# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
mindfulness in mental health and prison settings

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Mindfulness in mental health and prison settings

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This free course, Mindfulness in mental health and prison settings, introduces the key ideas and practices of mindfulness, describes how it is helping counselling clients and prisoners, and also...

# data[].attributes.body
McDermott et al 2009 spicy sauce

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Monoamine oxidase A gene (MAOA) predicts behavioral aggression following provocation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Monoamine oxidase A gene (MAOA) has earned the nickname "warrior gene" because it has been linked to aggression in observational and survey-based studies. However, no controlled experimental studies have tested whether the warrior gene actually drives behavioral manifestations of these tendencies.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Prison officers call for change as assaults remain at record levels

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Research over the past few decades has shown that viewing physical violence in the media can increase aggression in adults and children. But a new study, co-authored by an Iowa State University psychology professor, has also found that onscreen relational aggression -- including social exclusion, gossip and emotional bullying -- may prime the brain for aggression.

Douglas Gentile, an associate professor of psychology at Iowa State, was one of four authors of the study "'Frenemies, Fraitors, and Mean-em-aitors': Priming effects of viewing physical and relational aggression in the media on women," which was recently published by the journal Aggressive Behavior. The study of 250 college women showed that mean screens may also activate the neural networks that guide behavior.

"What this study shows is that relational aggression actually can cause a change in the way you think," said Gentile, who runs the Media Research Lab at Iowa State. "And that matters because of course, how you think can change your behavior."

Sarah Coyne and David Nelson, both researchers in Brigham Young University's School of Family Life; and Jennifer Ruh Linder, a professor of psychology at Linfield College (Ore.), were the study's other authors.
Studying cognitive patterns of college women
In the study, the researchers evaluated the cognitive patterns of the college women after they viewed one of three fictional video clips. One clip depicted physical aggression, including a gun and knife fight that ended in murder. A second clip portrayed relational aggression, where girls steal boyfriends, spread malicious gossip and kick someone out of their social circle. The third clip was simply a scary scene, one that would raise the heartbeat.

Researchers assessed physiological arousal, finding that all three films produced similar levels of excitement. They then measured reaction times when aggressive or neutral words flashed on a screen. Participants who had watched either aggressive film clip ascribed more meaning to words connected with aggression.

"Past research has shown that viewing physical violence on TV activates aggressive scripts in the brain, but our findings suggest that watching both onscreen physical or relational aggression activates those cognitive scripts," Linder said. "Viewers don't simply choose to imitate TV characters or make a conscious decision to engage in aggressive behavior. Aggressive reactions are more automatic and less conscious than most people assume."

Gentile sees the study having significance to today's societal norms.

"This matters because relational aggression tends to be considered more socially acceptable -- it's often portrayed on television as funny and how friends treat each other," he said. "Yet, several studies are starting to show that relational aggression can cause long-term harm."
Cyberbullying is relational aggression
And some of the most highly publicized effects have been a result of the rising incidence of cyberbullying, which Gentile says is a classic case of relational aggression.

"We're treating cyberbullying as if it's something totally different and totally new. It's actually relational aggression and it does all the things that relational aggression does," Gentile said. "You can spread rumors, you can ignore people, I can unlike you on Facebook, I can tell your secrets, and I can lie and make up stuff. So this study relates to cyberbullying."

The researchers say more research is needed to determine whether their results are gender-specific, and whether this script activation indeed changes behavior.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
anger management; social psychology; behavior; psychology; popular culture; educational policy; media and entertainment; education and employment

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Nasty people in the media prime the brain for aggression

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Research over the past few decades has shown that viewing physical violence in the media can increase aggression in adults and children. But a new study has also found that onscreen relational aggression -- including social exclusion, gossip and emotional bullying -- may prime the brain for aggression.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Exposure to Aggressive Media Blunts Emotional Responses and Increases Aggressive Behaviors

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A new study from the Oxford Journal Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience suggests that watching or playing violent video games leads to desensitization in teens. Researches found that regions of the brain responsible for emotional response became non-responsive when teens were exposed to repeated violence in media, such as video games.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
More than 200 academics have signed an open letter criticising controversial new research suggesting a link between violent video games and aggression.

The findings were released by the American Psychological Association.

It set up a taskforce that reviewed hundreds of studies and papers published between 2005 and 2013.

The American Psychological Association concluded while there was "no single risk factor" to blame for aggression, violent video games did contribute.

"The research demonstrates a consistent relation between violent video game use and increases in aggressive behaviour, aggressive cognitions and aggressive affect, and decreases in pro-social behaviour, empathy and sensitivity to aggression," said the report.

"It is the accumulation of risk factors that tends to lead to aggressive or violent behaviour. The research reviewed here demonstrates that violent video game use is one such risk factor."

However, a large group of academics said they felt the methodology of the research was deeply flawed as a significant part of material included in the study had not been subjected to peer review.

"I fully acknowledge that exposure to repeated violence may have short-term effects - you would be a fool to deny that - but the long-term consequences of crime and actual violent behaviour, there is just no evidence linking violent video games with that," Dr Mark Coulson, associate professor of psychology at Middlesex University and one of the signatories of the letter told the BBC.

"If you play three hours of Call of Duty you might feel a little bit pumped, but you are not going to go out and mug someone."

The question about whether violent games inspire violent behaviour "in real life" is a subject that strongly divides opinion.

Why is it so controversial?

The playing of violent video games is often cited as a factor in motivating shockingly violent youth crimes such as high school shootings in the US.

One of the students who carried out the Columbine High School massacre in 1999 used a gun he called "Arlene" - allegedly after a character in a novel inspired by the computer game Doom.

However, most people who played graphically violent games (such as Call of Duty, Hitman, Mortal Kombat) did not resort to violence - and most video games were not violent, said Dr Richard Wilson from trade body Tiga.

"I wouldn't rubbish the [APA] report, but think it is important to look beyond the headline," he said.

"Although there are adult games, there are also adult films, books, TV shows... the content should be, and is, regulated to ensure children and minors do not play inappropriate material."

Does this new work prove playing violent games can result in violent crime?

The taskforce said more research was now needed to establish whether violent games did lead to violent criminal behaviour.

However, the group of 230 academics from universities around the world wrote in its open letter to the APA youth violence in the US and around the world was currently "at a 40-year low".

"This decline in societal violence is in conflict with claims that violent video games and interactive media are important public health concerns," they wrote.

"The statistical data are simply not bearing out this concern and should not be ignored."

A study released by the Oxford Internet Institute last year suggested frustration at being unable to play a game was more likely to bring out aggressive behaviour than the content of the game itself.

"We focused on the motives of people who play electronic games and found players have a psychological need to come out on top when playing," said Dr Andrew Przybylski at the time.

"If players feel thwarted by the controls or the design of the game, they can wind up feeling aggressive.

"This need to master the game was far more significant than whether the game contained violent material."

But aren't the ratings designed to protect young people?

In Europe, games are given age-related ratings in accordance with the Pan-European Game Information (Pegi) system.

There are five age ratings - three, seven, 12, 16 and 18.

The problem is that violence is hard to classify.

A Pegi 18 certificate may contain scenes of "gross violence", says the website.

"Gross violence is the most difficult to define since it can be very subjective in many cases, but in general terms it can be classed as the depictions of violence that would make the viewer feel a sense of revulsion," it says.

The APA is calling for extra in-game controls in addition to the current ratings.

"This is censorship by another route," said Dr Coulson.

"The worry I have is that any soft-coded censorship will be immediately subverted.

"The people playing these games are more competent than the people acting as gatekeepers.

"It's kind of putting forward a solution to a problem I don't think exists."

How was the APA research conducted?

The APA taskforce used meta-analysis - combining the results of lots of studies in order to look for patterns and correlations, rather than carrying out any new research itself.

It conducted a comprehensive review of academic work around the subject, some of which dated back to 2005.

"While there is some variation among the individual studies, a strong and consistent general pattern has emerged from many years of research that provides confidence in our general conclusions," said task force chairman Mark Appelbaum.

However, this approach was criticised by the group of experts, which said such correlations sometimes had other explanations.

For example, boys were more likely to play video games than girls but they were also more likely to be aggressive in general.

Dr Coulson also cautioned about work included in the study that may not have been subject to peer review, where it is critiqued by the wider academic community.

"Obviously there is a lot of stuff out there that doesn't get into peer review journals," he said.

"If you look at all the literature in this area you are bound to get a sensationalist conclusion."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
More than 200 academics have signed an open letter criticising controversial new research suggesting a link between violent video games and aggression. The findings were released by the American Psychological Association. It set up a taskforce that reviewed hundreds of studies and papers published between 2005 and 2013.

# data[].attributes.body
Gaming

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Can Violent Video Games Play a Role in Violent Behavior?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On the morning of August 12, 2013, nearly eight months after 20-year-old Adam Lanza shot his way into Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., and killed 26 people, Michael Mudry, an investigator with the Connecticut State Police, drove to nearby Danbury to try to solve a little mystery. Police had found a Garmin GPS unit in Lanza's house, and its records showed that the gunman had driven to the same spot nine times in April, May and June 2012, arriving around midnight each time and staying for hours.

The GPS readout took Mudry to the vast parking lot of a suburban shopping center, about 14 miles west of Lanza's home. Workers at a movie theater there immediately recognized Lanza from a photograph. He was at the theater constantly, they told Mudry, but never to see movies. He came to the lobby to play an arcade game, the same one, over and over again, sometimes for eight to 10 hours a night. Witnesses said he would whip himself into a frenzy, and on occasion the theater manager had to unplug the game to get him to leave.

