User:Gracea64/sandbox

The Catharsis theory of aggression

A man experiencing anger

The Catharsis theory of aggression or the aggression Catharsis hypothesis is the idea that aggressive behaviour/ fantasies reduce the likelihood of future aggression because it allows people to release their pent up aggression (Geen & Quanty, 1977; Myers et al., 2014). The word Catharsis means purifying or cleansing. Aggression is physical or verbal behaviour that causes intentional harm (Myers et al., 2014). Anger also plays a role as research found aggression without anger has no cathartic value (Mallick & Mccandless, 1966). Aggression is a universal component of human behaviour (Gentile, 2013) thus its potential management through the Catharsis theory of aggression is of great significance. The Catharsis theory of aggression has been scrutinised greatly over recent decades, particularly as a myriad of research has supported the Escalation Hypothesis which argues that aggressive behaviour/ fantasies increase the likelihood of future aggression. That being said it marked the start of research in emotional regulation, the media and violence and individual and societal preventions. Perception of the Catharsis theory of aggression also impacts ones affective state even if it doesn’t change their aggressive behaviour. This article will not discuss therapeutic catharsis which is where a person is encouraged to express their feelings in order to promote good mental health.

Origins of the Catharsis theory of aggression

The Catharsis theory of aggression was first described by Aristotle before being popularised in the 20^th century by Freud in Psychology. Freud proposed that aggression could be lowered through exposure to aggressive people and expression of aggression related emotions (Breuer & Freud, 1936). This concept was then supported by other researchers arguing that if someone took part in an aggressive action, this could help to reduce future aggression in many areas (Dollard et al., 1939). This led to parents purposely giving their children toys that provoked violence and led to therapists encouraging clients to vent their feelings. This was particularly seen when considering aggressive fantasies as a mechanism of reducing aggression. In a study they induced aggression in a group of students by insulting them. They then either gave them an activity with or without aggressive fantasy and measured their aggression. They found that those who could express their aggression in the fantasy condition showed less aggression in comparison to the non fantasy condition (Feshbach, 1955).

These historical studies helped to popularise the Catharsis theory of aggression, however they have now largely been dismissed due to lack of adequate scientific controls and subsequent opposing evidence. For example Feshbach’s study was unable to distinguish if there was a decrease in aggression in the fantasy group or an increase in aggression in the control group (Feshbach, 1955). Dollard’s study also lacked advanced statistical techniques and confounding variables such as personal history of aggression (Dollard et al., 1939). There has since been research with greater scientific controls arguing that aggressive fantasies lead to aggressive behaviours (Berkowitz et al., 1963; Hartmann, 1969; Kersten & Greitemeyer, 2021; Mathias Twardawski et al., 2024). For instance a study examined if aggressive fantasies decrease or increase aggression in comparison to non aggressive fantasies in victims. They found that aggressive fantasies increase the inclination toward aggressive behaviour (Mathias Twardawski et al., 2024). This study had a greater level of experimental control through the use of control questions, randomisation and having an exclusion criteria such as those undergoing psychotherapeutic treatment (Mathias Twardawski et al., 2024).

However the Catharsis theory of aggression has been revisited and support can be shown from research with a higher level of control. It has been found that movement is linked with subsequent aggressive behaviour and the amount of movement in fantasies (Murray & Feshbach, 1978). Therefore movement is a confound in many studies (Kenny, 1953) because it could be movement or the nature of play that is influencing subsequent aggressive fantasies and behaviour. One study separated participants into 3 conditions- aggressive movement condition, aggressive Sedentary condition and non aggressive movement condition. Through taking movement into account they found results in line with the Catharsis theory of aggression- aggressive fantasies were reduced in the first two conditions and increased in the third condition (Murray & Feshbach, 1978). That being said even if Catharsis occurred some of the time, a number of meta analysis would not point the opposite way so consistently (Anderson et al., 2010; Ferguson, 2007; Ferguson & Kilburn, 2009; Savage & Yancey, 2008). Contemporary meta analysis have been particularly focused on aggression and violent media due to the increase in its usage in recent years (Gentile, 2013).

