my;
15" 1
V

r
‘-

a

“-A..'.,‘ '::v -
K v$~.~"3€,"’afll€’:t.‘ .E’zr ~

.u-t‘a- ~..-

' 1x24“

‘H: .4

.c.
3‘
if:

s}

." “5-9.5”

.r..:(,_,~“

.5...» . .w

a 1"

v
\
~J

r~
.—

36. s six-van
gem ”‘mw '
'{fm n- 3‘ " " "a ‘

‘ . Ate";
~

34 O '
J‘:\ .I} ,{v

 

llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

3 1293 01020

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled
A Perspective on Aggressive
Behavior of Adolescent Boys

presented by

Rachel Louise DiCioccio

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Masters degree in Communication

 

 

jor professor

0.7 639 MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution

 

LIBRARY
Michigan State
Unlverslty

 

 

 

PLAOE I! RETURN DDXbmwoufianfimyum.
TO AVOID FINES Mum onorbdonddo duo.

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

a r 1
a“
. .
"I
t‘ . 9
\
'4 o « I.
/ ‘ 7 .
b-

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MSU ION! WWI/E“ OW Imam

W1

 

A PERSPECTIVE ON AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR OF ADOLESCENT BOYS

BY

Rachel Louise DiCioccio

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
MASTERS OF ARTS

Department of Communication

1994

ABSTRACT

A PERSPECTIVE ON AGGRESSION OF ADOLESCENT BOYS

BY

Rachel Louise DiCioccio

This thesis presents and applies a conceptual
understanding of the aggressive behavior of adolescent boys.
This conceptual framework consists of three main components:
interactionist perspective, cognitive social leering
theories, and impulse control factors. The integration of
these three elements creates a strong theoretical foundation
for understanding aggression. This approach was applied to
the self-reported accounts of seventh grade boys. The
results suggest that the subjects who consistently
demonstrated aggressive behavior, also showed signs of poor
information processing and a lack of impulse control. ‘This
suggests that a deficit or absence of one or both of these

components, encourages aggressive tendencies.

Copyright by
RACHEL LOUISE DICIOCCIO
1994

To my parents, for inspiring me
to take on the world.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

There are many people I wish to acknowledge for helping
me to accomplish this thesis. First and foremost, I would
like to thank my parents for their love and encouragement.

I would also like to extend my thanks and gratitude to
my graduate committee: Dr. William Donohue, Dr. Charles
Atkin, and Dr. Vince Hoffman. Through his knowledge and
accomplishments, Dr. Donohue has served as an excellent role
model. His interest and concern in my work has been a
strong motivation for obtaining my goals. Dr..Atkin and Dr.
Hoffman gave me excellent advice and guidance toward writing
my thesis.

Finally, I would like to thank my friends and
colleagues for their support and understanding. Most
importantly a huge thank-you is extended to my dear friend

Anne Hubbell, for putting up with me and making me laugh.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Tables

Chapter I - Introduction.
Literature Review . .
Literature Critique.
Conceptual Framework
Research Questions

Chapter II - Methodology.
Subjects . . . . . . .
Preparation of Materials
Procedure. .

Sequencing
Measurement.

Chapter III - Results . . . . .

Chapter IV - Discussion . . .
Research Questions . .
Conceptual Framework . .

Prevention and Intervention.

Appendix A : Interview Questions.

Appendix B : Example of Sequenced Transcript.

Appendix C : Felson's Coding Scheme

Appendix D : Initial Twenty Codes

Appendix E : Revised Final Five Category

Coding Scheme .

List of References .

vi

vii

10
ll
24

27
27
28
28
29
3O
33
45
45
49
50
53
56
58

59

61

62

TABLE
I .—

II -

III -

LIST OF TABLES

Physical Aggressive Conflict

Verbal Aggressive Conflict

Abstaining From Aggressive Behavior.

vii

44

48

52

Chapter I
Introduction

Interpersonal violence is one of the leading causes of
death in today's society. One population particularly at
risk is adolescents. According to various reports (Bureau
of Justice Statistics, 1992), homicide ranks among the top
five causes of death for children. Adolescents demonstrate
these violent and aggressive tendencies with their peers,
families, and strangers. Nationally, the number of youth
arrested for violent crimes increased 50% between 1987 and
1991.

Research shows that the school environment has become a
stage for adolescent violence. The majority of child
related violence occurs within schools or on school property
(McDermott, 1983). Violence within the school can be
related to the individuals involved, the school, the
community, and the individual's family structure.

Unfortunately, the majority of our understanding
of adolescent violence is limited to statistics that explain
the results of violence and aggression. For the most part,
we do not know how children view conflict, aggression, and
violent behavior. Why do children perceive violence as
being the "best" option? How do they evaluate their goals

and the consequences of violent behavior? Finally, how do

2

they justify their actions? Answers to these questions
would provide explanations and insight into adolescent
violence.

Another weak link is the lack of concise and clear
theoretical reasoning of what adolescent violence really is.
Aggression has been defined as an act in which a person
attempts or threatens to harm another person, regardless of
the ultimate goal of the act (Felson, 1984). This
definition explains aggression as a process used to reach a
desired outcome. Examples of this would include defending
oneself, punishment, teaching a lesson, and saving face
(Felson, 1984). Using this definition, research on
aggressive behavior has been based on several different
theoretical perspectives. Adolescent aggression has been
studied from a frustration-aggression perspective (Dollard,
Doop, Miller, Mowrer, and Sears, 1939; Berkowitz, 1989;
Buss, 1963) and an interactionist approach (Felson, 1984;
Tedeschi, Gaes, and Rivera, 1977). At the same time,
cognitive theories of social learning and social information
processing have provided explanations for aggressive
behavior in children (Bandura, 1978; Dodge, 1990). Although
these theories provide strong arguments, there is not a
strong theoretical understanding about the factors that
influence adolescent violence and aggression.

There are two main goals of this thesis. The first aim
is to develop a clear conceptual understanding of the
problem of adolescent violence. The second goal is to apply

this theory to actual cases of aggressive behavior. Through

3

the integration of interactionist and cognitive learning
theories, and the inclusion of individual and social
variable influence factors, a theoretical foundation is
established.

The conceptual framework proposed in this thesis is
comprised of four elements. The first component is the
situational factors. This defines the context of the
incident by identifying the individuals involved, the
location of the incident, and the issues of conflict. The
second component in this model is information processing.
It is at this point that the individual evaluates the
situational factors, identifies the possible outcomes, and
weighs their benefits and losses. The third aspect of the
framework introduces individual skill variables and social
influence variables as components of impulse control. When
an individual is overwhelmed by anger, the results are
impulsive and destructive actions (Felson, and Tedeschi,
1993). The ability to control this impulse allows an
individual to have more influence over the conflict. The
final component of this model is the aggressive response.
There are three possible options which can be used to
determine the outcome of the incident: 1) physical violence,
2) verbal aggressiveness, and 3) abstinence. The outcome
that is chosen is determined by the individuals information
processing and the degree of impulse control.

The second part of this thesis examines adolescent
aggressive incidents. The goal is to conduct a study that

is based on interviewing adolescents with a history of

4

violence. Through self-reported data, aggressive incidents
will be evaluated in order to be further understood. First,
it is necessary to review the literature and survey the
different approaches to aggression. Considering these
different perspectives, it is then important to organize a
model that integrates these theories, as well as introduces

a new conceptual framework.

WW

Research in the area of aggression is based on two
major approaches: frustration-aggression and interactionist
theories. The frustration-aggression hypothesis assumes
that frustration is the sole antecedent of aggression (Buss,
1963). Dollard, Doop, Miller, Mowrer, and Sears (1939)
identified that the strength of frustration and punishment
variables determine the intensity of aggression. This
theory generalizes, by making the assumption that aggression
is always the consequence of frustration. In order to
justify this theory, it is necessary to adopt Dollard's
definition of frustration. Frustration in this context is
defined as the "interference with the occurrence of an
instigated goal-response at its proper time in the behavior
sequence" (Dollard, Doop, Miller, Mower, and Sears, 1939).
This explains that when an individual anticipates achieving
a goal, and this goal is thwarted, the result is

frustration.

5

Further evaluation of this theory, however, points out
several faults in this assumption. The first criticism is
that the frustration-aggression hypothesis neglects the
possibility that aggression can be a learned instrumental
behavior (Berkowitz, 1989). This theory also fails to
recognize that not all aggressive acts have hostile intent
(Berkowitz, 1989). Aggression is not only used to do harm,
but also as a way of obtaining another objective. For these
reasons the frustration-aggression hypothesis does not
provide a strong theoretical foundation for the study of

aggression.