Police had been scouring Lanza's home since the shootings, and on his computer hard drive they found information on weapons magazine capacities, images of Columbine killers Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold, copies of the violent movies Bloody Wednesday and Rampage, and a list of ingredients for TNT. And like many teenaged boys, Lanza owned the typical first-person shooter, fighting and action games: Call of Duty, Dead or Alive, Grand Theft Auto.

But those weren't the games that possessed Lanza at the movie theater. The title that so consumed the Sandy Hook shooter? Dance Dance Revolution-an arcade staple that has players dance on colored squares to the rhythm of Asian techno-pop. That discovery not only surprised investigators, it also was at odds with overheated speculation in the media and around dinner tables that violent video games had helped turn Lanza into a killer.

Yet no one knows how any of these games-Dance Dance Revolution included-might have affected a kid who was clearly struggling. The truth is that decades of research have turned up no reliable causal link between playing violent video games and perpetrating actual violence. This is not to say that games have no effect. They're built to have an effect. It's just not necessarily the one that most people think.

A tradition of worry
The implicit connection between violent media and violent behavior is so old that, like a barnacle clinging to a hull, it's not easily dislodged. The notion dates at least to the Victorian era, when educators, tastemakers and clergymen began criticizing what was then a fairly raucous popular culture. Violent, sex-soaked dime novels and penny-dreadful magazines were immensely popular, and upstanding publications such as Harper's and the Atlantic Monthly took delight in denouncing them. Author and critic Harold Schechter, whose 2005 book Savage Pastimes lays out a social history of violent entertainment, notes that the trend divided the literati of the time. Ralph Waldo Emerson complained about his countrymen "reading all day murders & railroad accidents," but Nathaniel Hawthorne loved the scandal sheets so much that he had a friend ship stacks of them to Liverpool, England, while he lived abroad as a U.S. consul. The belle of Amherst herself, Emily Dickinson, relished stories of "those funny accidents where railroads meet each other, and gentlemen in factories get their heads cut off quite informally."

The 20th century saw criticism grow more robust. In 1936 Catholic scholar John K. Ryan laid out what he called the "mental food of American children," as seen through the media they consumed. It was a long menu, one that included "sadism, cannibalism, bestiality. Crude eroticism. Torturing, killing, kidnapping." He was talking about daily newspaper comic strips. In 1947 critic and actor John Houseman lodged similar complaints about cartoons on television. They "run red with horrible savagery," he wrote.

Into this fray entered Stanford University psychologist Albert Bandura, now 89, whose experimental studies in the early 1960s established the theoretical basis for limiting kids' access to violent media. In a 1961 study, Bandura and his colleagues gathered 72 preschoolers. Laboratory assistants led the kids, one at a time, into a playroom, where they sat at a small table and received instruction on how to make potato-print pictures. Soon another adult entered the room and settled into the opposite corner with a Tinkertoy set, a mallet and a five-foot, inflated Bobo clown doll, the kind that rights itself if knocked over. The adult then either quietly assembled the Tinkertoys, ignoring Bobo, or turned to the doll and began "aggressing toward it"-punching it, sitting on it, kicking it around the room, all the while saying things such as "Sock him in the nose!" and "Pow!"

After 10 minutes, each child was led into another room and invited to play with some "relatively attractive toys," such as a fire engine, a spinning top and a doll set. But after two minutes, a lab assistant announced that these were "her very best toys" and that she'd decided to reserve them for other children. The kids were swept into a third room that held more toys, both "aggressive and nonaggressive": a tea set, crayons, dart guns, a mallet ... and a three-foot Bobo doll. You see where this is going.

Faced with the frustration of having nice new toys suddenly snatched away, the preschoolers who had watched Bobo get mistreated were more likely than the others to take out their aggression on the mini Bobo. Bandura repeated the experiment in 1963, using film and cartoon depictions of Bobo's mistreatment, with similar results. The conclusions seemed clear: watching unchecked aggression in real life, on film or in cartoons makes us more aggressive because it provides us with "social scripts" to guide our behavior. Bandura's conclusions opened a floodgate of "media effects" research that continues today.

The problem is that many of the findings, especially when applied to children's media and play, are misleading at best. Critic Gerard Jones, whose 2003 book Killing Monsters makes a case for giving kids access to "make-believe violence," writes: "There is no evidence to suggest that punching an inflatable clown has any connection to real-life violence." In many cases, he and others say, researchers mistake natural competitiveness or the effects of discomfort for aggression or mislabel the subjects' temporary aggression as behavior that holds the potential for violence. In an often quoted 1976 study led by Brian Coates at Washington State University, researchers found that preschoolers who watched the famously mild Mister Rogers' Neighborhood were three times more aggressive afterward. Jones suggests that the experiment itself may have made kids anxious or even angry by compelling them to "sit in a hard plastic chair in a strange room" and watch TV on cue.

It was the 1999 Columbine High School shootings that got many Americans thinking about violent video games. After the attacks, victims' families sued more than two dozen game makers, saying titles such as Doom, a first-person shooter that the two teen gunmen played, desensitized them to violence. A judge dismissed the lawsuits, but the post-Columbine uproar led more researchers to begin dissecting games, much as Bandura did for TV, in search of the roots of aggression.

Deciphering the data
A few studies tried to draw distinctions between good and bad games. In a 2010 experiment, Tobias Greitemeyer, then at the University of Sussex in England, and Silvia Osswald of Ludwig Maximilian University in Germany asked subjects to play one of three video games-either a "prosocial" game, an "aggressive" game or the "neutral" game Tetris. After eight minutes, an experimenter reached for a stack of questionnaires but "accidentally" knocked a cup of pencils off the table and onto the floor. Participants who had played the prosocial game were twice as likely to help pick up the pencils as those who played the neutral or aggressive game.

Others have tried to tease out the aftereffects of playing violent games. In a 2012 study, Andr Melzer of the University of Luxembourg, along with Mario Gollwitzer of Philipps University Marburg in Germany, found that inexperienced players felt a need to "cleanse" themselves after playing a violent video game (the so-called Macbeth effect: "Out, damned spot!"). Researchers asked subjects to play either a driving game or the mayhem-heavy Grand Theft Auto for 15 minutes, then pick gifts from an assortment, half "hygienic" (shower gel, deodorant, toothpaste) and half nonhygienic (gummy bears, Post-it notes, a box of tea). Inexperienced players who played Grand Theft Auto were more likely to pick out hygienic products than were experienced players or inexperienced players who had played the driving game.

But neither of those studies make the case that these games lead to real-word violence. Although drawing conclusions about small population subgroups-such as kids at risk of violence-from broad population trends can be dicey, it is still worth noting that as violent video games proliferated in recent years, the number of violent youthful offenders fell-by more than half between 1994 and 2010, according to the U.S. Department of Justice. This trend is not what you would expect if these games had the power to make good boys go bad. Indeed, in a 2011 analysis of game sales from 2004 to 2008, A. Scott Cunningham of Baylor University, Benjamin Engelsttter of the Center for European Economic Research in Mannheim, Germany, and Michael R. Ward of the University of Texas at Arlington found that higher rates of violent game sales actually coincided with a drop in crimes, especially violent crimes. They concluded that any negative behavioral effects playing violent games might have are more than offset because violent people are drawn to such games, and the more they play, the less time they have for crime.

Even if violent video games are not turning people into killers, we might still wonder if they are harming our kids in subtler ways. As psychologist Douglas A. Gentile of Iowa State University puts it, whatever we practice repeatedly affects the brain. If we practice aggressive ways of thinking, feeling and reacting, he writes, "then we will get better at those." In a 2008 survey on the gaming habits of about 2,500 young people, Gentile and his father, psychologist J. Ronald Gentile, found that children and adolescents who played more violent games were likelier to report "aggressive cognitions and behaviors." They concluded that violent video games "appear to be exemplary teachers of aggression." They also found that eighth and ninth graders who played violent games more frequently displayed greater "hostile attribution bias" (being vigilant for enemies) and got into more arguments with teachers.

The greatest worry is the impact on children who are already at risk. "Media is most powerful in our lives when it reinforces our existing values," media scholar Henry Jenkins, now at the University of Southern California, said in a 2003 episode of Religion & Ethics Newsweekly. Indeed, Jenkins argued in an essay for PBS, a child who responds to a video game the same way he or she does to a real-world trauma could be showing symptoms of an emotional disturbance. So used in the right setting, a violent game could actually serve as a diagnostic tool.

But beyond such special circumstances, media effects research, with its Bobo dolls as markers of real-world aggression, is problematic. The fighting kids do in physical games and video games alike is just a simulation. In other words, it is play. It looks like fighting, wrote Brian Sutton-Smith, the late renowned play theorist, in his book The Ambiguity of Play, "but it is also the opposite of fighting ... carried on by those who are not enemies and who do not intend to harm each other."

In a way, we are pointing fingers at the wrong people. When we worry that a violent game is going to turn our kids into killers, aren't we the ones who can't tell fantasy from reality? Kids already know the difference.

