Often, the person experiencing the aggressive feelings will find another way to vent their
hostility. This is known as displacement of aggression. Imagine you are 12 years old, and your
father tells you that you are not allowed to go to the movies with your friends. You try your
best to change his mind, but he is adamant that his decision is final. You experience frus-
tration and feelings of aggression. Your father is too powerful for you to act out your
20. UNDERSTANDING AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR AND DEALING WITH ANGRY PEOPLE
287
aggression on him; moreover, acting out against him may even make the chance to go to the
movies with your friend less likely in the future.
Frustrated and angry, you look around your environment for some other convenient tar-
get to attack. Acting out your aggression on something else is a possible source of displace-
ment. If your father is not an option, you may have your mother, your older brother, your
older sister, your younger sister, or even the boy next door. The closer the individual cho-
sen to take your anger out on is to the actual source of frustration, the more psychological
relief you will achieve. Therefore, your mother would be the ideal substitute, but she may
also still be perceived as too powerful. Naturally, you go through the other choices: your
older brother – still too powerful; the boy next door – right sex, but tough; your younger
sister – just right!
When you cannot act out your aggression directly with the person responsible for your
frustration and anger because they are not available – that is, if the only reason you did
not retaliate against your father is that he was out of town – then the choice of aggression
will be the next highest/closest choice, in this case, your mother. What is happening is that
you are choosing a surrogate for the object of your aggression.
There may be times when there is no clear target to act out against. Perhaps you are driving
in your brand-new car and hit a pothole, causing a great deal of damage to the vehicle.
You have to put out a lot of money for repairs, which you cannot spare. Your hardship leads
to frustration and aggressive feelings. You may have the need to find someone to act out
against. This is called scapegoating.
Your choice of whom to use as a scapegoat is determined by a number of things. Most
likely, you will choose someone who is weaker and who will not be able to retaliate. Your
choice of scapegoat will probably be influenced by your prejudices. As you grew up,
you probably learned that certain targets were more “socially acceptable” than others.
If you were raised in a middle-class family in the South 40 or 50 years ago, your favorite
target might be an African American or Jew. If you came from the same background,
but were raised in Texas, you might choose a Mexican or other Hispanic.** You
may select your choice of scapegoat from what you learned from your parents or
peers. The easier it is to identify the scapegoat, the more likely it is to be the choice. This
territorial and tribal thinking is what makes people of a different race or nationality such
easy targets.
In 1968, Stanford University researchers J. L. Freedman and A. N. Doob confirmed this
scapegoating theory in an interesting experiment. They had six individual subjects com-
plete a personality test. They told the subjects that the personality test would give a clear
and accurate indication of their personalities. After all of the subjects completed the tests,
they were scored. Each of the subjects was given feedback about how they themselves
scored, as well as how each of the other five subjects involved in the experiment scored.
**As this chapter was being written, the state of Arizona passed a highly controversial law allowing law
enforcement to demand proof of citizenship from anyone they suspect is an illegal alien. If proof is not
forthcoming, they will arrest the offending person for a criminal offense. Although this law does not specify the ethnicity of suspects, it is obvious that it will affect mostly Hispanics.
288
20. UNDERSTANDING AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR AND DEALING WITH ANGRY PEOPLE
This feedback was given specifically to identify who within the group was “alike,” and who
was “different.” Then the members of the experimental group were told that there would
be a second part to the experiment that would involve possible electric shocks. They were
directed to list which of the other participants they thought should be the person to partici-
pate in the shock experiment by ranking everyone in the group. Almost all of the subjects
chose someone who was identified as being “different” from themselves.
Another method to deal with aggressive feelings one cannot act out is to find some more
socially acceptable way to vent anger, such as playing football. The repressed aggressor
may find some relief watching someone else vent anger: in person, in the newspaper, on
television, or, as in ancient Greece, at the theater. The final method would be to redirect
anger toward a constructive behavior. Perhaps the repressed aggressor might use the
energy to get work done, or develop his mind and body in the martial arts. Any of these
behaviors that allow the individual to reduce his aggressive feelings in an acceptable man-
ner is called catharsis. Catharsis may be an explanation for the vicarious pleasure so many
people take in spectator sports. Watching two pugilists beat each other into bloody pulps
is a socially accepted catharsis for aggression.