I l I' . l
The second hypothesis to understanding aggression is
from an interactionist perspective. Some of the most
significant research on aggression is derived from the
interactionist approach. Symbolic interactionism, although
general and vague in its explication of certain concepts,
does provide insight into aggression. Symbolic
interactionism defines the way in which a person interprets
a situation, and plans a course of action. When the plan
that is decided on involves harm-doing in some way, the
action can be defined as aggressive (Felson, 1982). This
approach is based on the assumption that an individual is
responsible for understanding the responses of three types
of others: significant others, generalized others, and
people who serve as the audience. Symbolic interactionism

emphasizes the significant and generalized others in an

6

aggressive situation (Felson, 1982). This means that an
individual's aggressive behavior is influenced by the
presence of meaningful people, as well as strangers. This
also includes the behavior conducted in private and how it
may reflect the internalized audience (Felson, 1978; Mead,
1934). Although the presence of an actual audience is a
powerful determinant of aggressive behavior, symbolic
interactionism also recognizes one's own self perception as
influential. This view suggest that individuals tend to
behave in ways consistent with internalized values and
identities (Felson, 1978). Symbolic interactionism explains
aggression through three different theories: impression
management, coercive power, and punishment. Each one of
these explanations approaches aggression from a different

perspective.

W Derived from symbolic

interactionism, Impression Management Theory stresses the
importance of an external audience as a determinant of ones
behavior. Impression management borrows the basic
assumptions of symbolic interactionism in that it accepts
that individuals respond to a symbolic environment, that the
role taking process is crucial, and that the respondent
faces a great deal of difficulty when predicting behavior
(Felson, 1982). The difference is that for impression
management theory the person's behavior is determined by
their perception of what will make them look favorable in

the eyes of the audience (Felson, 1982). When aggression is

7

studied as impression management it centers on the role of
the self in the situation (Felson, 1984). In this way it is
perceived as a face saving behavior when one interprets an
action as an intentional attack. When a person perceives
that their image or persona has been insulted, they are
likely to retaliate. It is the original disapproval that
casts or places the respondents in an unfavorable identity
(Wienstein & Deutschberger, 1963). Because of the
significance of the audience, the respondent must act to
counteract this insult and nullify their negative image.
Aggression in this way serves as a reward (Felson, 1982).
Retaliation is most likely when third parties are around
because the respondents' face saving needs are intensified.
Important to note, however, is that if third parties act as
mediators of the conflict, the aggressive behavior is less
serious and both parties are able to back down without
losing face (Rubin, 1980).

Although Impression Management Theory provides a strong
argument for aggression as a face saving mechanism, it fails
to provide an explanation for two other important aggressive
and violent situations. The first weakness is that it does
not account for aggression that is used strategically to
obtain rewards (Felson, 1984). Violent acts such as robbery
are not performed to maintain a positive image, but rather
to gain a tangible reward. Second, this approach also does
not account for initial attacks of aggressive behavior.

Face saving and honor maintenance are only relevant when

people feel they have been attacked

(Felson, 1984).

Coergiye_figwer. The second interactionist theory
discussed in this paper is coercive power. Coercive power
can be used to explain many different domains aside from
aggression. When discussed in terms of aggression, it is
associated with self defense, revenge, reciprocity, and self
presentation. Tedeschi, Gaes, and Rivera, (1977) explain
this theory as the use of aggression to influence people
when other methods fail. After weighing the benefits and
loses, the respondent must decide if the actions will
produce and justify the rewards. Tedeschi and Bonoma (1977)
explain that when an individual can not persuade or
manipulate the target to meet their demands, then the
success of their influence is dependent on injury,
immobilization, and destroying the target.

The respondent must consider three important factors
when using this approach: 1) what values the target.
controls, 2) the probability of success, and 3) the
potential cost (Tedeschi, Gaes, Rivera, 1977). When using
coercive power, the goal is achieved when the respondent
chooses a target and type of influence that will
successfully use these three factors. The key is to reach
one's interpersonal objectives with the least amount of
personal loses (Tedeschi, Gaes, Rivera, 1977). Factors that
contribute to an individual's use of coercive power are a
lack of self confidence, failure to perceive costs, fear,

self presentation, face saving maintenance of authority,

9

reciprocity, self defense, perceived justice (Tedeschi,
Gaes, Rivera, 1977).

.Although aggression as coercive power is able to
explain initial attacks and retaliation, unlike impression
management, it to is limited in its explanation (Felson,
1984). First, harmful acts that are used as face saving are
not always coercive. Actions that help an individual avoid
losing face in front of a significant other do not also work
to force the others to change their behavior.

Secondly, the main intention of harmful acts is not
always to influence others (Felson, 1984). Coercive
aggression that is used to maintain justice is not an
example of social influence. There is aggressive behavior

that is acceptable as the means to a justifiable end.

Punishment. Punishment is conceptualized as a third
interactionist perspective. This approach suggests that
aggression is legitimized when it is identified as
punishment for a wrongful act (Felson, 1984). Punishment
can be defined in terms of the legal system and informal
acts. Legal punishments are controlled by the state and
govern what penalties are appropriate for what offenses.
Informal acts of punishment can range from a reproach to a
verbal/physical attack, and can be carried out by persons
who have observed the violation (Felson, 1984). The
rationale for both of these types of punishment is the same:
deterrence and retribution. Deterrence defines punishment

as a way of discouraging others from committing future

10

offenses. Retribution refers to a person's desire to punish
someone for their misbehavior. The punishment approach
suggests a control process that occurs early in the
encounter (Felson, 1984). The product of this process is
puniShment, and it is demonstrated in the form of physical

attack, insults, or reproaches.

1.! I : 'I'

These three interactionist perspectives offer insights
into the different ways in which aggression is used to
accomplish a goal. However, these explanations are
incomplete in addressing certain issues. Impression
management, coercive power, and punishment, each describe
the various reasons individuals engage in aggressive
behavior. Impression management interprets aggressive
behavior as a face saving mechanism, when an individual
feels they under personal attack (Felson, 1984). Coercive
power defines aggression as a last resort, an influential
mechanism (Tedeschi, Gaes, and Rivera, 1977). Finally,
punishment illustrates aggression as a response to a
misbehavior (Black, 1983). These three approaches are only
successful in explicating aggressive behavior as it pertains
to specific conflict situations. These interactionist
approaches fail to provide a rationale that encompasses a
wide range of cognitive factors, individual factors, and
situational factors.

When creating an all inclusive explanation for

aggression, it is necessary to recognize cognitive and

11

social learning factors as instrumental elements in
explaining aggression. The way in which an individual
interprets and evaluates information greatly influences
their perceptions of an aggressive attack (Dodge and Coie,
1987). At the same time, these perceptions regulate how an
individual chooses to retaliate to an aggressive attack
(Dodge and Coie, 1987). In this way information processing
plays a key role in the development of aggressive conflict.

These interactionist explanations also fail to discuss
the factors that restrain an individual from engaging in
aggressive behavior. What are the motivations that allow an
individual to control their desire to be aggressive? What
process takes place when an individual chooses not to use
aggression to punish or coerce? This restraint is defined
as impulse control. Through the influence of individual and
social variables, an individual is able to prevent the
escalation of a conflict into violence, by maintaining
impulse control.

Further investigation into the area of aggression
stresses the need for a conceptual framework that
incorporates the existing interactionist literature, and
integrates cognitive theories and the concept of impulse
control. The combination of these three components
establishes a theoretical understanding that can explain

aggression to a much greater extent.

W

There are three variables used to explain the

12

conceptual framework of this thesis: situational factors,
information processing, and impulse control. Together,
these variables offer an explanation for aggressive
behavior. These variables present a variety of factors that
influence the individual and the situation of an aggressive
incident. The variables do not provide a sequential
understanding of the factors leading up to aggressive
behavior, but rather represent the different components that

contribute to aggression.

5.! l' J E I

The initial stage of this model is the existence of an
aggressive situation. The aggressive conflict is defined by
the individuals involved and the logistics of the incident.
The relationship the respondents has with the antagonist is
a strong determinant of the use of aggression. The
antagonist can be a family member, such as a parent or
sibling, a friend, an acquaintance, a superior, (such as a
teacher) and also a stranger. Depending on the connection
between the the two individuals, the aggressive
ramifications are established.

The second situational factor of a conflict is the
setting of the incident. Where the conflict takes place has
a definite bearing on the degree of aggressive behavior.
Aggressive conflicts that take place within the school are
influenced differently than those that take place at home.

