ArticlePDF Available

Guns, Testosterone, and Aggression: An Experimental Test of a Mediational Hypothesis

Authors:

Abstract

We tested whether interacting with a gun increased testosterone levels and later aggressive behavior. Thirty male college students provided a saliva sample (for testosterone assay), interacted with either a gun or a children's toy for 15 min, and then provided another saliva sample. Next, subjects added as much hot sauce as they wanted to a cup of water they believed another subject would have to drink. Males who interacted with the gun showed significantly greater increases in testosterone and added more hot sauce to the water than did those who interacted with the children's toy. Moreover, increases in testosterone partially mediated the effects of interacting with the gun on this aggressive behavior.
Research Report
Guns, Testosterone, and
Aggression
An Experimental Test of a Mediational Hypothesis
Jennifer Klinesmith, Tim Kasser, and Francis T. McAndrew
Knox College
ABSTRACT—We tested whether interacting with a gun in-
creased testosterone levels and later aggressive behavior.
Thirty male college students provided a saliva sample (for
testosterone assay), interacted with either a gun or a
children’s toy for 15 min, and then provided another saliva
sample. Next, subjects added as much hot sauce as they
wanted to a cup of water they believed another subject
would have to drink. Males who interacted with the gun
showed significantly greater increases in testosterone and
added more hot sauce to the water than did those who
interacted with the children’s toy. Moreover, increases in
testosterone partially mediated the effects of interacting
with the gun on this aggressive behavior.
Substantial evidence suggests that aggression can be increased
by the presence of weapons in the environment and by the
hormone testosterone. Several studies show that the presence of
aggressive environmental cues such as weapons can increase
the accessibility of hostile, aggressive thoughts and lead to more
aggressive behavior (Anderson, Benjamin, & Bartholow, 1998;
Bartholow, Anderson, Carnagey, & Benjamin, 2005; Berkowitz
& LePage, 1967; Bettencourt & Kernahan, 1997; Killias &
Haas, 2002). Regarding testosterone, in animal species ranging
from chickens to monkeys, the injection of this hormone in-
creases aggressiveness and social dominance behavior, re-
gardless of whether the animals are males or females (Ellis,
1986); in humans, however, the results are more mixed, with
many laboratory and field studies revealing strong positive re-
lations between testosterone and levels of restlessness, tense-
ness, and tendency toward violence (Archer, 1994; Campbell,
Muncer, & Odber, 1997; Dabbs, Carr, Frady, & Riad, 1995;
Dabbs, Jurkovic, & Frady, 1991) and other studies failing to
replicate such effects (Archer, 1991; Archer, Birring, & Wu,
1998; O’Connor, Archer, Hair, & Wu, 2001; Rowe, Maughan,
Worthman, Costello, & Angold, 2004).
Surprisingly, we were unable to find any studies that examined
whether testosterone and the presence of a weapon might work
together to increase aggressive behavior. Perhaps the presence
of a stimulus such as a gun triggers increases in testosterone
levels, which in turn increase aggressive behavior. Such a chain
of events would be predicted by the challenge hypothesis de-
veloped by Wingfield, Hegner, Dufty, and Ball (1990) to explain
aggressive behavior in male pair-bonded birds. According to
this hypothesis, testosterone rises in response to situational cues
that represent either a threat to a male’s status or a signal that
competition with other males is imminent; such increases in
testosterone then facilitate whatever competitive behaviors
(including potentially aggressive responses) are necessary for
meeting the challenge. The challenge hypothesis has been
supported by studies across a wide range of vertebrate species
(Cavigelli & Pereira, 2000; Ferree, Wikelski, & Anderson,
2004; Hirschenhauser, Taborsky, Oliveira, Canario, & Oliveira,
2004; Muller & Wrangham, 2004); most studies in humans have
focused on how males’ testosterone levels rise and fall de-
pending on success or failure in competitions (Archer, 1991;
Booth, Shelley, Mazur, Tharp, & Kittok, 1989; Gladue, Boechler,
& McCaul, 1989; Mazur, Booth, & Dabbs, 1992; Mazur & Lamb,
1980) or in response to insults (Cohen, Nisbett, Bowdle, &
Schwarz, 1996; see Archer, 2006, for a review of the applica-
bility of the challenge hypothesis to humans).
