CHILDHOOD EXPERIENCES AND ADULT AGGRESSION
Sarah Castagnola
B.A., California State University of Sacramento, 2007
THESIS
Submitted in partial satisfaction of
the requirements for the degree of
MASTER OF ARTS
in
CHILD DEVELOPMENT
(Applied Settings)
at
CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, SACRAMENTO
SUMMER
2011
CHILDHOOD EXPERIENCES AND ADULT AGGRESSION
A Thesis
by
Sarah Castagnola
Approved by:
__________________________________, Committee Chair
Dr. Juliana Raskauskas
__________________________________, Second Reader
Dr. Todd Migliaccio
____________________________
Date
ii
Student: Sarah Castagnola
I certify that this student has met the requirements for format contained in the University
format manual, and that this thesis is suitable for shelving in the Library and credit is to
be awarded for the thesis.
__________________________, Graduate Coordinator
Dr. Karen Davis-O’Hara
Department of Child Development
iii
___________________
Date
Abstract
of
CHILDHOOD EXPERIENCES AND ADULT AGGRESSION
by
Sarah Castagnola
Violence/aggression is a public health problem, and children who witness or
experience acts of violence are particularly vulnerable to its effects. What are the
childhood experiences that lead to adult aggression? Research is needed to examine the
relationship between different forms of aggression in childhood to adult adjustment.
Investigation of the contribution of different forms of aggression can also help with the
identification of factors that are related to stability between childhood exposure and later
aggression. Identification of these factors can provide avenues for prevention as well as a
better understanding of the effects of these experiences.
The present study will include research on family aggression (i.e. between
parents, parent-child, and child-child). With new information about childhood
experiences and how it can lead to adult aggression, researchers may find a way to reduce
the amount of violence from adults who have aggressive childhood experiences.
_______________________, Committee Chair
Dr. Juliana Raskauskas
_______________________
Date
iv
DEDICATION
To my handsome husband Travis, my beautiful daughter Sidney, my Mother, and all of
my family and friends, thank you for all of the support you have given me.
v
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
First, I would like to thank my sponsor, Dr. Juliana Raskauskas. Without her
encouragement, quick feedback and patience, I would have been unable to complete this
thesis. I would also like to thank my second reader, Dr. Todd Migliaccio. Thank you both
for taking time to work with me to complete my Thesis.
Thank you to the Child Development Department at Sacramento State University
and all of the staff for making my college experience so wonderful. I am proud to say
received my graduate degree is from Sacramento State.
A special thanks to the college and anger management facilities for allowing me
to come in and collect data and to the participants who took the time to fill out the survey.
Thank you to my husband for your support and for believing in me. It has been a
crazy four years but you have helped me believe in myself. To my daughter Sidney, you
are my world and I am so thankful we had you; your smile makes my heart melt.
Thank you to my mother, you have always had encouraging words for me
whenever I was down. You have a always believed in me, that means more to me than
you will ever know. You are the most amazing, loving person, and I am so happy that
you are my mommy!
Finally, thank you to everyone who supported me, listened to me, and
encouraged me to keep going. Melissa Brown, thank you for all your help from the very
beginning. Without you keeping me motivated and encouraged, this would not have
happened. I am so thankful for each and every one of you!
vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Dedication ................................................................................................................... iv
Acknowledgments..........................................................................................................v
List of Tables ............................................................................................................. viii
Chapter
1. INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................1
Purpose of the Study ..........................................................................................2
Statement of the Problem ...................................................................................3
Significance of the Study .................................................................................. 3
Methods..............................................................................................................4
Definition of Terms ...........................................................................................5
Key Findings .....................................................................................................6
Limitations ........................................................................................................7
Organization of the Study .................................................................................8
2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE .........................................................................9
Theoretical Frameworks .................................................................................10
Aggression .......................................................................................................15
Parent Violence ...............................................................................................17
Siblings ...........................................................................................................20
Related Factors.................................................................................................23
The Present Study ...........................................................................................24
3. METHODS ...........................................................................................................26
Design and Research Questions ..................................................................... 26
Participants ......................................................................................................27
Measures ..........................................................................................................29
Procedures .......................................................................................................31
vii
Summary ..........................................................................................................32
4. RESULTS ..............................................................................................................33
Question 1 .......................................................................................................33
Question 2 .......................................................................................................34
Question 3 ........................................................................................................36
Conclusion ......................................................................................................37
5. DISCUSSION .........................................................................................................38
Aggressive Childhood Experiences and Adult Aggression .............................38
Childhood Experiences and Adult Aggression Compared Between
Community College and Anger Management .................................................40
Factors Relating to Adult Aggression ..............................................................42
Implications......................................................................................................43
Limitations ......................................................................................................44
Appendix A. Information Sheet for Participation .......................................................47
Appendix B. Aggression Survey..................................................................................49
References ....................................................................................................................54
viii
LIST OF TABLES
Page
1.
Table 1 Demographic characteristics of the sample ........................................26
2.
Table 2 Correlations Between Childhood Experiences ...................................32
3.
Table 3 Independent Samples T-test Comparing Reports ..............................33
4.
Table 4 Regression Predicting Total Aggression.............................................35
ix
1
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
Domestic violence (DV) is a widespread issue affecting many families and
children. Defined as abuse that occurs between two people including current and former
spouses and dating partners, Domestic violence or “intimate partner violence” can
include physical, verbal, emotional, monetary, social control or harm (Center for Disease
Control, 2007). The center for disease control (2007), states that one in four women, and
one in nine men in the United States are victim of DV at some point in their lives. In
lower income homes 35% of women and 21% of men were victims of DV. It is estimated
that more than 1,200 deaths and two million injuries among women and roughly 600,000
reported injuries among men per year are due to DV. On average, 24% of women and
12% of men aged 18 years or more have a lifetime history of DV (2007). These numbers
indicate that a significantly large number of individuals are affected by violence. Further,
statistics indicate that more than half of female victims of DV live in households with
children under the age of 12, therefore as many as 3 to 10 million children witness DV.
The National Center for Children Exposed to Violence (2006) reported that child abuse
occurs in 30-60% of family violence cases that involve families with children.
Not only are the two people involved in violence affected, but others around them
are affected as well. The exposure to violence in the home can lead to aggression in the
child’s adult relationships later life it would indicate intergenerational transmission of
violence. Victimization in childhood from adults or peers has been shown to contribute to
2
later aggression and crime perpetration (Kwong, Bartholomew, Henderson, & Trinke,
2003). This connection between crime and aggression and exposure to violence in
childhood should make this a vital area for study. Previous research has shown that while
there is a relationship not all children exposed to violence and aggression become
aggressive themselves. Research is needed to identify factors that are related to the
relationship between childhood exposure and later aggression. Identification of these
factors might provide avenues for prevention and a better understanding of the effects of
these experiences on children.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of the proposed study is to investigate the nature of the relationship
between childhood experiences of family violence and adult aggression. In this study
childhood experiences is divided into two categories, witnessing aggression and
experiencing aggression. Witnessing aggression includes witnessing domestic violence,
parental violence, and sibling violence. The present study included a quantitative survey
of men and women currently attending a community college and those attending
domestic violence and anger management meetings. Factors suspected of influence
exposure to DV and the relationship between childhood and adult aggression such as
education, SES, gender, parental relationships, social support, age, recreation, parental
involvement, and addictions, were included as possible covariates.
3
It was hypothesized that individuals who exhibit aggression or excessive anger in
adulthood will report witnessing aggression in childhood. The relative predictive power
of each form of childhood aggression to frequency and severity of aggression in
adulthood will also be examined.
Statement of the Problem
There is substantial research related to intergenerational transmission of violence
and aggression and or violence perpetration in adulthood. The current study is an
extension of previous research on aggression. The data collected in this study help
identify sources of childhood experiences with aggression that relate to adult aggression.
The research questions that are drawn from the literature and the theoretical framework
are (1) Is there a relationship between aggressive childhood experiences (from all
sources) and adult aggression? (2) Is there a difference in childhood experiences and
adult aggression between a community college and an anger management sample? (3) Do
factors such as age, gender, employment status, income, or substance dependency
statistically predict adult aggression?
Significance of the Study
Violence affects people in all stages of life from infancy to elderly. It was
reported in 2006 that 18,573 people died as a result of homicide and 33,300 took their
4
own life (CDC, 2008a, 2008b). The number of violent deaths only tells part of the story
that is behind the scenes. Many more people survive violence than those who are who
have died as a result of violence. Those individuals who have survived are left with
permanent physical and emotional scars.
Knowing that violence is a public health problem, there are important factors
needed to understand to that protect people or put them at risk for experiencing or
perpetrating violence. Identifying how transmission of aggression and violence across
different forms or sources and what factors may be related can contribute to prevention
and intervention efforts in the future.
Methods
The study examined the relationship between childhood experiences with
family violence and adult aggression. This study used a quantitative design with suveys
about current and childhood experiences being collected with two targeted samples. The
study sample included 38 adults from two anger management treatment programs in
Southern California and 43 adults from a community college in Northern California. The
individuals from the anger management facility were targeted due to the nature of this
study and their increased risk of exposure to aggression in childhood identified in the
literature. The community college sample served as a comparison group for this study.
Surveys were administered in classrooms at both the anger management treatment
program and community college. All measures were administered to participating
5
students at the same time. All information regarding the proposed study and forms that
explain the survey were read out loud and surveys completed silently and independently
by participating adults. Precautions were taken to protect confidentiality of participant’s
answers and for their protection no items asked participants to identify their name.
Consent to participate in this study was given by completing the survey.
