RELATIONAL AGGRESSON: A PRECURSOR TO
WORKPLACE BULLYING?
Phillip L. Davidson
University of Phoenix, School of Advanced Studies
1
10/13/2011
Introduction
• Original research in 1939 by Lewin,
Lippitt, and White at the University of
Iowa’s Child Welfare Research Station.
• Attempt to understand group behavior
– Rebellion against authority.
– Persecution of a scapegoat.
– Submissiveness to authoritarian
domination.
– Aggression.
2
(Lewin, Lippitt, & White, 1939)
The social psychology issues
• Aggression in young children
– A precursor to adult behavior?
– Association with leadership styles.
• Precursor to studies in adults regarding
– Rebellion against authority.
– Submissiveness to authority.
– Effectiveness of democratic leadership.
3
(Chang, 2003)
Research by Rose and Swenson.
– 439 seventh and ninth grades.
– Findings:
• Popular students did not internalize feelings
in relational aggression.
• Relational aggression expected in popular
students.
Relational aggression includes the spreading rumors, creation of
an inner circle of friends while excluding others.
4
(Rose & Swenson, 2009)
Metropolitan Area Child Study Research Group
(MACS)
• Seven-year longitudinal study.
• Focused on interventions to reduce aggression.
– Classroom interventions
– Peer group interventions
– Family interventions
• the results demonstrated only moderate success, and
that was with only one intervention and with only
students from moderate-income families. The
interventions had no statistical affect on students from
low-income families.
5
(MACS, 2007)
Support for original study by
the follow-up studies
• Aggression may be •
perceived in a positive
way by some students
(Rose & Swenson,
2009).
• Relational aggression
may have value to
some groups,
especially students in
low-income families
(MACS, 2007)
6
Increase in study
variables offers
greater richness to the
study, but makes
projection of result
validity more difficult.
Lewin et al. carefully
controlled and limited
their variables (Lewin,
Lippitt, & White, 1939)
How researchers and practitioners
interpret personality and personalityrelated behaviors
• Primary question is whether aggression is
always “bad.”
– Further studies are needed covering
different age groups.
– Better understanding of how both men and
women express aggression.
– Increased understanding of the interplay of
aggressive acts between men and women
and same-gender aggression.
7
Implications for interpreting
behavior in employment
• The study by Lewin et al.
• Can leaders change?
(1939) focused on a small
– Charismatic leaders
controlled group of young
reduce aggression
boys.
(Hepworth & Towler,
• Application to employment
2004).
requires a better and deeper
– Laissez-faire leaders
understanding of how
provide a destructive
different leadership styles
leadership style
relate to aggression.
(Skogstad, Einarsen,
• Leaders do not typically
Torsheim, Aasland, &
change leadership styles to
Hetland, 2007).
deal with aggression.
8
Implications for interpreting behavior
in the social environment
• Potentially important to understand
perceptions of aggression by children.
– How do these perceptions perpetuate into
adulthood?
– Is bullying and victimization a normal
evolution of aggression?
– Does aggression fulfill a positive social role
from an evolutionary perspective?
9
(LeShan, 1958)
Implications for interpreting
personal behaviors.
• Aggression is always personal.
• Authoritarian aggression plays in important
part in the evolution of social discrimination
(Kessler, 2008).
• Aggression is biologically hardwired into
humanity. A deeper understanding of its
etiology as well as pathological aspects will
provide the psychologist with better tools
(Cillessen & Mayeux, 2004).
10
Impact on the treatment and
understanding of personality
disorders.
• Researchers commonly equate aggression
with violence.
• Relational aggression may be of value to an
individual (MACS, 2007).
• Hostility “is a valuable lever to help the
individual break free of both physical and
ideational restriction” (LeShan, 1958, p.
119).
11
The Pilot Study
The pilot study examined ethnicity, family
income, and gender in adults as the
independent variables and responses to a
modified EXPAGG (Campbell, Muncer, &
Coyle, 1992) scale as the dependent
variables. The intent was to discover
whether adults see relational or indirect
aggression as advantageous.
12
Results of Study
Figure #1
Males averaged 3.2 compared to females at 2.0 on the instrumental
scale. The small number of participants does not provide significance
for the data. However, the data does suggest agreement with Driscoll
et al. (2005).