In this study, we examined whether the presence of a gun (vs. a
control object) might act as a stimulus signaling competition and
a threat to status; if so, according to the challenge hypothesis,
it should cause increases in males’ testosterone levels, which in
turn should increase their aggressive behavior. We assessed
males’ testosterone levels both before and after interacting with
a gun or a children’s toy; to measure aggression, we adapted a
method developed by Lieberman, Solomon, Greenberg, and
Address correspondence to Tim Kasser, Box K-83, Knox College,
Galesburg, IL 61401, e-mail: tkasser@knox.edu.
PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE
568 Volume 17—Number 7Copyright r2006 Association for Psychological Science
McGregor (1999) that gives subjects the opportunity to anony-
mously put hot sauce in a cup of water that they believe another
person will have to drink. We hypothesized that males who in-
teracted with the gun would show both a greater increase in
testosterone levels and more aggression than would males who
interacted with the children’s toy. We also hypothesized that
changes in testosterone levels would be correlated with ag-
gression levels and would indeed mediate the effects of inter-
acting with a gun on later aggressive behavior.
METHOD
Subjects
Subjects were 30 male college students (age range: 18–22) who
received extra course credit or a small monetary reward for their
participation. All subjects were run during the afternoon or early
evening.
Procedure and Materials
When recruited, subjects were informed that the study would
examine taste sensitivity in males and that they would therefore
need to provide saliva for hormone analysis; subjects were asked
not to eat, drink, smoke, or brush their teeth for 1 hr prior to
testing in order to minimize impurities in the saliva samples.
When subjects arrived at the lab, a female experimenter con-
firmed that the subjects had indeed followed these instructions
before she administered consent procedures. Next, participants
provided an approximately 6-ml sample of saliva by spitting into
a cup; this saliva was used to assess baseline, or Time 1,
testosterone levels.
All subjects were then led into a room containing a television,
a chair, and a table with an object and some paper on it. For
experimental subjects, the object was a pellet gun identical in
size, shape, and feel to a Desert Eagle automatic handgun; for
control subjects, the object was the children’s game Mouse
Trapt. Subjects were told that the study was investigating
whether taste sensitivity was associated with the attention to
detail required for creating instructions concerning the object.
Subjects were therefore asked to spend 15 min handling the
object and writing a set of instructions about how to assemble
and disassemble it; a drawing of the object was also provided for
subjects to label the object’s parts. The handgun and children’s
game were similar in number and complexity of parts.
After 15 min, the experimenter reentered the room, asked the
subject to stop working on the instructions, and obtained a Time
2 saliva sample from the subject. The subject was told he would
next perform the taste-sensitivity portion of the study. He was
given a cup filled with 85 g of water and a single drop of Frank’s
Red Hot Sauce. The subject was told that the sample had been
prepared by a previous subject, was instructed to take a sip of the
sample, and was then asked to rate the taste of the sample on a
scale provided.
The experimenter left and then returned with a tray containing
a cup of 85 g of water, a nearly full bottle of Frank’s Red Hot
Sauce, and a lid. The subject was asked to prepare a sample for
the next subject by placing as much hot sauce in the water as he
wanted. He was assured that neither the person who drank it nor
the experimenter would know how much hot sauce he had put in
the water, as the lid was to be put on the cup after the hot sauce
was added. The experimenter then left the room, and the sub-
ject signaled when he was finished adding the hot sauce.
(Throughout this process, the gun or the game remained in the
room.) The cup was then removed from the room, and the ex-
perimenter weighed it again to obtain a measure of the amount of
hot sauce, in grams, the subject had added to the water. This
served as our primary measure of aggression (see Lieberman et
al., 1999).
Because of the potentially arousing nature of the experiment,
we wanted to ensure that all subjects were reasonably calm when
they left the lab. Therefore, all subjects next watched a relaxing
video of nature scenes and classical music. Given that subjects
had been deceived, we next debriefed them, emphasizing that
they should not feel badly about any aggressive behavior they
exhibited. Interestingly, several subjects were disappointed
when told that the sample of hot sauce and water they had
prepared would not actually be given to the next subject. No
subjects expressed suspicion as to the true nature of the study.