Finally, the presence of other people at the time of an

aggressive incident plays a powerful role in determining the

13

degree of aggressive behavior. Third parties intervene in
conflicts for a variety of reasons: at the request of the
individuals involved, of their own accord, or to impose
their own decisions (Rubin, 1980). The presence and
involvement of third parties in an aggressive conflict,
plays a major role in the outcome of the incident.
Depending on how influential the party is, the individual's

interpretation of the conflict is altered.

2 'l' S . J I .

The first phase of the conceptual model introduces
cognitive social learning. Under the heading of cognitive
learning, there are four different perspectives that deal
with aggression. Within the framework of social learning
theory, aggression is explained by how aggressive patterns
develop, what provokes aggressive behavior, and how
aggressive actions are sustained (Bandura, 1978). The
origins of aggression are established through observational
learning, reinforced performance, and structural
determinants (Bandura, 1978). Bandura (1978) explains that
the instigation of aggression includes physical/verbal
assaults, instruction control, and influencing incentives,
.while regulators of aggression are punishment, external
controls, and self reinforcement. The most influential of
these three is the origins of aggression (Bandura, 1978).
Observational learning of aggression allows a child to
acquire a large repertoire of aggression while bypassing the

lessons of trial and error. These lessons are most strongly

14
enforced by family members. Studies of family aggression
show that parents who use aggressive solutions tend to have
children who use the same resolution tactics with others
(Hoffman, 1960).

One theory used to justify aggression is Social
Learning Theory. Social learning analysis contends that
defensive aggression is maintained by the individual's
anticipated consequences rather then the immediate effects
(Patterson, 1967). For example, a child views their
aggressive actions as a means of reaching a desired goal,
without considering the actual consequences of the
aggressive act.

An influential determinant of one's behavior is not
only the perceived ability to perform the action, but also
the consequences one foresees as being a result of that
action (Perry, Perry, and Rasmussen, 1986). Significant to
the aggression and social learning relationship are two
classes of social cognition: 1) perception of self-efficacy,
and 2) response-outcome expectancies. Research suggests
that part of a child's motivation to act aggressively comes
from a misguided perception of the projected outcome.
Although social learning theorists view self-efficacy
perceptions and outcome expectations as causal influences on
aggressive behavior, this is not to suggest that a child
reviews these possibilities each time they are presented
with a conflict (Perry, Perry, and Rasmussen, 1986).

The cognitive theories of attribution, decision making,

and information processing can be applied to aggressive and

15

violent behavior problems in children (Dodge, 1980).
Attribution Theory explains that based on logical
principles, individuals search for causes of events and
respond behaviorally according to those attributions
(Kelley, 1971). It is when illogical principles are

used that attributional errors are made. Dodge (1980) finds
that an individual's inability to evaluate situational
factors, or accurately interpret situational outcomes
encourages attributions of hostile intent, and therefore
warrants an aggressive response. An individual's aggressive
retaliation is a direct function of the degree to which they
attribute negative feelings to a provocateur (Epstein and
Taylor, 1967).

Also theorized under the theory of attribution, is the
concept of "hedonic relevance" or motivational significance
(Jones and Davis, 1965). Motivational significance defines
the individuals incentive to commit the aggressive act.

This theory explains that an individual's motivational
significance of an act to the respondent will effect the
probability that the respondent will make correspondent
inferences about the perpetrator of the act (Jones and
Davis, 1965). For example, when a child's toy is broken by
a peer, there are several factors that influence their
interpretation this action. If the toy had a high hedonic
relevance to the child, then they are more likely to
attribute malicious intent to the peer than if the toy was
unimportant. It is this motivational significance that

encourages aggressive retaliation.

16

The third theory from a cognitive learning perspective
is decision making theory. Decision Making Theory is based
on the cognitive principle individuals use in making
judgments and decisions (Dodge, 1980). A common problem
that people face is how to distinguish and sort through the
abundance of stimulus information. Two key issues when
making these inferences are representativeness and
availability (Dodge, 1980). Representitiveness deals with
the way in which stimulus is classified according to certain
characteristics. For example, if a child has been verbally
abused by male peers repeatedly, they might fear a new peer
just because they are male. Availability is similar in that
it is based on judgments of the likelihood of an action
taking place and on how frequently it is stored in memory
(Dodge, 1980).

The Information Processing Theory is an extension of
Attribution Theory and Decision Making Theory in that it
views an individual's actions as a result of the processing
of social cues (Dodge, 1982). When a child can not properly
interpret someone else's actions, the decision making skills
used to choose the response are impaired. .Acting on these
misunderstood social cues will increase the probability of
aggressive and deviant behavior. Dodge (1980) uses the
social cognitive theory to maintain that aggressive behavior
is directly influenced by poor and inadequate patterns of
information processing. A child's perception of the
antagonists intent is what determines an aggressive response

(Dodge, Murphy, and Buchsbaum, 1984). For instance, a child

17

who is bumped in the lunch.line can interpret this action as
accidental or intentional. The child's response will
reflect their interpretation. This rational suggests that
successful development of information processing skills will
result in less aggression and more constructive conflict
(Dodge, and Crick, 1990).

Three kinds of processes are particularly crucial:
encoding and interpretation of cues, response decision, and
response enactment (Dodge, 1980). The lack of one or all of
these skills will increase the potential of aggressive
behavior. The first step is encoding information. This is
a process of selecting the relevant information from a
multitude of stimulus cues. Failure to properly encode the
cues will increase the possibility of an aggressive response
to a peer's actions (Dodge, 1980).

After the cues are encoded, it is necessary to
interpret them and give them meaning. If the peer's
behavior is clear, it is simple for the respondent to make
an accurate interpretation, however if they are not, the the
respondent has a greater tendency to misinterpret and and
place attention on malicious and benign information (Dodge
and Newman, 1981). Finally the respondent accesses the
possible behavioral responses. The individual,s skills of
accessing the appropriate strategies for resolution are
tainted at this point, if the first two steps have been
impaired. Misinterpretation of social cues and poor
response access and evaluation are deficient processing

skills which lead to aggressive behavior.

18
Impul§e_gentrel
The examination of aggressive and violent behavior in
children includes an evaluation of individual and social
influence factors. Research in this area provides insight
into the relationship between information processing and the
development of impulse control. Impulse control represents
the second phases of this theoretical model. Significant to
aggressive and violent behavior is the influence of
individual and social influence factors. Central to this
approach is the idea of impulse control. Impulse is defined
as the motivation that drives an individual to respond to a
situation in a certain way. In recognizing the existence of
impulses, an individual exercises self reflective skills.
It is this self reflection that identifies impulse control
or the lack of impulse control. The level at which an
individual is able to control their impulse determines the
outcome of the conflict (Felson and Tedeschi, 1993).
Berkowitz (1962) suggests that impulsive violence usually
starts out as verbal aggression and culminates into physical
aggression. For example, children who have been insulted by
a peer are likely to want to retaliate physically. Without
control over this impulse, children are more likely to use
physical force to control the situation, perhaps by hitting
the threatening other.
Impulse control is achieved when successful
interpersonal skills are combined with positive social
influence. Interpersonal skills are an individual's

internal capabilities or resources for interpreting and

19

 

responding to conflict. Positive social influence is the
prosocial external control over an individual's impulse.
The influence serves as leverage against acting on negative
impulses.

Elements of impulse control are divided into two
categories. Individual skill variables include: 1)
self-esteem, 2) communication skills, and 3) conflict
management skills. The second category of social leverage
variables include: 4) parenting, 5) attachment to school,
6) a moral validity of the law, and 7) awareness of health
and nutrition. These seven variables are the core of
successful impulse control. It is the lack of, or
insufficient development of, these variables that makes
individuals, particularly adolescents, more susceptible to
violence, drug and substance abuse, promiscuity, and law

violations (Fagan, 1987).

I l'V” l J 51.1] I! . 1 1 . S 1 E-E I .

Self-esteem is a skill which influences a child's
behavior and their decision making process. Without a
feeling of self-esteem or a sense of self-confidence in
their ability to make and follow through with decisions,
children are unable to make successful decisions regarding
their behavior (Dryfoos, 1990). Low self-esteem can hinder
the development of decision making and problem-solving
skills. Dryfoos (1990) contends that positive self-esteem
and a strong sense of self-identity, fosters children's

ability to regulate their own behavior. .Although this

20

source does not directly refer to violent behavior, it draws
a significant connection between self-esteem, decision
making, and regulating behavior.

Dryfoos (1990) also identifies the importance of
self-esteem in acknowledging that there is a relationship
between low self-esteem and delinquent behavior among
children. Low self-esteem can serve as an important
predictor of problem behavior. Analysis to date, however,
has been unable to provide a measurable correlation between
self-esteem/locus of control and delinquency. The absence
of proof may be do to the fact that in multiple variable
studies, self-esteem does not demonstrate high levels of

significance.