Visual media and lack of empirical evidence

Children playing video games

Research has shown that only 3% of media has an anti violence theme (Smith et al., 1997). Although evidence has shown that violent video games can improve visual perception (Green & Bavelier, 2003), they have little influence on limiting aggressive behaviour (Ferguson et al., 2009). One study did not find violent video games predicted aggressive behaviour (Ferguson et al., 2009), but there has been far more research opposing the Catharsis theory of aggression by showing that media is a key risk factor of aggression (Anderson et al., 2010; Gentile & Bushman, 2012). It was shown in a longitudinal, cross sectional experimental meta analysis that violent video games were a risk factor to physical, cognitive and affective aggression (Anderson et al., 2010). Although some studies didn’t find any significant effects (Kühn et al., 2018), typically the effect size of violent video games and aggression is small so it seems logical that some studies may not find significant results. Therefore there is more consistent research supporting the Escalation Hypothesis over the Catharsis hypothesis when considering visual media and aggression.

Nonscientific findings

Research into aggression and the media has been lent credibility by studies grounded in biology. For example through the use of fMRI’s they found that the same brain regions are active during vicarious and individual learning. This means contrary to the Catharsis hypothesis, observing aggressive behaviour will not reduce learning, but rather increase it. (Monfardini et al., 2013; McCarthy et al., 2016). Aggression strengthens neural networks for aggression making individuals more likely to act that way in the future (Monfardini et al., 2013). Furthermore biology has criticised the basis of the Catharsis theory of aggression through its assumption that anger is a drive in the same sense as other biological drives such as eating (Gentile, 2013).

Key criticism- anger is not a drive

Unlike common biological drives such as eating and sleeping, aggression does not fit this pattern- e.g. when an individual doesn’t sleep they feel more tired. Pressure increases until the individual partakes in the activity and when they do this pressure is reduced for a certain amount of time (Gentile, 2013). This is not the case with aggression as one doesn’t become more aggressive the less they engage in aggressive actions. This leads to the question of why the Catharsis theory of aggression still has influence today if its basis is flawed.

Influence on affective but not behavioural states of aggression

Evidence has shown that people take part in aggression as they believe if will improve their affective state- even if their aggressive behaviour has not decreased (Bushman et al., 2001). A study examined how people respond to the Catharsis theory of aggression. Participants read an article arguing that venting anger is either effective, negative or neutral. They were then put in a room with a punching bag or did nothing for two minutes. Contrary to the Catharsis theory of aggression they found those who used the punching bag were more aggressive. Even though the participants got pleasure out of hitting the bag and felt better (in accordance with the Catharsis theory of aggression), this was linked to aggression not linked with decreases in aggression (Bushman et al., 1999). They found the same results when they controlled for psychological arousal- one group hit a punching bag with the intention of being physically fit and the other thinking about a student who had angered them (Bushman, 2002). This is linked with the idea that people who believe in the catharsis theory of aggression are more likely to seek out violent video games or aggress in order to improve their mood (Bushman et al., 2001; Ferguson et al., 2010). Therefore although catharsis doesn’t change an individuals behavioural aggression, their perception of the Catharsis hypothesis influences the situations they seek out and their mood when they experience aggression.

People are also often misinformed of a cathartic effect after aggression. They found by examining participants before and after playing violent video games that they had improved moods and this had a positive correlation with their belief of the cathartic impact of violent video games. This means participants were misinformed in their beliefs about the cathartic effects of playing violent video games as even if it changed their affective state, this did not translate to level of aggressive behaviour (Kersten & Greitemeyer, 2021). A study also showed that habitual violent video game players were more likely to believe that playing violent games decreases the player's aggression than were individuals who do not play violent video games (Greitemeyer, 2014). A possible explanation for this could be that people who like to watch media violence reduce cognitive dissonance by believing in the cathartic effects of violent media (Gentile, 2013). This shows that people often believe that pleasure after an aggressive event is in line with the Catharsis theory of aggression however this has been misinterpreted and is likely to lead to more aggression.