Testosterone Levels
Time 1 and Time 2 saliva samples were stored for 24 hr at room
temperature, centrifuged, and then frozen at 20 1C until the
time of the assay (Erikkson & Von Der Pahlen, 2002). The
samples were then brought to room temperature, transferred to
Eppendorf tubes, centrifuged for 15 min at 3,000 rpm to remove
debris, and then assayed in duplicate using a commercially
available microwell kit for testosterone level (Salimetrics, LLC,
State College, PA). All samples were assayed in house in a single
batch using a standard radioimmunoassay (RIA) procedure
under the supervision of an experienced RIA technician; at both
Time 1 and Time 2, the duplicates were averaged to yield our
measures of testosterone level. The intra-assay coefficient of
variation for subjects was 5.3%, and the sensitivity of the assay
was less than 1.5 pg/ml from zero for men. Mean Time 1 and
Time 2 testosterone levels were 222.59 pg/ml (SD 597.17) and
253.92 pg/ml (SD 598.32), respectively. We subtracted each
subject’s Time 1 level from his Time 2 level to obtain a measure
of change in testosterone.
RESULTS
Our first hypothesis was confirmed: Subjects who interacted with
the handgun showed a greater increase in testosterone from
Time 1 to Time 2 (mean change 562.05 pg/ml, SD 548.86)
than did those who interacted with the children’s game (mean
Volume 17—Number 7 569
Jennifer Klinesmith, Tim Kasser, and Francis T. McAndrew
change 50.68 pg/ml, SD 528.57), t(28) 54.20, p
rep
5.99,
d51.53. Thus, interacting with the gun increased testosterone
levels.
Our second hypothesis was also confirmed: Subjects who in-
teracted with the gun added more hot sauce to the water (M5
13.61 g, SD 58.35) than did those who interacted with the
children’s toy (M54.23 g, SD 52.62), t(28) 54.16, p
rep
5
.99, d51.52. Thus, interacting with the gun increased ag-
gressive behavior.
Our third hypothesis was also confirmed: The amount of hot
sauce placed in the cup was positively correlated with changes
in testosterone level (r5.64, p
rep
5.99; R
2
5.41). Given that
all three of Baron and Kenny’s (1986) prerequisites for a me-
diational model were met, we next examined whether the size of
the association between the predictor variable (i.e., gun vs.
game) and the outcome variable (i.e., grams of hot sauce added)
diminished once the effects of the purported mediating variable
(i.e., changes in testosterone) were controlled. Indeed, the size of
the correlation between group membership (experimental vs.
control) and aggression dropped from r5.62 (p
rep
5.99) to
pr 5.36 (p
rep
5.91) after controlling for changes in testos-
terone. Finally, to more stringently test our mediational hy-
pothesis, we computed Sobel’s (1982) test for mediation, using
the Web site developed by Preacher and Leonardelli (2001). As
before, the evidence suggested that the effect of guns on ag-
gression was significantly mediated by changes in testosterone
levels, Sobel’s test 52.09, p
rep
5.93.
DISCUSSION
Past research shows that both testosterone and exposure to guns
are associated with aggressive behavior, but no studies, to our
knowledge, have examined how the two factors might work to-
gether. The present results demonstrated that males who inter-
acted with a gun showed a greater increase in testosterone levels
and more aggressive behavior than did males who interacted
with a children’s toy. Mediational analyses suggested that part of
the reason that guns increase aggression is that they cause in-
creases in testosterone levels.
Such findings not only are consistent with the challenge hy-
pothesis (Wingfield et al., 1990), but also provide new support
for it both by examining a new type of ‘‘challenging’’ stimulus
and by assessing later aggressive behavior. Additionally, the
results provide evidence against some interpretations suggest-
ing that experimental effects of guns on aggression are due to
subtle demand characteristics. That is, it seems unlikely that
subtle experimenter pressures could significantly increase
subjects’ testosterone levels; instead, it seems more reasonable
to believe that the presence of the gun had this effect.