I l' 'l J 51.1] M . 11 . : . I' 51.1] .

Communication skills are the essence of interpersonal
interaction. The way in which individuals interact with
others, perceive others, and respond to others is a
reflection of their communication abilities. Communication
skills are necessary in order for individuals to listen to
others, develop proposals, and bargain over goals (Donohue,
1992). It is when these skills are inadequate and impaired,
that the individual resorts to aggressive and violent

behavior to resolve the conflict (Infante, 1987).

I l' . l 1 El .11 I! . ll . : {1' I ll I S] .1] .
Conflict management skills are an obvious component of

impulse control. Knowledge in conflict reduction and

21

problem solving leads to successful conflict management.
Awareness of the conflict, proper diagnosis of its nature,
and a rational approach towards handling the situation
achieves a win/win resolution. .According to Tedeschi
(1983), conflict management also relies on an individual's
ability to evaluate the possibilities and the outcomes. He
contends that the probability of aggressive behavior is
dependent upon the rational evaluation of alternatives.
People who are unable to remove themselves from the
emotional tension of the conflict have a hard time arriving
at a clear understanding of the dispute and in tern do not
adequately judge their alternatives. Individuals who are
unable to accurately assess benefits and losses are more
likely to engage in conflict.

One approach toward equipping children with conflict
management skills is through peer mediation. Peer mediation
is a school based program developed as an effective way of
resolving situations that are difficult to address through
traditional means (Dryfoos, 1990). The process of peer
mediation encourages children to engaged in decision making
that effects their own lives. Mediation training and
involvement in the resolution process helps children to
recognize their actions and apply problem-solving skills to

reach a solution.

5 . J I M . l] . E l' .
Fagan (1987), argues that inadequate parental bonds

have a direct correlation with delinquent behavior. From

22

childhood to adulthood the major source of social control
comes from the family (Hawkins and Weiss, 1985). This is a
crucial element in the development of a child's
understanding of self and others. The absence or breakdown
of these socializing agents leads to juvenile delinquency
(Hirschi, 1969). Parenting is the most powerful and
influential force in a child's life. Through the
development of attachments and bonds to parents, children
learn to form other crucial bonds that are necessary in
order to be productive. Children who do not develop these
parental bonds fail to the value of other relationships, and

therefore do not value their loss.

Fagan (1987) contends that an attachment to parents
will lead to an attachment to school and commitment to
education. Recognizing the importance of an education
allows a child to value their accomplishments and more
importantly, their future. Children who do not receive
appropriate and effective sanctions for their actions, from
parents and schools, are less likely to value their behavior

and commitment to the broader society (Fagen, 1987).

S . J I M . 1] _ H J M 1.1.! E I! I .

Fagan's (1987) integrated model suggests that youth who
lack family support and tend to experience failure in school
are most vulnerable to becoming involved in illegal

activities and violence. Without a foundation of support

23

and commitment, children cannot differentiate between loss
and achievement. Children who are faced with negative
information about themselves from the home and school often
discard the rules and values of the society which has put
them in this disillusioning position (McGuire, Prestly,
1985). Socialization through direct contact and social
institutions encourages cultural learning, social learning,
and social bonds, three key components necessary for the

reduction of violent behavior.

Although there have been claims that suggest a
connection between juvenile delinquency and dietary
inadequacies, there has been no credible evidence to support
these findings (Gray, 1983). At the same time evidence does
support a relationship between caffeine and hyperactivity.
In a study conducted with grade school children, results
reported that high caffeine use caused nervousness,
frustration, and easily aroused anger (Rapoport, 1986).

These seven elements define the significant factors of
impulse control development. It is when an individual has
learned and experienced these components, that they have a
positive perspective of conflict. Without these skills and
leverage variables a child is not equiped with the proper
tools needed to overcome aggressive and violent tendencies,
when involved in a conflict.

This conceptual model is successful in providing a

strong foundation for the explanations of aggressive

24

behavior. Through the synthesis of interactionist
approaches to aggression, cognitive social learning
theories, and the individual skill and social leverage
variables of impulse control, a basis for understanding
aggression is presented. Interactionist theory defines the
scope of aggressive behavior. Cognitive learning represents
the information processing that takes place during an
aggressive conflict. Finally, impulse control demonstrates
an individual's capacity to govern their own aggressive

desires and actions.

W

The fundamental groundwork of this thesis originated in
an earlier study conducted by Felson (1984). Through
Felson's (1984) original evaluation of aggression, the
skeletal framework for this thesis is established. Felson's
(1984) analysis of aggression is conducted through the
self-reported data of aggressive and non-aggressive
individuals. The data collected from these transcripts is
used to rationalize different aspects of the interactionist
theories.

Born out of this study is the basis for this thesis.
Using self-reported data of adolescent boys, this thesis is
a modified replication of Felson's (1984) study. By asking
the same script of interview questions, and dividing
aggressive conflict into three categories, this thesis
explores aggressive behavior in the same context of Felson's

(1984) study.

25

The fundamental assumptions guiding this thesis
involve how an individual interprets an aggressive
situation, what governs their decision making processes, and
what are the impulse control factors that determine their
aggressive tendencies. The literature review argues for the
connection between information processing and impulse
control, and how they serve as determinants of aggressive
behavior.

This rationale will be applied to the transcripts
collected for this study. This thesis poses five research

questions regarding adolescent aggression:

R1: What is the sequence of behaviors respondents
recall from their own accounts of situations in
which they recall violence, non violent overt
conflict, and covert conflict?

R2: What are the situational factors that influence
violence, non violent overt conflict, and covert
conflict?

R3: To what extent do respondents demonstrate
information processing biases in their accounts?

R4: What are the individual skill variables that
individuals demonstrate?

R5: What are the social leverage variables that

individuals demonstrate?

The theories explicated in the literature review and

the conceptual framework provide the groundwork necessary to

26

conduct a study of aggressive behavior. By using the
guidelines of Felson's (1984) study, this thesis altered
some of the evaluative components, but replicated the
general analysis of aggressive behavior through

self-reported data.

Chapter II
Methodology

The present study takes a theoretical approach to
identifying what occurs in aggressive and violent attack
episodes. Three levels of intensity were observed:
incidents of physical violence, incidents of verbal
aggression, and incidents in which the respondent chose to
abstain. (Felson, 1984). Through the use of self-reported
data, adolescents were interviewed about their experiences
with these different aggressive situations. Transcripts of
these interviews were coded and evaluated. The position and
types of actions, the position and type of accounts, and the
choice between retaliation and abstinence were all examined,
to further uncover the motivating factors and thought

processes behind aggressive and violent attacks.

Subjects

Twenty five seventh grade boys, enrolled in a
midwestern public junior high school, were interviewed for
this study. After obtaining human subjects approval, the
students were chosen according to their detention an
behavior records. The experiment or study group consisted
of nineteen boys, whose records reflected excessive

involvement in school related conflict. The comparison

27

28

group was comprised of six students whose records showed no
accounts of aggressive or violent behavior, and who were

chosen randomly from a class list.

E I' E H I . J

A.script of questions, developed by Felson (1990), was
chosen to discuss situations of varying severity (Appendix
A). Each question addressed a different dispute response.
The questions asked for complete descriptions of the most
recent incident that involved slapping, hitting and
punching, the most recent argument that involved screaming,
yelling and name calling, and the most recent incident in
which the respondent was extremely angry, but chose not to
do or say anything. For each incident, the respondent was
asked to discuss what the conflict was over, their
relationship to the antagonist, who was present during the
conflict, and how the incident started and ended.

The second half of the questions dealt with issues of
family structure, family attitudes toward conflict, and
awareness of the use of weapons. The interviewer was
trained in conducting these interviews to assure that the
questions would be open-ended so as not to lead or influence

the respondent.

Emcedute
After a list of students was compiled, each child was
informed about the study and what they would be expected to

do. At this time consent forms and a letter of explanation

29

was sent home to the parents. Each subject was individually
interviewed for approximately 30 minutes. During this time
they were asked to describe, in detail, the three incidents
in the questionnaire, and discuss the issues dealing with
family, conflict, and weapons. All the interviews were

recorded in order to be transcribed at a later time.

Sequencing

The description of each type of incident was rewritten
in sequence form so that each action could be studied
individually. Every action was given a number to order the
events and recreate the encounter (Appendix B). In order to
sequence the conflict, it was necessary to first reorganize
the incident. Many times the respondents would report the
incident out of the natural order, or use different terms to
describe the same action. The same attack could be described
as a slap early in the interview and a punch later on. For
this reason it was important to recreate the incident as
exact as possible so that one action was not counted twice.
At the same time the respondent's accounts and explanations
were recorded to their corresponding action. Sequencing
each incident allowed each action to become a single unit of
analysis. Through simplifying the description, the sequence
rebuilt the incident according to the respondent. This
would allow the coding of these events to be more precise.
Each transcript was sequenced by the interviewer and an
assistant. After comparing the two decisions a final

sequence was agreed upon.

