Aggression during competition: effects of age, sex, and amount and type of provocation.

Three experiments were designed to examine the expression of instrumental and hostile aggression by 6- to 10-year-old children during a competitive game. The rate at which a child pressed a button which allegedly interfered with his opponent's progress on the task was the measure of instrumental aggression. Pressing a second button presumably caused one's opponent to hear an aversive noise and served as the measure of hostile aggression. The task was designed in an attempt to isolate (a) frustration from attack as the instigator of aggression and (b) instrumental from hostile aggression as the desired outcome. In all three experiments the measures of instrumental and hostile aggression were generally highly correlated except under provocation conditions during which the number of attacks exceeded the number of frustrations. This suggested that the task was successful in tapping two different classes of aggressive responding. In Experiment 1 older children (N = 161 males and females) expressed more of both instrumental and hostile aggression than did younger children, and males were more aggressive than females on both measures. However, neither measure of aggression varied as a function of level of provocation. This finding was discrepant from the authors' previous research which had focused solely on instrumental aggression. Apparently, the introduction of attack and the opportunity for hostile responding changed the experimental situation. In order to focus more directly on this issue, Experiments 2 (N = 60 males) and 3 (N = 56 males) used various combinations of attack and frustration with 9- and 10-year-old males. Attack, prior to frustration, elicited the greatest amount of hostile aggression. Frustration, with no attack, resulted in the highest level of instrumental aggression. The complex relationship between these sources of provocation and instrumental and hostile aggression was discussed.

How do children form impressions of persons? They average.

The experiment reported was concerned with impression formation in children. Twelve subjects in each of Grades K, 2, 4, and 6 rated several sets of single trait words and trait pairs. The response scale consisted of a graded series of seven schematic faces which ranged from a deep frown to a happy smile. A basic question was whether children use an orderly integration rule in forming impressions of trait pairs. The answer was clear. At all grade levels a simple averaging model adequately accounted for pair ratings. A second question concerned how children resolve semantic inconsistencies. Responses to two highly inconsistent trait pairs suggested that subjects responded in the same fashion, essentially averaging the two traits in a pair. Overall, the data strongly supported an averaging model, and indicated that impression formation of children is similar to previous results obtained from adults.