Future directions

A future direction of research for the Catharsis theory of aggression is using modern methodology for empirical studies. Even recent research in this area is often focused exclusively on self report as a measure of aggression which leads to issues with social desirability bias (Lobbestael, 2015; Mathias Twardawski et al., 2024; Tonnaer et al., 2019). Instead there needs to be a greater focus on measuring actual aggression through methods such as observations or physiological measures e.g. heart rate. Furthermore most research in this area has been focused on the short term aggressive behaviour seen after aggression. One study found that goal catharsis in particular (aggression to the frustrater) can only work short term or else aggression will be increased (Denzler & Förster, 2012). This shows short term effects may differ from long term effects of aggression (Zhan et al., 2021). There has been very little research in this area so is a potential avenue for future research as the Catharsis theory of aggression argues for a decrease in aggression long term.

There has been a recent move in research on the Catharsis theory of aggression to examining different groups such as criminals. Research in a controlled setting found that venting anger led to a subsequent decrease in aggression in forensic psychiatric offenders but not penitentiary offenders who instead had an increase in aggression (Tonnaer et al., 2019). Although speculative, this offers support for the Catharsis theory of aggression. Future research could focus on building on this small body of research to examine the Catharsis theory of aggression in different contexts e.g. in the case of the above study in non high security hospital contexts in order to improve generalisability and understand how responses to aggression differ based on context.

Conclusion

Although historically the Catharsis theory of aggression has been popularised and there has been a small evidence base in its support, the majority of more scientifically robust research shows it is not a valid concept. A lot of the research in its support fails to limit confounds and even if catharsis occurred even some of the time, the vast array of meta analysis would not point the opposite way so consistently. This has also been supported by research into violent media and neuroscientific findings. Although the theory has been greatly criticised- such as the key flaw that anger is not a drive- it continues to have influence on emotional regulation even if this doesn’t translate to behavioural catharsis. Future directions for research in this can be seen through methodology and examining aggression in different contexts with different groups.

References

Anderson, C. A., Shibuya, A., Ihori, N., Swing, E. L., Bushman, B. J., Sakamoto, A., Rothstein, H. R., & Saleem, M. (2010). Violent video game effects on aggression, empathy, and prosocial behavior in eastern and western countries: a meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 136(2), 151–173. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018251

Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63(3), 575–582. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0045925

Berkowitz, L., Corwin, R., & Heironimus, M. (1963). Film Violence and Subsequent Aggressive Tendencies. Public Opinion Quarterly, 27(2), 217. https://doi.org/10.1086/267162

Breuer, J., & Freud, S. (1936). Studies in Hysteria. Nervous and Mental Disease Publishing Company.

Bushman, B. J. (2002). Does Venting Anger Feed or Extinguish the Flame? Catharsis, Rumination, Distraction, Anger, and Aggressive Responding. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(6), 724–731. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167202289002

Bushman, B. J., Baumeister, R. F., & Phillips, C. M. (2001). Do people aggress to improve their mood? Catharsis beliefs, affect regulation opportunity, and aggressive responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81(1), 17–32. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.81.1.17

Bushman, B. J., Baumeister, R. F., & Stack, A. D. (1999). Catharsis, aggression, and persuasive influence: Self-fulfilling or self-defeating prophecies? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(3), 367–376. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.76.3.367

Denzler, M., & Förster, J. (2012). A goal model of catharsis. European Review of Social Psychology, 23(1), 107–142. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2012.699358

Dollard, J., Miller, N. E., Doob, L. W., & Murray, H. A. (1939). Frustration and Aggression. American Sociological Review, 4(4), 576. https://doi.org/10.2307/2084329

Ferguson, C. J. (2007). The Good, The Bad and the Ugly: A Meta-analytic Review of Positive and Negative Effects of Violent Video Games. Psychiatric Quarterly, 78(4), 309–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11126-007-9056-9

Ferguson, C. J., & Kilburn, J. (2009). The Public Health Risks of Media Violence: A Meta-Analytic Review. The Journal of Pediatrics, 154(5), 759–763. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpeds.2008.11.033

Ferguson, C. J., Olson, C. K., Kutner, L. A., & Warner, D. E. (2010). Violent Video Games, Catharsis Seeking, Bullying, and Delinquency. Crime & Delinquency, 60(5), 764–784. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128710362201

Feshbach, S. (1955). The drive-reducing function of fantasy behavior. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 50(1), 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0042214

