![]() |
| What Makes You Angry? |
Anger is an emotion that like other emotions is hard to understand the root cause. Carol Tavris (1982, p. 37) looks at what
Freud considered to be the reasons for the existence of anger. Freud, like
Darwin, viewed aggression as
“an ineradicable part of the human biological heritage.” Neither him nor Darwin spent a lot of time studying anger and focused more on aggression. Tavris (1982) continues with other
Freudian theories, such as his findings on repression, sublimation and guilt. What is relevant to the subject at hand is repression. Tavris (1982) states that
psychoanalysis was formed to counteract repression. If a person were to repress too many thoughts and feelings that person might become exceedingly neurotic or worse, they might have a nervous breakdown. This ties in with anger and the act of aggression because if not properly dealt with, both can lead to some pretty violent or regretful outcomes.
Of course, the emotional expression of anger and aggression is also reliant on the individual's culture, upbringing and general
temperament. In regards to temperament, Tarvis (1982, p. 79-80) describes an experiment done by the
Freedmans' who noticed differences in temperament between
babies of different cultural backgrounds. They found that babies of Caucasian backgrounds were harder to mellow compared to Asian babies. This might mean that the normal development of a baby in the western part of the world might not be the same as one from somewhere else.. This information could give us clues as to the environmental factors that affect individual's emotional responses, as well as the part that genetics play in regards to how people feel and control their emotional impulses.
Averill (1983, p. 1145) looks at the societal reasons for the expression of anger and states
“Young children are typically punished when they become angry (e.g: at parents or teachers), and adults who become angry too readily may be labelled as childish.” He also asked why is anger so common in our day to day lives? He concludes that anger must have had some other purpose in
human evolution as an adaptive function and that anger is most commonly the motive behind aggressive behaviours. Averill (1983) goes on to establish that aggression in other animals has been observed but in regards to the expression of anger, this is harder to see in
animals. One facet, according to Averill (1983), that theorists can agree on is that frustrations in everyday life can and probably will lead to anger. But besides frustrations it is hard to pin point what it is that makes humans angry, besides cultural, environmental, temperamental aspects.
Exploring Aggression
Anderson and Bushman (2002, p.28) define aggression as:
“any behaviour directed towards another individual that is carried out with the approximate (immediate) intent to cause harm.” All aggression can be traced back to a
flight or fight response in an individual and even other animals (p.30). They describe this as being the cognitive
neoassociation theory, where all aggressive situations can be dealt with or linked with the individual or animals memory of other similar aggressive events (p. 29-30). This theory is among many others that try to decipher the causes and effects of human and animal aggressiveness. Another theory explored by Anderson and Bushman (2002) falls into the category of
Bandura's social learning theory. In regards to aggression, social learning theory would stipulate that individuals will learn aggressive behaviours through experience or observing others displaying those behaviours.
Along with the social learning theory, Anderson and Bushman (2002, p.31-32) acknowledge that children who are exposed to violence or aggressive behaviour in
media might internalize those ideas or ways of behaving to be used in the future. Another theory that can perhaps predict the occurrences when an individual or even animal will be aggressive is something that Anderson and Bushman (2002, p.32) call the
Social Interaction Theory, that is defined by aggression is a way to get one's point across of to establish boundaries with other peers. They also talk about other risk factors involved with aggression, such as an individual's overall temperament, their situational environment, their individual culture which includes: values, beliefs, and overall attitudes.
Comparative Approaches Between Animals and Humans
Martin, Bennett, and Murray (2008, p.153) discuss the differences between animals and humans regarding which emotions they share and which ones have been found to only be experienced by humans. They argue that
primary emotions, such as anger, fear, and surprise are emotions that can be observed in both humans and animals. They use the example of young children and speak about the term of
infrahumanization, meaning that the children will learn and react a certain way according to which social group they belong to. They also state that individuals perceived as being outside of the
social group are seen as less human to the individuals within the group (p.153-154). Thus, at a certain age, children are not aware or do not understand the complexity of their primary emotions. As the children grow older, they will develop and acquire more understanding of their emotions and secondary more complex emotions.
These findings might explain to us some aspects of the situational factors of anger and aggression in humans as well as animals. When children are small, it is very likely that their parents will tell them to stay away from strangers, this can also be true for animals. So if a human or an animal come across another being in their territory or near them and they do not know who they are, this could lead to anger or aggressive behaviour which could trigger fight or flight. The mechanism of fight or flight is probably the easiest comparison between humans and animals. When confronted with a problem all sentient beings must choose to either fight or run away from said problem. But when it comes to the actual feeling and expressing of emotions, animals are harder to evaluate. Many researchers still deny that animals feel genuine emotion, but they seem to forget that humans are animals, albeit measurably intelligent.