The survey for this study included four sections: demographic information such as
age and gender, level of education, occupation, household income, childhood
information, childhood experiences with in the family, and information regarding
aggression in the past six months.
Definition of Terms
For the purpose of clarity, this thesis used the following terms as defined below:
Aggression
According to previous research aggression can be defined as (a) intent to harm
another person; (b) intense autonomic arousal and strong responses to perceived threats;
and (c) hostility (Coie & Dodge, 1998; Kokko & Pilkkinen, 2005).
6
Violence
Violence is the actual act of aggression, intent to cause pain or injury. Violence
can be defined as (a) maltreatment and/or neglect; (b) physical abuse; and (c) sexual
abuse (Margolin & Gordis, 2004; Slep & O’Leary, 2007; Linder & Collins, 2005).
Anger management
Anger management refers to classes taken by individuals who are court ordered to
receive therapy for aggressive/violent behavior.
Child Abuse
Child abuse is defined as any act or series of acts by a parent or caregiver that
results in harm, potential for harm, or threat of harm to a child (CDC, 2009).
Key Findings
The key findings from the study support the hypothesis that early experiences
with aggression as a target or witness is associated with adult aggression. Correlations
between childhood experiences and adult aggression were significant for all sources of
childhood aggression experiences. All correlations were positive which means that high
levels of adult aggression were associated with exposure to aggression during childhood
from the mother, father and/or siblings. It was also shown that the anger management
sample was, on average, higher on both current physical and verbal aggression than the
7
community college sample. Variables for dependency and anger management
significantly predicted total aggression, while gender was not a significant predictor in
regression analyses.
When comparing the reports of childhood exposure to aggression between
community college participants and participants in anger management, the findings
support the hypothesis that the anger management group was significantly higher in all
early experiences with aggression at home.
Limitations
It is important to note the limitations of the current study. One limitation was the
use of self-report surveys which can be vulnerable to participants misreporting or
reporting in a manner that they feel is socially desirable. Future research should include
other means of self report such as focus groups and interviews, as well as attempt to get
corroboration from other sources (e.g., teachers, social workers, family members, police
reports/government statistics).
Another limitation is that this is a retrospective. Participants were asked to recall
their childhood experiences but memory can be vulnerable to deterioration. It is possible
that for those who were in anger management aggressive memories were more salient.
Also since the data were collected all at the same time and are correlational, no
conclusions about causality can be drawn. It can only show that there is a relationship
between the variables.
8
Finally, the current study has a relatively small sample size. Future research
should include a large population of participants in order to ensure that group
comparisons are reliable and valid. Lastly, the questionnaire was long and individuals
expressed displeasure with the time and cognitive load required, some participants even
stopped completing the survey before the end. Future research should use shorter
questionnaires or divide the items into parts to be taken at different times.
Organization of the Study
This chapter has provided an introduction to the topic and serves as the overview
of the thesis. The next chapter, Chapter 2, presents a review of the literature and
examines the relationship between childhood experiences and adult aggression.
Chapter 3 describes the methodology used in this study. It describes methods used
to examine the specific research question: (1) Is there a relationship between aggressive
childhood experiences and adult aggression? (2) Is there a difference in childhood
experiences and adult aggression between the community college and anger management
samples? (3) Do factors such as age, gender, employment status, income, or substance
dependency predict concurrent adult aggression? Chapter 4 presents a summary of the
results of the study. Chapter 5 includes a discussion of conclusions reached, the
limitations of the study and the major findings of the study in the context of existing and
future research.
9
Chapter 2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Family violence is a public health problem, and children who witness or
experience acts of violence within the family are particularly vulnerable to its effects
(Margolin & Gordis, 2004). What are the childhood experiences that lead to adult
aggression? Research is needed to examine the relationship between different forms of
aggression within the family (i.e. between parents, parent-child, and sibling-sibling) and
adult adjustment. Investigation of family violence can lead to the identification of factors
that moderate the relationship between childhood exposure and later aggression.
Identification of these factors will provide avenues for prevention and a better
understanding of the effects of these experiences.
There are two theories that can help explain how aggression is passed down from
generation to generation. These theories explain why seeing or experiencing family
violence within your family of origin may lead to the use of violence or aggression with
others as an adult (Capelle & Heiner, 1990; MacEwem, 1994). The first theory is the
Social Learning Theory and the second is Intergenerational Transmission Theory. Both
theories focus on modeling and direct tuition as ways to learn behaviors and for behavior
to be transmitted from one generation to the next (Bandura, 1977; MacEwem, 1994).
10
Theoretical Frameworks
Intergenerational Transmission theory explains how aggression can be passed
down to each generation. This theory explains children are socialized by parents about
appropriate behavior in relationships. This transmission of aggression is often learned as
appropriate behavior with spouse and parent through witnessing aggression or
experiencing violence from a family member. Intergenerational transmission influences
the goals, choices and opportunities available to offspring (Story, Karney, Lawrence,
Bradbury, & Thomas, 2004). Adolescents most likely use their parents’ marital
relationships as models for their own relationships (Hare, Migra & Allen, 2009). Hare,
Miga, and Allen (2009) found characteristics of parents’ marital relationships were a key
predictor of characteristics of adolescents’ romantic relationships. There were 75
adolescent participants who were interviewed with their parents and re-interviewed five
years later. Hare, Miga and Allen (2009) also found that higher levels of paternal
aggression during marital conflict were associated with greater perpetration of and
victimization by aggression in romantic relationships five years later. Intergenerational
transmission includes aggressions/violence amongst family members and influences more
than two people.
Within a family there are several dyads in which aggression can occur: Fathermother, mother-father, father-self, mother-self, sibling-self and parents-siblings. These
are the ways that children can either witness aggression as well as experience aggression.
The intergenerational transmission of domestic violence has been one of the most
commonly reported influences of domestic violence in adulthood (Corvo, 2006). The
11
subjects in Corvos’s research were part of a domestic violence treatment program.
Measures used were from the conflict tactic scale (CTS). Corvo found that greater effects
for parental child abuse upon current levels of violence than witnessing domestic
violence. Prior research indicated that parents’ treatment of one another during times of
conflict may depict the overall tone for how children interpret conflict in the family
system (Hare, Miga, & Allen, 2009). Marital conflict that happens frequently may cause
individuals to have intense emotional hesitant relationships in which they do not connect
with their spouse emotionally and tension within the family environment (Hare, Miga, &
Allen, 2009). Kwong, Bartholomew, Henderson, and Trinke (2003) found that children
who witness or experience aggression through intergenerational transmission of violence
may be violent or have aggression issues later in life. Intergenerational transmission
theory has some of the same explanation as the social learning theory, but it is not based
on the behaviorist orientation that focuses on rewarding of behavior rather the
establishment of normal or expected behavior.
Behaviorist theorists argue that observable behavior is shaped by responses to it
such as reinforcement that increase the likelihood that behavior will continue or
punishment that decreases the likelihood that behavior will be repeated. One theorist that
comes from the behaviorist perspective is Albert Bandura (1977, 1986), and his
behaviorist theory is called Social Learning Theory. The basic tenant of the theory is that
people not only respond to reinforcement/punishment they receive but also learn new
behaviors through observational learning. Bandura (1977) explained that most human
behavior is learned by watching other individuals model the behavior and observing
12
whether the model is reinforced or punished. Social Learning Theory directly addresses
the transmission of aggression, in fact Bandura (1965; 1973) proposed that children can
learn aggression from watching aggressive models such as parents. Bandura’s
experiments included showing children videos of models being aggressive and seeing
whether the children who viewed the aggression would respond aggressively in the lab.
The findings indicated that those that viewed the aggressive models showed more
aggressive behavior, more aggressive vocalizations, and that these effects were increased
if models were reinforced and less if the models were punished. It was also shown that
the effect of observing aggressive models was more for male than female children
(Bandura, 1965). Much of the subsequent application of this theory has focused on
children imitating aggressive modeled by actors in the media (Boyatzis, Matillo &
Nesbitt, 1995; Huesmann et al., 2003) or on how parents using physical abuse can model
the use of violence in children (Corvo, 2006; Kuppens, Grietens, Onghena, & Michiels,
2009).
When individuals observe others, ideas of how to perform new behaviors are
formed. If people observe positive, desired outcomes of the observed behavior, they are
more likely to model, imitate, and adopt the behavior themselves. Individuals learn
through observation, this influences how one responds to and reacts in any given
situation. Modeled behavior is more likely to be imitated if the behavior is perceived as
resulting in desirable outcome (Corvo, 2006). Therefore, individuals who observe others
model aggressive/violent behaviors and achieve their goals will learn how to show
aggression or acts of violence.
13
Not every individual who is exposed to violence will become violent, this is
because every individual will act in a different manner depending on their personal
beliefs and characteristics. Many individuals will self-regulate their thoughts and actions
due to their internal standards. Children observe people around them and learn standards
for others and themselves. Behaviors that measure up to internal standards are judged
positively (self-praise), and behaviors that fall short of these standards are judged
negatively (self-blame) (Grusec, 1992). If individuals are exposed to aggressive
behaviors that are rewarded, they may learn that this is a positive standard and not learn
that this social standard is not accepted. People who do not learn normative morals will
not have the correct tools to self-regulate (Bandura, Barbaranelli, Caprara, & Pastorelli,
1996).