Animals within a species occasionally fight; however, unlike humans, they rarely kill
each other. Most aggressive behavior in animals consists only of displays of threats. By
these threat displays, animals are able to maintain a territorial boundary, and they also
hold their social positions in the hierarchy of power and dominance. Usually, the threat-
ening behavior is enough to reestablish order and control. For example, dominant behav-
ior for a monkey includes penetrating the personal space of the other by leaning in, a
jutted head or jaw, and direct eye contact. If this does not work, the next level of threat
behavior would include displaying or baring the teeth, and/or making biting movements
in the air.
There do appear to be specific stimuli that will automatically trigger certain animals to
react aggressively. These aggressive behaviors appear to be evolutionary or genetic in
FIGURE 20.2
20. UNDERSTANDING AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR AND DEALING WITH ANGRY PEOPLE
289
nature. One researcher, naturalist Konrad Lorenz, discovered this while studying
blackbirds. He reported that based on his observations of this species, the birds appeared
to be very peaceful, calm, and playful by nature. He actually kept several as pets. Over
time they got to know him and normally reacted toward him in a friendly manner. One
day he entered the room carrying a black rag. The birds immediately attacked him.
They flew at him, pecking at his hand and head, swarming around him. After experiment-
ing for a while, Lorenz discovered that the attack was inspired by the black rag he
had been carrying. He found that the birds would attack anyone carrying any small
black object. Obviously, there was no evident frustration, annoyance, or attack here. In
f
act, Lorenz concluded that any small black object took on the appearance of a baby black-
bird to the adult birds. Their instincts were to attack whoever was taking a baby away
from the flock.
It does not appear that humankind has these types of instincts that cause us to just auto-
matically attack. We are sure that parents would fight a kidnapper to save their child, but
we do not think they would automatically attack someone based on any abstract similar
stimulus, such as a doll-shaped object.
There does appear to be a relationship between aggressive behavior in our species and
other stimuli or external cues present at the time. In one experiment, shocks were given
to volunteers while researchers observed differences in patterns of aggression based on
whether a tennis racquet or gun was lying on a table in the room. They found that there
did seem to be more aggressive behavior in the volunteers when the gun was present. It
does not appear that these stimuli work the same on humans as the example given of
stimuli that genetically cause aggression in lower animals. It is more likely that with
humans, these external cues may alter behavior by giving the impression that aggressive
behavior is more justifiable. A stranger approaching you on the street asking for money
may be an annoyance, but probably would not threaten you enough to make you become
aggressive. If the stranger had a stick in his hand, that external implied threat might cause
you to believe that aggressive behavior was necessary and justifiable.
As you can see, aggressive behavior in humans does appear to be affected more by the
social and physical environment than by genetics. This is probably due to operant or instru-
mental conditioning. This is also known as the “law of effect” and was first postulated by
Thorndike in 1898. As stated in the earlier chapter on psychophysiology, with operant con-
ditioning you must first do something. Whether that behavior is rewarded or punished will
affect similar behavior of this nature in the future. Behavior that is rewarded is much more
likely to be repeated.
If as we grow up and experience frustration, which leads us to behave aggressively, and
we are consistently rewarded for this aggressive behavior, then we are more likely to act
aggressively throughout our lives. However, society cannot and would not allow indivi-
duals to continuously act out aggressively to achieve their goals. We call people who
behave in this manner sociopaths, and usually put them behind bars.
At the opposite end of the behavior spectrum, you can imagine what type of life a person
who never acted aggressively would have. As the Buddha declared, in life, as with aggres-
sion, we must take the “middle way.” Most of us have learned this wisdom through the
socialization process, through operant conditioning and by imitating just when, where,
290
20. UNDERSTANDING AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR AND DEALING WITH ANGRY PEOPLE
and with whom aggressive behavior is acceptable. Imitation, or modeling, occurs throughout
our lives. Obviously, as we grow older our own set of values allows each of us to better dis-
cern what behaviors we want to imitate. The most important models we have in our lives
for this are our own parents. How our parents behave and discipline us will have a remark-
able effect on us as adults. It is not unusual for a child to grow up displaying a parent’s
worst behavioral characteristic. We even have sayings that recognize this, such as “The
apple doesn’t fall far from the tree,” or “We become our parents.”
Patricia Jakubowski and Arthur Lange write in The Assertive Option: Your Rights and Your
Responsibilities that there are helpful keys to recognizing the response style of other people
and determining whether they are nonassertive, assertive, or aggressive.