Adapted from The Game Believes in You: How Digital Play Can Make Our Kids Smarter, with permission from Palgrave Macmillan, a division of St. Martin's Press. Copyright 2015.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Do Video Games Inspire Violent Behavior?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On the morning of August 12, 2013, nearly eight months after 20-year-old Adam Lanza shot his way into Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., and killed 26 people, Michael Mudry, an investigator with the Connecticut State Police, drove to nearby Danbury to try to solve a little mystery.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
n 1976, the driving simulation Death Race was removed from an Illinois amusement park. There had, according to a news story at the time, been complaints that it encouraged players to run over pedestrians to score points. Through a series of subsequent newspaper reports, the US National Safety Council labelled the game "gross" and motoring groups demanded its removal from distribution. The first moral panic over video game violence had begun.

This January, a group of four scholars published a paper analysing the links between playing violent video games at a young age and aggressive behaviour in later life. The titles mentioned in the report are around 15-years-old - one of several troubling ambiguities to be found in the research. Nevertheless, the quality and quantity of the data make this an uncommonly valuable study. Given that game violence remains a favoured bogeyman for politicians, press and pressure groups, it should be shocking that such a robust study of the phenomenon is rare. But it is, and it's important to ask why.

With the arrival of Pong in 1973, video games became a commercial reality, but now, in 2016, they are still on the rocky path to mass acceptance that all new media must traverse. The truth is that the big targets of moral concern - Doom, Grand Theft Auto, Call of Duty - are undeniably about killing and they are undeniably popular among male teenagers. An industry report estimates that 80% of the audience for the Call of Duty series is male, and 21% is aged 10-14. Going by the 18 rating on the last three entries, that means at least a fifth of the game's vast audience shouldn't be playing.

The problem is, while regulatory boards like Pegi in Europe and ESRB in the US are doing what they can to inform people about age certification, you have products like Mega Bloks, one of Mattel's major toy lines, featuring Call of Duty branded playsets. The question of video games and violence remains controversial because of relationships like this. Consumers, parents, the games industry itself, regulatory bodies, and the headline-hungry media - all contribute towards an era in which moral, sociocultural and developmental concerns are pitted against commercial interest.

Over the past three decades, there have been plenty of headlines about games research, but on many occasions the studies are flawed, limited or misleading, or are simply misrepresented - often, it has to be said, by their own accompanying press releases.

'Violent videogames cause an increase in aggression long after the game has been turned off' is the headline for one 2010 study, which draws this conclusion by linking a 20-minute gaming session with an abstract aggression test 24 hours later, and differentiating between players who had 'thought' about the game in the interim and those who hadn't. This is a tenuous experimental setup in the first place and one that fails to account for any number of other factors, so to draw firm causal conclusions - never mind extrapolate (as the authors did at the time) that it is "reasonable to assume that our lab results will generalise to the 'real world'" - is fanciful.

The problem is not just on academia's side: the media almost never stops to challenge a tasty headline linking games and real-world violence. This use of games as panic fodder is not benign, but percolates into real-world flash points that have consequences. Rockstar North, the pioneering Scottish development studio behind the Grand Theft Auto series, also made Manhunt - a 2003 stealth-horror title that features brutal killing animations. Manhunt was erroneously implicated in a 2004 murder case by the tabloids, with MP and chair of home affairs committee Keith Vaz telling the House of Commons: "The parents of the victim believe that the perpetrator of this savage attack was influenced by the videogame Manhunt."

The police reported that a copy of the game was found in a bedroom - but it was later discovered that the game was actually owned by the victim, Stefan Pakeerah, and the crime's motive was instead "drug-related robbery." At trial the defence, prosecution, and eventually the judge all agreed that the game was not a factor. But by this point Manhunt had already been banned by several large retailers and the link was fixed in the public mind to the point where facts didn't matter - the Daily Mail reported the eventual sentencing as "Teenager gets life for 'Manhunt murder.'" Before the evidence had emerged the paper had campaigned for the game to be banned.

When a sequel to the game was announced three years later, the response was predictable. Dogged by controversy, Manhunt 2 was subsequently refused classification by the BBFC - not once, but twice. It eventually limped out, heavily-censored, on appeal and years late. Manhunt 2 is a graphically violent game, but it's unexceptional when put next to the Saw films - and is intended for adults. It is difficult to believe that the BBFC's decision was based on the content of the game, rather than a response to media pressure. This is an extreme example but it shows how inaccurate actions can arise from inaccurate reporting, anecdote, and unwarranted inference.

It's in this context that January's research paper is exceptional. Entitled 'Prospective Investigation of Video Game Use in Children and Subsequent Conduct Disorder and Depression Using Data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children' it was co-authored by Dr Peter Etchells of Bath Spa University, Dr Suzanne Gage and Professor Marcus Munafò of the University of Bristol, and Dr Adam Rutherford.

"I think it started off as frustration really at all the stuff you see in the news," says Etchells. "Either studies that are overhyped or people making claims that aren't backed-up by evidence. Suzanne Gage was using this Children of the 90s dataset and we thought 'why don't we have a look in this dataset to see if there's anything we could use to look at this question.' We didn't have any funding, it's something we had to do in our spare time."

The Children of the 90s is a group of around 14,500 children born in the Avon area between 1991-1992 and observed for the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children [Alspac]. This size makes it a prime research tool, but the combination of clinical data and video game data gives it an unusual value: conduct disorder is a real-world measure of aggression, not an abstract clinical test; the video games played are differentiated by genre. This doesn't mean the dataset lacks problems, such as how useful genre classifications really are, but it's a solid foundation.

The Conduct Disorder study looks at whether children at the age of eight or nine are playing video games, what genres they're playing, and then, using statistical controls, looks at a specific measure of aggression at age 15 to see if there is any association between the two. Conduct disorder is a bunch of related negative behaviours in children and adolescents, which here is measured in six levels - from (1) extremely unlikely you have it to (6) very likely.

"This is a context-finding study rather than a causal study, so we're not saying 'you play violent videogames, you get more aggressive,'" says Etchells. "With that, what our main finding shows is that if you take these different games people have played when they're eight- or nine-years-old, and try and account for as many potential confounding variables as possible that might have an effect on aggression, socioeconomic status and stuff like that, at age 15 there is a 19% higher chance of being in one of those higher conduct disorder bands, as you go from not playing games to playing puzzle games to playing shoot-em-up games."

"Then if we take the violent/non-violent division, which I don't really like calling that, if you play shoot-em-up games there's a 19% risk of you being higher up in one of those conduct bands than if you didn't play violent games. So that doesn't mean you're going to be diagnosed with conduct disorder, it's just that you're maybe more likely to show those aggressive tendencies."

Here we come to the difficult job of interpreting statistics, because a bald 19% may seem to indicate quite a sizeable increase - but that number represents a correlation rather than a causal factor, spread over six levels, for a disorder that you have a tiny risk of being diagnosed with in the first place (of 1,815 children in the sample, 26 met the criteria.) On top of this there are the external factors ('confounders') which the study accounts for, and the ones it doesn't - the known unknowns and the unknown unknowns.

"It's not 'if you play videogames that will cause you to have higher risk of being in a higher conduct disorder band,'" says Etchells. "That's just one part. If you look at the p-values [which gauge the uncertainty around the data] they're quite high at over 0.5 - so the strength of that association seems to be quite weak. It suggests there are other things that are having an effect that are driving that association."

What the Conduct Disorder study is saying is that there's a relationship here worth looking into, but it can't point the finger at anything, and that above all the association is weak. This conclusion has to be interpreted in the context of (a) the solid data and (b) other studies arguing for a much larger and in some cases causal effect between violent videogames and aggressive behaviour. The fact these findings are so uncertain also highlights the difficulties researchers face in getting a handle on the subject.

The problem with violent video games and aggression is that defining and categorising both is an inexact science. The Children of the 90s study began in 1991, so the 'shoot-em-ups' this paper was looking at when those kids were eight or nine might be the likes of Goldeneye 007, Medal of Honor, Quake III and so on. These games are from a different and often incomparable era to the modern first-person shooter, a Call of Duty or Halo, which is much more realistic visually and in most cases includes a competitive online element.

The sharp-eyed will have spotted that 'shoot-em-up' is itself something of a misnomer, more commonly used to refer to 2D space blasters than 3D first-person shooting games. Such a distinction might seem rather fine, and many conflate the two, but it really matters. "In the questionnaires they asked essentially what kind of games do you play, and categorised them by genre," says Etchells. "Now the options aren't great, and it's a point that came up in review: shoot-em-up is a different category to FPS. So there are assumptions in what we've done, in the sense that if you're playing Goldeneye you're probably going to tick the 'shoot-em-up' box, even if that might not be the exact genre."

This seems a not-unreasonable assumption, though it shows how even such good data can have a troubling fuzziness up-close. But this is a broader issue for games research. "We don't have a good way of categorising games," says Etchells. "I don't think genres is a particularly good way of doing it. Technically Portal 2 would be in our shoot-em-up category here, but that's not an especially violent or competitive game. You could make an argument that certain platform games are violent, even say Mario in the sense of squashing goombas."

To briefly unpack that, Portal 2 could be fairly described as a puzzle game - but one played from a first-person perspective. Your character has a 'gun,' but it fires portals onto walls rather than bullets, and is used to navigate the environments. Minor elements of the game, such as the automated turrets in some levels, mean you could argue for Portal 2 to be categorised as a first-person shooter, but the content bears so little relation to a game like Call of Duty it shows how essentially meaningless the definition is.