It is also evident that individuals are not only products of their life circumstances;
they are contributors (Bandura, 2006). The person’s own agency contributes to the
development and whether he/she will follow aggressive models. Social learning theory
identifies four core properties of human agency: The first agency is intentionality, this
includes action plans and strategies for realizing intentions. The second agency is
forethought, this involves goals and anticipation of outcomes. The third agency is selfreactiveness, agents are planners and forethinkers, and are self-regulators. The fourth and
final agency is self-reflectiveness, they are self-aware, reflect on personal efficacy and
meanings of their pursuits and make corrective adjustments when needed (Bandura,
2006). Individuals may follow aggressive models if they cannot regulate their emotions,
set positive goals, make adjustments in their thinking, and do not have the capacity for
14
realizing intentions because their thinking is one track and follow other models does not
require thinking, it only requires actions. Individuals who do not follow aggressive
models are able to think about appropriate strategies and make adjustment according to
each individual situation.
When aggression and/or violence occurs in one’s family of origin, it may create
ideas and norms about how, when, and towards whom aggression is appropriate (Corvo,
2006). In order for a person to learn and model a behavior there are four requirements
people must obtain which include retention, reproduction, motor reproduction, and
motivation to want to adopt the behavior. Albert Bandura’s latter additions to Social
Learning Theory (Social Cognitive Theory) states that behavior is explained in terms of
continuous bidirectional relationships between cognitive, behavioral, and environmental
influences. Individuals do not need external rewards to model a behavior they observe.
Bandura’s theory discusses that individuals experience intrinsic reinforcement as a form
of internal reward. Internal rewards include pride, satisfaction, and accomplishment that
lead to multiple perpetration of aggression (Bandura, 1977). This past research directly
relates to the proposed study regarding family dynamics and the effects it can have on the
children involved because individuals who experience violence in their lifetime can have
different issues relating back to their childhood experiences of violence.
Social cognitive theory also explains human behavior in terms of continuous
reciprocal interactions called reciprocal determinism. Reciprocal determinism explains
that behaviors are not created as a result of the environment, personal, or behavioral
factors independently but by the threes factors together. Reciprocal determinism explains
15
that an individuals’ behavior and the world cause each other, and that one’s environment
causes one’s behavior (Bandura, 2001). Some influences are stronger than others. Factors
between the three interactions will be determined based on the individual (Bandura,
1986). The interaction between an individual and behavior involves the influences of an
individual’s thoughts and actions (Bandura, 2001). Every individual understands and
responds to situations differently, which helps explain why individuals that grew up in
the same environment can respond differently to the same situations.
The interaction between the individual and the environment involves cognition
and human beliefs that are developed and modified by social influences and structures
within the environment. The interaction between the environment and behavior, involves
an individual’s behavior thoughts about their environment then the behavior is modified
by that environment (Bandura, 2001). By understanding the basic function of the Social
Learning Theory (and by extension Social Cognitive Theory) one can begin to understand
how aggression can be learned through observation and be transmitted from one
generation to the next.
Aggression
Aggression is generally defined as the intent to do harm. Previous research on
aggression, has defined it as the intent to harm another person, intense autonomic arousal
and strong responses to perceived threats and hostility (Coie & Dodge, 1998; Kokko &
Pilkkinen, 2005). Violence, on the other hand, is the actual act of aggression. Violence
16
within the family can take the form of maltreatment and/or neglect, physical abuse, and
sexual abuse (Margolin & Gordis, 2004; Slep & O’Leary, 2007). Aggression and
violence are important to study due to the vast amounts of individuals affected by it
everyday. Family violence statistical information, reports that in 2007, as many as
40,200 incidents of spousal violence were reported. Nearly 53,400 children and youth
were reported to have been assaulted; someone they knew perpetrated 3 in 10 incidences
of assaults against children and youth (Wallace, 2009). Approximately, 3 to 10 million
children witness family violence each year (National Center for Children Exposed to
Violence, 2006). Experiencing or witnessing aggression and/or violence in one’s family
of origin increases the likelihood of experiencing it in future intimate relationships and
ones own family (Kwong et al. 2003). Parenting practices that include interactions that
involve yelling and threatening, were associated with many types of disruptive behavior
problems such as aggressive behavior (Sheehan & Watson, 2007).
As shown above being exposed to aggression and experiencing aggression both
have detrimental affects on the lives of children with affects that stay with these children
throughout their lives. The experience or effects of violence may differ by the form of
aggression (e.g., physical/verbal) or the source of the violence within the family.
Specifically, children may experience physical aggression that includes hitting, kicking
and punching, verbal aggression including threats, name-calling, or emotion aggression
such as intimidation, control, or hurting the victim psychologically. Children may also
experience aggression in the family from different sources (e.g., parents/siblings).
17
Parent Violence
Witnessing Aggression/Violence
Domestic violence is widespread. The Center for Disease Control (2005) states
that 1 in 4 women, and 1 in 9 men in the United States are victim of domestic violence at
some point in their lives. There are an estimated 3.2 million children per year who
witness incidences of domestic violence. Individuals who observe parental hitting during
childhood had twice the likelihood of experiencing severe marital aggression compared
to individuals who did not report aggression in the home (Kwong, 2003; Jackson 1996).
Marital conflict negatively affects family functioning and sibling relationships (Cox,
Paley, & Harter, 2001). According to the Social Learning perspective, parental
aggression during childhood is related to later relationship aggression through the
influences of modeling (Chermack & Walton, 1999; Owens, Thompson, Shaffer,
Jackson, & Kaslow, 2009). Individuals exposed to marital violence during childhood are
more likely to justify the use of violence in dating relationships (Hare et al., 2009;
Jackson, 1996). Research has been conducted examining marital conflict in the family of
origin and affect adult relationships (Hare, et al., 2009; Jackson, 1996; Jenkins, 2005).
Poor parental modeling of problem solving skills provides little opportunity for children
to develop these skills. Witnessing inter-parental aggression has negative effects on
children’s social processing functions and over time this causes children to learn this
behavior and take on this as a stable personality attribute. Repeatedly witnessing
destructive inter-parental conflicts on children has an effect on mental representations of
18
how conflicts should be handled in adulthood (Kennedy, Bolger, & Shrout, 2002).
Children who observe aggression between their parents may perceive aggression and
conflict as threatening, and develop difficulty regulating their own emotions with
interpersonal conflict (Margolin & Gordis, 2004; Owen et al, 2009).
The next subsection will discuss childhood experiences of aggression from parents
and the effects it has on children. Linder and Collins (2005) conducted research on parent
and peer predictors of physical aggression and conflict management in romantic
relationships. In this study there were 121 participants from a larger study, 21 or 23 years
of age. Findings were that individuals who witnessed or experienced violence in their
families learned aggressive behaviors from modeling and may become victims or violent
towards an intimate partner (Linder & Collins, 2005).
Experiencing Aggression
Many children experience aggression from their parents in the home. Each year
there are approximately two million children that are abused and/or neglected (Giant,
2003). Received aggression from parents is related to aggression in non-dating/ spousal
relationships, but observing parental aggression was related to dating aggression
(Chermack & Walton, 1999). Parents’ use of physical aggression is normative, and
occurs in over 85% of families (Slep & O’Leary, 2007). Researchers also found that
males and females who experienced high levels of physical abuse as children were more
likely to engage in violence against an intimate partner and children as adults than
individuals who did not have these childhood experiences (Felson & Lane, 2009; Karley,
19
2010). Inmates who have been physically abused as children are more likely to engage in
assaultive violence targeting adults (Felson & Lane, 2009). White and Widom (2003)
found a significant relationship between childhood abuse and neglect and Intimate
Partner Violence for both men and women. White and Widom (2003) also found higher
rates of domestic violence perpetration among women compared to men. Children with a
history of physical abuse, sexual abuse, or a mother who was battered are almost four
times more likely to be perpetrators and victims of family violence in adulthood (Karley,
2010).
Studies indicate that juveniles with conduct disorders report higher incidents of
traumatic experiences (Vandenberg & Marsh, 2009). Vandenber and Marsh (2009),
found that aggressive adults had higher percentages of traumatic history. Research found
that women rather than men reported being beaten as children and to perceive them
abused. Researchers found victimization from mothers predicted marital perpetration
whearas victimization from fathers’ predicted marital victimization (Simmons, Lehmann,
& Craun, 2008). Physical punishment suggests that it is permissible to hit, slap, or use
force under certain conditions. Parental physical punishment may provoke aggression or
violence in children (Kuppens, Grietens et al., 2009). Children will believe that it is
appropriate to use physical force against others (Hoffman & Edwards, 2004). Parents are
not the only influence on their children. Siblings are very influential and can have lasting
effect o their siblings.
20
Siblings
Witnessing Aggression
Siblings tend to behave similarly to one another during childhood. Patterns of
aggressive behavior of siblings increase the likelihood that younger siblings will adopt
similar behavior over time (Perlman, Garfinkel, & Turrell, 2007). Children learn from
other children by observing their behaviors and seeing the results that come from that
type of behavior (Slomkowski, Rende, Conger, Simons, & Conger, 2001). If a child
knows there were no negative consequences, they are more likely to repeat the same
behavior. Children who witness their sibling’s aggressive behavior tend to watch for the
reinforcements and benefits that their sibling will receive following this type of behavior
(Hoffman &Edwards, 2004; Sims, Dodd & Teheda, 2007). Reinforcements have more
impact on future actions than punishment has, especially if punishment is delayed. When
children witness their siblings acting aggressively and receive reinforcement, such as
gaining control of and object or changing a family member’s behavior, they learn that
this type of behavior has benefits (Hoffman & Edwards, 2004).