Future research could explore a variety of avenues for cor-
recting some of the limitations of the present study. For example,
would females’ biological and behavioral responses to guns be
similar to males’? Perhaps they would, as other female animals
act more aggressively when injected with testosterone (Ellis,
1986). But perhaps they would not, as the types of evolutionary
challenges faced by ancestral females were different from those
faced by males, and thus females may react to guns differently
than males. Another topic worthy of further study concerns the
fact that subjects in this study only had the opportunity to ag-
gress in an anonymous, rather indirect fashion against an un-
known individual. Would the same pattern of results hold if the
aggression was directed against a particular individual, or if
there was a possibility of retribution from the victim? Finally,
would past experience with guns moderate these effects? That is,
would individuals who frequently handle guns (such as hunters
or soldiers) respond similarly to those with little or no experience
with weapons? Previous research (Bartholow et al., 2005) sug-
gests that this may be the case, but a link with testosterone has
yet to be established.
In sum, the present study replicates past research showing
that exposure to guns may increase later interpersonal aggres-
sion, but further demonstrates that, at least for males, it does so
in part by increasing testosterone levels. Such findings raise
many of the usual questions about whether the presence of guns
in modern society contributes to violent behavior. Although our
study is clearly far from definitive, its results suggest that guns
may indeed increase aggressiveness partially via changes in the
hormone testosterone.
Acknowledgments—We thank Heather Hoffmann, Janet Kirk-
ley, Glen Normile, and Neil Schmitzer-Torbert for their assistance.
This research was funded by a grant from the Richter Memorial
Scholarship Program.
REFERENCES
Anderson, C.A., Benjamin, A.J., Jr., & Bartholow, B.D. (1998). Does the
gun pull the trigger? Automatic priming effects of weapon pictures
and weapon names. Psychological Science,9, 308–314.
Archer, J. (1991). The influence of testosterone on human aggression.
British Journal of Psychology,82, 1–28.
Archer, J. (1994). Violence between men. In J. Archer (Ed.), Male vi-
olence (pp. 121–140). London: Routledge.
Archer, J. (2006). Testosterone and human aggression: An evaluation of
the challenge hypothesis. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Re-
views,30, 319–345.
Archer, J., Birring, S.S., & Wu, F.C.W. (1998). The association between
testosterone and aggression among young men: Empirical findings
and a meta-analysis. Aggressive Behavior,24, 411–420.
Baron, R.M., & Kenny, D.A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable
distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strate-
gic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology,51, 1173–1182.
Bartholow, B.D., Anderson, C.A., Carnagey, N.L., & Benjamin, A.J., Jr.
(2005). Interactive effects of life experience and situational cues
on aggression: The weapons priming effect in hunters and non-
hunters. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology,41, 48–60.
Berkowitz, L., & LePage, A. (1967). Weapons as aggression-eliciting
stimuli. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,7, 202–207.
570 Volume 17—Number 7
Guns, Testosterone, and Aggression
Bettencourt, B.A., & Kernahan, C. (1997). A meta-analysis of aggres-
sion in the presence of violent cues: Effects of gender differences
and aversive provocation. Aggressive Behavior,23, 447–456.
Booth, A., Shelley, G., Mazur, A., Tharp, G., & Kittok, R. (1989).
Testosterone and winning and losing in human competition. Hor-
mones and Behavior,23, 556–571.
Campbell, A., Muncer, S., & Odber, J. (1997). Aggression and testos-
terone: Testing a bio-social model. Aggressive Behavior,23, 229–
238.
Cavigelli, S.A., & Pereira, M.E. (2000). Mating season aggression and
fecal testosterone levels in male ring-tailed lemurs, Lemur catta.
Hormones and Behavior,37, 246–255.
Cohen, D., Nisbett, R.E., Bowdle, B.F., & Schwarz, N. (1996). Insult,
aggression, and the Southern culture of honor: An ‘‘experimental
ethnography.’’ Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,70,
945–960.
Dabbs, J.M., Jr., Carr, T.S., Frady, R.L., & Riad, J.K. (1995). Testos-
terone, crime, and misbehavior among 692 male prison inmates.
Personality and Individual Differences,18, 627–633.