30

W

Three types of participants were identified in these
transcripts: the respondent, the antagonist, and the third
parties present at the time of the incident (Felson, 1990).
The respondent was the student who was interviewed for this
study. They were responsible for reporting the information
about each incident. The antagonist defined the individual
engaging in conflict with the respondent. This is the
person the respondent viewed as the enemy or the problem.

In these transcripts, the relationship of the antagonist to
the respondent was as a peer, a family member, or a school
faculty member. During these different conflict
situations, there was also the element of a third party.
This refers to those people who were present at the time of
the conflict, but did not get involved in the actual
dispute. The third parties represented in these transcripts
included peers, family members, teachers, and neighbors. In
the sequencing each action was identified with one of the
three participants.

The coding scheme that was adopted was developed by
Felson and Steadman (1983) to classify earlier work on.
homicide and assault (Felson, 1984). For this study however
it was necessary to alter this scheme to more accurately
measure the information reported in the transcripts. In
addition to the original ten action codes, ten more
classifications were introduced. These new categories dealt
with actions pertaining to both the individuals and to the

third parties involved in the incident. See original

31

(Appendix C) and revised version (Appendix D).

The first round of coding was conducted by the
interviewer and an assistant. In both cases the codes were
chosen from the extended list of twenty categories
(Appendix C). The coders agreed on the actions
approximately 77% of the time.

Final coding scheme - In order for the coding scheme
to demonstrate a clear distinction between the actions that
occurred, it was then necessary to combine the twenty
categories into broader and more inclusive groups.
Categories one though four defined actions that were
performed by either the respondent or the antagonist in the
situation, while category five eXplained the actions and
intervention of the third parties involved in the incident
(Appendix E).

Category_l - Physical / verbal abusive behavior ---
This category consists of actions that intend to physically
or mentally harm the other individual involved. This
includes physical attacks, insults, threats, and
physical/verbal precipitating acts.

Category_2 - Behavior encouraging conflict - The
actions in this group are attempts made to in some way
influence the target and precipitate the conflict. This
category includes reproaches, rule violations, orders, and
noncompliance.

Category_3 - Steps toward resolution - This category
identifies the ways in which the respondent or the

antagonist approach solving the conflict. This includes

32

mediation, submission, and abstaining from involvement.

Categgry_4 - Influential activities - This category
consists of activities that have the potential to encourage
or deter the incident. These actions can be play,
uncontrolled, unintentional, and regular activities.

Category_§ - Third party actions - This category only
defines the actions performed by the individuals outside of
the immediate conflict, but presents at the time of the
incident. Included in this are passive presence, verbal
escalatory intervention, verbal de-escalatory intervention,
physical escalatory intervention, physical de-escalatory
intervention, and punishment.

Each action was coded on two levels. The first level
determined which general category the action demonstrated
(e.g.. physical/verbal abusive behavior and resolution
attempts). The second level of coding defined the specific
acts performed by each individual (e.g. physical attack,
insult, and threat). By using this coding scheme, the
transcripts were re-coded by the interviewer and two
assistants. The coders were in 100% agreement when coding
‘the general action categories. .The specific action types
were agreed upon 92% of the time. The differences were
discussed and resolved, and a final code was decided upon.

After collecting the transcripts and conducting the
elaborate coding scheme, the data was ready for evaluation.
The results drawn from this study provided tangible

explanations and conclusions about aggressive behavior.

Chapter III

Results

Through the analysis of the coded transcripts,
qualitative conclusions were drawn about the varying degrees
of aggressive incidents. Each of the three questions are
represented by a separate table. The tables consist of each
distinguishing action, as identified under the five major
descriptive categories. Every code was tabulated for each
sequence slot. The majority of the actions in each question
took place between the first sequence slot and the tenth
sequence slot. For this reason the tables reflect only the
first ten actions of every aggressive incident. With this
set-up, the figures are clearly presented for each separate
action. From this table, the results can be evaluated
according to each action, as well as being assessed as a
flow pattern for all the aggressive behavior that was coded.
By looking at the quantity of codes in each category, for
each level of aggressive severity, significant conclusion
can be drawn about adolescent aggression. The results are

as follows:

33

34

 

In question one, the main activity of the individuals
involved in the incident centers around physical/verbal
abusive behavior. Physical attacks (1A) are a consistently
dominant action throughout every incident. The greatest
concentration of physical attacks is located towards the end
of the sequence slots. Insults are the second most
frequently used action. These numbers demonstrate a steady
flow of verbal abusive behavior that accompanies physical
attacks.

The actions of category two are used only in the

35

beginning of the encounter. Orders and noncompliance are
used the most. The table suggests that orders and
noncompliance may be used initially as a form of
retaliation, but then individuals resort to stronger and
more direct abusive behavior as the incident continues.

Category three is also insufficiently represented in
Table I. There is evidence that there are attempts made
towards resolution by the individuals early on in the
incident, but are not successful in de-escalating the
conflict.

The results for question one clearly show that category
four only takes place in the beginning of the aggressive
encounter. There is no account of an aggressive situation
returning to normal behavior or activities prior to the
incident. This suggests that category four's activities
could be the issues that the conflict centers around.
Playing and unintentional actions can be misinterpreted as
intentional or threatening, and therefore instigate
aggressive conflict.

Finally, there is strong representation of category
five. Each of the six different actions of category five
are coded, demonstrating definite evidence of third party
influence. Out of the six actions, the most significant is
verbal escalatory intervention. This is represented
throughout the ten sequence slots. The results show that
rarely do third partys verbally try to de-escalate a
situation, and that there is a greater chance of a third

party just watching then taking steps to resolve the

36

conflict.

When summarizing the overall flow pattern for question
one, it is evident that the table is heaviest at the two
extremes: physical/verbal abusive behavior, and third party
intervention. From this table the general course of action
for aggressive encounters is initiated by an undirected
activity, and from there becomes a conflict. The actions of
the incident start out with physical and verbal abusive
behavior, specifically physical attacks and insults. As the
behavior continues, some verbal attempts are made to either
retaliate or resolve the conflict. .As the incident
escalates, verbal attempts give in to more abusive tactics.

The number of third party intervention attempts that
take place explain that physical behavior promotes verbal
escalatory intervention from the audience. What is also
significant, however, is that there is evidence of an almost
equally strong attempt made to physically de-escalate the
situation. By sequence slot eight, category two, three, and
four are no longer present, and the majority of the
individuals resort back to physical aggression as a
solution.

Out of twenty-one reported incidents of physically
aggressive conflict, eleven resulted in some type of
punishment. The other remaining ten were ended by either
third party physical intervention, submission, threats, or
physical attacks.

In addition to the qualitative table, to analyze the

results of question one, it was necessary to run a lag

37

sequential. Running a lag would explain how often one act
followed another. Specifically, the lag program was used to
show how many times a physical/verbal abusive behavior was
followed by the other main categories. There were two
significant statistical findings. First, category four,
activities, had a 2 value of -1.969. This shows that
category four will significantly not follow a physical or
verbal attack. The second important finding is that
category five, third party intervention, had a Z value of
2.613. This explains that third party involvement, whether
positive or negative, follows abusive behavior more than by
chance alone. The lag sequential run did not show any other
significant statistics concerning the ordering of aggressive
actions. The conclusion drawn from this is that there was
no pattern of hitting and then identity saving, but rather
individuals hit, a crowd forms, and then anything can

happen.

38

 

Question two only deals with verbally aggressive

conflicts. As the table shows, the most widely used action
was insults. The results explain that insults are a
constant throughout all the aggressive encounters. Although
the actual numbers decrease slightly towards the end of the
sequence slots, overall the high number of insults that are
exchanged suggest that the two individuals focus on using an
insult as the main form of retaliation.

Category 2 is only used early on in the conflict. Rule

violations are used the most, followed by noncompliance.

39

Category two consists of the weaker verbal violations (e.g.
reproach, rule violation, orders, and noncompliance). The
table suggests that these actions were used in the beginning
of the conflict, but did not produce the desired result, and
therefore the individuals continued to use insults.

A major contrast to question one, is the use of
resolution tactics in Table II. After the initial insults
and verbal attacks take place, all three types of resolution
styles are demonstrated. Mediation is attempted during the
middle of the conflict. Submission and abstinence are used
more often as a step toward resolution. Although the
individuals tried to resolve the incident, there is only one
conflict that is actually ended through abstinence.