Siblings can be the most influential people throughout a lifetime. It has been
found that siblings tend to behave similarly to one another; younger siblings typically
mimic the behavior of the older sibling (Perlman et al., 2007; Whiteman, McHale, &
Crouter, 2007). Sibling influences can be negative and/or positive. Siblings develop
similar attributes, attitudes, and behaviors (Whiteman et al., 2007). Siblings are similar to
one another due to observational learning and imitation (Perlman, Garfinkel, & Turrell,
2007; Whiteman, McHale, & Crouter, 2007). When older siblings show prosocial
21
behavior such as helping and sharing, younger siblings express the same types of
behaviors. Consistent with influences of prosocial behavior, aggressive behavior by older
siblings increases the chances that younger siblings with mimic similar behavior. There is
evidence that when younger siblings use aggression, the older sibling with also use
aggressive behavior (Perlman, Garfinkel, & Turrell, 2007; Snyder, Bank, & Burraston,
2005). There is not much research conducted on witnessing sibling aggression compared
to experiencing aggression from siblings. The next section will discuss the effects of
experiencing sibling aggression.
Experiencing Aggression
Research suggests that sibling violence is highly prevalent. Research characterizes
sibling relationships as intense, loving and having rivalry. Physical aggression by a
sibling is defined as causing physical harm to the other by shoving, hitting, slapping,
kicking, biting, pinching, scratching, pulling hair (Bermann, Cutler, Litzenberger,
Schwartz, 1994; Garcia et al., 2000; Kettrey & Emery, 2006). Physical aggression that is
more severe can include use of objects to inflict harm and injury. Parents report that
siblings conflict are one of the most common childhood problems. Kettrey and Emery
(2006) reported that almost 76% of American children between the ages of three and 17
who had a sibling at home committed at least one violent act towards their sibling. Even
more, 48% of these children engaged in severe violence based on the Conflict Tactics
Scale. Age is an important factor to consider in relation to sibling aggression. Children
under the age of 8 years tend to use physical aggression to resolve conflict over objects,
22
whereas adolescents between the ages 9-13 years use physical aggression to assert spatial
boundaries. Parental treatment towards each child has an impact on sibling relationships.
If the family structure supports power imbalances, with the use differential treatment of
siblings and lack parental supervision, there is an increased risk for sibling abuse
(Kiselica & Morrill-Richards,2007; Sims, Dodd & Tejeda, 2007). Children who bully
their siblings do it to gain power because they to have been victimized by their parents,
an older sibling, or someone outside the family (Kiselica & Morrill-Richards, 2007).
There are many different long-term effects due to sibling violence. Some longterm effects include difficulty with interpersonal relationship, repeating the victim role in
other relationships, over-sensitivity, continued self-blame, anger toward perpetrator, and
substance abuse (Bermann et al., 1994; Garcia et al., 2000; Kettery, 2006). For example,
men who were in treatment programs for anger control issues had reported both having
experienced more physical abuse by a sibling and being more physically abusive toward
a sibling (Kettery, 2006). Research findings indicate that the rate of sibling violence is
highest among children in homes where both sibling and parental abuse are present
(Kiselica & Morrill-Richards, 2007). Much research has been conducted leading to the
cycle of violence in the house that is a contributing factor to aggression in the home.
Kiselica and Morrill-Richards (2007) evidence suggests that a violent family environment
has shown to promote sibling abuse as well as a cycle of violence that may be repeated
throughout life and across generations (Dunn, Slomskowski, Beardsall, & Rende, 1994).
All childhood experiences will make some type of impact on individuals, but not all
interactions will have negative effects on children.
23
Related Factors
The following sections will look at factors related to violence and aggression
within families. The related factors of SES, relationship quality with parents or teachers
and addictions may be related to whether aggression exists within family and in
adulthood with those who have experienced family aggression in childhood.
Socioeconomic Status (SES). Low-SES has been shown to have negative effects
on families. Research suggests that 80% of children exposed to violence are low income,
17% of middle-upper class youth have been victims of violence, and 57% of children in
Suburban and rural areas have witnessed violence (Berger, 2004). Poverty is one of the
most robust and strongest predictors of recurrent intimate partner violence (Davies &
Cummings, 1998; Sonis & Langer, 2008).
Relationship Quality. Positive relationship qualities have shown to have positive
impacts on at-risk youth. Supportive relationships with a parent or persons outside the
child’s family may promote resiliency against violence (Behborin & McMahon, 2008).
O’Keefe (1998) identified mediating factors between childhood witnessing of aggression
and aggressive behavior. Factors that reduced aggressive behavior were good scholastic
achievement and a positive relationship with one parent, while factors that increased
aggressive behavior included low socioeconomic status, minority status, large family
size, harsh parental discipline, and drug or alcohol dependencies. Parental support is
associated with positive outcomes in youth. Parental support has been associated with
increased self-esteem, school-related interests and academic goal orientation as well as
24
lower levels of conduct problems and drug use (Behborin & McMahon, 2008;
Zimmerman, Ramirez-Valles, Zapert, & Maton, 2000).
Teacher support provides both emotional and academic support, as well as serves
as a positive role model. A close relationship with a teacher has been found to positively
increase social, emotional, and academic adjustments (Benborin & McMahon, 2008;
Murray & Greenberg, 2000). It was also found that higher perceived support from
teachers and school personnel was related to higher grades, fewer suspensions, and lower
levels of drug and alcohol use among disadvantaged youth.
Addictions. Alcohol is the most widely used and abused drug in the United
States. It is the most common drug associated with domestic violence (Mignone,
Klostermann, & Fam, 2009 ). According to the US department of Justice (2009), nearly
two- thirds of all instances of DV involved alcohol (Mignone et al., 2009). It has been
consistently revealed that 50-60% of men seeking alcohol treatment reported one or more
episodes of DV (O’Farrell & Murray, 1995; Stewart, 2003). Alcohol is present in a large
number of both abusers and victims. Willson, McFarlane, Malecha, Watson, Lemmey,
Schultz, Gist, & Fredland (2000) found that 19% of male perpetrators consumed alcohol
and 30% both drank and used drugs.
The Present Study
There are many different factors that may contribute to adult aggression but
childhood experiences with aggression may be a key one (Margolin & Gordis, 2004;
25
O’Keefe, 1998). As stated above, when a child witnesses physical aggression in the
home, they are considered secondary victims because they too are affected by this act of
violence. Individuals who witness aggression as children can either become victims later
or are perpetrators of aggression. Children who are exposed to direct violence or
aggression in the home may exhibit problem behaviors such as aggression and
delinquency (Margolin & Gordis, 2004).
The current study is an extension of previous research on aggression. The data
collected in this study helps identify sources of childhood experiences with aggression
that relate to adult aggression. The research questions that are drawn from the literature
and the theoretical framework are (1) Is there a relationship between aggressive
childhood experiences (from all sources) and adult aggression? (2) Is there a difference in
childhood experiences and adult aggression between a community college and an anger
management sample? (3) Do factors such as age, gender, employment status, income, or
substance dependency statistically predict adult aggression?
People often learn aggression through social models. The purpose of this research
is to examine the relationship between aggression in the childhood home with different
sources (mother, father, and sibling) not just “parents” and adult aggression. With new
information about childhood experiences and how it can lead to adult aggression,
researchers may find a way to reduce the amount of violence from adults who have
aggressive childhood experiences.
26
Chapter 3
METHODS
In this study relationships between childhood experiences and adult aggression
were examined. This chapter describes the methods that were used in the study. The
research questions are listed first and then the measures are presented. The procedures
and information about the sample size are also discussed.
Design and Research Questions
The purpose of the proposed study is to investigate the relationship between
childhood experiences with aggression from different sources (father, mother, sibling,
and self) and adult aggression. The three specific research questions are (1) Is there a
relationship between aggressive childhood experiences (from all sources) and adult
aggression? (2) Is there a difference in childhood experiences and adult aggression
between a community college and an anger management sample? (3) Do factors such as
age, gender, employment status, income, or substance dependency statistically predict
adult aggression?
It is hypothesized in the proposed study that individuals who have experiences
with childhood aggression in the home will report more aggression in adulthood. It is also
hypothesized that a sample from an anger management program will report more
childhood aggression exposure than those from a community college sample. Finally,
27
based on the literature review, it is hypothesized that factors like gender (male),
employment status (unemployed), income (low), and substance dependency (yes) will be
related to more aggression in adulthood.
Participants
The participants for this study were recruited from two locations. The target group
was recruited from domestic violence and anger management facilities in Southern
California. There were 60 adults enrolled in the three anger management classes, 38
adults completed the survey (63%). The comparison group consisted of three Sacramento
community college classes. There were 72 students enrolled in the three classes at the
community college, 43 students completed the survey (60%). The adults represent an
ethnically diverse population from low to upper middleclass families. The participants
were both male and females ages 18 and older. The results of this study are based on the
final total of participants of n = 81. Characteristics of the sample are provided in Table 1.
Table 1. Demographic Characteristics of the Sample
% of Anger Management
% of Community College
Male
50.0
48.8
Female
50.0
51.2
Black
23.7
30.2
28
Mexican
21.1
7.0
White
31.6
3.2
Other
23.6
32.6
Working
58.3
81.4
Dependency
27.8
7.5
Anger
100.0
9.3
Management
The participants’ ages for the Anger management participants ranged from 18-64
years, with a mean of 31.11 (SD=11.54). The participants’ ages for the community
college ranged from 18-53 years, with a mean of 25.35 (SD= 7.39). The two groups
differed in some key characteristics such as average age, prior drug dependency – with
anger management group reporting more prior dependence. The community college
sample reported more current employment. These variables will be entered in analysis
with total aggression in chapter 4.