Dabbs, J.M., Jr., Jurkovic, G., & Frady, R.L. (1991). Salivary testos-
terone and cortisol among late adolescent male offenders. Journal
of Abnormal Child Psychology,19, 469–478.
Ellis, L. (1986). Evidence of neuroandrogenic etiology of sex roles from
a combined analysis of human, nonhuman primate, and nonpri-
mate mammalian studies. Personality and Individual Differences,
7, 519–552.
Erikkson, C.J., & Von Der Pahlen, B. (2002). Testosterone, dihydro-
testosterone and cortisol in men with and without alcohol-related
aggression. Journal of Studies on Alcohol,63, 518–526.
Ferree, E.D., Wikelski, M.C., & Anderson, D.J. (2004). Hormonal
correlates of siblicide in Nazca boobies: Support for the challenge
hypothesis. Hormones and Behavior,46, 655–662.
Gladue, B.A., Boechler, M., & McCaul, K.D. (1989). Hormonal re-
sponse to competition in human males. Aggressive Behavior,15,
409–422.
Hirschenhauser, K., Taborsky, M., Oliveira, T., Canario, A.V.M., &
Oliveira, R.F. (2004). A test of the ‘‘challenge hypothesis’’ in
cichlid fish: Simulated partner and territory intruder experiments.
Animal Behaviour,68, 741–750.
Killias, M., & Haas, H. (2002). The role of weapons in violent acts:
Some results of a Swiss national cohort study. Journal of Inter-
personal Violence,17, 14–32.
Lieberman, J.D., Solomon, S., Greenberg, J., & McGregor, H.A. (1999).
A hot new way to measure aggression: Hot sauce allocation. Ag-
gressive Behavior,25, 331–348.
Mazur, A., Booth, A., & Dabbs, J.M., Jr. (1992). Testosterone and chess
competition. Social Psychology Quarterly,55, 70–77.
Mazur, A., & Lamb, T.A. (1980). Testosterone, status, and mood in
human males. Hormones and Behavior,14, 236–246.
Muller, M.N., & Wrangham, R.W. (2004). Dominance, aggression, and
testosterone in wild chimpanzees: A test of the ‘challenge hy-
pothesis.’ Animal Behaviour,67, 113–123.
O’Connor, D.B., Archer, J., Hair, W.H., & Wu, F.C.W. (2001). Ex-
ogenous testosterone, aggression, and mood in eugonadal and
hypogonadal men. Physiology and Behavior,75, 557–566.
Preacher, K.J., & Leonardelli, G.J. (2001, March). Calculation for the
Sobel test:An interactive calculation tool for mediation tests.
Retrieved September 2005 from http://www.unc.edu/preacher/
sobel/sobel.htm
Rowe, R., Maughan, B., Worthman, C.M., Costello, E.J., & Angold, A.
(2004). Testosterone, antisocial behavior, and social dominance in
boys: Pubertal development and biosocial interaction. Biological
Psychiatry,55, 546–552.
Sobel, M.E. (1982). Asymptotic intervals for indirect effects in struc-
tural equations models. In S. Leinhart (Ed.), Sociological meth-
odology 1982 (pp. 290–312). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Wingfield, J.C., Hegner, R.E., Dufty, A.M., Jr., & Ball, G.F. (1990). The
‘‘challenge hypothesis’’: Theoretical implications for patterns of
testosterone secretion, mating systems, and breeding strategies.
American Naturalist,136, 829–846.