Significant to question two is the occurrence of
category four, activities. These actions take place early
in the encounter, as well as in the middle and the end. It
is important to note, however, that the most commonly used
activities are under the classification of "uncontrolled”.
These actions were not influenced by the individuals
involved in the conflict and therefore, can have both a
positive or negative effect on the outcome of the incident.
For example, a classroom bell ringing, is an uncontrolled
activity. This can encourage a conflict because when the
bell rings, individuals are let out of class and are free to
engage in a confrontation. The bell can also act as a
deterrent of conflict by forcing an incident to diffuse.

Third party intervention in a verbal conflict centers

around passive presence, and verbal de-escalatory

40

involvement. These results suggest that when a conflict is
only verbal, an audience will form, but not encourage the
individuals to continue to fight. As expected, physical
intervention is never used.

There were a total of eighteen verbally aggressive
conflicts. The conclusions to these incidents were much
more diversified then in question one. The most actions
used to end the conflict were submission, abstinence, third
party verbal de-escalatory intervention, and punishment.
However, interviews reported that noncompliance,
uncontrolled, and mediation were also used to conclude the
incident.

Table two suggests that a verbal resolution pattern is
much more prominent when there is no physical escalation in
the conflict. Individuals will attempt to reconcile the
situation through some form of mediation if they have not
been threatened by a physical attack. The results also
imply that third parties do not find verbal conflicts to be
interesting overall. An audience will form to watch the
incident, but is not enticed enough to encourage and
participate the fight.

An important aspect of question two, deals with the
individual's accounts of their actions. Throughout the
transcripts the respondents explained their reasons for not
engaging in a physical confrontation. These accounts define
why the situation did not escalate to a more violent
situation. The accounts for question two can be put into

four categories: 1) fear of harm to themselves; 2) fear of

41

harming the other individual; 3) fear of punishment; and 4)
fear of harming the relationship with the other individual.
Fear of physical harm to themselves or the antagonist was
due to an individuals body size, age, sex, and grade in
school. Fear of punishment was either through the school or
from a parent. The results propose that being reprimanded by
a parent was a stronger deterrent then the threat of
suspension from the school. Finally, the transcripts did
reveal that some students refrained from physical contact
because it would place their relationship with the other

person in jeopardy.

42

 

Question three considers incidents in which the

respondent abstained from any participation in the conflict.
There was no physical or verbal contact made by the
respondent. The results in table three indicate that there
were a high number of insults and reproaches being committed
by the antagonist in the situation. There is also evidence
of other physical and verbal abusive behavior that takes
place even though the respondent chose to walk away from the
situation.

The greatest number of actions were attempts toward

43

resolution, specifically abstinence. There are accounts of
mediation taking place as a first step in resolving the
conflict. When these efforts failed, the individual chose
to remove themselves from the situation.

As in the other two tables, category four is really
only present in the early part of the encounter. The
respondent felt that it was necessary to eliminate
themselves physically from the situation, in order to
prevent the conflict from escalating.

There are only three reports of third party
intervention taking place when the respondent walked away
from the confrontation. There were no reports of any crowds
forming to listen and watch the two individuals. Only once
did someone attempt to verbally escalate and de-escalate the
conflict. Since the hostility was only one-sided, the
incident did not become a huge display for others to watch.

Overall, since question three asked for accounts of
abstinence, it was expected that the majority, if not all
conflicts would be resolved in that manner. As the results
demonstrate, resolution tactics were the most frequently
used, and in turn influenced the other categories.

Because the respondent chose to abstain from any physical or
verbal conflict, there was a considerable less amount of
abusive and confrontational behavior. The results suggest a
strong correlation between aggression and third party
intervention. First, it can be assumed that with a lack of
aggression, there is a lack of third party interest.

Secondly, the results suggest that when there is no third

44

party presence or instigation, aggression is less likely to
occur.

.As noted for question two, accounts for the
respondent's actions, help to explain their reasons for
abstaining from aggressive conflict. Three out of the four
categories are the same as question two: fear of harm to
themselves; fear of harming others; and fear of punishment.
Exclusive to question three is the worthiness of the
conflict. Several of the transcripts indicate that the
respondent chose to walk away from the conflict because it
did not seem to be significant in their opinion. The
respondent abstained from involvement with the antagonist
because the ends did not justify the means. This implies
that the risk of an unwanted outcome discouraged the
respondent's involvement.

These results have strong implications about the
reasons adolescents participate in aggressive behavior. The
evaluation of these results provides explanations to
substantiate the conceptual framework that is presented
here. Applying a theoretical understanding to the data will
allow further investigation of adolescent's perceptions of

aggressive and violent behavior.

Chapter IV

Discussion

Interpersonal violence is one of the leading caueses of
children dying in the United States and all across the
world. As the casualties of adolescent violence continue to
mount, so to does the need to understand, address, and
prevent aggression. In order to tackle this staggering
issue, it is necessary to apply a conceptual understanding
to the data collected on aggression and with this

information, project recommendations.

BMW

From the data collected for this thesis, several
explanations for aggressive behavior are provided. The
tables demonstrate how certain actions are performed more
than others, depending on the type of aggressive situation.
This information provides insight as to the "weapons"
children use to fight in different situations. The tables
also underscore the significance of a third party. The
results explain that the presence of other individuals
during a conflict is an important determining factor of the
use of aggressive behavior.

In Table I, the results demonstrate that when physical

abusive behavior initiates the conflict, it sets the stage

45

46

for the incident. Once the physical attack takes place,
both the respondent and the antagonist continue to use
physical abusive behavior. There are very few attempts made
to verbally mediate or resolve the conflict. Consistent
throughout all physical encounters is the involvement of
third parties. The results Show strong participation by
third parties, either to accelerate or de-accelerate the
incident. This suggests that physically aggressive behavior
provides enticing entertainment to the other people present.

Table II explains that when verbal attacks are the only
type of aggression, the individuals involved are more prone
to use verbal resolution tactics to solve the conflict. If
there is no physical escalation, individuals attempt to
reconcile the incident through some form of mediation. A
significant contrast to Table I is the involvement of third
parties. When there is no physical aggression, third
parties demonstrate less involvement with the conflict.

As expected, Table III describes conflicts that were
resolved through abstinence. When the respondent chose not
to encourage the conflict, the antagonist was influenced to
use less aggressive behavior. Interestingly, the lack of
third parties in this type of incident is both a reason and
and a result. When there is no aggression, there is a lack
of third party interest and involvement. At the same time,
without the presence of an audience, the encounter is less
likely to escalate into physical aggression. This
highlights the influential control of a third party, and how

significant they are in determining aggressive behavior.

47

The evaluation of the situational factors of the
reported incidents suggest several conclusions. All of the
physically aggressive conflicts were between the respondent
and their peers. Although the location of the conflicts
varied, physical attacks were committed against friends,
classmates, and other children of the same approximate age.
This infers that physical aggression was used when the
respondent perceived the antagonist as an equal, or less
powerful opponent.

Verbal aggression and abstinence was used in situations
in which the respondent had less control. If the antagonist
was physically stronger, older, or more intimidating then
the respondent, the conflict demonstrated more verbal
aggression. If the antagonist was an authority figure or an
adult relative, the respondent kept their anger inside and
chose not to react. This suggests that depending on what
type of individual the antagonist is, both physically and
socially, the respondent will react in what they think will
be the most successful way.

In order to understand the information processing
biases of the subjects, it is necessary to evaluate their
accounts of the the situations. The most significant
finding is that all twenty five subjects viewed themselves
as being the victim of the conflict. When discussing the
incidents, the boys felt that they were wrongfully attacked
or provoked in some way by the antagonist. Another unique
finding is that the respondents reported that the

antagonists were the ones that had misinterpreted the

48

situation, and therefore used physical aggression to settle
the conflict. The respondent perceived their actions as
necessary in order to protect themselves and their image.

To find out the implications this information suggests
about impulse control, it is necessary to evaluate what kind
of data the respondents reported. The majority of students
interviewed for this study were able to recall episodes in
which there was only verbal abusive behavior, and times in
which they chose to abstain from any aggressive behaviors.
What is interesting about this is that even though they have
demonstrated this control in the past, they do not always
refrain from physical aggression. Since they were able to
recognize and recall the three different types of aggressive
situations, there is proof that there are factors that help
control the child's impulse.

What are the reasons why an individual does not always
demonstrate impulse control? Why are children able to
express the appropriate accounts for why they did not become
violent, but yet unable to use that rationale on a regular
basis? Impulse control is a very fragile concept in that
in order for it to take place, there must be the presence of
positive individual and social leverage variables.

