Talk:Aggression

message: Predatory behavior between members of one species towards another species is also described as "aggression." To be aggressive towards members of another species is common, such as in these examples: "Lions are aggressive hunters of antelopes," and "Eagles are aggressive hunters of small mammals." There are also other uses of the word "aggressive", such as in describing chemical reactions, bacterial or viral infections, and cancers or tumors.98.81.17.215 (talk) 16:17, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments 

message: "Aggression is a basic aspect of living beings and part of the process of survival and evolution.
Aggression in humans is partly genetic, with origins going back to our reptilian ancestors, and partly a result of upbringing. "
"living beings" might better be restricted to "animals", and "reptilian ancestors" is a bit strange, fish are perfectly capable of aggression... Merely fixing these errors wouldn't really result in a marked improvement, so I moved the material here. Pete.Hurd 01:20, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: removed from article

message: In my opinion, this piece still needs work, including some citations to back up the various assertions.  It's still conceptually self-contradictory, and in places the writing could be improved.
:Yep, this thing is maybe 5% done... Even just making a "to do" list would be a big step forward Pete.Hurd 00:29, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Needs work

message: This page really needs some structured thinking, clarification of different disciplines use of the word, good references, etc etc and the writing needs to be cleaned up throughout. Pete.Hurd 15:40, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I added a well accepted definition of aggression from social psychology, so this should help us to focus our thoughts while cleaning up this article. While talking about aggression, it's important to make sure we understand what aggression is not. Jcbutler 23:42, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup

message: This article seems to me to be sorely lacking in content, at least based on my expectations for such an important topic.  Further, I have noted it as anthropocentric, as it completely ignores questions of animal aggression, which could then be tied into how animal aggression is manifest in more complex human aggression.
I cannot rewrite the article myself at this time, though I may contribute to it later.  Excellent reading on the subject could be had in Desmond Morris's books, as he covers the topic in many of his published works. --Lvthn13 04:24, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This is an interesting point. I normally think of aggression as something that occurs between human beings, but I can see how a short section on animal aggression would be very valuable here, especially in the context of evolutionary theory and research. Jcbutler 23:45, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Anthropocentric

message: It looks like 140.247.44.100 has made some solid improvements. I think the definition and Moyer's classification have value though, so I have restored them, along with some softening of the language suggesting that aggression is no longer perplexing. I like the emphasis on biology and evolution, though I think the article needs some additional social psychological research and theory. Some anthropological work on the influence of culture would also help to round out the section on human aggression. Jcbutler 20:29, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Improvements 

message: I'd say that in the biological literature, "aggression" is taken to mean within a social context, that is to say between members of the same species. Pete.Hurd 19:32, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, though this distinction seems to have been confused in edits to this article over the past few years. I tried fixing up the introduction but the article really needs some serious "top to bottom" attention. --Jcbutler (talk) 22:57, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Predation

message: Alcohol, pain and discomfort, frustration, and violence on television are just a few of the factors that influence aggression in humans.Er...I'm pretty sure the television thing isn't a scientifically proven fact.138.243.129.4 15:14, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: From a review article by Anderson & Bushman 2001 (Psychological Science 12:353-359) "Five decades of research into the effects of exposure to violent television and movies have produced a thoroughly documented and highly sophisticated set of research findings. It is now known that even brief exposure to violent TV or movie scenes causes significant increases in aggression, that repeated exposure of children to media violence increases their aggressiveness as young adults, and that media violence is a significant risk factor in youth violence (Bushman & Huesmann, 2001; Huesmann et al., 2001)." Pete.Hurd 15:45, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problem with "Agression in humans" section 

message: I'm confused about this paragraph:
"There is some evidence to suggest that the presence of violent objects such as a gun can trigger aggression. In a study done by Leonard Berkowitz and Anthony Le Page (1967), college students were made angry and then left in the presence of a gun or badminton racket. They were then led to believe they were delivering electric shocks to another student, as in the Milgram experiment. Those who had been in the presence of the gun administered more shocks. It is possible that a violence-related stimulus increases the likelihood of aggressive cognitions by activating the semantic network."
What's all this about badminton rackets and electric shocks? It makes no sense to me. 76.2.4.94 15:52, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Agression and the presence of a gun

