Aggress to Impress Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy Vladas Griskevicius et al....
-
Upload
hede-hafner -
Category
Documents
-
view
228 -
download
0
Transcript of Aggress to Impress Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy Vladas Griskevicius et al....
![Page 1: Aggress to Impress Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy Vladas Griskevicius et al. 2009.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062502/570491c51a28ab14218da61f/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Aggress to ImpressHostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent StrategyVladas Griskevicius et al. 2009
![Page 2: Aggress to Impress Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy Vladas Griskevicius et al. 2009.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062502/570491c51a28ab14218da61f/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
Übersicht•Einführung + Theorie•Vorstudien•Experiment 1 – Kontext•Experiment 2 – Publikum•Experiment 3 – Ressourcen•Diskussion
![Page 3: Aggress to Impress Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy Vladas Griskevicius et al. 2009.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062502/570491c51a28ab14218da61f/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Theorie•Kosten von Aggression
▫Gefahr durch Verletzung bei Gegenaggression
▫Reproduktionschancen verringert• Nutzen von Aggression
▫Verteidigung Natural Selection▫Statusgewinn Sexual Selection
![Page 4: Aggress to Impress Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy Vladas Griskevicius et al. 2009.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062502/570491c51a28ab14218da61f/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
Theorie•Kontext
▫Competition Intrasexual Selection▫Courtship Intersexual Selection
•Mann & Frau▫Unterschiedliche Kosten für Aggression▫Parental Investment
•Direkte Aggression vs. Indirekte Aggression▫Kosten-Nutzenanalyse
![Page 5: Aggress to Impress Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy Vladas Griskevicius et al. 2009.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062502/570491c51a28ab14218da61f/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
Vorstudien• Erste Vorstudie
▫ N= 153 (89/64)▫ Primärer Grund für Aggression▫ Geschätzte Gesamtzahl
direkter/indirekter Aggression
![Page 6: Aggress to Impress Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy Vladas Griskevicius et al. 2009.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062502/570491c51a28ab14218da61f/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
ErgebnisseErste Vorstudie
Männer Frauen
Gesamtzahl direkter Aggressionen
123,6 16,45
Gesamtzahl indirekter Aggressionen
624,8 188,15Hauptgrund: der eigene Status/Ruf
Männer Frauen
Gesamtzahl direkter Aggressionen
20,7 5,9
Gesamtzahl indirekter Aggressionen
18,1 22,9
![Page 7: Aggress to Impress Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy Vladas Griskevicius et al. 2009.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062502/570491c51a28ab14218da61f/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Vorstudien• Erste Vorstudie
▫ N= 153 (89/64)▫ Primärer Grund für Aggression▫ Geschätzte Gesamtzahl
direkter/indirekter Aggression• Zweite Vorstudie
▫ N= 156 (93/63)▫ „natürliche“ aggressions-
provozierende Situation▫ Reaktionserfassung
![Page 8: Aggress to Impress Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy Vladas Griskevicius et al. 2009.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062502/570491c51a28ab14218da61f/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
ErgebnisseZweite Vorstudie
Männer Frauen
Situation erlebt 76,3% 76,2%
Reaktion:
- Direkte Aggression 43,0% 25,0%
- Indirekte Aggression
09,7% 29,0%
- Ausweichen (gehen) 39,8% 34,9%
- Sonstiges 07,5% 11,1%
![Page 9: Aggress to Impress Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy Vladas Griskevicius et al. 2009.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062502/570491c51a28ab14218da61f/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Experiment 1•N= 178 (94/84)•Coverstory•Motivinduktion
▫Competition▫Courtship▫Control
•Partysituation – Provokation▫Aggressionsmessung
![Page 10: Aggress to Impress Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy Vladas Griskevicius et al. 2009.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062502/570491c51a28ab14218da61f/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Ergebnisse
![Page 11: Aggress to Impress Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy Vladas Griskevicius et al. 2009.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062502/570491c51a28ab14218da61f/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Ergebnisse
![Page 12: Aggress to Impress Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy Vladas Griskevicius et al. 2009.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062502/570491c51a28ab14218da61f/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Experiment 2•N= 313 (158/155)•Vgl. Experiment 1•Männliches vs. Weibliches Publikum
![Page 13: Aggress to Impress Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy Vladas Griskevicius et al. 2009.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062502/570491c51a28ab14218da61f/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
ErgebnisseDirekte Aggression Indirekte Aggression
• Ergebnisse analog zum ersten Experiment
• Unabhängig vom Publikum
Indirekte Aggression weist keinen Publikums- bzw. Situationseffekt auf
• keine Effekte bei Frauen
![Page 14: Aggress to Impress Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy Vladas Griskevicius et al. 2009.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062502/570491c51a28ab14218da61f/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Sind Frauen NIE direkt aggressiv?•Video
![Page 15: Aggress to Impress Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy Vladas Griskevicius et al. 2009.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062502/570491c51a28ab14218da61f/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Experiment 3Sexual Selection Natural Selection• StatusorientiertDirekte Aggression beim
MannKeine direkte Aggression
bei Frauen
• knappe RessourcenDirekte Aggression bei
beiden Geschlechtern gesteigert
KONTEXT:Partner & Kind vs. Single
![Page 16: Aggress to Impress Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy Vladas Griskevicius et al. 2009.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062502/570491c51a28ab14218da61f/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
Experiment 3•N= 352 (141/211)•Vgl. Experiment 1•Story:
▫Wirtschaftskrise▫Familie vs. Single
![Page 17: Aggress to Impress Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy Vladas Griskevicius et al. 2009.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062502/570491c51a28ab14218da61f/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
Ergebnisse
Motive Mann Frau
Status ↑Knappe
Ressourcen (Single)
↑
Knappe Ressourcen
(Familie)
![Page 18: Aggress to Impress Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy Vladas Griskevicius et al. 2009.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062502/570491c51a28ab14218da61f/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
ZusammenfassungDirekte Aggression Indirekte Aggression
Motive Mann Frau
Status (Publikum w)
X
Status (Publikum m)
X
Courtship(Publikum w)
X X
Courtship (Publikum m)
X
Ressourcen (Familie)
X X
Ressourcen (Single)
Motive Mann Frau
Status (Publikum w)
X
Status (Publikum m)
X
Courtship(Publikum w)
X
Courtship (Publikum m)
X
Ressourcen (Familie)
X X
Ressourcen (Single)
X
![Page 19: Aggress to Impress Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy Vladas Griskevicius et al. 2009.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062502/570491c51a28ab14218da61f/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
Take Home MessageAggressionstendenzen sind angepasst an
kontext- und geschlechtsspezifische Kosten und Nutzen von aggressivem Verhalten.
![Page 20: Aggress to Impress Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy Vladas Griskevicius et al. 2009.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062502/570491c51a28ab14218da61f/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
DiskussionWas bedeuten die Ergebnisse für den
Alltag?
![Page 21: Aggress to Impress Hostility as an Evolved Context-Dependent Strategy Vladas Griskevicius et al. 2009.](https://reader035.fdocuments.net/reader035/viewer/2022062502/570491c51a28ab14218da61f/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
Danke für eure Aufmerksamkeit!