First they suggest that you evaluate the type of emotion they are experiencing. Non-
assertive people tend to internalize their feelings and to experience emotions such as fear,
anxiety, guilt, depression, fatigue, or nervousness. They generally do not express their
feelings verbally. With aggression, the tension being experienced is turned outward. They
may still be experiencing fear, anxiety, or guilt, but they mask it in a secondary emotion,
such as anger. This person’s “emotional temperature” will be above normal and expressed
by anger, rage, hate, or misplaced hostility. They have a tendency to become loud and
explosive. An individual who is merely being assertive is aware of his feelings and does
not deny his feelings, or yours, but keeps his emotional level normal and his behavior
constructive.
The nonverbal style of a nonassertive person is characterized by attempting to move
away from or avoid the situation. Such a person may display downcast eyes, a slumped
body, wringing of the hands, whining, chin on chest, or a giggly/nervous tone of voice.
These people are nonconfrontational.
The aggressive individual, on the other hand, will use nonverbal behavior that moves
against the situation. He may display glaring eyes, an exaggerated forward body lean, a
raised or pointing finger, and a sneering or haughty tone of voice. Such people are often
confrontational.
The assertive individual will generally establish good eye contact and stand in a settled
and comfortable way, with his hands loosely at his sides or used as illustrators, and talk in a
strong, steady tone of voice. Such people are confident but not necessarily confrontational
in their behavior.
The verbal language of the nonassertive person will include equivocating qualifiers, such
as, “maybe,” “I guess,” “I wonder if you could,” “only,” “just,” “I can’t,” and “don’t you
think.” Such people will use context fillers, such as “maybe,” “uh,” “well,” and “you
know.” They will use negation verbiage that may include “don’t bother,” “it’s not really
important,” or “whatever.”
Assertive people will use “I” statements, such as “I think,” “I feel,” and “I want.”
They use “cooperative” language: “let’s,” and “how can we resolve this?” They also
make empathic statements of interest such as “What do you think?” or “How do you
see it?”
The aggressive individual will make threats – “you’d better,” “if you don’t watch out” –
or will use put-downs or challenges such as “come on,” “you must be kidding,” or “you
really don’t believe that?” or even make sexist, racist, or other derogatory remarks.
INTENTION MOVEMENTS OF ATTACK
291
When assessing nonverbal behavior to detect aggression, you may notice a tense body
posture due to the aroused state and exaggerated breathing as the body’s demand for
oxygenation during an emergency increases. Sometimes the aroused state will also be
accompanied by piloerection (hair erection/goose bumps). Because of all of the physiologi-
cal and metabolic activity occurring within the body, there is an actual buildup of heat. Hair
erection caused by piloerection aids in allowing air to pass over the body more efficiently
and cool the body down through the evaporation of perspiration. This phenomenon occurs
in many other mammals as well. Psychologically, in primitive times when we were mor
e
hairy, it probably made us appear larger and a more powerful foe to our opponent. The
ability to appear larger is common among small fish that travel in schools to deceptively
ward off larger opponents. Think of an aroused cat, hair standing on end, and how much
more ferocious it looks.
The following nonverbal gestures are warning signs of aggression.
INTENTION MOVEMENTS OF ATTACK
These are actions that begin, but are not completed. Perhaps the most familiar of these
is the raised arm threat, where the potential attacker raises his arm as if to strike out but
stops the action in mid-air. He may swing his hand out sideways, as if he is back slapping
his victim, and then drop it harmlessly to his side. Often, he holds the attack in check by
moving his hand to the back of his neck to avoid striking the object of his aggression.
Another intention movement gesture is where the arms are bent and the fingers are like
claws, curled up, and about to strike the victim. All of these nonverbal behaviors indicate
hostility.
FIGURE 20.3
292
20. UNDERSTANDING AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR AND DEALING WITH ANGRY PEOPLE
FIGURE 20.4
VACUUM GESTURES
These gestures represent actions that are completed, but make no contact with the victim.
They include a shaking fist, hand chopping, neck wringing, imaginary choking, and a wag-
ging “pointer” finger that actually serves as a miniature club as the aggressor symbolically
beats his victim over the head.
REDIRECTION GESTURES
These are nonverbal attacks where contact is made with something other than the victim,
such as another surface or the attacker’s own body. Examples of these gestures include the
attacker punching his own palm with his fist, slicing his own throat with a finger, grabbing
FIGURE 20.5
REDIRECTION GESTURES
293
his own throat in a strangling manner, and biting his own finger or hand. There are some
interesting cultural gestures that fit in this latter category. Among Spaniards, one fist grinds
into the palm of the other hand. Italians hook the thumbnail under their tooth and flick at
the victim. In some Arab cultures, they “flatten” their own nose. In Saudi Arabia, they bite
Nathan J Gordon, William L Fleisher Page 43