2.7 Developmental theories and the development of aggression
2.7.2 Theories of cognitive development and aggression
argues that boys tend to have more of the individual risk factors considered to be predictors for more severe antisocial tendencies, such as neurological abnormalities, difficult temperament and hyperactivity.
2.7.2 Theories of cognitive development and aggression
that there are multiple viewpoints. Once this breakthrough is made, children can begin to adopt the viewpoints of others. Thereafter, the child‟s own viewpoint becomes socially modified and is no longer egocentric” (p. 95). It seems likely that with increased reciprocity children should become more prosocial and altruistic, rather than aggressive. We obviously need further explanations as to why children utilize relational aggression even whilst (or maybe because) their ability to take the perspective of the other improves.
Hudson, Forman and Brion-Meisels (1982) investigated the correlation between the ability of a child to take on the social perspective of another, and prosocial behaviour, as they hypothesized that this ability is the basis of healthy, functional reciprocal relationships. As they had predicted, they found that such social cognition is significantly related to prosocial behaviour. However, they caution that future
research needs to also investigate other factors which may contribute to the variability in children‟s social functioning, such as assertiveness, communicative competence, affective state and situational determinants, since ongoing interactions do not occur in isolation from their larger contexts, which often impact significantly upon their meaning. Conversely, Vaillancourt, Miller, Fagbemi, Côté and Tremblay (2007) found a positive predictive link for girls between prosocial behaviour, moral maturity and indirect aggression. They suggest that moral maturity and prosocial behaviour both represent more sophisticated social skills which allow for the more advanced use of indirect aggression. Staub (1986) points out that human beings are incredibly malleable, therefore: “Culture and individual personality that evolves through socialization and experience will strongly affect, increase, or decrease the likelihood of aggression and altruism” (p. 137)
2.7.2.3 Selman’s theory of social perspective-taking
Selman (1980) has also offered valuable insights, through his social-cognitive model of how friendships develop, into the development of social perspective-taking as children grow older. He posits that social-cognitive development is an entity which is related to, but simultaneously distinct from, non-social cognitive development.
Selman's (1980) theory, which outlines how children develop an increasingly
sophisticated understanding of the self-other relationship as they mature, is considered to be extremely useful in building an understanding of the development of girls'
aggression. Truly social perspective-taking involves “changes in understanding of the relations between persons and changes in concepts of relations within persons, for example, relations among feelings, thoughts, actions…” (p. 34). According to Selman (1980):
That the child has potential capacity for knowing and reflecting upon the human ability to look inward as well as back and forth across to others strikes us as a most powerful and most potentially adaptive of intellectual
tools…there is evidence that this understanding develops steadily in the years of childhood and adolescence. And…we maintain that knowledge of the level of social understanding which underlies behavior can be critical to
understanding and dealing with that behavior (p. 16).
Selman (1980) asserts that there is a strong link between social perspective taking and moral reasoning, in that a child structures her social environment through perspective- taking, which in turn impacts upon her moral reasoning.
Selman (1980) developed a model of five levels of social perspective taking/social understanding that develop as the cognitive capacity of the growing child increases:
- Level 0 (Age 3 to 6 years) (Momentary friendships)
The young child only notices physical differences amongst people and does not recognise that others may have a different perspective on the same
situation. S/he deals with conflict through physical force or ignoring the other and only has one friend at a time.
- Level 1 (Age 5 to 9 years) (One-way friendship)
The child begins to realise that people are different psychologically. The child now recognises that persons may have different subjective perspectives, but still does not recognize the two-way reciprocity between these. Conflict is seen as unilateral (caused by one and felt by the other) so the solution is to stop the problem action or to do something nice to make the offended child feel better.
- Level 2 (Age 7 to 12 years) (Bilateral friendships)
The child has an increasing ability to step mentally outside of the self and to look at his/her own thoughts and actions from the perspective of the second- person. There is an understanding that others may have an outward appearance that does not correspond to their more truthful inner reality, and that this may
deceive others. Two-way reciprocity of not only actions, but of thoughts and feelings is recognised. „I know that she knows that I know that she knows…‟
is taken into consideration in decision-making. However, the child does not yet truly comprehend the mutual relationship between self and other, i.e.
conflict is not seen to originate within the relationship itself, but from an external cause. The child understands that both parties participate in conflict and therefore resolution requires each (independently) to be satisfied. It is not necessary to have mutual consensus.
- Level 3 (Age 10 to 15 years) (Stability of friendships)
This level encompasses the true third-person perspective. Now, rather than just taking another‟s perspective on the self, the child is able to simultaneously include and coordinate the perspectives of self and others, seeing the whole system from the perspective of the „generalized other‟. The child recognizes conflict as arising out of the interaction itself and believes that resolution involves both being truly satisfied with the outcome, and would be even if in the others‟ place. She also recognizes that conflicts may be due to personality differences and resolution may need a change in personality. She believes that conflict can be talked through, and if successful, will strengthen friendship bonds. Finally, she is able to distinguish between superficial conflict and the deeper bonds which hold friends together and are the source of resolution.
- Level 4 (Age 12 to adult) (In-depth level)
This level involves partial rejection of the mutuality of the previous level in favour of a healthy state of independence (i.e. a balance between dependence and independence). The individual begins to recognise mutuality at a deeper level of awareness (at the level of non-verbal feelings and communication).
There is an understanding that intra-psychic conflicts may impact upon relationships with others and of the importance of keeping the lines of communication open between friends.
Selman‟s (1980) developmental model asserts that each level underlies and influences the next, and that progression occurs with the acquisition of more abstract reasoning abilities and adaptation to the social environment.
2.7.2.4 Social intelligence, empathy and ‘theory of mind’
Kaukianinen, Björkqvist, Lagerspetz, Österman, Salmivalli, Rothberg and Ahlbom (1999) conducted a study wherein they investigated the relationship between social intelligence, different types of aggression and empathy. Their hypotheses that greater relational aggression would be correlated with the development of greater social intelligence, and that empathy would have a moderating effect on aggression, were both verified. According to Staub (1986), empathy is different to prosocial orientation in that it does not include a feeling of responsibility for the well-being of another and is, therefore, a less reliable source of positive behaviour.
Some developmental theorists posit that the acquisition of a „theory of mind‟ in children is essentially a maturational process that occurs with increasing age according to a universal pattern. However, more recent research shows significant cultural differences in both the rate and pattern of theory-of-mind development (Hughes & Leekam, 2004). Such findings suggest that a variety of social interactions are crucial in this process.