The community college sample also reported “other” as the majority ethnicity,
some of these students wrote in mixed ethnicities, others did not state, it is not clear why
33% were classified as other except that the community college may have had a more
diverse group.
29
Measures
A survey was used to collect information on participants’ past exposure to
violence across contexts and possible mediating and moderating factors. The instrument
used was a self-report survey and is provided in the Appendix. It included items about
relationships between parents and others, relationships between siblings and others,
relationships between self and others. It was used to understand the relationships between
aggressive experiences as a child and adult aggressive behavior.
Demographics. Individuals self-reported information on, age, gender, education
during childhood and within the past six months, and dependencies to drugs or alcohol.
Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS) (Straus, 1999). The CTS used for this study to
test childhood experiences with aggression. Four modified scales from the CTS were
included to ask about aggression from multiple sources within the family: Mother, Father,
Sibling, and Self. There were 78 items for each individual in the original scale, for this
study 28 items were used for each source (mother, father, sibling, self) from the conflict
tactic scale to reduce completion time. The CTS was also modified by the rating scale,
the original version had 0-7 rating scale. For this study, a rating scale from 1-4 was used.
Participants were given possible responses on a 4-point scale that included: (1) Never, (2)
Sometimes, (3) Often, (4) Always. Information on each subscale is presented below:
Childhood Aggression- Mother-others. An example question was “caused
another to pass out from being hit in head during a fight.” The mean was 1.37 (SD=.40)
and the internal consistency is good at alpha = .92.
30
Childhood Aggression- Father-others. An example question was “beat up
someone.” The mean was 1.48 (SD=.51) and the internal consistency was good with
alpha = .95.
Childhood Aggression- Sibling-others. An example question used was
“Threatened to hit or throw something at another.” The average was 1.60 (SD=.45) and
the internal consistency was alpha = .93.
Childhood Aggression- Self-others. An example question used was “Caused
another to go to the doctor because of a fight.” The mean for the total sample was1.53
(SD=.44) and the internal consistency was alpha = .93.
Adult Aggression. The Overt Aggression scale, created by Yudofsky (1996), was
used to collect information on current aggression. The scale included questions about
overt verbal aggression and physical aggression. The current study included 12 total
questions not including fillers. Scores are looked at as verbal aggression and physical
aggression in some analyses and combined for total aggression in others. For this study a
rating scale from 1-4 was used. Participants were given possible responses on a 4-point
scale that included: (1) Never, (2) Sometimes, (3) Often, (4) Always. Information on each
subscale is presented below:
Total Aggression. There were 12 items included in the scale. A sample item
included questions pertaining to aggression “Caused someone to have a sprain, bruise, or
small cut because of a fight.” The average for the total scale was 1.50 (SD=.52) and
internal consistency with alpha = .89.
31
Physical Aggression. There were 7 items included in the physical aggression
subscale. A sample question was “had a broken bone from a fight with another.” The
mean was 1.34 (SD=.48) with good internal consistency (alpha = .90).
Verbal Aggression. There were 5 items included in the verbal aggression
subscale. An example question was “shouted or yelled.” The average on the verbal
subscale was mean =1.77(SD=.65) and alpha = .88.
Procedures
Before collecting any data at the facilities, the researcher talked with the
instructors about all aspects of the study, and answered questions. On the day of data
collection the participants were given a survey with a consent letter explaining the study
with information regarding questions related to childhood experiences of witnessing
aggression through family members and experiencing aggression from parents and
siblings. Individuals who chose not to participate had the option to stay in the classroom
or go outside. Further, they were told that if at any time they felt uncomfortable they may
skip questions, mark NP, or stop the questionnaire.
Participants were asked not to put names or signatures on the survey to maintain
anonymity. Passive consent was used to protect the identity of these adults since
aggression can be shameful to participants and this way their anonymity was completely
protected. Participants were told that by completing the survey they were giving their
consent. All measures were administered at the same time and all participating
32
individuals in the class were read the consent to participate sheet. After participants were
finished with their survey they placed it in a manila folder at the front of the classroom.
At no point did the school or anger management facility have access to student survey
responses. Theses procedures approved by the CSUS Human Subjects committee.
Summary
This chapter described the methods used to conduct a study of childhood
experiences and its relationship to adult aggression. The analysis of these data is reported
in the following chapter. The following chapter will examine the hypotheses and look at
related factors of gender, SES, relationship quality with parents, and addictions.
33
Chapter 4
RESULTS
This chapter reports the results of the analysis of the survey measure as well as
the analysis of the research questions presented in Chapter 2.
Question 1: Is there a relationship between aggressive childhood experiences and
adult aggression?
To test whether a relationship exists between aggressive childhood experiences
and adult aggression, correlations were run between the childhood experiences from all
sources (mother, father, sibling, self) and the total aggression in adulthood (Table 2).
Correlations between childhood experiences and adult aggression were significant for all
sources of childhood aggression experiences. All correlations were positive which means
that high levels of adult aggression were associated with exposure of aggression during
childhood from the mother, father and/or siblings.
Correlations were also run separately for the community college sample and anger
management sample. These correlations are also provided in Table 2. While most of the
correlations were significant and positive as with the total aggression for the sample, an
interesting finding was that within the anger management group father-mother childhood
experiences were not significantly associated with adult aggression (r = .18, p = .34) and
for the community college mother-father experiences were not significantly correlated
with adult aggression (r = .19, p = .23).
34
Table 2. Correlations Between Childhood Experiences With Aggression and Adult
Aggression.
Adult Aggression Total
Childhood
Total
Anger
Community
Sample
Management
Mother Aggression
.50**
.60**
.19
Father Aggression
.33**
.18
.42*
Sibling Aggression
.47**
.37*
.39*
Self Aggression
.54**
.49**
.29
Experiences
College
Note. *p<.05, **p<.01
Question 2: Is there a difference in childhood experiences and adult aggression
between the community college and anger management samples?
Subjects rated each of the aggression questions including current physical
aggression, verbal aggression, Aggression during childhood from mother, father, sibling
and self. In order to examine the group differences we did Community College vs. Anger
Management, an independent t-test was conducted (See Table 3).
Table 3. Independent Samples T-test Comparing Reports of Aggression From Community
College and Anger Management Participants
35
Name Type
Anger
Community
Management College
t
p
df
d
Total Aggression
1.75(0.57)
1.28(0.34)
4.54
.000 79
1.03
Physical Aggression
1.54(0.55)
1.15(0.32)
3.93
.000 79
0.90
Verbal Aggression
2.08(0.71)
1.49(0.45)
4.57
.00
79
1.02
Childhood Aggression 1.46(0.46)
Mother
1.29(0.34)
1.97
.05
77
0.43
Childhood Aggression ather
1.62(0.58)
Father
1.36(0.43)
2.08
.04
67
0.52
Childhood Aggression 1.77(0.44)
Sibling
1.43(0.40)
3.24
.00
64
0.81
Childhood Aggression 1.75(0.45)
Self
1.34(0.33)
4.79
.00
79
1.05
Each comparison between anger management and community college showed a
significant difference between the groups. Current physical aggression was higher for
participants in anger management (M = 1.54, SD=.55), than the control group, (M= 1.15,
SD= .32). It was also found that current verbal aggression was higher for anger
management participants, (M= 2.08, SD=.71), than for the community college
participants, (M=1.49, SD=.45).
When comparing reports of childhood aggression between community college
participants and participants in anger management, the findings support the hypothesis
that the anger management group, shown above to be higher in total current aggression,
36
was also higher in early experiences with aggression at home (as shown in Table 3) for
each category including childhood aggression, mothers, fathers, sibling, and self, were
reported higher in anger management participants.
Question 3: Do factors such as age, gender, employment status, income, or substance
dependency predict adult aggression?
In order to examine whether the variables identified by prior literature predicted
total aggression in our sample a linear regression analysis was conducted. The variables
entered as the independent variables were age, gender, weather they were working (work
status), current household income, self reported dependency on substances, and if they
have now or ever taken anger management classes. As seen in Table 4, the regression
model was significant.
Table 4. Regression Predicting Total Aggression
B
-.11
.13
-.17
-.14
.34
.35
SE
.00
.10
.12
.03
.14
.11
Age
Gender
Work Status
Current Income
Dependency
Anger
Management
Note. F(6,63) = 7.477, p<.001, Adjusted R2 = .36
P
.31
.22
.10
.19
.00
.00
37
Variable for dependency and anger management significantly predicted total
aggression. Contrary to the hypothesis, gender was not a significant predictor. This
regression explained 36% of variance in total aggression.
Conclusion
There was significance for each of the following, working (work status), current
household income, self-reported dependency on substances, and if they have now or ever
taken anger management classes. This study found that there was a relationship between
reported aggression in the childhood home and adult aggression for the whole sample. It
was also found that individuals who reported more aggression for all sources in
childhood also reported higher levels of aggression in adulthood. The following chapter
discusses the results in terms of the existing literature. Limitations for the study will also
be discussed.
38
Chapter 5
DISCUSSION
This study investigated the relationship between childhood experiences and adult
aggression. The purpose of this study was to gain a better understanding of why some
individuals are more aggressive than others. This research contributes to existing research
on aggression by showing that individuals who experience aggression directly and
indirectly are more likely to become aggressive as adults than those individuals who have
not been exposed (Hare et al., 2009; Jackson, 1996; Jenkins, 2006; Kwong et al., 2003)
and provides a better understanding of how aggression varies by gender, exposure,
socioeconomic status, and dependency. This chapter will discusses the findings of the
research with a focus on, (1) the relationship between aggressive childhood experiences
and adult aggression (2) the difference in childhood experiences and adult aggression
between the community college and anger management samples (3) age, gender,
employment status, income, or substance dependency predict adult aggression. Finally,
the limitations, recommendations, and areas of future research are discussed.