When you look at videogames research, it's difficult to escape the suspicion that many of these studies don't understand the different aspects and modes in a game like Call of Duty - and much more importantly, how players interact with them. Call of Duty has a single-player mode, several co-operative modes, and an online competitive mode, each of which you play with a different mindset.

"We didn't look at context massively in our study, but how you play videogames will likely have an effect on what their effect on you is," says Etchells. "So it also might be different playing a particular mode solo to playing it with loads of people in the room with you, and if those people are mates or your parents or siblings."

The Conduct Disorder study draws a distinction between competitive games and violent games, but most contemporary games defy such easy categorisation while many of the biggest hits have elements of both. What of last year's breakout hit Rocket League, which is ultra-competitive but has no violence? Some games are designed to be lifestyle commitments over months and years, like the online shooter Destiny or any given massively multiplayer role-playing game, while others last minutes. Genres are an inadequate way of categorising the nature of these experiences, and thus measuring their potential impact.

"There have been 25 years of research in this area and, for the most part, it's not very good research," says Etchells. "Particularly the experimental side. It's a real missed opportunity, because there's so much stuff about this in the media and we really don't have a handle on it, and it would be good to have a handle on it so we could maybe get a final say at some point - either no, games are not an issue or, look, games are an issue but in these populations in these situations and it's these games specifically. We can't say anything even close to that at the minute."

It's worth remembering that part of the problem is the reluctance of funding bodies to support researchers in this area - it's surprising to say the least that a study of this importance had to be undertaken by the researchers in their spare time. What video games research needs is more high-quality work in the field, because the questions are not impossible to answer. "The dataset we used is open and available," says Etchells. "What I'd like to see happen in this area is people doing more open science, making their data available to other researchers. Just so we can start getting it right! Because there's so much stuff that's not right out there."

The violence debate also holds us back from other, possibly more interesting, questions about this omnipresent interactive entertainment medium. There is an enormously positive side to games that receives no attention, yet the potential fruits of research could be enormous. "Take brain training games and whether they work," says Etchells. "The evidence there is quite shaky, some suggests they do work and a lot says they don't, but if there were anything there that would be novel and quite important. That's a more useful question to ask really."

Without quality research, we allow debates about videogames to be influenced by ideologically-driven sceptics. It is less than a decade since one of Britain's greatest developers, Rockstar North, had to censor Manhunt 2. Perhaps we'll look back on that the same way we look at something like A Clockwork Orange, in 1972, being blamed for various violent acts - the whipped-up reaction to which saw Stanley Kubrick request the film be withdrawn from British distribution.

Film is not the same as videogames, of course. But Kubrick's response to the charge that A Clockwork Orange was inspiring copycat violence is, in the absence of answers, an important one to consider. "To try and fasten any responsibility on art as the cause of life seems to me to put the case the wrong way around," he said. "Art consists of reshaping life, but it does not create life, nor cause life. Furthermore, to attribute powerful suggestive qualities to a film is at odds with the scientifically accepted view that, even after deep hypnosis in a posthypnotic state, people cannot be made to do things which are at odds with their natures."

Do videogames make your kids violent? No one knows and, by now, we really should have a better answer than that.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Do video games make children violent? Nobody knows - and this is why

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
n 1976, the driving simulation Death Race was removed from an Illinois amusement park. There had, according to a news story at the time, been complaints that it encouraged players to run over pedestrians to score points. Through a series of subsequent newspaper reports, the US National Safety Council labelled the game "gross" and motoring groups demanded its removal from distribution.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
An outline of the importation and deprivation model Made using the videoscribe app for Ipad Information from A2 Complete companion textbook

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Psychologists offer ways to improve prison environment, reduce violent crime

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
U.S. prisons are too punitive and often fail to rehabilitate, but targeting prisoners' behavior, reducing prison populations and offering job skills could reduce prisoner aggression and prevent recidivism, a researcher told ...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Predators And Prey - Life In Prison - Prison  Documentary

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Bad Behavior Online: Bullying, Trolling & Free Speech | Off Book | PBS Digital Studios

# data[].attributes.body
Genetics and the brain

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
subscribe to TED Radio Hour podcast

Part 2 of the TED Radio Hour episode The Violence Within Us.
About Jim Fallon's TED Talk
Psychopathic killers are the basis for some must-watch TV, but what really makes them tick? Neuroscientist Jim Fallon talks about brain scans and genetic analysis that may uncover the rotten wiring in the nature (and nurture) of murderers. In a too-strange-for-fiction twist, he shares a fascinating family history that makes his work chillingly personal.
About Jim Fallon
Jim Fallon, professor of neuroscience at the University of California, Irvine, looks at the way nature and nurture intermingle to wire up the human brain. Through his research, Fallon explores the way genetic and in-utero environmental factors affect the way the brain gets built - and then how individuals' experience further shapes its development. He lectures and writes on creativity, consciousness and culture, and has made key contributions to our understanding of schizophrenia, Parkinson's disease and Alzheimer's disease. Fallon has turned his research toward the subject of psychopaths - particularly those who kill. With PET scans and EEGs, he's beginning to uncover the deep, underlying traits that make people violent and murderous.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Jim Fallon: What Does The Mind Of A Killer Look Like?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
subscribe to TED Radio Hour podcast Part 2 of the TED Radio Hour episode The Violence Within Us. About Jim Fallon's TED Talk Psychopathic killers are the basis for some must-watch TV, but what really makes them tick? Neuroscientist Jim Fallon talks about brain scans and genetic analysis that may uncover the rotten wiring in the nature (and nurture) of murderers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Fluctuations of serotonin levels in the brain, which often occur when someone hasn't eaten or is stressed, affects brain regions that enable people to regulate anger, new research from the University of Cambridge has shown.

Although reduced serotonin levels have previously been implicated in aggression, this is the first study which has shown how this chemical helps regulate behaviour in the brain as well as why some individuals may be more prone to aggression. The research findings were published today, 15 September, in the journal Biological Psychiatry.

For the study, healthy volunteers' serotonin levels were altered by manipulating their diet. On the serotonin depletion day, they were given a mixture of amino acids that lacked tryptophan, the building block for serotonin. On the placebo day, they were given the same mixture but with a normal amount of tryptophan.

The researchers then scanned the volunteers' brains using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) as they viewed faces with angry, sad, and neutral expressions. Using the fMRI, they were able to measure how different brain regions reacted and communicated with one another when the volunteers viewed angry faces, as opposed to sad or neutral faces.

The research revealed that low brain serotonin made communications between specific brain regions of the emotional limbic system of the brain (a structure called the amygdala) and the frontal lobes weaker compared to those present under normal levels of serotonin. The findings suggest that when serotonin levels are low, it may be more difficult for the prefrontal cortex to control emotional responses to anger that are generated within the amygdala.

Using a personality questionnaire, they also determined which individuals have a natural tendency to behave aggressively. In these individuals, the communications between the amygdala and the prefrontal cortex was even weaker following serotonin depletion. 'Weak' communications means that it is more difficult for the prefrontal cortex to control the feelings of anger that are generated within the amygdala when the levels of serotonin are low. As a result, those individuals who might be predisposed to aggression were the most sensitive to changes in serotonin depletion.

Dr Molly Crockett, co-first author who worked on the research while a PhD student at Cambridge's Behavioural and Clinical Neuroscience Institute (and currently based at the University of Zurich) said: "We've known for decades that serotonin plays a key role in aggression, but it's only very recently that we've had the technology to look into the brain and examine just how serotonin helps us regulate our emotional impulses. By combining a long tradition in behavioral research with new technology, we were finally able to uncover a mechanism for how serotonin might influence aggression."

Dr Luca Passamonti, co-first author who worked on the research while a visiting scientist at the Medical Research Council Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit in Cambridge (and currently based at the Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (CNR), Unità di Ricerca Neuroimmagini, Catanzaro), said: "Although these results came from healthy volunteers, they are also relevant for a broad range of psychiatric disorders in which violence is a common problem. For example, these results may help to explain the brain mechanisms of a psychiatric disorder known as intermittent explosive disorder (IED). Individuals with IED typically show intense, extreme and uncontrollable outbursts of violence which may be triggered by cues of provocation such as a facial expression of anger.

"We are hopeful that our research will lead to improved diagnostics as well as better treatments for this and other conditions."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
mrc cognition and brain sciences unit mrc cognition and brain sciences unit trevor robbins trevor robbins anger

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
spotlight on neuroscience behavioural and clinical neuroscience institute (bcni)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
school of the biological sciences behavioural and clinical neuroscience institute (bcni)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Serotonin levels affect the brain's response to anger

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fluctuations of serotonin levels in the brain, which often occur when someone hasn't eaten or is stressed, affects brain regions that enable people to regulate anger, new research from the University of Cambridge has shown.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Testosterone causing 'financial aggression' on Wall Street?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A video on the relation between anger, the amygdala and the prefrontal cortex. It highlights how our regulatory systems in the prefrontal cortex may, or may not, inhibit anger.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Summary

This video shows the resident-intruder paradigm in rats. This test is a standardized method to measure offensive aggression, defensive behavior and violence in a semi-natural setting. The use of the paradigm for social stress experiments is explained as well.

Cite this Article
Copy Citation |Download Citations

Koolhaas, J. M., Coppens, C. M., de Boer, S. F., Buwalda, B., Meerlo, P., Timmermans, P. J. The Resident-intruder Paradigm: A Standardized Test for Aggression, Violence and Social Stress. J. Vis. Exp. (77), e4367, doi:10.3791/4367 (2013).