13
Results of Study (continued)
Figure #2
While the data is too small a sample for accurate prediction, there is a
suggestion that more physical aggression or dominance might have a
place with the poor and the wealthy.
14
Results of Study (continued)
Figure #3
Instrumental and expressive aggression by ethnic background.
Reported ethnic backgrounds included three African-Americans, one
individual of Asian ancestry, and five white, non-Hispanics.
15
Discussion of Pilot Study
• Men possibly tend to be more instrumental
in the expression of aggression whereas
women tend to be more expressive.
• Women view aggression as more personal.
• Asking participants to recall an early age is
an interesting consideration.
16
Formal Study
• 200 nonmanagement employees (100 men
and 100 women), in a stratified random
population sample.
• Use EXPAGG survey.
• Correlational analysis between the
independent and dependent variables will
provide insight into relationships.
• A multivariate analysis (MANOVA) will
provide comparative data between the three
primary groups.
17
References
Boulton, M. J. (1999). Concurrent and longitudinal relations between
children's playground behavior and social preference, victimization,
and bullying. Child Development, 70(4), 944-954.
Campbell, A., Muncer, S., & Coyle, E. (1992). Social representation of
aggression as an explanation of gender differences: A preliminary
study. Aggressive Behavior, 18(2), 95-108.
Chang, L. (2003). Variable effects of children's aggression, social
withdrawal, and prosocial leadership as functions of teacher beliefs
and behaviors. Child Development, 74(2), 535-548.
Cillessen, A. H. N., & Mayeux, L. (2004). From censure to
reinforcement: Developmental changes in the association between
aggression and social status. Child Development, 75(1), 147-163.
Cote, S. M. (2007). Sex differences in physical and indirect
aggression: A developmental perspective. European Journal on
Criminal Policy & Research, 13(3|4), 183-200.
Courtois, C. A. (2001). Commentary on ‘guided imagery and memory’
Additional considerations. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 48(2),
133-135.
18
References (Continued)
Dodge, K. A., Coie, J. D., Pettit, G. S., & Price, J. M. (1990). Peer
status and aggression in boys' groups: Developmental and
contextual analysis. Child Development, 61(5), 1289-1309.
Eibl-Eibesfeldt, I. (1977). Evolution of destructive aggression.
Aggressive Behavior, 3(2), 127-144.
Hepworth, W., & Towler, A. (2004). The effects of individual
differences and charismatic leadership on workplace aggression.
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 9(2), 176-185.
Kessler, T., & Cohrs, J. C. (2008). The evolution of authoritarian
processes: Fostering cooperation in large-scale groups. Group
Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 12(1), 73-84.
LeShan, L. (1958). Some aspects of the positive value of hostility.
American Psychologist, 13(3), 118-119.
Lewin, K., Lippitt, R., & White, R. K. (1939). Patterns of aggressive
behavior in experimentally created "social environments." The
Journal of Social Psychology, 10, 271-299.
Lippitt, R. (1939). Field theory and experiment in social psychology: Autocratic
and democratic group atmospheres. American Journal of Sociology, 45(1),
26-49.
19
References (Continued)
20
Metropolitan Area Child Study Research Group (MACS). (2007).
Changing the way children 'think' about aggression: Socialcognitive effects of a preventive intervention. Journal of Consulting
and Clinical Psychology, 75(1), 160-167.
Passini, S. (2008). Exploring the multidimensional facets of
authoritarianism: Authoritarian aggression and social dominance
orientation. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 67(1), 51-60.
Rose, A. J., & Swenson, L. P. (2009). Do perceived popular
adolescents who aggress against others experience emotional
adjustment problems themselves? Developmental Psychology,
45(3), 868-872.
Skogstad, A., Einarsen, S., Torsheim, T., Aasland, M. S., & Hetland, H.
(2007). The destructiveness of laissez-faire leadership behavior.
Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12(1), 80-92.
Webster, G. D. (2008). The kinship, acceptance, and rejection model
of altruism and aggression (KARMAA): Implications for
interpersonal and intergroup aggression. Group Dynamics Theory,
Research, and Practice, 12(1), 27-38.
Wills, T. A. (1981). Downward comparison in social psychology.
Psychological Bulletin, 90(2), 245-271.