Aggressive Childhood Experiences and Adult Aggression
Consistent with the hypothesis, there was a relationship between reported
aggression in the childhood home and adult aggression for the whole sample such that
those reporting more aggression for all sources in childhood also reported higher levels of
39
aggression in adulthood. Kwong et al., (2003) found that relationships children who
witness or experience aggression may be violent or have aggression issues later in life.
Repeatedly witnessing destructive inter-parental conflicts on children has an effect on
mental representations of how conflicts should be handled in adulthood (Kennedy,
Bolger, & Shrout, 2002). Children who observe aggression between their parents may
perceive aggression and conflict as threatening, and develop difficulty regulating their
own emotions with interpersonal conflict (Margolin & Gordis, 2004; Owen et al, 2009).
While most of the correlations were significant and positive as with the total
aggression for the sample, an interesting finding was that within the anger management
group aggressive father source childhood experiences were not significantly associated
with adult aggression, and for the community college aggressive mother source
experiences were not significantly correlated with adult aggression. As found in past
research, anger management issues, especially among boys, may result from observed
aggressive male role models in the home or fathers modeling aggression in their dealing
with conflict with mothers or children (Hare, Miga, & Allen, 2009). It is possible that
respondents in the anger management group all were high on father source aggression
regardless their adult level of aggression.
The present research findings also indicate that the rate of sibling violence was
highest among children in homes where both children and parental abuse are present
(Dunn et al. 1994; Kiselica & Morrill-Richards, 2007). Much research has been
conducted leading to the cycle of violence in the house that is a contributing factor to
aggression in the home. Kiselica and Morrill-Richards (2007) found that a violent family
40
environment has shown to promote sibling abuse as well as a cycle of violence that may
be repeated throughout life and across generations. It was not surprising that the findings
of the current study found a relationship between sibling aggression in the home and the
participants’ adult aggression.
Childhood Experiences and Adult Aggression Compared Between Community
College and Anger Management
It is important to study the similarities and differences in childhood aggression
and related factors for the anger management and community college samples. It may be
that in anger management have some type of issue with aggression as a group and
comparing this group with individuals not involved in anger management allows us to
compare those with childhood experiences with aggression and those without regardless
of whether they were currently in anger management. Of course, this is not a perfect
comparison since the anger management group did report, on the whole, more childhood
experiences with aggression.
When comparing reports of childhood aggression between community college
participants and participants in anger management, the findings support the hypothesis
that the anger management group, shown above to be higher in total current aggression,
was also higher in early experiences with aggression at home for each of the childhood
experiences of mothers, fathers, sibling, and self, were reported higher in anger
management participants. Individuals in the anger management group reported more
experiences of aggression.
41
One point that this study adds to the current discussion on family violence and
aggression is comparing physical and verbal aggression in transmission from childhood
to adulthood. Current physical aggression was higher for participants in anger
management than the control group. Physical aggression questions were asked in regards
to whether they had done any of the following in the past six months, such as throwing
objects, strike, kick, push, pull hair, and/or caused mild injury to others. It was important
to have these questions on the survey in order to find out if the individuals were
physically aggressive. It was also found that current verbal aggression or conflicts was
higher for anger management participants than for the community college participants.
Verbal aggression questions included yelling, cursing in anger, and making threats
towards others. These questions were important to ask to find if the individual was
verbally aggressive. Aggressive behavior in children is one of several negative outcomes
that are associated with physical punishment used by parents.
Parenting practices that include interactions that involve yelling and threatening,
were associated with many types of disruptive behavior problems such as aggressive
behavior (Sheehan & Watson, 2007). Individuals who observe parental hitting during
childhood had twice the odds of experiencing severe marital aggression compared to
individuals who did not report aggression in the home (Kwong, 2003; Jackson 1996). The
theoretical frameworks in the literature review support the idea that individuals who are
aggressive most likely have learned the behaviors from some other source. Much
research has been conducted on the intergenerational transmission of violence and the
social learning theory. These two theories support that witnessing aggression through
42
family is a learned behavior (Bandura, 1965; 1973; Hare et al. 2009; Kwong et al., 2003;
Story et al., 2004).
Factors Relating to Adult Aggression
There was significance for each of the following, working (work status), current
household income, self-reported dependency on substances, and if they have now or ever
taken anger management classes. This is consistent with findings that indicate that low
income and substance dependency are related to aggression (Mignone, 2009; Wilson et
al., 2000). In fact, it has been consistently revealed that 50-60% of men seeking alcohol
treatment reported one or more episodes of DV (O’Farrell & Murray, 1995; Stewart,
2003). The significant finding for anger management classes may indicate that there is a
difference in the combination or interaction of these factors in relating to current
aggression. The sample size was not big enough to statistically test for interactions and
more complex models but future research should examine these relationships.
Contrary to hypothesis, gender was not a significant predictor. Past research has
also found that there is a difference in gender and the likelihood of being an aggressor.
For males, low socioeconomic status and exposure to violence influenced later adult
aggression (Owens et al., 2009). For females, witnessing high levels of parental violence
and experiencing child abuse had effects on adult aggression (Sims et al., 2008).
One associated factor that was not assessed was supportive relationships with a
parent or persons outside the child’s family may promote resiliency against effects of
43
violence (Behborin & McMahon, 2008). Some factors that reduce aggressive behavior
include, good scholastic achievement and a positive relationship with one parent. Parental
support is associated with positive outcomes in youth. Parental support has been
associated with increased self-esteem, school-related interests and academic goal
orientation as well as lower levels of conduct problems and drug use (Behborin &
McMahon, 2008; Zimmerman et al, 2000). There are many factors that influence
aggression and the current study supports the past research and theoretical frameworks.
The focus of this study was to understand what childhood experience influence later adult
aggression. Theory helps support my findings by explaining that most individual
behavior is learned by watching other individuals model the behavior and observing
whether the model is reinforced or punished (Bandura, 1977). This study supported the
hypothesis that individuals who exhibit aggression or excessive anger in adulthood will
report witnessing aggression in childhood.
This research is relevant to study because aggression comes in all forms.
Knowing related factors can help educators and research planners identify possible
solutions to help decrease the likelihood of transmitting violence of those individuals who
have experienced violence in the home. Future research is needed to examine whether
supportive parent relationship can mediate between these factors, childhood exposure to
aggression, and adult aggression as suggested by (O’Keefe, 1998).
Implications
Although the current study reflects a small population of adult who are very
44
aggressive and a non-random community college sample, this study and its finding can be
useful to parents, practitioners, and law makers. Practitioners, such as counselors and
social workers who work with children could benefit from understanding the warning
signs of aggression and that it can come from more than one source. It is also important
to keep in mind that childhood experiences can contribute to issues in adulthood so
helping young children exposed to violence make connections with adults or build skills
known to contribute to resilience like education and involvement with activities outside
the home to help encourage other avenues to get aggression out (Berger, 2004; Sonis &
Langer, 2008). Parents who have to take parenting classes or domestic violence and anger
management should understand the long lasting effects that their behavior has on their
children. The quality of relationship with parents can be an important intervening factor
between long lasting effects. Finally, policy and lawmakers should note that, as in prior
studies, income and lack of resources is clearly associated with aggression. Policies to
reduce poverty and support families can reduce child exposure and adult aggression.
Limitations
It is important to report the limitations of the current study for those interested in
doing future research. One limitation was the methods used to collect the data. Self-report
surveys were used to collect data for all variables. Questions answered by participants
may not have been answered truthfully, therefore may have caused the data to be
inaccurate. Future research should include interviews to allow the participant to explain
the information they were giving. This will allow researchers to gain a better
45
understanding of what happened during childhood and what was going on currently. This
would also allow for some participants to verbalize their feelings.
Another limitation was the modification of the CTS. In order to shorten the
measure and gather data about aggression from various sources in the family of origin,
respondents were asked about mother, father, sibling, and self engaging in various
aggressive behaviors but the target of aggression was not identified, so it is unknown if
parents were being aggressive toward each other or the children or both. Since both
witnessing domestic violence and experiencing child abuse have previously been shown
to contribute to adult aggression future research is needed to tease apart the witness vs.
target of aggression from different sources within the family and its relationship with
adult aggression.
A third limitation is that this is a retrospective. Participants were asked to recall
their childhood experiences but memory can be vulnerable to deterioration. It is possible
that for those who were in anger management aggressive memories were more salient.
Also since the data were collected all at the same time and are correlational to
conclusions about causality can be drawn, it can only show that there is a relationship
between the variables.
Last, there are concerns the relatively small sample size. Previous research on
aggression has included a much larger number of participants. This study however
included 81 total participants but they were from two Anger Management Facilities in
Southern California, and from one Community college in Sacramento. With a small
number of participants involved in this total study a small percentage reported
46
aggression, which makes group comparisons questionable and may have contributed to
small effect sizes. It is also possible that the samples from southern and northern
California differed in overall aggression inflating group differences. Future research
should include a larger and more diverse population of participants. Despite these
limitations, these findings add to our understanding of childhood experiences and its
potential consequences for adult aggression.
47
APPENDIX A
Information Sheet for Participation
Los Rios Community College
Consent to Participate in Research
You are being asked to participate in research which will be conducted by Sarah
Castagnola, a graduate student in Child Development at California State University,
Sacramento. The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationships of childhood
experiences and aggression in adulthood.