Abstract

This video publication explains in detail the experimental protocol of the resident-intruder paradigm in rats. This test is a standardized method to measure offensive aggression and defensive behavior in a semi natural setting. The most important behavioral elements performed by the resident and the intruder are demonstrated in the video and illustrated using artistic drawings. The use of the resident intruder paradigm for acute and chronic social stress experiments is explained as well. Finally, some brief tests and criteria are presented to distinguish aggression from its more violent and pathological forms.

Introduction

Aggressive behavior belongs to the natural behavioral repertoire of virtually all animal species. From a biological point of view, aggressive behavior can be considered as a highly functional form of social communication aimed at active control of the social environment. It is characterized by a set of species-typical behaviors performed in close interaction with the opponent. Overt aggression and physical conflicts are potentially harmful not only for the victim but for the aggressor as well. Therefore, throughout the animal kingdom, mechanisms have been developed to minimize and control physical aggression in order to prevent its potentially adverse consequences. Such mechanisms include, for example, threatening behavior that often predicts and may thereby prevent physical attacks. Other mechanisms to keep aggression in control are taboos, ritualization, submission, reconciliation and appeasement. This holds in particular for offensive aggression, which is a form of aggressive behavior characterized by initiative of the offender and a range of introductory, often threatening, behavioral displays before attempting to reach the back and neck as non-vulnerable targets for the consummatory aggressive attack bites. Despite such highly adaptive control mechanism, examples exist of functional aggression turning into violence, which can thus be defined as an injurious form of offensive aggression that is out of control and out of context; it is a pathological form of offensive behavior that is no longer subject to inhibitory control mechanisms and that has no additive functional value to normal aggressive behavior in social communication ⁸. Violence thus differs both quantitatively and qualitatively from normal adaptive offensiveness. This may include bites attacks targeted at vulnerable body parts such as the throat, belly and paws are normally off limits 5, 13, 20, 24.

Defensive aggression is the form of aggressive behavior performed in response to an attack by another individual. It is distinctly different from offense in terms of its behavioral expression and inhibitory controls ⁵. Note that extreme forms of defensive behavior can have violent characteristics.

Much of the preclinical aggression research is conducted in territorial male resident rats or mice confronting an intruder conspecific. This so-called resident-intruder paradigm allows the spontaneous and natural expression of both offensive aggression and defensive behavior in laboratory rodents in a semi natural laboratory setting. By recording the frequencies, durations, latencies and temporal and sequential patterns of all the observed behavioral acts and postures in the combatants during these confrontations, a detailed quantitative picture (ethogram) of offensive (resident) and defensive (intruder) aggression is obtained. For extensive descriptions of the various behaviors see 3, 12, 18. The paradigm is based on the fact that an adult male rat will establish a territory when given sufficient living space. Territoriality is strongly enhanced in the presence of females and/or sexual experience ¹. As a consequence of territoriality, the resident will attack unfamiliar males intruding in its home cage. Hence, offensive aggression can be studied by using the resident as the experimental animal. To determine the violent nature of aggression one can assess whether the offense is out of context and inhibitory control by using different types of intruders such as females or anesthetized males or a novel environment. A detailed quantitative analysis of the offensive behavioral repertoire is required to reveal to what extent the observed aggression is out of control.

The intruders in the resident-intruder paradigm will show defensive behavior in response to the offensive attacks by the resident. The paradigm therefore also allows one to study defensive behavior and social stress by using the intruder as the experimental animal. A form of chronic social stress can be created by repeatedly using the experimental animal as intruder, or by housing it in the cage (territory) of the resident, separated by a wire mesh screen ⁴.

Like any kind of stress paradigm, the resident-intruder paradigm is not free from ethical concerns. We therefore want to present a number of ethical considerations. Aggression, violence and social stress are serious problems in our human society. A report of the World Health Organization shows that interpersonal violence is not only a major source of death worldwide it is also a major source of serious health problems in the surviving victims of aggression ¹⁹. Hence, there is a need to understand these behaviors in terms of their underlying causal mechanisms and modulating factors. Animal models are essential to obtain experimental support of the causal nature of physiological and environmental factors. From a biological point of view, aggression is a natural, biologically functional form of social behavior aimed at the establishment of a territory, social dominance and defense of resources. The resident-intruder paradigm brings this natural form of behavior into a laboratory setting that allows for controlled studies of both the aggressor and the victim. An issue of ethical concern is the question to what extent the animal's welfare is compromised when exposed to this paradigm. Several studies show that engaging in offensive aggressive behaviors and winning a fight are highly rewarding and/or reinforcing ¹¹. From that perspective, there is no suffering in the resident. However, an aggressive interaction requires an opponent as well. Defensive behavior and submission belongs to the natural repertoire to cope with dominance. Defeat and subjugation triggers an adaptive behavioral and physiological response aimed at adopting a subordinate position in a social group. From that point of view, the initial response during the defeat will lead to a well-adapted animal that does not necessarily suffer ¹⁵. Only repeated exposure to a dominant and social isolation after the defeat may lead to a condition that goes beyond the adaptive capacity of the animal. This makes the paradigm suitable as an animal model for stress pathology with a high ecological validity ¹⁷. Although the stress of social defeat is mainly of a psychosocial nature, physical harm and injury may occur. In a normal (non-violent) social interaction, this physical harm is limited. Biting occurs mainly at the back and flanks of the opponent; an area of the body with a thick and tough skin 5, 6. Biting is in fact brief nipping of the skin, leaving behind small imprints of the incisors. This type of skin damage does not require any veterinary care. However, biologically functional aggression may change to a pathological, violent form of aggression which is out of control and out of context. In these situations, more serious wounds inflicted in particular at vulnerable body regions (belly, throat and paws) may occur ¹⁴. To be clinically relevant, experimental model systems for violent aggressive behavior need to be valid, and this development poses a central ethical dilemma of this type of aggression research, namely harm and injury. Two countervailing principles govern this research: face validity is achieved when the behavior is potentially harmful and injurious, yet, at the same time, every ethical research guideline emphasizes the reduction and avoidance of the risk to be harmed or injured. Each research question and protocol needs to probe how much harm and injury is necessary or acceptable to generate scientifically valid information that can be translated into concerns of the public health system. When research on violence is the main aim of the experiment, it is self-evident that great care should be taken of the victim in terms of wound care or even euthanasia. The presence of serious wounding at vulnerable body regions should be the humanitarian endpoint of the intruder. When social stress is the main aim of the experiment, the interaction should be stopped when the resident shows signs of violence causing serious bite wounds at vulnerable body parts. After all, the psychosocial nature of the stress paradigm should not be mixed with the stress of severe physical injury. When residents show these signs of violence they should be excluded from the experiment.

Protocol

1. The Experimental Setup

1. Use for each resident a cage with a floor space of about half a square meter. Offensive aggression is a highly active form of behavior that requires sufficient space for its full expression. The cage should be made of sanitizable material.

2. House each resident with a female for at least one week before the start of the experiments, which will facilitate the development of territoriality. At the same time this will prevent social isolation, which is known to be stressful for social animals and may lead to reduced welfare and aberrant forms of social behavior.

3. Use companion females that are sterilized by ligation of the oviducts. In this way, the female stays hormonally intact and will be regularly receptive without becoming pregnant and developing maternal aggression.

2. Procedure

1. House the resident male and the companion female together in the resident cage for at least one week prior to testing.

2. Do not clean the bedding of the cage during that initial week or prior to later testing, since territoriality is strongly based on the presence of olfactory cues. These cues are both important for the resident in establishing its own territory and for the intruder to know that it is in the home cage of the resident. Please, notice that this deviation from the general animal care taking procedures may require special permission from the authorities.

3. Remove the companion female from the residential cage one hour before the test.

4. Introduce an unfamiliar male into the home cage of the resident at the start of the test. Preferably, the intruder should be slightly smaller than the resident and should not have been used in previous interactions with the same resident.

5. Record the behavior of the resident, preferably using a light sensitive video camera.

6. A test duration of 10 min is usually sufficient for the expression of the full offensive behavioral repertoire. For the purpose of standardization one may consider to continue recording for ten minutes after the first attack.

7. After completion of the test, remove the intruder male from the cage and reunite the resident male with its companion female.

8. Although aggression may occur at all times of day, it is best to test only during the dark phase; the rats' main activity phase.

9. Testing can be performed once or twice per day. The level of aggressive behavior often increases across the first couple of tests but generally stabilizes after three to four tests.

3. Offensive Aggressive Behavior

1. In principle, any strain of rats can be used as residents. However, strains may differ considerably for their absolute level of aggressive behavior. Moreover, there may be a considerable individual variation within strains.

2. Standardize intruders as much as possible in terms of strain, age and weight. Use rats of a non-aggressive strain that are slightly lower in body weight than the resident male.

3. Determine in the resident male the duration and frequency of the following behavioral parameters:

1. Attack latency: the time between the introduction of the intruder and the first clinch attack

2. Move towards

3. Social exploration

4. Ano-genital sniffing

5. Rearing

6. Lateral threat

7. Upright posture

8. Clinch attack

9. Keep down

10. Chase

11. Non-social explore

12. Rest or inactivity

4. Analyses

1. The behavioral parameters recorded should cover 100% of the observation time. This facilitates an unbiased interpretation of the results, i.e. when one behavior goes up, another has to go down.