When there are missing variables such as self-esteem,
or parental bonds, the chain is weak and vulnerable.

Without all the components of impulse control, adolescents
are not equipped with the skills needed to interpret the

situation, and process the necessary resolution tactics.

49

W

Because of the lack of theoretical reasoning of what
really encourages and deters adolescents violence, there are
a limited number of explanations and recommendations for
ways to reduce aggressive behavior can be reduced. This
thesis presents a conceptual framework that fills in a
significant gap in understanding adolescent aggression.
There are three main components used to explain adolescent
aggressive behavior: situaiontal factors. information
processing, and impulse control factors. Together these
three elements offer a rationale for aggression.

The first component is situational factors. The
results emphasize a definite influence of different
siuational circumstances. The data suggests that the
relationship between the respondent and the antagonist plays
a major role in determining the degree of aggressive
behavior. There is also strong evidence that explains that
when third parties are present, conflicts have a greater
chance of becoming physically abusive. This evidence
underscores the need to include situational factors as one
of the determinants of aggression.

Information processing is the second aspect of the
conceptual framework presented in this thesis. The subjects
that were interviewed, demonstrated information processing
biases in the way they interpreted the role they played in
the conflict and the the intent of the antagonist. Viewing
themselves as the victim, the respondent justified their use

of physically abusive behavior by describing it as a defense

50

mechanism. This suggests that the respondent might be using
aggressive behavior because they feel that it is the only
way to protect themselves. This implies that when an
incident is misinterpreted, the individuals are more prone
to use aggressive behavior.

Finally, the individual skills and social leverage
factors that represent impulse control are demonstrated
through the respondents ability to recognize the different
ways they have solved conflicts. The fact that the
respondents could recall incidents in which they held back,
or controlled their anger identifies the use of some impulse
regulating agent. Moreover, the fact that the respondents
were able to use this control for specific reasons and when
dealing with particular individuals, identifies the presence

of individual skills or social leverage factors.

W

In the future, efforts made to reduce adolescent
aggressive behavior should focus on three areas. First, as
this study suggests, social leverage variables play a
significant role in influencing the use of aggressive
behavior. The most important variable is the development of
parental bonds. Through these relationships evolves an
attachment to education, positive values and morals, and a
feeling of self worth. Since these qualities are not
automatic, it is necessary to not only stress their
importance, but to teach and encourage them to both adults

and children.

51

Another approach directed toward the reduction of
adolescent aggression, is to make children aware of the
effects of violence, and to teach them ways to keep
themselves and others from using aggressive behavior to
solve a problem.

The first step to accomplishing this is to instruct
children to refrain from encouraging their peers to fight.
Either as the primary individual involved, or as an audience
member, promoting aggression and violence is harmful. .As
the results demonstrate, the influence of one's peers has
the potential to escalate or de-escalate a potentially
threatening situation.

The final suggestion is to educate adolescents on how
to reduce aggressive conflict. It is not only important to
be aware of the harm of violence, but to also know
alternatives to using aggression to solve a problem. The
most successful approach to enlightening children to their
options is to equip them with conflict management skills,
and establish a peer mediation program within the school.
Conflict management skills provide children with the proper
tools necessary to recognize and process a situation, and
positively influence the outcome. Realizing that there does
exist constructive conflict encourages more mediated
approaches towards resolution.

Peer mediation programs not only serve as an actual
form of school discipline, but more importantly empower
children with the ability to regulate and influence their

own environment. By eliminating the unknown, and the gap

52

between violator and punisher, successful conflict
resolution becomes a tangible and rewarding skill. When
children are given some control over their environment, they
have a much greater value for it, and in tern work harder to

preserve it.

AP PENDI CES

APPENDIX A

Interview Questions

53

SCHOOL CONFLICT INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

I. Questions about Physical Contact

1. Recall the last dispute that you can remember
clearly, that you were involved in, where there was some
kind of physical force used.

2. Give me some background about the people in the
dispute and their relationship to each other.

3. Give me some information about the situation
surrounding the dispute. Where did it take place, who
actually witnessed the disputes?

4. What and who was the cause of the dispute? What was
the specific problem that led up to it?

5. How did the actual dispute start? What words were
exchanged, if any, between the parties?

6. When did it actually start?

7. What other words were exchange while the incident
was going on?

8. How did the incident end?

9. Do you know if anyone was high on drugs or alcohol

during the dispute?

II. Questions about Overt Conflict with on Violence

1. Now, recall an incident involving a bad argument
with someone, which involved screaming, shouting, or name
calling, but no physical contact.

2. Give me some background about the people in the

dispute and their relationship to each other.

54

3. Give me some information about the situation
surrounding the dispute. Where did it take place, who
actually witnessed the disputes?

4. What and who was the cause of the dispute? What was
the specific problem that led up to it?

5. How did the actual dispute start? What words were
exchanged, if any, between the parties?

6. When did it actually start?

7. What other words were exchange while the incident
was going on?

8. How did the incident end?

9. Do you know if anyone was high on drugs or alcohol

during the dispute?

III. Questions about Conflict Avoidance

1. Now, recall a dispute in which you were really mad
at another person, but said nothing about it. You kept your
anger inside.

2. Give me some background about the people in the
dispute and their relationship to each other.

3. Give me some information about the situation
surrounding the dispute. Where did it take place, who
actually witnessed the disputes?

4. What and who was the cause of the dispute? What was
the specific problem that led up to it?

5. What made you decide not to say anything to the
other person about the problem?

6. How are you likely to handle this incident in the

55

future?
III. Weapons Questions

1. Are gun or knives available to you if you wanted
them?

2. Do you think it is a good idea to carry a weapon?

3. Do any of you friends carry weapons?

IV. Personal Information

1. Describe your household? How many people and who
are they?

2. Is there a lot of conflict in your home? How do
other peoples in your home handle conflict?

3. What do they tell you about how you should handle

conflict?

APPENDIX B

Example of Sequenced Transcript

56

Sequence of Events

Question 1 = Physical Fight .Action - Events according to

Question 2 - Verbal fight Boy1

Question 3 - Anger held in .Accounts = Reasons and
justification according
to Boy1

Boy1- Demps

m;

This lg;ntinn_of this incident was in the yard of the
participant. The time of the fight is estimated at taking
place during the afternoon. The individuals involved were
playing games with each other. The relationship between the
two individuals was as acquaintances. They lived in the
same neighborhood.

Aeneas Accounts

01. Boy1 throws acorn at Boy2

02. Boyg is hit in head with acorn

03. Boy3 walks over to Boy1

04. Boya‘tries to explain actions 04. Boyl is scared

05. Boy3 pushes chest of Boy1

"a couple of times"

06. Group forms saying stop 06. Boy1 gets mad
cause of bad temper
and worried about
health

07. Boy1 punches Boy3

08. Boya falls to ground in the act

of punching Boy3

09. Boy1 and Boy1 roll on the ground

10. Boy1 pulls knife on Boy1

11. Boyl's mom comes out of house screaming

12. Boy1 runs to mom

57

13. Boy3 scratches (stab) Boy1 with knife
14. Mom calls police
15. Boy3 runs down street

mm:

The Ingntinn of this incident was in the hallway of the
school. The time was during the school day. The
individuals involved were waiting to go to their next class.
The :elntinnship_between the two individuals was as
acquaintances.

Actinns Acccunts
01. Boy2 screams in Boyl's ear
02. Boy1 tells Boy2 to stop 02. Boy1 is very mad

03. Crowd listens

04. Boy, does not stop

05. Boy1 calls Boy2 names

06. Boya yells threats of physical violence at Boy2
07. Boy2 walks away

08. Boy2 apologizes in class to Boy,

QuestinnJ

The Ingntinn of this incident was in the school. The
time was during a class and afterwards in the hall. The
relatinnsnin between the boys was that they were classmates.

Artisans Acccunts
01. Boy, picks on Boy1 during class 01. Boy1 is mad
02. Boy2 hit and pushes Boy1 in the hall
03. Boy1 pulls back to hit Boy2
04. Boy1 hold anger in and walks away 04. Boy1
decides it is
not worth it

APPENDIX C

Felson's Coding Scheme

58

Felson's Coding Scheme

Physical attacks: including physical violations,
pursuing for physical attack, and drawing and
struggling for a weapon.

Insults: direct attack on identity, including instances
of yelling.

Threats: including challenges and dares, and nonverbal
threatening gestures.

Rule violations: including annoying behavior, failure to
discharge an obligation, ignoring, causing another's
loss inadvertently, boasting, inappropriate demeanor,
and violating property.

Reproaches: including accusals, complaints, protests,
and commands to cease some action,

.Accounts: and explanation of conduct.