This research may provide information to help create awareness on factors that
are associated with aggression in childhood and children’s ability to overcome it. If you
participate you will be asked to complete a questionnaire about your current background
information as well as information about your childhood background. You will also be
asked questions about your experiences with aggression in the household as a child, from
your mother, father, siblings as well as yourself. The questionnaire may require up to 20
minutes of your time.
You have the right to stop the survey at any time or skip any questions you do not
want to answer. You may also choose to mark the “Not Participating” box marked “NP,”
if you do not want other individuals to know you are not taking the survey. Some
questions may ask about illegal activities or past events for which you have unpleasant
memories. If you would like to talk to someone after the questionnaire you may call 1800-799-SAFE (7233) a 24-hour free counseling hotline.
All information that is obtained in this study will be anonymous and confidential.
You will not be asked for your name or signature. Data will be reported in aggregate
form and no individuals or schools will be identified. By completing the survey you are
giving your consent. Information obtained will not be shown to anyone.
For participating in this research, you will receive a raffle ticket for a drawing to
win a $10 gift card.
If you have any questions about this research, you may contact me Sarah
Castagnola at scastagnola84@yahoo.com or my faculty sponsor at CSU Sacramento, Dr.
Juliana Raskauskas, phone 916-278-7029 or email jraskauskas@csus.edu
Your participation in this research is entirely voluntary. Your signature is not
required, by completing and submitting the survey you are agreeing to participate in
this research.
Thank you,
Sarah Castagnola
48
Psychological Health Services
Consent to Participate in Research
You are being asked to participate in research which will be conducted by Sarah
Castagnola, a graduate student in Child Development at California State University,
Sacramento. The purpose of this study is to investigate the relationships of childhood
experiences and aggression in adulthood.
This research may provide information to help create awareness on factors that
are associated with aggression in childhood and children’s ability to overcome it. If you
participate you will be asked to complete a questionnaire about your current background
information as well as information about your childhood background. You will also be
asked questions about your experiences with aggression in the household as a child, from
your mother, father, siblings as well as yourself. The questionnaire may require up to 20
minutes of your time.
You have the right to stop the survey at any time or skip any questions you do not
want to answer. You may also choose to mark or circle the Not participating box marked
NP, if you do not want other individuals to know you are not taking the survey. Some
questions may ask about illegal activities or past events for which you have unpleasant
memories. . If you would like to talk to someone after the questionnaire you may call 1800-799-SAFE (7233) a 24-hour free counseling hotline.
All information that is obtained in this study will be anonymous and confidential.
You will not be asked for your name or signature. Data will be reported in aggregate
form and no individuals or schools will be identified. By completing the survey you are
giving your consent. Information obtained will not be shown to anyone.
For participating in this research, you will receive a raffle ticket for a drawing to
win a $10 gift card.
If you have any questions about this research, you may contact me Sarah
Castagnola at scastagnola84@yahoo.com or my faculty sponsor at CSU Sacramento, Dr.
Juliana Raskauskas, phone 916-278-7029 or email jraskauskas@csus.edu
Your participation in this research is entirely voluntary. Your signature is not
required, by completing and submitting the survey you are agreeing to participate in
this research.
Thank you,
Sarah Castagnola
49
APPENDIX B
Aggression Survey
Thank you for agreeing to complete this survey. Before you begin the survey please
complete the personal information below. This information is important for this study.
Remember all information you provide here and on the survey will be kept confidential.
If you are choosing not to participate, please select NP for each answer.
Current Information
What is your age? ____________________________
What is your gender (circle)?
Male
Female
NP
What was the highest level of education you have completed?
_____Less than high school
_____NP
_____ High School
_____ Some College
_____ Bachelors Degree
_____ Master’s Degree
_____ Doctoral Degree
_____ Professional Degree
_____ Other (specify)
_______________________________________________________________________
What is your race (eg. Asian, Caucasian, African American)?
_____________________________________________________________________
What is your current occupation status?
_____Working
____NP
_____ Not working
_____ Other
If working, what is your occupation?
______________________________________________________
What is your total household income, including all earners in your household?
_____Under $20,000
_____NP
50
_____$20,001 to 35,000
_____$35,001 to $50,000
_____$50,001 to $75,000
_____$75,001 to $100,000
_____$100,001 to $125,000
_____$125,001 to $150,000
_____$150,001 or more
Do you have any dependency on alcohol or other drugs?
_____Yes
____NP
_____No
Childhood Information- up to 12 years of age
What was your parents’ total household income as a child?
_____Under $20,000
____NP
_____$20,001 to 35,000
_____$35,001 to $50,000
_____$50,001 to $75,000
_____$75,001 to $100,000
_____$100,001 to $125,000
_____$125,001 to $150,000
_____$150,001 or more
_____ Unknown
What was your relationship like with your mother as a child? Please circle the response to
rate the quality of your relationship with your mother.
Not close
1
Somewhat close
2
Close
3
Very close
4
Not applicable
0
NP
X
What was your relationship like with your father as a child? Please circle the response to
rate the quality of your relationship with your father.
Not close
1
Somewhat close
2
Close
3
Very close
4
Not applicable
0
NP
X
51
What was your relationship like with your siblings as a child? Please circle the response
to rate the quality of your relationship with your sibling.
Not close
1
Somewhat close
2
Close
3
Very close
4
Not applicable
0
NP
X
Were your parents actively involved with you during your childhood? Please rate your
parents involvement on a scale from 1-4.
Not involved
Somewhat involved
Involved
1
2
3
Extremely involved
Not Applicable
NP
4
0
X
Mother
Father
Education
Extracurricular activities
Social Groups- friends
How dependable were these community members to you during childhood. Please rate
each community member’s support on a scale from 1-4.
Never
Sometimes
Often
Always
Not Applicable
NP
1
2
3
4
0
X
Teachers
Counselors
Parents
Grandparents
Coaches
What was your involvement in extra curricular activities during your
childhood/adolescence?
Have you ever participated in anger management or domestic violence classes. Please
circle one.
Yes No
NP
Please continue to the next page
52
These are questions about what it was like for you during childhood within the family.
For each question there are four individuals to rate. Rate each individual on a scale from
1-4. Mark NP with an X if you are not participating.
Never
Sometimes
Often
Always
1
2
3
4
Mother
Showed they cared when they disagreed
Explained their side of a disagreement
Insulted or swore at others
Threw something that could hurt another
Twisted another’s arm or hair
Caused someone to have a sprain, bruise, or small
cut because of a fight
Showed respect for others feelings about an issue
Pushed or shoved another
Used a knife or gun on another
Caused another to pass out from being hit on the
head during a fight
Called others fat and ugly
Punched or hit another with an object
Destroyed something belonging to another person
Caused another to go to the doctor because of a
fight
Choked someone
Shouted or yelled
Slammed another against a wall
Said they could work out problems
Beat up someone
Grabbed someone
Stomped out of the room/house/yard when they
had a disagreement
Slapped someone
Had a broken bone from a fight with another
Suggested a compromise to a disagreement
Burned another on purpose
Did something to spite another
Threatened to hit or throw something at another
Felt Physical pain the next day because of fight
Kicked another
Agreed to try a solution to a disagreement
suggested by another
Father Sibling
Self
NP
53
Please answer these questions about yourself currently. How frequently have you done
the following in the past 6 months. Rate each question on a scale from 1-4. Mark NP
with an X if you are not participating.
Never
1
Sometimes
2
Often
3
Always
4
SELF
Make loud noises, shout angrily
Yell mild personal insults (e.g. “You’re Stupid”)
Curse viciously, uses foul language in anger, makes moderate threats to others or
self
Make clear threats of violence toward others or self
Use yelling or pillow hitting to reduce anger.
Slam doors, scatter clothing, make a mess
Throw objects down, kick furniture without breaking it
Break objects, smash windows
Do something to reduce anxiety or anger (take a walk, mediation, etc.)
Set fires, throw objects dangerously
Make threatening gesture, swing at people, grab at another’s clothes
Strike, kick, push, pull hair (without injury to self)
Attack others, cause mild to moderate physical injury (bruises, sprain, welts)
Attack others, cause severe physical injury (broken bones, deep lacerations, internal
injury)
Talk to someone else about feelings of anger
Thank you for completing this survey
NP
54
REFERENCES
Bandura, A. (1965). Influence of models’ reinforcement contingencies on the acquisition
of imitative responses. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 3-11.
Bandura, A. (1973). Aggression: A social learning analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A. (1977) Self-Efficacy: Toward a Unifying Theory of Behavioral Change.
Psychology Review, 84, 191-215.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G.V., & Pastorelli, C. (1996). Mechanisms of
moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology. 17(2), 364-374.
Bandura, A. (2001) Social cognitive theory: An agentive perspective, Annual Review of
Psychology, 52 (1), 1-26.
Bandura, A. (2006). Social cognitive theory. In S. Rogelberg (Ed.). Encyclopedia of
Industrial/Organizational Psychology. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.
Benhorin, S. & McMahon,S.D. (2008). Exposure to violence and aggression: Protective
roles of social support among urban African American youth. Journal of
community psychology, 36 (6), 723-743.
Berger, L. M. (2004). Income, family structure, and maltreatment risk. Child and Youth
Services Review, 26, 725–748.
Bermann, S.G., Cutler, S., Litzenberger, B., Schwartz, W. (1994). Perceived conflict and
violence in childhood sibling relationships and later emotional adjustment.
Journal of Family Psychology, 81(1), 85-97.
Boyatzis, C., Matillo, G., Nesbitt, K. (1995). Effects of “The mighty morphin power
rangers” on children’s aggression with peers. Child Study Journal, 25(1).