2. Data reduction can be obtained by calculating scores of different behavioral categories; particularly:

1. Total offense score: sum of lateral threat, upright, clinch, keep down and chase

2. Social exploration score: sum of social explore, ano-genital sniffing and social groom

3. Data can be expressed as percentages of the total observation time

4. Violence

1. Follow the protocol explained under section 2

2. Behavioral tests and criteria:

1. Determine in the resident male the attack latency. A very short latency is a first indicator of violence.

2. Calculate for the resident male the ratio between the frequencies of lateral threat and clinch. A ratio below 1 shows that animals attack without any introductory behavior and forewarning which is a reliable indicator of violence (out of control).

3. Bite target sites:

1. Bites attacks targeted at vulnerable body parts such as the throat, belly and paws are a sign of violence.

2. Bites targeted at the snout of the opponent indicate defensive behavior of the actor.

4. Out of context tests:

1. Use an unfamiliar female as intruder. Attack of a female is a sign of violence.

2. Use an anesthetized male as intruder. Attack of an anesthetized male is a sign of violence.

3. Test the aggressive behavior of the resident in a novel environment. The absence of a change in aggression compared to the home cage is a sign of violence. The endpoint of this test is the first attack or ten minutes when the resident does not attack.

5. Defensive Behavior

1. Select a number of well trained, highly aggressive, non-violent resident males

2. Follow the protocol as explained under section 2

3. Determine in the intruder the duration and frequency of the following behavioral parameters (in addition to 3c):

1. Submission latency

2. Submissive posture

3. Move away

4. Flight

5. Defensive upright posture

6. Freeze

7. Non-social explore

8. Rearing

4. Analysis
Data reduction can be obtained by calculating a defense score, which is the sum of the amount of time spent on flight, defensive upright posture, submission and freeze

6. Social Stress

1. Follow the protocol as explained under section 5

2. For intermittent social stress, repeat the protocol

3. For chronic social stress, keep the intruder in the resident's cage, but separated from the resident by a wire mesh screen

4. Continue step b and/or c for as long as the scientific questions and hypotheses require.

Representative Results

There is a considerable variation between strains and within strains in the level of offensive aggressive behavior. This is demonstrated in Figure 1 which shows the frequency distribution of the offensive aggression score in a laboratory bred but originally feral strain of rats (Wild Type Groningen strain (WTG)) ( Figure 1a) and a more common strain of laboratory rats (Wistar, Figure 1b). In the WTG strain, about one third of the animals is extremely aggressive whereas another third is not or very low aggressive. This is in contrast to the frequency distribution of a Wistar strain in which the highly aggressive phenotype is absent and about fifty percent of the animals can be considered as low or non-aggressive ¹⁶.

Figure 2 shows the distribution of different behavioral categories in the resident-intruder paradigm with the WTG strain as residents ( Figure 2a) and the Wistar rats as intruders ( Figure 2b). Shown is the average composition of offensive behavior in the WTG resident rat and the average composition of defensive behavior in the Wistar intruder in terms of the relative amount of time spent on the various behaviors.

Figure 3 shows an example of the use of the resident-intruder paradigm in behavioral pharmacology. The selective serotonin 1a receptor agonist Alnespirone induces a dose dependent reduction in offensive aggression, which is accompanied by a dose dependent increase in social exploration. The absence of any significant effects on non-social exploration and inactivity supports the view that the behavioral effects of this compound are specific for offensive aggression ⁹.

In some individuals offensive aggression may escalate into a violent form of aggression. The distinction between high levels of aggression and violence is illustrated in Figure 4. Despite the fact that there is no statistical difference in offense score, the violent form of aggression is characterized by a very short attack latency, attack of an anesthetized male or a female, serious wounding and a very low threat attack ratio ⁸.

Figure 1. Frequency distribution of individual levels of offensive aggression in a laboratory bred, but originally feral rat strain (A - Top panel) and in a Wistar strain of male rats (B - Bottom panel) ¹⁶.

Figure 2. Behavioral profile of resident males WTG rats (A) and Wistar intruder rats (B) during a ten minutes resident intruder test.

Figure 3. Dose dependent reduction of offensive aggression by the 5-HT1a agonist Alnespirone ⁹. Click here to view larger figure.

Figure 4. Comparison between highly offensive males and violent males ⁸.

Discussion

The resident-intruder paradigm can be used to study offensive aggression, defensive behavior, violence and social stress in rats and, with some small modifications for other rodent species as well. When studying aggression, principally all rat strains can be used. However, strains are not equally suitable. Depending on the exact purpose of the experiment, some specific characteristics of the animals should be considered. It is important to notice that there are large strain differences in the level and intensity of offensive aggression shown as a resident. Figure 1 shows the frequency distribution of offensive aggression in an originally feral rat strain ( Figure 1a) and in a standard laboratory Wistar strain ( Figure 1b). The two strains differ considerably in the number of animals that will show aggressive behavior at all. Moreover, there is a large difference in the absolute scale of offense. The feral rat strain ranges from zero up to 80% offense in our standard 10 min test whereas the Wistar strain has a maximum of 25% offense; the highly aggressive phenotype is absent in this latter strain ¹⁶.

When the resident-intruder paradigm is used to study defensive behavior and social stress in the intruder, one needs these highly aggressive phenotypes as residents. After all, the resident has to reliably defeat any intruder entering his territory. Of course, the most aggressive individuals should be chosen and one should realize that even in a highly aggressive strain, not all individuals will be suitable for this purpose. True adult males of at least four months of age ¹⁰ should be used and one may consider using former breeder males. It is recommended to give the resident males some further experience with intruders during the days before the actual start of the social stress experiment. Any strain can be used as intruder. However, to guarantee clear winning by the resident and defeat of the intruder, we advise to use intruders with a slightly lower body weight than the resident male. Because olfactory cues are important in social communication and territoriality, cleaning the cage of the resident prior to testing will be a serious confounder.

It is recommended to videotape and record the full behavioral repertoire of the experimental animal during the test. This allows an unbiased analysis of the results, i.e. when one behavior goes up, another is likely to go down. For example, the results depicted in Figure 3 shows that a reduction in offense following drug treatment is accompanied by an increase in social exploration and not by immobility. This provides evidence that the drug induced reduction in offense is not due to some kind of a sedative or motor inactivity effect. The total offense score is an index of the intensity of aggression and the latency of the first attack and number of attacking animals can be used as a measure of the readiness to attack ²².

For social stress experiments one should have a clear criterion for social defeat. When the intruder adopts a submissive posture (see above) and stays in this posture even when the resident moves away, this is a reliable criterion for social defeat. Notice that housing conditions of the intruders are extremely important in social stress research. First, the social stress should not be administered in the same room where the non-stressed controls are housed. Control animals witnessing (social) stress in other individuals may experience major stress themselves 7, 21. Second, the consequences of social stress are sensitive to social buffering effects. Group housed, socially stressed animals do not show the same long-term consequences seen in socially stressed animals that are socially isolated afterwards ²³.

Taken together, the resident intruder paradigm allows research on both the causes and the consequences of aggressive behavior. It is a model with a high face and construct validity that covers not only the adaptive biology of social behavior, but can be used to study maladaptive aspects as well in terms of violence and social stress pathology.

Disclosures

The authors declare that they have no competing financial interests.

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) for their generous support to publish this manuscript as an open access paper.

References

1. Berton, O., McClung, C. A., Dileone, R. J., Krishnan, V., Renthal, W., Russo, S. J., et al. Essential role of BDNF in the mesolimbic dopamine pathway in social defeat stress. Science. (New York, N.Y.). 311, (5762), 864-868 (2006).

2. Koolhaas, J. M., Bartolomucci, A., Buwalda, B., de Boer, S. F., Flugge, G., Korte, S. M., et al. Stress revisited: A critical evaluation of the stress concept. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews. 35, (5), 1291-1301 (2011).

3. Koolhaas, J. M., De Boer, S. F., Coppens, C. M., Buwalda, B. Neuroendocrinology of coping styles: Towards understanding the biology of individual variation. Front Neuroendocrinol. (2010).

4. Krug, E. G., Dahlberg, L. L., Mercy, J. A., Zwi, A. B., Lozano, R. World report on violence and health. World Health Organization. Geneva. (2002).

5. Ruis, M. A., te Brake, J. H., Buwalda, B., de Boer, S. F., Meerlo, P., Korte, S. M., et al. Housing familiar male wildtype rats together reduces the long-term adverse behavioural and physiological effects of social defeat. Psychoneuroendocrinology. 24, 285-300 (1999).

6. Timmermans, P. J. A. Social behaviour in the rat. Unpublished. (1978).

Usage Statistics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Resident-intruder Paradigm: A Standardized Test for Aggression, Violence and Social Stress | Protocol

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This video shows the resident-intruder paradigm in rats. This test is a standardized method to measure offensive aggression, defensive behavior and violence in a semi-natural setting. The use of the paradigm for social stress experiments is explained as well. Copy Citation |Download Citations Koolhaas, J. M., Coppens, C. M., de Boer, S.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Research over the past few decades has shown that viewing physical violence in the media can increase aggression in adults and children. But a new study, co-authored by an Iowa State University psychology professor, has also found that onscreen relational aggression -- including social exclusion, gossip and emotional bullying -- may prime the brain for aggression.