message: I find it interesting that from the very first line of this article aggression is painted as a negative, dark part of human nature.  There are many examples of how aggression can be a good thing.  Watch a game of poker on television and see how aggressive play can result in a win, even when the cards don't warrant it.  Aggressive play in sports and aggressive moves in a game of strategy are often the correct play in oarder to secure a win.  Perhaps this is because the games themselves were designed by aggressive humans, but one could argue that life itself favors the aggressive.  
The willingness to take on greater risk is also a form of aggression.  Aggressive business strategies, aggressive investing, etc.  The natural world and human society favor the bold.  Why is this article devoted only to the modern psychologist's view of aggression as a negative?
:Whoever you are, you don't exactly provide any reason to see it as positive, unless you think survival of the fittest to be the basis of what is right and wrong (see appeal to nature). Richard001 08:07, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Aggression is not always a bad thing 

message: Hello Contributors to this issue,
I recently began to write ex nihilo a new WIKIPEDIA page, under the title of "Social Defeat", it is excellent for within-species aggression.
I think this approach is more adequate for scientific investigation of human aggression than social psychology approachs because i)it draws comparisons with animal studies (experiments in laboratory and observations in naturalistic settings), ii) evaluates physiological (neurological and endocrine) ccorrelates and iii) usually evaluates social context parameters (isolation vs. group housing, group stability vs. instability, etc.) 
Please read the page, and make good contributions if possible:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_defeat
Thank you for your attention,
AlbertoAlcor2010 17:57, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The "Social Defeat" approach is excellent for studying intra-specific aggression 

message: Cancers have three traits:  aggressive, invasive, and metastatic.  I'd like to be able to link to pages explaining these terms.  On this page, could someone add a section about aggressive as it relates to cancer? --Una Smith 04:06, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This would be more appropriately handled in a medical article, or the article on cancer. The "aggressive" growth of a tumor and a mugging are two entirely different subjects. --Jcbutler (talk) 17:41, 17 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Make room for aggressive cancers

message: #PEER PRESSURE,pressure set by peers(friends) to be "cool"or have a social status.
See normative social influence.
#PRESSURE,force set upon an object.(I put pressure on the can.) 
Students of behavioral and social sciences have a jargon. Thus when a conversation speaks of pressure, it is taken to mean in the context of the social world, not the kitchen.
 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.236.184.200 (talk) 21:57, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  pressure 

message: I noticed that there wasn't a lot of information in some of the sections on this page, specifically Evolution of Aggression: Aggression with in a Species, Biology of Aggression: Aggression in the Brain, Neurotransmitters and Hormones, and Genetics and Aggression. I just added some material I thought would be useful from some research I conducted over the past weeks.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by KristyK3211 (talk • contribs) 19:06, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Added some material

message: What is the reason a specific person can become agressive, when she is drugged with hashish and also also Abilify(R).
Do doctors give medicine to limit a hostile and emotional agression?
This topic is far to subjective to answer. See; definition of situation, perceptual salience, fundamental attribution error, and alcohol myopia (just for starters). An individual under the influence may do anything; furthermore, it is unlikely a licensed practioner would add another substance to one under the influence of illegal drugs. More importantly though, this is not the proper place for question and answer, try psych how.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Applejack32 (talk • contribs) 22:23, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Question 

message: Suicide and other self-injurious acts are also forms of aggression. However, I only see information related to self-injury in the section about violent female youths.
68.54.107.114 (talk) 18:44, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: There is a whole page on self harm. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:37, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not enough information on self-aggression or self-harm 

message: Interesting study regarding punishment and aggression in children.  Not sure were to add it.  Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:37, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay added it. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 06:41, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: And I moved it! (The next sentence did not make sense with your study inserted) Lova Falk talk 10:42, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Pediatrics

