Outline and evluate one socio-psychological explantion of aggression

One socio-psychological theory of aggression is Social learning theory. The social learning theory of aggression suggests that through vicarious learning, we observe and imitate an aggressive act that is rewarded. Normally, people would imitate an aggressive act if a role model was the one doing the action or if they are similar to us in some way (Duck). Imitation also needs the person to have the motivation, self-efficacy and positive or nor retention of past aggressive acts. The environment is also important in determining whether or not imitation will occur. In a darkened, aggressive, loud and confusing nightclub in which people have had much to drink, someone may be more prone to copying aggression. Or differently, a fearful person may be too afraid of retaliation to copy an aggressive act in an unfamiliar setting.
In Bandura’s Bobo doll study, children watched an adult act aggressively towards the Bobo doll. They then either saw the adult get rewarded, punished, or neither. The children were then let out to play with the Bobo doll. The condition in which the children watched the adult get rewarded displayed the greatest aggressive acts. However the other two conditions displayed no aggressive acts. This shows that imitation only occurs when children have a positive, rewarded mental representation of aggressive behaviour. A weakness with the Bobo doll study is that it does not could for individual differences. Children may have naturally been more aggressive in one condition rather than the other. Being children, social learning theory is hard pushed to then generalise to adults who have a much more developed and experienced representation of aggressive behaviour.

However, the study does have real life applications. The Jamie Bugler case, in which two young boys horrifically murdered a toddler, apparently supported this explanation. The boys admitted to watching Chucky and imitating the violence they saw. Although this seems to be shocking vicarious learning and was the explanation given, one psychologist found no link between SLT and the crime. Moreover, the perpetrators were deeply disturbed and therefore such a simple and natural demonstration of SLT cannot be attributed. Phillips also found that SLT has real world applications in America. After a wrestling match, homicides increased, perhaps showing imitation of the violence shown on the media. However this is merely correlational data and therefore other factors may influence homicide rates such as: team rivalry, hostile environments and Deindividuation.

Altgough championed for its universalised and cultural variations, SLT can be seen as an imposed ethic on non Western cultures. Wolfgang’s “culture of violence” study showed that according to different cultures, aggressive and non-aggressive behaviour models varied. He gave the example of the !Kung Sang men who are completely non-violent and look down upon aggressive behaviour whereas in Western society, aggressive behaviour is a sign of manliness. Therefore in some cultures, the imitation of violence is simply not there no matter the reward.

Studies into SLT are also limited, meaning that further experimentation is required to gain more detailed information. This poses an ethical problem, imitation of aggressive behaviour is not something to encourage, especially in children, and is not protecting participants from harm.

Moreover, the study is incredibly deterministic, suggesting that people will copy rewarded behaviours without giving any explanation as to how or why. In this sense, it is also reductionist, reducing complex psychological and biological behaviour into imitation. Runciman claimed an alternative to SLT, that deprivation caused aggression, as did Dollard- environmental factors were the reason for aggressive behaviour.