(RECEIVED 8/11/05; ACCEPTED 10/17/05;
FINAL MATERIALS RECEIVED 10/31/05)
Volume 17—Number 7 571
Jennifer Klinesmith, Tim Kasser, and Francis T. McAndrew
... Questionnaires are completed with a certain degree of awareness, and the results may be influenced by explicit reasoning. In addition, physiological markers of aggression (e.g., fluctuations in salivary testosterone levels) might be relevant, and relatively direct and reliable outcome measures for testing NIBS effects on aggression, including dissociations between overt and physiologically implicit responses [216,246,247]. In conclusion, several studies highlighted the potential of NIBS techniques in the field of cognitive and social neuroscience for drawing causal inferences about the relevance of specific regions for cognitive, affective, and social processes, and for establishing new treatment approaches by modulating neural networks and observable behavior [81,84,110,231,248]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Intro. Aggressive behavior represents a significant public health issue, with relevant social, political, and security implications. Non-invasive brain stimulation (NIBS) techniques may modulate aggressive behavior through stimulation of the prefrontal cortex. Aims. Reviewing research on the effectiveness of NIBS to alter aggression, discussing main findings and potential limitations, considering specifics of the techniques and protocols employed, and discussing clinical implications. Methods. A systematic review of the literature available in the PubMed database has been carried out, and 17 randomized sham-controlled studies investigating the effectiveness of NIBS techniques on aggression have been included. Exclusion criteria included reviews, meta-analyses, and articles not referring to the subject of interest, or not addressing cognitive and emotional modulation aims. Conclusions. The reviewed data provide promising evidence for beneficial effects of tDCS, conventional rTMS, and cTBS on aggression in healthy adults, forensic, and clinical samples. The specific stimulation target is a key factor for the success of stimulation on aggression modulation. rTMS and cTBS showed opposite effects on aggression, as compared to tDCS. Due to the heterogeneity of stimulation protocols, experimental designs, and samples, we however cannot exclude that other factors play a confounding role.
... The challenge hypothesis was proposed to explain the mechanism of aggression in animals. However, it is suggested that it also applies to human males (Archer, 2006;Klinesmith et al., 2006;McAndrew & Perrilloux, 2012). McAndrew and Perrilloux (2012) also found that the personality traits theoretically related to tendencies for competitive altruism were more visible in males than females. ...
Chapter
Competitive altruism is the process through which actors attempt to appear better than others in terms of their generosity (Hardy & Van Vugt, 2006). To understand competitive altruism, a two-stage model of cooperative interactions proves helpful. In the first, so-called “assessment” stage, individuals build up reputations by competing with one another to appear as cooperative as possible. In the second, “partnered” stage, they actively select further interaction partners. If they succeed by attracting a partner who may bring profit, it can be assumed that the cooperativeness displayed in the first stage paid off (Roberts, 1998; Sylwester & Roberts, 2013).
... Başka bir araştırmada silahla ilgili olan/olmayan, saldırganlıkla ilgili olan/olmayan sözcüklerin ve resimlerin kullanıldığı iki deney sonucunda, basitçe silahları tanımlamanın saldırgan düşüncelerin erişilebilirliğini artırdığı gösterilmiştir (Anderson, Benjamin ve Bartholow, 1998). Bazı araştırmalarda da Berkowitz ve LePage'in çalışmalarından farklı olarak saldırgan davranışı ölçmek için elektroşok yerine laboratuvar ortamında kulaklıklardan iletilen rahatsız edici gürültü (Lindsay ve Anderson, 2000) veya baharatlı yiyeceklerden nefret eden deneklere verilen aşırı derecede acılı ve baharatlı sos (Klinesmith, Kasser ve McAndrew, 2006) kullanılmıştır. Laboratuvar ortamı dışında alanda yapılan deneyler de mevcuttur. ...
Article
Full-text available
Due to the prevalence of violent behaviors in societies, such behaviors are increasing day by day in the traffic. Verbal or physical violence experienced in traffic, often due to reasons such as not giving way among drivers, reaches serious dimensions by threatening traffic safety. This issue is called “road rage” in the literature. Some studies on road rage have shown that drivers with guns in their vehicles may be risky in terms of their tendency to display aggressive behavior. It has been suggested that the concept called "weapons effect" in social psychology may be effective on aggressive behaviors. In this study, it is aimed to make an evaluation based on the research findings in the literature on the relationship between this effect and road rage by emphasizing the weapons effect, which is one of the factors thought to affect the aggressive behaviors exhibited in the traffic environment. Within the framework of the theoretical foundations and the research results carried out in this direction, it is thought that the presence of weapons may be an important risk factor on road rage behaviors. This article comprehensively discusses the topic within the scope of traffic safety through the perspective of social psychology and traffic psychology. Keywords: Road Rage, Aggressive Driving, Weapons Effect, Review
Chapter
One of the most widely studied biological correlates of aggressive behavior is the steroid hormone testosterone. Although traditional wisdom might suggest that individuals with more testosterone are more likely to be aggressive, research over the past several decades has identified important contextual, individual difference, and methodological variables that are key moderators of any such effect. In this chapter, we review literature examining how aggression is linked with baseline levels of testosterone, how testosterone fluctuates rapidly within the context of human competitive behavior, and how such competition‐induced hormonal fluctuations serve to potentiate ongoing and/or future aggressive behavior. The neuroendocrine mechanisms underlying such complex social behavior are discussed from research conducted within humans as well as nonhuman species, providing comparative clues as to the adaptive nature of such intricate systems.