message: I saw on User:Delta shewa that he had made a sentence with a source. But it was not added to the article. 
The contribution:This kind of behavioural problem has a big impact in social life and also it is not acceptable or it is not neccessary in the community that you are living with.[1]
The source: oliver, africano; murphy (2009). aggressive behaviour. 23. pp. 903-913.
I couldn't check for reliablility of the source, because it there wasn't a link to the article and I couldn't find it on the web or in a database. The contribution is all opinion though. Honestly, it shouldn't be put into this article, simply because a good wikipedia article is factually accurate and verifiable, with a non-biased opinion. Since the sentence is someone's opinion, it can not follow any of these three standards. 
I added information in the Varieties Section:
Both of these can be classified under Relational aggression. Reactive relational aggression (hosile, affective, retaliatory) is used in response to feeling attacked, threatened, or mad. Usually the person who exhibits this type of aggression feels provoked to do so. Instrumental relational aggression (predatory, goal-oriented) is used in order for an individual to get what they want.[6]
My Source: YOUNG, ELLIE L.; NELSON, DAVID A.; HOTTLE, AMERICA B.; WARBURTON, BRITTNEY; YOUNG, BRYAN K.. Education Digest, Mar2011, Vol. 76 Issue 7, p24-29, 6p; Reading Level (Lexile): 1360
SCayce1230 (talk) 19:33, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Just read the article & found that point very interestingj, looking for the source online the reference seems to be to a codensed version (which I couldn't access) of an article published in 2010 in 'Principle Leadership' the full text is here http://www.nasponline.org/resources/principals/Relational_Aggression_PLOct10.pdf  It seems to be about relational aggression without necessarily making the distinction between, or using the words, reactive vs instrumental. So not sure if anyone has any ideas on that but I'll also try to look into this topic & help cover it. EverSince (talk) 13:17, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Psychology 101: [[User:Delta shewa]]'s Contributions

message: I added a new section on aggression as a positive adaptation in humans.  Given that most discussion of aggression in psychology implies it is always negative, I think this scholarship suggesting otherwise is worth bringing to light.  It was removed by another user who said it was unnecessary, but I suspect it is.  Perhaps there is a difference between disciplines, psychology and biology where this point is "obvious" to biologists (and thus seems unnecessary) but is not to psychologist who tend to add moral terms to their views of aggression.  Thus I have moved it to the section on humans where perhaps it is more relevant.  May be ways to improve the discussion or even make the heading clearer.  ~~MVGuy  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.91.76.238 (talk) 15:41, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: I wonder if a section on positive vs negative views of it would be a way to address this, as there isn't currently a section heading on it being negative. I think it needs to always be clear wehther 'adaptive' is being used in a technical sense in context of past (or theoretically current) natural selection, or a general sense in terms of current society. The heading structure generally seems a bit of a hindrance but i'll address that below so as not to detract from this. Eversync (talk) 14:38, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Aggression as Positive

message: Seems like the overall heading structure could be clearer - evolution-biology-human seems confusing and the content under them tends to mix those aspects anyway, even if the former are intended to mean non-human. Don't know how others see it. I've moved all the references inline (rather than two systems in place) as that seemed confusing too. Eversync (talk) 14:38, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Heading structure

message: This article is mostly about violence, instead of aggression.
Violence:   
 The use of physical force. 
Aggression: 
 The initiation of involuntary violence on someone or something. 
Surgeons, chiropractors, voluntary fighting martial artists etc. all use violence, yet they are not aggressing.  Fawby (talk) 12:27, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Violence vs. Aggression 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Aggression. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120525061300/http://www.tamiu.edu/~cferguson/Video%20Games%201%20Year.pdf to http://www.tamiu.edu/~cferguson/Video%20Games%201%20Year.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:10, 28 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: This article could introduce the distinction between violence and aggression earlier, in that violence is a form of physical aggression that may cause physical harm to another person. Vorbee (talk) 16:59, 1 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title: Aggression and violence