AGGRESSION
“Aggression is a response having for it’s goal – the injury of a
human being” (Dollard 1939)
 Aggression must be directed against something that is living
and it must have the intention of causing it harm or injury
 Violence is a severe form of aggression
 Instrumental aggression is aggression occurring in the
achievement of non-aggressive goal (controlled way of
pushing the rules to the limit)
 Eg: Boxing – the punching of an opponent (above waist) is
allowed within the rules as a means of winning a contest
 Eg: Rugby – Attacking the other team’s best player with
valid but hard tackles (within the rules) in order to intimidate
the player and have more chance of winning
 Eg: Cricket – A wicket-keeper talking to the batsman to
disturb his concentration when facing the bowler
 Instrumental aggression is sometimes called Channelled
aggression *
 Channelled aggression is a more controlled response in
which anger is developed into assertion
 Eg: Football - Taking a deep breath after a foul, but
playing harder and fairer
 Reactive aggression is the aggressive response to other
aggressive behaviour.
Eg:
Involvement in football
hooliganism
 Instrumental aggression is a means to an end – WINNING
IN COMPARISION:
 Reactive aggression has only one end – HARMING
opponents
Differences between Aggression and Assertion:
Aggression
Assertion
Behaviour intended to cause Behaviour directed towards a
harm
non-violent goal
Behaviour outside the rules
Behaviour is within the rules
Always involves the use of force Can involve the use of force
Uncontrolled
Channelled/Controlled
Hostile
Instrumental
Increasing control
Aggression
Assertion
Increasing frustration
CAUSES OF AGGRESSION
It is difficult to completely identify the causes of aggressive
actions in sport – but contributory factors can be identified:
Arousal
Frustration
Moral reasoning
AROUSAL:
 Increased arousal can bring about aggression
 Heightened arousal levels being about the fight or flight
response – readying the body for aggression
 Threatening situations can increase arousal. The threat
could be a physical one, it could be caused by pain or the
fear of getting hurt.
 This threat could also be a threat to the ego, the fear of
losing, or the fear of looking a fool
 Often – players decide to “get their retaliation in first”
FRUSTRATION:
 Frustration at not being able to achieve an individual or
team goal can lead to aggression
 This could be caused by other players, officials, spectators
or even playing badly. This effect could be heightened
when playing away from home
STATE OF MORAL REASONING:
 From childhood to adulthood, a person passes through a
number of stages of moral reasoning
 A child may reason that there is nothing wrong with
aggression as it is an effective means of getting their own
way
 An adult may reason that violence in sport is morally
wrong
 Aggression can occur when a person gets stuck at an early
stage on moral reasoning development, believing that
aggression can be justified
 Bracketed morality occurs – the moral rules for contact
sports are different to those of society in general
THEORIES OF AGGRESSION
There are 4 main theories which attempt to explain Aggression
 Instinct Theory
 Frustration – Aggression Theory
 Aggressive –Cue Hypothesis
 Social Learning Theory
INSTINCT THEORY
 Aggression is INNATE. We are all born with a certain predisposition to be aggressive
 Aggressive tendencies are difficult to control
 The stress of everyday life builds up the aggression inside.
Eventually the aggression will be let out – often in big
outbursts of violent or deviant behaviour.
 CATHARTIC RELEASE – Instinct theorists see aggression
in sport as being healthy – as within sport aggression is
controlled.
 PROBLEMS:
 It does not take into account the importance of environmental
and situational factors.
 It assumes that sport allows people to be aggressive –
although rules, make it difficult to be aggressive.
FRUSTRATION-AGGRESSION THEORY
 Aggression is the result of frustrating circumstances. If
people are frustrated in being unable to achieve a goal they
can respond aggressively.
 “Sport is frustrating” in itself – as one player is always
trying to prevent the other from winning.
As a
consequence, it is sport itself that can cause aggression.
 Drive Theory – Frustration leads to an uncontrollable
drive to be aggressive. This aggression can be directed
against the cause of frustration – but can be directed else
where too.
 Coaches should therefore help performers cope with
frustrating circumstances – “channel their aggression”
towards a goal:
Reactive aggression
into
Instrumental aggression
 Where aggression in sports is forbidden, a coach should
try to make the player release his/her need for aggression
in a different way – cathartic release. Eg??
 It does NOT however – explain why people are not
aggressive when the situation is frustrating?
Frustration-Aggression hypothesis – inevitable aggression
occurs when goals are blocked.
Diagram to explain this hypothesis:
AGGRESSIVE CUE HYPOTHESIS
 This theory attempts to explain aggression by
reformulating the frustration-aggression theory and
combining it with social learning
 Berkowitz 1973 argued that frustration-aggression
theory was flawed – as frustration does not always
lead to aggression
 Aggression only results from frustration if an
aggressive response was appropriate
THEREFORE
 It can be concluded that an aggressive act is a learned
response to a frustrating situation
 Aggression in Aussie Rules Football is an appropriate
response to frustration – BUT
 A cricketer attacking a bowler who has just caught
him/her out would be highly inappropriate.
DIAGRAMATIC REPRESENTATION OF THE
AGGRESSIVE-CUE HYPOTHESIS
SOCIAL LEARNING THEORY
“Aggression is learned”
Learned through Primary Socialising Agents:
Parents
Teachers
Friends
An aggressive act can be learned either by being TAUGHT or
through OBSERVATIONAL LEARNING/MODELLING
If a learner observes a role model perform an aggressive OR nonaggressive act, it is likely that they will want to copy
If a learner is rewarded for an aggressive OR non-aggressive act it
is likely that they will REPEAT it
If a learner is punished for an aggressive act – they are likely not to
repeat it.
Rewards and punishments in sport can lead the teaching of
aggressive/non-aggressive acts – depending on how they are used.
Sport is seen as a valuable way of teaching the attitudes valued by
society such as:
Fair Play
Cooperation
Coping with Defeat/Victory
Ways of being assertive without being aggressive
Eliminating Aggressive Tendencies
 In order to eliminate aggressive tendencies – the CAUSE of
aggression must be identified.
 Causes have been linked to levels of arousal – which could
increase due to:
- A physical threat/ego threat (fear of losing/looking
foolish)
- Frustrating circumstances
- Over-emphasis on winning
 Reduction of aggression must begin by preventing it
occurring – the promotion of non-aggressive acts will
encourage this
PREVENTING AGGRESSION
 Reduce performers arousal levels – using relaxation
techniques/coping strategies to deal with high levels of
arousal
 Punishment – sending players off/fines/taking league points
away
 Strong officials – who consistently enforce rules
 Rule changes – to reduce performers’ expectation of
opposition aggression
 Remove the emphasis on winning – coach should set
performance goals rather than outcome goals (school/amateur
level)
 Removal of aggressive players – before they commit on
offence
 Reduction of media sensationalisation
PROMOTION OF NON-AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOUR
 Promote positive role models
 Reward non-aggressive acts – FIFA Fair Play Award
 Channel aggression towards a team/individual goal
 Additional responsibility – decreases the risk of players’
feeling as though they have ‘let the side down’