Article
Full-text available
Identifying the mechanisms that compel prosocial and antisocial behaviors is essential when seeking to develop effective social policies. While selfishness is ever present, in many situations cooperation is the norm. Testosterone increases a variety of antisocial behaviors but can also induce cooperation and honesty. We tested whether testosterone influences taking money from others, a measure of proactive aggression. We administered synthetic testosterone to participants (N = 163) in a double-blind placebo-controlled study before they made decisions in the power-to-take (PTT) game in which participants can take resources controlled by another while the other person can destroy resources so they are not taken. Three measures of testosterone were obtained from blood samples before and after drug administration to assess parametric effects. The data showed that an average 62% increase in total testosterone had no effect on average taking or destroying decisions in the PTT game. But taking money from others increased linearly in participants with supraphysiologic levels of testosterone. At the same time, testosterone improved participants’ moods and those with positive affect destroyed fewer resources. Our results show that testosterone should be viewed as a nuanced modulator of social interactions rather than the cause of antisocial behaviors.
Chapter
Procesul de recenzie a unui articol ştiinţific implică evaluarea nivelului calitativ al redactării acestuia. Dezvoltarea abilităţii de redactare adecvată a unui articol ştiinţific, impusă de standardele calitative înalte ale revistelor cu factor mare de impact, este esenţială pentru un cercetător ştiinţific şi se formează în timp, prin exerciţiu. În acest capitol prezentăm structura de bază a unui astfel de raport științific redactat ca urmare a derulării unei cercetări de tip cantitativ, menţionând cerinţele redactării, precum şi erorile de evitat în cadrul fiecărei secţiuni. Problema plagiatului este extrem de importantă şi gravă. Există în rândul cercetătorilor începători un nivel ridicat de ambiguitate privind înţelegerea modalităţii adecvate de citare a rezultatelor anterioare în vederea evitării plagiatului. Sperăm că informaţiile prezentate în acest capitol vor fi utile masteranzilor, doctoranzilor, şi, în general, studenţilor interesaţi de cariera de cercetător.
Article
Full-text available
In this article, we attempt to distinguish between the properties of moderator and mediator variables at a number of levels. First, we seek to make theorists and researchers aware of the importance of not using the terms moderator and mediator interchangeably by carefully elaborating, both conceptually and strategically, the many ways in which moderators and mediators differ. We then go beyond this largely pedagogical function and delineate the conceptual and strategic implications of making use of such distinctions with regard to a wide range of phenomena, including control and stress, attitudes, and personality traits. We also provide a specific compendium of analytic procedures appropriate for making the most effective use of the moderator and mediator distinction, both separately and in terms of a broader causal system that includes both moderators and mediators. (46 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Article
Full-text available
A combination of field and laboratory investigations has revealed that the temporal patterns of testosterone (T) levels in blood can vary markedly among populations and individuals, and even within individuals from one year to the next. Although T is known to regulate reproductive behavior (both sexual and aggressive) and thus could be expected to correlate with mating systems, it is clear that the absolute levels of T in blood are not always indicative of reproductive state. Rather, the pattern and amplitude of change in T levels are far more useful in making predictions about the hormonal basis of mating systems and breeding strategies. In these contexts we present a model that compares the amplitude of change in T level with the degree of parental care shown by individual males. On the basis of data collected from male birds breeding in natural or captive conditions, polygynous males appear less responsive to social environmental cues than are monogamous males. This model indicates that there may be widely different hormonal responses to male-male and male-female interactions and presumably equally plastic neural mechanisms for the transduction of these signals into endocrine secretions. Furthermore, evidence from other vertebrate taxa suggests strongly that the model is applicable to other classes
Article
Full-text available
The role of guns and other weapons in violent acts has often been a subject of debate. The present study is based on a sample of 21,314 valid interviews with 20-year-old Swiss men, representing more than 70% of this cohort. The results show a much higher frequency of violence among owners of handguns and other weapons, but not of rifles. Gun owners also have been injured more often and they suffer more often from psychiatric symptoms. A considerable proportion of violent gun owners had previous police contacts and court appearances, suggesting that policies designed to confiscate guns would be feasible. In a multivariate model, which considered a great number of conventional criminological variables (such as delinquent friends) and indicators of psychopathology, ownership of handguns and other weapons (but not rifles) turned out to be a very important factor in explaining violence leading to bodily injury.