Douglas Gentile, an associate professor of psychology at Iowa State, was one of four authors of the study "'Frenemies, Fraitors, and Mean-em-aitors': Priming effects of viewing physical and relational aggression in the media on women," which was recently published by the journal Aggressive Behavior. The study of 250 college women showed that mean screens may also activate the neural networks that guide behavior.

"What this study shows is that relational aggression actually can cause a change in the way you think," said Gentile, who runs the Media Research Lab at Iowa State. "And that matters because of course, how you think can change your behavior."

Sarah Coyne and David Nelson, both researchers in Brigham Young University's School of Family Life; and Jennifer Ruh Linder, a professor of psychology at Linfield College (Ore.), were the study's other authors.
Studying cognitive patterns of college women
In the study, the researchers evaluated the cognitive patterns of the college women after they viewed one of three fictional video clips. One clip depicted physical aggression, including a gun and knife fight that ended in murder. A second clip portrayed relational aggression, where girls steal boyfriends, spread malicious gossip and kick someone out of their social circle. The third clip was simply a scary scene, one that would raise the heartbeat.

Researchers assessed physiological arousal, finding that all three films produced similar levels of excitement. They then measured reaction times when aggressive or neutral words flashed on a screen. Participants who had watched either aggressive film clip ascribed more meaning to words connected with aggression.

"Past research has shown that viewing physical violence on TV activates aggressive scripts in the brain, but our findings suggest that watching both onscreen physical or relational aggression activates those cognitive scripts," Linder said. "Viewers don't simply choose to imitate TV characters or make a conscious decision to engage in aggressive behavior. Aggressive reactions are more automatic and less conscious than most people assume."

Gentile sees the study having significance to today's societal norms.

"This matters because relational aggression tends to be considered more socially acceptable -- it's often portrayed on television as funny and how friends treat each other," he said. "Yet, several studies are starting to show that relational aggression can cause long-term harm."
Cyberbullying is relational aggression
And some of the most highly publicized effects have been a result of the rising incidence of cyberbullying, which Gentile says is a classic case of relational aggression.

"We're treating cyberbullying as if it's something totally different and totally new. It's actually relational aggression and it does all the things that relational aggression does," Gentile said. "You can spread rumors, you can ignore people, I can unlike you on Facebook, I can tell your secrets, and I can lie and make up stuff. So this study relates to cyberbullying."

The researchers say more research is needed to determine whether their results are gender-specific, and whether this script activation indeed changes behavior.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
anger management; social psychology; behavior; psychology; popular culture; educational policy; media and entertainment; education and employment

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Nasty people in the media prime the brain for aggression

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Research over the past few decades has shown that viewing physical violence in the media can increase aggression in adults and children. But a new study has also found that onscreen relational aggression -- including social exclusion, gossip and emotional bullying -- may prime the brain for aggression.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Exposure to Aggressive Media Blunts Emotional Responses and Increases Aggressive Behaviors

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A new study from the Oxford Journal Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience suggests that watching or playing violent video games leads to desensitization in teens. Researches found that regions of the brain responsible for emotional response became non-responsive when teens were exposed to repeated violence in media, such as video games.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Can Violent Video Games Play a Role in Violent Behavior?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
n 1976, the driving simulation Death Race was removed from an Illinois amusement park. There had, according to a news story at the time, been complaints that it encouraged players to run over pedestrians to score points. Through a series of subsequent newspaper reports, the US National Safety Council labelled the game "gross" and motoring groups demanded its removal from distribution. The first moral panic over video game violence had begun.

This January, a group of four scholars published a paper analysing the links between playing violent video games at a young age and aggressive behaviour in later life. The titles mentioned in the report are around 15-years-old - one of several troubling ambiguities to be found in the research. Nevertheless, the quality and quantity of the data make this an uncommonly valuable study. Given that game violence remains a favoured bogeyman for politicians, press and pressure groups, it should be shocking that such a robust study of the phenomenon is rare. But it is, and it's important to ask why.

With the arrival of Pong in 1973, video games became a commercial reality, but now, in 2016, they are still on the rocky path to mass acceptance that all new media must traverse. The truth is that the big targets of moral concern - Doom, Grand Theft Auto, Call of Duty - are undeniably about killing and they are undeniably popular among male teenagers. An industry report estimates that 80% of the audience for the Call of Duty series is male, and 21% is aged 10-14. Going by the 18 rating on the last three entries, that means at least a fifth of the game's vast audience shouldn't be playing.

The problem is, while regulatory boards like Pegi in Europe and ESRB in the US are doing what they can to inform people about age certification, you have products like Mega Bloks, one of Mattel's major toy lines, featuring Call of Duty branded playsets. The question of video games and violence remains controversial because of relationships like this. Consumers, parents, the games industry itself, regulatory bodies, and the headline-hungry media - all contribute towards an era in which moral, sociocultural and developmental concerns are pitted against commercial interest.

Over the past three decades, there have been plenty of headlines about games research, but on many occasions the studies are flawed, limited or misleading, or are simply misrepresented - often, it has to be said, by their own accompanying press releases.

'Violent videogames cause an increase in aggression long after the game has been turned off' is the headline for one 2010 study, which draws this conclusion by linking a 20-minute gaming session with an abstract aggression test 24 hours later, and differentiating between players who had 'thought' about the game in the interim and those who hadn't. This is a tenuous experimental setup in the first place and one that fails to account for any number of other factors, so to draw firm causal conclusions - never mind extrapolate (as the authors did at the time) that it is "reasonable to assume that our lab results will generalise to the 'real world'" - is fanciful.

The problem is not just on academia's side: the media almost never stops to challenge a tasty headline linking games and real-world violence. This use of games as panic fodder is not benign, but percolates into real-world flash points that have consequences. Rockstar North, the pioneering Scottish development studio behind the Grand Theft Auto series, also made Manhunt - a 2003 stealth-horror title that features brutal killing animations. Manhunt was erroneously implicated in a 2004 murder case by the tabloids, with MP and chair of home affairs committee Keith Vaz telling the House of Commons: "The parents of the victim believe that the perpetrator of this savage attack was influenced by the videogame Manhunt."

The police reported that a copy of the game was found in a bedroom - but it was later discovered that the game was actually owned by the victim, Stefan Pakeerah, and the crime's motive was instead "drug-related robbery." At trial the defence, prosecution, and eventually the judge all agreed that the game was not a factor. But by this point Manhunt had already been banned by several large retailers and the link was fixed in the public mind to the point where facts didn't matter - the Daily Mail reported the eventual sentencing as "Teenager gets life for 'Manhunt murder.'" Before the evidence had emerged the paper had campaigned for the game to be banned.

When a sequel to the game was announced three years later, the response was predictable. Dogged by controversy, Manhunt 2 was subsequently refused classification by the BBFC - not once, but twice. It eventually limped out, heavily-censored, on appeal and years late. Manhunt 2 is a graphically violent game, but it's unexceptional when put next to the Saw films - and is intended for adults. It is difficult to believe that the BBFC's decision was based on the content of the game, rather than a response to media pressure. This is an extreme example but it shows how inaccurate actions can arise from inaccurate reporting, anecdote, and unwarranted inference.

It's in this context that January's research paper is exceptional. Entitled 'Prospective Investigation of Video Game Use in Children and Subsequent Conduct Disorder and Depression Using Data from the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children' it was co-authored by Dr Peter Etchells of Bath Spa University, Dr Suzanne Gage and Professor Marcus Munafò of the University of Bristol, and Dr Adam Rutherford.

"I think it started off as frustration really at all the stuff you see in the news," says Etchells. "Either studies that are overhyped or people making claims that aren't backed-up by evidence. Suzanne Gage was using this Children of the 90s dataset and we thought 'why don't we have a look in this dataset to see if there's anything we could use to look at this question.' We didn't have any funding, it's something we had to do in our spare time."

The Children of the 90s is a group of around 14,500 children born in the Avon area between 1991-1992 and observed for the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children [Alspac]. This size makes it a prime research tool, but the combination of clinical data and video game data gives it an unusual value: conduct disorder is a real-world measure of aggression, not an abstract clinical test; the video games played are differentiated by genre. This doesn't mean the dataset lacks problems, such as how useful genre classifications really are, but it's a solid foundation.

The Conduct Disorder study looks at whether children at the age of eight or nine are playing video games, what genres they're playing, and then, using statistical controls, looks at a specific measure of aggression at age 15 to see if there is any association between the two. Conduct disorder is a bunch of related negative behaviours in children and adolescents, which here is measured in six levels - from (1) extremely unlikely you have it to (6) very likely.

"This is a context-finding study rather than a causal study, so we're not saying 'you play violent videogames, you get more aggressive,'" says Etchells. "With that, what our main finding shows is that if you take these different games people have played when they're eight- or nine-years-old, and try and account for as many potential confounding variables as possible that might have an effect on aggression, socioeconomic status and stuff like that, at age 15 there is a 19% higher chance of being in one of those higher conduct disorder bands, as you go from not playing games to playing puzzle games to playing shoot-em-up games."

"Then if we take the violent/non-violent division, which I don't really like calling that, if you play shoot-em-up games there's a 19% risk of you being higher up in one of those conduct bands than if you didn't play violent games. So that doesn't mean you're going to be diagnosed with conduct disorder, it's just that you're maybe more likely to show those aggressive tendencies."

