这些发现支持了适应不良信念在攻击性脚本和 AITs 体验中的作用。关于暴力的信念、攻击行为的历史和自我意识障碍似乎可以区分攻击性脚本和 AITs。