Geen, R. G., & Quanty, M. B. (1977). The catharsis of aggression: An evaluation of a hypothesis. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 1–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60353-6

Gentile, D. (2013). Catharsis and Media Violence: A Conceptual Analysis. Societies, 3(4), 491–510. https://doi.org/10.3390/soc3040491

Gentile, D. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2012). Reassessing media violence effects using a risk and resilience approach to understanding aggression. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 1(3), 138–151. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028481

Green, C. S., & Bavelier, D. (2003). Action video game modifies visual selective attention. Nature, 423(6939), 534–537. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01647

Greitemeyer, T. (2014). I Am Right, You Are Wrong: How Biased Assimilation Increases the Perceived Gap between Believers and Skeptics of Violent Video Game Effects. PLoS ONE, 9(4), e93440. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0093440

Hartmann, D. P. (1969). Influence of symbolically modeled instrumental aggression and pain cues on aggressive behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 11(3), 280–288. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0027071

Kenny, D. T. (1953). An experimental test of the Catharsis theory of aggression. University of Washington.

Kersten, R., & Greitemeyer, T. (2021). Why do habitual violent video game players believe in the cathartic effects of violent video games? A misinterpretation of mood improvement as a reduction in aggressive feelings. Aggressive Behavior, 48(2). https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.22005

Kühn, S., Kugler, D. T., Schmalen, K., Weichenberger, M., Witt, C., & Gallinat, J. (2018). Does playing violent video games cause aggression? A longitudinal intervention study. Molecular Psychiatry, 24(24), 1220–1234. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41380-018-0031-7

Lobbestael, J. (2015). Challenges in Aggression Assessment: The Gap between Self-report and Behavior, and a Call for New Valid Behavioral Paradigms. Journal of Socialomics, 05(01). https://doi.org/10.4172/2167-0358.1000141

Mallick, S. K., & Mccandless, B. R. (1966). A study of catharsis of aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 4(6), 591–596. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0023987

Mathias Twardawski, Eva‐Maria Angerl, & Lobbestael, J. (2024). The effect of aggressive fantasizing on aggressive inclinations: Moderating effects of dispositional anger expression. Aggressive Behavior, 50(2). https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.22143

McCarthy, R. J., Coley, S. L., Wagner, M. F., Zengel, B., & Basham, A. (2016). Does playing video games with violent content temporarily increase aggressive inclinations? A pre-registered experimental study. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 67, 13–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2015.10.009

Monfardini, E., Gazzola, V., Boussaoud, D., Brovelli, A., Keysers, C., & Wicker, B. (2013). Vicarious Neural Processing of Outcomes during Observational Learning. PLoS ONE, 8(9), e73879. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0073879

Murray, J., & Feshbach, S. (1978). Let’s not throw the baby out with the bathwater: The catharsis hypothesis revisited1. Journal of Personality, 46(3), 462–473. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1978.tb01012.x

Myers, D. G., Abell, J., & Fabio Sani. (2014). Social psychology. Mcgraw-Hill.

Savage, J., & Yancey, C. (2008). The Effects of Media Violence Exposure On Criminal Aggression. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 35(6), 772–791. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854808316487

Smith, S. L., Wilson, B. J., Kunkel, D., Linz, D., Potter, W. J., Colvin, C. M., Donnerstein, E., Bernhardt, J. M., Brown, J. D., & Golden, S. (1997). National Television Violence Study. Sage Publications.

Tonnaer, F., Cima, M., & Arntz, A. (2019). Explosive Matters: Does Venting Anger Reduce or Increase Aggression? Differences in Anger Venting Effects in Violent Offenders. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment & Trauma, 29(5), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/10926771.2019.1575303

Zhan, J., Yu, S., Cai, R., Xu, H., Yang, Y., Ren, J., & Luo, J. (2021). The effects of written catharsis on anger relief. PsyCh Journal, 10(6), 868–877. https://doi.org/10.1002/pchj.490

Zillmann, D., Katcher, A. H., & Milavsky, B. (1972). Excitation transfer from physical exercise to subsequent aggressive behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 8(3), 247–259. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-1031(72)80005-2