Cappell, C., & Heiner, R. B. (1990). The intergenerational transmission of family
aggression. Journal of Family Violence, 5, 135–152.
55
Center for Disease Control. (2008a). Child Maltreatment. Retrieved March 28, 2009,
from http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/pubs/cm09/index.htm
Center for Disease Control. (2008b). Adverse Health Conditions and Health Risk
Behaviors Associated with Intimate Partner Violence. Retrieved March 28, 2009,
from http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5705a1.htm
Center for Disease Control. (2007). The Cost of Violence in the United States. Retrieved
March 28, 2009, from http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/factsheets/CostOfViolence.htm
Chapell, M.S., Hasselman, S.L., Kitchin, T., Lomon, S.N., MacIver, K.W., & Sarullo, P.
(2006). Bullying in elementary school, high school, and college. Adolescence, 41.
Chermack, S., Walton, M. (1999). The relationship between family aggression history
and expressed aggression among college males. Aggrissive Behavior, 25(4), 255267.
Coie, J.D., & Dodge, K.A. (1998). Aggression and antisocial behavior. Journal of Child
Psychology. 3, 779-862.
Corvo, K. (2006). Violence, separation, and loss in the families of origin of domestically
violent men. Journal of Family Violence, 21(2).
Cox, M. J., Paley, B. & Harter, K. (2001). Interparental conflict and parent–child
relationships. In J. Grych & F. Fincham (Eds.), Child development and
interparental conflict (pp. 249–272). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Davies, P., & Cummings, M. (1998). Exploring children’s emotional security as a
mediator of the link between marital relations and child adjustment. Child
Development, 69(1), 124-139.
Dunn, J., Slomskowski, C., Beardsall, L., & Rende, R. (1994). Adjustment in middle
childhood and early adolescence: Links withearlier and contemporary sibling
relationships. Child Psychiatry, 35,491–504
Felson, R. B., & Lane, K. J. (2009). Social learning, sexual and physical abuse, and adult
crime. Aggressive Behavior, 35, 489-501.
Garcia, M., & Shaw, D. (2000). Destructive sibling conflict and the development of
conduct problems. Developmental Psychology, 36(1), 44-53.
56
Giant, C., & Vartanian, L.R. (2003). Experiences with parental aggression during
childhood and self-concept in adulthood: The importance of subjective
perceptions. Journal of Family Violence, 18(6), 361.
Grusec, J. E. (1992). Socializing Concern for Others in the Home. Developmental
Psychology 27(2), 338-42.
Hare, A.L., Miga, E.M. & Allen, J.P. (2009). Intergenerational transmission of aggression
in romantic relationships: The moderating role of attachment security. Journal of
Family Psychology, 23(6), 808-818.
Hoffman, K.L., & Edwards, J.N. (2004). An integrated theoretical model of sibling
violence and abuse. Journal of Family Violence, 19, 185-197.
Huesmann, L.R., Moise-Titus, J., Podolski, C.L., & Eron, L. (2003). Longitudinal
relations between children’s exposure to TV violence and their aggressive and
violent behavior in young adulthood. Developmental Psychology, 39, 201–221.
Jackson, N. A. (1996). Observational experiences of intrapersonal conflict and teenage
victimization: A comparative study among spouses and cohabitors. Journal of
Family Violence, 11, 191–203.
Jenkins, J.M., Simpson, A., Dunn, J., Rasbash, J., & O’Connor, T.G. (2005). Mutual
influences of marital conflict and children’s behavior problems: Shared and
nonshared family risks. Child Development, 76, 24-39.
Kennedy, J., Bolger, N., & Shrout, P. (2002). Witnessing interpearental psychological
aggression in childhood: Implications for daily conflict in adult intimate
relationships. Journal of Personality, 70(6), 1051-1077.
Kettrey, H., & Emery, B. (2010). The discourse of sibling violence. Journal of Family
Violence, 21, 407-416.
Kiselica, M.S., & Morrill-Richards, M. (2007). Sibling maltreatment: The forgotten
abuse. Journal of Counseling & Development, 85.
Kokko, K., & Pulkkinen, L. (2005). Stability of aggressive behavior from childhood to
middle age in women and men. Aggressive Behavior, 31, 485-497.
Kuppens, S., Grietens, H., Onghena, P., & Michiels, D. (2009). Associations between
parental control and children’s overt relational aggression. Journal of
Developmental Psychology, 27(3), 607-63.
57
Kwong, M., Bartholomew, K., Henderson, A., & Trinke, S. (2003). The intergenerational
transmission of relationship violence. Journal of Family Psychology, 17, 288-301.
Lehmann, P., & Simmons, C.A. (2008). Children exposed to domestic violence:
Assessment and treatment protocols. In A.R. Roberts. (Eds.), Social Workers
Desk Reference. 2nd Ed (pp. 1101-1104). New York: Oxford.
Linder, J.R., & Collins, A.W. (2005). Parent and peer predictors of physical aggression
and conflict management in romantic relationships in early adulthood. Journal of
Family Psychology, 19(2), 252-262.
MacEwen, K. E. (1994). Refining the intergenerational transmission hypothesis. Journal
of Interpersonal Violence, 9, 350–365
Margolin, G., Gordis, E.B. (2004). Children’s exposure to violence in the family and
community. American Psychological Society, 13(4).
Mignone, T., Klostermann, K. & Fam, R. (2009). The relationship between relapse to
alcohol and relapse to violence. Family Violence, 24, 497–505
Murray, C., & Greenberg, M.T. (2000). Children’s relationship with teachers and bonds
with school: An investigation of patterns and correlates in middle childhood.
Journal of School Psychology, 38, 423–445.
National Center for Children Exposed to Violence. 2006. Children and Violence,
Domestic Violence. Retrieved March 29, 2009 from
http://www.nccev.org/violence/domestic.html.
O’Farrell, T. J., & Murphy, C. M. (1995). Marital violence before and after alcoholism
treatment. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 63, 256–262.
O’Keefe, M. (1998). Factors mediating the link between witnessing interparental
violence and dating violence. Journal of Family Violence, 13(1), 39-57.
Owens, A., Thompson, M., Shaffer, A., Jackson, E., & Kaslow, N. (2009). Family
Variables that mediate the relation between intimate partner violence and child
adjustment. Journal of Family Violence, 24(7), 433-445.
Perlman, M., Garfinkel, D., & Turrell, S. (2007). Parent and sibling influences on the
quality of children’s behaviours across the preschool period. Journal of
Developmental Psychology, 16(4), 619-641.
58
Sheehan, M., Watson, M. (2008). Resciprocal influences between maternal discipline
techniques and aggression in children and adolescents. Aggressive Behavior,
34(3), 245-255.
Sims, E., Dodd, V., Tejeda, M. (2008). The relationship between severity of violence in
the home and dating violence. Journal of Forensic Nursing, 4(4), 166-173.
Slep, A.M.S., & O’Leary, S.G. (2007). Multivariate models of mothers’ and fathers’
aggression toward their children. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,
75, 739-751.
Slomkowski, C., Rende, R., Conger, K.J., Simons, R.L., & Conger, R.D. (2001). Sisters,
brothers, and delinquency: Evaluating social influence during early and middle
adolescence. Child Development, 72, 271-283.
Sonis, J. & Langer, M. (2008). Risk and protective factors for recurrent intimate partner
violence in a cohort of low-income inner –city women. Journal of Family
Violence, 23(7), 529-538.
Stewart, W. (2003). The occurrence of partner physical aggression on days of alcohol
consumption: a longitudinal diary study. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology, 71, 41–52.
Story, L., Karney, B., Lawrence, E., Bradbury, A., & Thomas, N. (2004). Interpersonal
Mediators in the Intergenerational Transmission of Marital Dysfunction. Journal
of Family Psychology, 18(3), 519-529.
Synder, J., Bank, L., & Burraston, B. (2005). The consequences of antisocial behavior in
older male siblings for younger brothers and sisters. Journal of Family
Psychology, 19, 634-653.
U.S. Department of Justice. Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2009) Domestic Violence.
Retrieved September 19, 2009 from http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/cvictgen.htm.
Vandenberg, B., & Marsh, U. (2009) Aggression in youths: Child abuse, gender and SES.
Journal of Psychology, 11(3).
Wallace, M. 2009. “Police-reported crime statistics in Canada, 2008. Juristat, 29(3).
White, H.R., & Widom, C.S. (2003). Intimate partner violence among abuse and
neglected children in young adulthood: The mediating effects of early aggression,
antisocial personality, hostility and alcohol problems. Aggressive Behavior, 29,
332-345.
59
Whiteman, S., McHale, S., & Crouter, A. (2007). Completing processes of sibling
influence: Observational learning sibling deidentification. Social Development,
16(4), 642-661.
Willson, P., McFarlane, J., Malecha, A., Watson, K., Lemmey, D., Schultz, P., Gist, J., &
Fredland, N. (2000). Severity of violence against women by intimate partner and
associated use of alcohol and/or illicit drugs by the perpetrator. Journal of
Interpersonal Violence, 15(9), 996-1009.
Yudofsky S. C., Silver J. M., Jackson W., Endicott J. & Williams D. (1996) The overt
aggression scale for the objective rating of verbal and physical aggression.
American Journal of Psychiatry 143, 35–39.
Zimmerman, M.A., Ramirez-Valles, J., Zapert, K.M., & Maton, K.I. (2000). A
longitudinal study of stress-buffering effect for African-American male
adolescent problem behaviors and mental health. Journal of Community
Psychology, 28, 17–33.