Submission: including apologies, crying, pleas not to
attack, and fleeing.

Orders: including requests and commands.

Noncompliance: including refusals to comply and doing

nothing when the antagonist has called for action.

10. Mediation: actions that attempt to reconcile the

opposing parties.

APPENDIX D

Initial Twenty Codes

59

.Action Coding Scheme

Individual

(0)

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(8)

(9)

Uncontrolled = happenings that are not affected by the
individuals involved in the incident

Physical.Attacks - Physical violations, pursuing
physical violations

Insults - Direct attacks on identity, instances of
yelling

Threats 8 Challenges and dares, impending harm unless
target complies

Rule Violations = Failure to act on obligations,
violating property

Reproaches = Accusals, complaints, protests, to find
fault

Submissions = Apologies, compliance, fleeing
Orders 8 Commands to gain compliance
Nonccmpliance - Refusal to obey or agree

IMediation = Actions that attempt to reconcile apposing
parties

(10) Play - Verbal and physical prosocial activity

(11) Unintentional attack 8 Physical or verbal actions not

meant to harm

(12) Regular activity - Activities that people conduct every

day or on a regular basis

60

(13) verbal/physical precipitating acts 8 Any attempt made

by an individual to encourage conflict

(14) Abstaining = Walking away from conflict, saying nothing

Third Party

(15) Passive presence

(16) Verbal escalatory intervention

(17) verbal de-escalatory intervention
(18) Physical escalatory intervention
(19) Physical de-escalatory intervention
(20) Punishment

(21) No code possible

APPENDIX E

Revised Final Five Category Coding Scheme

61

Action Codes

Category 1 -- Physical/verbal Abusive Behavior --Actions
that intend to physically or mentally harm the other
individual involved.

A. Physical Attack

. Insult

. Threats

. Precipitating acts

DON

Category 2 -- Behavior Encouraging Conflict -- Attempts made
to influence the target and precipitate the conflict.

A" Reproach

B. Rule violation

C. Orders

D. Noncompliance

Category 3 -- Steps toward resolution -- Ways in which the
respondent or the antagonist approach solving the conflict.
A. Mediation
B. Abstaining
C. Submission

Category 4 -- Activities that have the potential to
encourage or deter the conflict.

A" Play

B . Uncontrolled

C. unintentional

D. Regular activities

Category 5 --Third party.Actions -- They only define that
actions carried out by the individuals outside the immediate
conflict, but who are present during the incident.'
A" Passive presence
. verbal De-escalatory intervention
. Verbal Escalatory intervention
. Physical Escalatory intervention
Physical De-escalatory intervention
Punishment

WINDOW

REFERENCES

62

REFERENCES

Bandurs, A. (1978). Social Learning Theory of Aggression.
JOurnal of Communication, 28, 12-29.

Berkowitz, L. (1962). Aggression: A social Psychological
Analysis. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Berkowitz, L. (1989). Frustration - Aggression Hypothesis:
Examination and Reformation. Psychological Bulletin,
106, 59—73.

Black, D. (1983). Crime as Social Control. American
Sociological Review, 48, 34-45.

Bureau of Justice Statistics. criminal Victimization in the
Uhited States: 1973-1990 Trends. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Justice, 1992.

Buss, AIR. (1963). Physical Aggression in Retaliation to

Different Frustrations. Abnormal and Social Psychology,
67, 1-7.

Dodge, K.A, (1980). Social Cognition and Children's
.Aggressive Behavior. Child Development, 51, 162-170.

Dodge, K.A.,& Coie, J.D. (1987). Social Information
Processing Factors in Reactive and Proactive Aggression
in Children's Peer Groups. JOurnal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 53, 1146-1158.

Dodge, K.A,,& Crick, N.R. (1990). Social Information
Processing Bases of Aggressive Behavior in Children.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 16, 8-22.

Dodge, KIA.,& Frame, C.L. (1982). Social Cognitive Biases
and Deficits in Aggressive Boys. Child Development,

53, 620-635.

Dodge, K.Al, Murphy, R.R.,& Buchsbaum, K. (1984). The

63

assessment of intention-cue detection skills in
children: Implications for developmental psychology.
Child Development, 55, 163-173.

Dodge, K.A.,& Newman, J.P. (1981). Biased decision making
processes in aggressive boys. Journal of Abnormal
Psychology, 40, 375-379.

Donohue, W.,& Kolt, R. (1992)..Managing Interpersonal
Conflict. New Bury Park: Sage Publications.

Dollard, J., Doop, L., Miller, N., Mower, 0.,& Sears, R.
(1939). Frustration and Aggression. New Haven,
Connecticut: Yale Press.

Dryfoos, J.G. (1990). Adolescents At Risk: Prevalence and
Prevention. New York: Oxford University Press.

Epstein, S.,& Taylor, S.P. (1967). Instigation to aggression
as a function of degree of defeat and perceived
aggressive intent of the opponent. JOurnal of
Personality, 35, 265-284.

Fagan, J. (1987). Neighborhood Education, Mobilization and
Organization for Juvenile Crime Prevention. Annals.
AAPSS, 494, 54-70.

Felson, R.B. (1978)..Aggression as Impression Management.
Social Psychology, 41, 205-213.

Felson, R.B. (1982). Impression Management and the
Escalation of aggression and Violence. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 45, 245-254.

Felson, R.B. (1984). Patters of aggressive social
interaction. In. A" Mummendy (Ed.) Social Psychology of
Aggression, (pg. 107-126). Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

Felson, R.B.,& Steadman, H.J. (1983). Situational Factors in

Disputes Leading to Criminal Violence. Criminology,
21’ 59-74.

64

Felson, R.B.,& Tedeschi, J.T. (1993). Aggression and
Violence: Social Interactionist Perspectives.
Washington D.C.: American Psychological Association.

Grey, G.E.,& Grey, L.K. (1983). Diet and Juvenile
Delinquency. NUtrition Today, 14-22.

Hawkins, J.D.,& Wies, J.G. (1985). The Social Development
Model: An Integrated Approach to Delinquency
Prevention. JOurnal of Primary Prevention, 6, 73-97.

Hirschi, T. (1969). Causes of Delinquency. Berkely:
University of California Press.

Hoffman, M.L. (1960). Power assertion of the parent and its
impact on the child. Child Development, 31, 126-143.

Infante, D.A.,& Wigley, C.T. (1986). Verbal Aggressiveness:
An Interpersonal Model and Measure. Communication
.Mcnographs, 53, 61-69.

Jones, E.E.,& Davis, K.E. (1965). From acts to dispositions:
The evaluation process in person perception. In.
Berkowitz (Ed.) Advances in Experimental Social
Psychology, (Pg. 219-266). Orlando, Florida: Academic
Press.

Kelley, H.H. (1971). Attribution in Social Interaction.
In. E.E. Jones, D.E. Kanous, H.H. Kelley, R.B. Nisbett,
S. Valins,& B. Weiner (Ed.) Attribution: Preventing the
causes of behavior, (Pg. 1-26). Morristown, New Jersey:
General Learning Press.

Mead, G.H. (1934). Mind, Self, and Society; Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.

McDermott, J. (1983). Crime in the school and in the
community: Offenders, victims, and fearful youth.
crime and Delinquency, 270-282.

65

McGuire, J.,& Priestley, P. (1985). Offending Behavior
Skills and Strategies for Going Straight. New York: St.
Martin Press.

Patterson, G.R., Littman, R.A.,& Bricker, W. (1967).
.Assertive Behavior of Aggression. Mbnographs of the
Society for Research in Child Development, 32, 122-
137.

Perry, D.G., Perry, L.C.,& Rasmussen, P. (1986). Cognitive
Social Learning Mediators of Aggression. Child
Development, 57, 700-711.

Rapoport, J.L. (1986). Diet and Hyperactivity. Nutrition
Reviews, 158-161.

Rubin, J.Z. (1980). Experimental Research on Third Party
Intervention in Conflict: Toward some Generalizations.
Psychological Bulletin, 87, 379-391.

Tedeschi, J.T. (1983). SocialInfluence Theory and
Aggression. Aggression, 135-162.

Tedeschi J.T.,& Bonoma. (1977). T.V. Measures of A.last
Resort: Coercion and.Aggression. In. D. Drukman (Ed.)

Negotiations: Social Psychological Perspectives.
Beverly Hills, California: Sage.

Tedeschi, J.T., Gaes, G.G.,& Rivera, A.N. (1977). Aggression
and the Use of Coercive Power. Journal of Social '
Issues, 33, 101-125.

Weinstein, E.,& Deutschberger, P. (1963). Some Dimensions of
Altercating. Sociometry, 26, 454-466.

"llllllllllllllllllllli