Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

Social Information-Processing Mechanisms in Reactive and Proactive Aggression

Nicki R. Crick and Kenneth A. Dodge
Child Development
Vol. 67, No. 3 (Jun., 1996), pp. 993-1002
Published by: Wiley on behalf of the Society for Research in Child Development
DOI: 10.2307/1131875
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1131875
Page Count: 10
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Download ($34.00)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Social Information-Processing Mechanisms in Reactive and Proactive Aggression
Preview not available

Abstract

Theories of aggressive behavior and ethological observations in animals and children suggest the existence of distinct forms of reactive (hostile) and proactive (instrumental) aggression. Toward the validation of this distinction, groups of reactive aggressive, proactive aggressive, and nonaggressive children were identified (n = 624 9-12-year-olds). Social information-processing patterns were assessed in these groups by presenting hypothetical vignettes to subjects. 3 hypotheses were tested: (1) only the reactive-aggressive children would demonstrate hostile biases in their attributions of peers' intentions in provocation situations (because such biases are known to lead to reactive anger); (2) only proactive-aggressive children would evaluate aggression and its consequences in relatively positive ways (because proactive aggression is motivated by its expected external outcomes); and (3) proactive-aggressive children would select instrumental social goals rather than relational goals more often than nonaggressive children. All 3 hypotheses were at least partially supported.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
[993]
    [993]
  • Thumbnail: Page 
994
    994
  • Thumbnail: Page 
995
    995
  • Thumbnail: Page 
996
    996
  • Thumbnail: Page 
997
    997
  • Thumbnail: Page 
998
    998
  • Thumbnail: Page 
999
    999
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1000
    1000
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1001
    1001
  • Thumbnail: Page 
1002
    1002