Examining Living Fossils
Blanchard and Blanchard (1984) look to animals to understand aggressive behaviour and to make links with aggression in humans. They separate anger and aggression into two categories: anger in aggressive attacks and fear in defensive attacks. Both categories are said to have a particular subjective antecedent behind the behaviour, meaning what the animal or human perceives or feels from the situation will determine how they react. The authors state that both types have a similar sequence of events in both animals and humans (p.57). They criticize other research on the matter by saying that it only looks at aggression at a response to pain or frustration. They propose that there are other factors such as: territoriality and belongings, which is a factor that both animals and humans share (p.58). In making their point, they view defensive attacks as a good form of aggression, whereas offensive attack not so much.
Archer (1988) on the other hand distinguishes two types of aggression as
competition for resources and
reactions to danger. Competition for resources can be seen as a form of dominance over another animal for the space occupied, the food accumulated, even the mates available. (p.20) He also talks about frustration based aggression which is characterized by delayed gratification or expectations not being met. For example, if an animal or human is used to something occurring at a specific time in a specific way and that something does not occur, then the animal or human might exhibit aggressive behaviour in an attempt to express frustration (p.21).
Understanding Anger
Berkowitz and Jones (2004) focus on the reasons individuals get angry, specifically pain and memory. Anger is said to be a negative emotion. They state that with other negative emotions, the typical response will be to avoid the stimuli that is producing the negative effective state, but anger seems to transcend this theory due to confrontations and escalation to aggression from anger that can occur (p.107). They argue that research has defined anger as happening simultaneously with hostility, aggression, as well as
physiological markers. This is true to an extent, most of the time, however, more research is needed to be able to clearly identify all aspects to be able to fully understand the causes and impacts. (p.108) Thus, anger and aggressivity are very similar and are both emotional reactions to outside stimuli, be it pain or environmental factors (p.122).
Aggression is a part of who we are as animals and so it is important to note that the need for control or at least maintenance is required, so as to not lash out at every potential threat. This, in turn, will protect us from bigger animals or humans and regulate the amount of times we feel aggression so as to not become too habit forming (p.1142-1143). There is no doubt that aggression is present in humans and animals, and is at times quite similar in function. Anger is another story, many researches still today have a hard time believing that animals feel emotions, or some are not sure of the range of emotions animals can feel. What we do know is that emotions in animals and humans is subjective, meaning that each individual animal will base their anger on their environment, their memories of similar past experiences and even their group culture. It is easier to understand human emotions and how they are formed or impact the world around us but it is surprising to see just how much animals have in common in terms of function, fight or flight and brain processes.
References
Andreson, A., C., Bushman, J., B. (2002). Human Aggression. Annual Reviews Psychology, Vol 53, 27-51. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135231
Archer, J. (1988). The Behavioural Biology of Aggression. New York, NY: Press syndicate of the University of Cambridge.
Averill, J., R. (1983). Studies on Anger and Aggression: Implications for Theories of
Emotion. American Psychologist, Vol 38(11), 1145-1160. doi: 10.1037/0003-
066X.38.11.1145
Berkowitz, L. (1983). Aversively Stimulated Aggression: Some Parallels and Differences in Research with Animals and Humans. American Psychologist, Vol 38(11), 1135-1144. DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.38.11.1135
Berkowitz, L., Jones, H., E. (2004). Toward an Understanding of the Determinants of Anger. Emotion, Vol 4(2), 151-155. DOI: 10.1037/1528-3542.4.2.151
Blanchard, D., C., Blanchard, J., R. (1984). Advances in the Study of Aggression: Volume 1. Orlando, FL: Academic Press Inc.
Blanchard, D., C., Blanchard, J., R. (2003). What Can Animal Aggression Research Tell Us About Human Aggression? Hormones and behaviour, Vol 44, 171-177. DOI:10.1016/S0018-506X(03)00133-8
Lorenz, K. (1966). On aggression. New York, NY: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc.
Martin, J., Bennett, M., Murray, S. W. (2008). A Developmental Study of the Infrahumanization Hypothesis. British Journal of Developmental Psychology. Vol 26 (2), 153-162. DOI: 10.1348/026151007X216261
Tavris, C. (1981). Anger. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.
About The Author
Astrid Syme is presently studying at
Champlain College Lennoxville located in Quebec, Canada.
Exploring Anger and Aggression in Animals and Humans was written as part of special project for
The Beast Within in the
Department of Humanities.
Call For Submissions!
Would you like to be a
Guest Contributor? The Wicked Academic is always looking for quality contributions to both the website and the academic online journal. For further information check out
The Printing Press and
FAQ section.