Article
Full-text available
More than 30 years ago, Berkowitz and LePage (1967) published the first study demonstrating that the mere presence of a weapon increases aggressive behavior. These results have been repli- cated in several contexts by several research teams. The standard explanation of this weapons effect on aggressive behavior involves priming; identification of a weapon is believed to automatically increase the accessibility of aggression-related thoughts. Two experi- ments using a word pronunciation task tested this hypothesis. Both experiments consisted of multiple trials in which a prime stimulus (weapon or nonweapon) was followed by a target word (aggressive or nonaggressive) that was to be read as quickly as possible. The prime stimuli were words in Experiment 1 and pictures in Experiment 2. Both experiments showed that the mere identification of a weapon primes aggression-related thoughts. A process model linking weapons as primes to aggressive behavior is discussed briefly.
Article
Full-text available
TESTED THE HYPOTHESIS THAT STIMULI COMMONLY ASSOCIATED WITH AGGRESSION CAN ELICIT AGGRESSIIVE RESPONSES FROM PEOPLE READY TO ACT AGGRESSIVELY. 100 MALE UNIVERSITY SS RECEIVED EITHER 1 OR 7 SHOCKS, SUPPOSEDLY FROM A PEER, AND WERE THEN GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO SHOCK THIS PERSON. IN SOME CASES A RIFLE AND REVOLVER WERE NEAR THE SHOCK KEY. THESE WEAPONS WERE SAID TO BELONG, OR NOT TO BELONG, TO THE AVAILABLE TARGET PERSON. IN OTHER INSTANCES THERE WAS NOTHING NEAR THE KEY, WHILE FOR CONTROLS 2 BADMINTON RACQUETS WERE NEAR THE KEY. THE GREATEST NUMBER OF SHOCKS WAS GIVEN BY THE STRONGLY AROUSED SS (WHO HAD RECEIVED 7 SHOCKS) WHEN THEY WERE IN THE PRESENCE OF THE WEAPONS. THE GUNS HAD EVIDENTLY ELICITED STRONG AGGRESSIVE RESPONSES FROM THE AROUSED MEN. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Article
The hormone testosterone (T) has a central role in recent theories about allocation of status ranks during face-to-face competition. It has been methodologically convenient to test the hypothesized T mechanism in physically taxing athletic contests, where results have been supportive, although their generalizability to normal social competition is questionable. Competition among chess players is a step closer to normal social competition because it does not require physical struggle, and it is the arena for tests of the T mechanism which are reported here. We find that winners of chess tournaments show higher T levels than do losers. Also, in certain circumstances, competitors show rises in T before their games, as if in preparation for the contests. These results generally support recent theories about the role of T in the allocation of status ranks.
Article
Meta-analytically examines experimental studies that include violent cues in the setting and assesses the effects of aversive provocation on gender differences in aggression. The results show that when violent cues are present, men are more aggressive than women under neutral unprovoked conditions. However, when they are exposed to both violent cues and aversive provocation, men and women are equally aggressive. Differences in individual reactivity to violent cues as well as the type of aggressive response and the sex of the target also affected the magnitude of gender differences in the presence of violent cues. Aggr. Behav. 23:447–456, 1997. © 1997 Wiley-Liss, Inc.