Here we come to the difficult job of interpreting statistics, because a bald 19% may seem to indicate quite a sizeable increase - but that number represents a correlation rather than a causal factor, spread over six levels, for a disorder that you have a tiny risk of being diagnosed with in the first place (of 1,815 children in the sample, 26 met the criteria.) On top of this there are the external factors ('confounders') which the study accounts for, and the ones it doesn't - the known unknowns and the unknown unknowns.

"It's not 'if you play videogames that will cause you to have higher risk of being in a higher conduct disorder band,'" says Etchells. "That's just one part. If you look at the p-values [which gauge the uncertainty around the data] they're quite high at over 0.5 - so the strength of that association seems to be quite weak. It suggests there are other things that are having an effect that are driving that association."

What the Conduct Disorder study is saying is that there's a relationship here worth looking into, but it can't point the finger at anything, and that above all the association is weak. This conclusion has to be interpreted in the context of (a) the solid data and (b) other studies arguing for a much larger and in some cases causal effect between violent videogames and aggressive behaviour. The fact these findings are so uncertain also highlights the difficulties researchers face in getting a handle on the subject.

The problem with violent video games and aggression is that defining and categorising both is an inexact science. The Children of the 90s study began in 1991, so the 'shoot-em-ups' this paper was looking at when those kids were eight or nine might be the likes of Goldeneye 007, Medal of Honor, Quake III and so on. These games are from a different and often incomparable era to the modern first-person shooter, a Call of Duty or Halo, which is much more realistic visually and in most cases includes a competitive online element.

The sharp-eyed will have spotted that 'shoot-em-up' is itself something of a misnomer, more commonly used to refer to 2D space blasters than 3D first-person shooting games. Such a distinction might seem rather fine, and many conflate the two, but it really matters. "In the questionnaires they asked essentially what kind of games do you play, and categorised them by genre," says Etchells. "Now the options aren't great, and it's a point that came up in review: shoot-em-up is a different category to FPS. So there are assumptions in what we've done, in the sense that if you're playing Goldeneye you're probably going to tick the 'shoot-em-up' box, even if that might not be the exact genre."

This seems a not-unreasonable assumption, though it shows how even such good data can have a troubling fuzziness up-close. But this is a broader issue for games research. "We don't have a good way of categorising games," says Etchells. "I don't think genres is a particularly good way of doing it. Technically Portal 2 would be in our shoot-em-up category here, but that's not an especially violent or competitive game. You could make an argument that certain platform games are violent, even say Mario in the sense of squashing goombas."

To briefly unpack that, Portal 2 could be fairly described as a puzzle game - but one played from a first-person perspective. Your character has a 'gun,' but it fires portals onto walls rather than bullets, and is used to navigate the environments. Minor elements of the game, such as the automated turrets in some levels, mean you could argue for Portal 2 to be categorised as a first-person shooter, but the content bears so little relation to a game like Call of Duty it shows how essentially meaningless the definition is.

When you look at videogames research, it's difficult to escape the suspicion that many of these studies don't understand the different aspects and modes in a game like Call of Duty - and much more importantly, how players interact with them. Call of Duty has a single-player mode, several co-operative modes, and an online competitive mode, each of which you play with a different mindset.

"We didn't look at context massively in our study, but how you play videogames will likely have an effect on what their effect on you is," says Etchells. "So it also might be different playing a particular mode solo to playing it with loads of people in the room with you, and if those people are mates or your parents or siblings."

The Conduct Disorder study draws a distinction between competitive games and violent games, but most contemporary games defy such easy categorisation while many of the biggest hits have elements of both. What of last year's breakout hit Rocket League, which is ultra-competitive but has no violence? Some games are designed to be lifestyle commitments over months and years, like the online shooter Destiny or any given massively multiplayer role-playing game, while others last minutes. Genres are an inadequate way of categorising the nature of these experiences, and thus measuring their potential impact.

"There have been 25 years of research in this area and, for the most part, it's not very good research," says Etchells. "Particularly the experimental side. It's a real missed opportunity, because there's so much stuff about this in the media and we really don't have a handle on it, and it would be good to have a handle on it so we could maybe get a final say at some point - either no, games are not an issue or, look, games are an issue but in these populations in these situations and it's these games specifically. We can't say anything even close to that at the minute."

It's worth remembering that part of the problem is the reluctance of funding bodies to support researchers in this area - it's surprising to say the least that a study of this importance had to be undertaken by the researchers in their spare time. What video games research needs is more high-quality work in the field, because the questions are not impossible to answer. "The dataset we used is open and available," says Etchells. "What I'd like to see happen in this area is people doing more open science, making their data available to other researchers. Just so we can start getting it right! Because there's so much stuff that's not right out there."

The violence debate also holds us back from other, possibly more interesting, questions about this omnipresent interactive entertainment medium. There is an enormously positive side to games that receives no attention, yet the potential fruits of research could be enormous. "Take brain training games and whether they work," says Etchells. "The evidence there is quite shaky, some suggests they do work and a lot says they don't, but if there were anything there that would be novel and quite important. That's a more useful question to ask really."

Without quality research, we allow debates about videogames to be influenced by ideologically-driven sceptics. It is less than a decade since one of Britain's greatest developers, Rockstar North, had to censor Manhunt 2. Perhaps we'll look back on that the same way we look at something like A Clockwork Orange, in 1972, being blamed for various violent acts - the whipped-up reaction to which saw Stanley Kubrick request the film be withdrawn from British distribution.

Film is not the same as videogames, of course. But Kubrick's response to the charge that A Clockwork Orange was inspiring copycat violence is, in the absence of answers, an important one to consider. "To try and fasten any responsibility on art as the cause of life seems to me to put the case the wrong way around," he said. "Art consists of reshaping life, but it does not create life, nor cause life. Furthermore, to attribute powerful suggestive qualities to a film is at odds with the scientifically accepted view that, even after deep hypnosis in a posthypnotic state, people cannot be made to do things which are at odds with their natures."

Do videogames make your kids violent? No one knows and, by now, we really should have a better answer than that.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Do video games make children violent? Nobody knows - and this is why

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
n 1976, the driving simulation Death Race was removed from an Illinois amusement park. There had, according to a news story at the time, been complaints that it encouraged players to run over pedestrians to score points. Through a series of subsequent newspaper reports, the US National Safety Council labelled the game "gross" and motoring groups demanded its removal from distribution.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
An outline of the importation and deprivation model Made using the videoscribe app for Ipad Information from A2 Complete companion textbook

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Mealtimes at San Quentin prison - Louis Theroux Behind Bars - BBC

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Louis has breakfast with two inmates who tell him about mealtime politics and the brutal punishments inflicted by the prisoners on anyone who doesn't play by their rules. Strong themes and language. Compelling video from BBC show Louis Theroux - Behind Bars.

# data[].attributes.headline
Aggression - institutionalised in prison

# data[].attributes.subject
Aggression - institutionalised in prison

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Predators And Prey - Life In Prison - Prison  Documentary

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
15min part of the documentary Human Resources : Social Engineering in the 20th Century by Scott Noble Website : http://metanoia-films.org/ No copyright infringement intended.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
evolutionary explanation of human aggression - sexual jealousy

# data[].attributes.body
Ethological explanation of aggression

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Nova Documentary: Warriors of The Amazon - Explore the unique culture of the Yanomami, an isolated tribe living deep in the Amazonian rain-forest.

# data[].attributes.body
Yanomamo tribe

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Andy Jilling's famous ethnographical documentary about a Yanomami village in the Amazon rainforest of Venezuela. Famoso documental etnográfico de Andy Jilling sobre una comunidad Yanomami en la selva amazónica venezolana.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Decades of violence running through a large Dutch family may stem from
a defect in a gene crucial for proper brain chemistry, according to a research
team in the Netherlands. Their report, if it holds up, would provide the
first concrete link between a specific gene and aggressive behaviour in
humans.

Clinicians at the University Hospital in Nijmegen first encountered
the 'aggressive' family when several women of child-bearing age sought genetic
counselling in 1978. Certain family members - always male - were mildly
mentally retarded.

More disturbingly, the male members of the family were prone to aggressive,
impulsive outbursts, during which they would threaten and fight with people.
One had raped his sister, and two had repeatedly set fire to houses. Another
tried to run over his employer when he was told that his work was substandard.

'Based on the information gleaned by the family, there was a pattern
that was quite compatible with a genetic disorder,' says Han Brunner, a
clinical geneticist at the University Hospital. The pattern of inheritance
- afflicted males and normal, female carriers - immediately suggested that
a genetic defect causing the disorder might reside on the X chromosome,
which sons always inherit from their mothers.

Advertisement

But it was not until a decade later - when the tools of modern molecular
biology became available - that Brunner and his colleagues were able to
get to the root of the mystery, by sampling and studying the genetic material
of members of the family. Earlier this year, the team reported that they
had tracked down a possible gene causing the problem to a region of the
X chromosome. In the current issue of Science, Brunner's team, along with
Xandra Breakefield of Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, report the
identity of that gene.

The gene codes for an enzyme called monoamine oxidase A (or MAOA), which
plays a pivotal role in brain chemistry. MAOA breaks down brain chemicals,
such as serotonin, noradrenaline and dopamine, which transmit messages from
one nerve cell to the next. In the afflicted males, however, a mistake in
the coding sequence prevents proper production of MAOA. As a result, abnormally
large quantities of these chemicals are found in the blood of the affected
males - and, presumably, in the brain, too.

Brunner's group does not know exactly how the MAOA defect causes either
mental retardation or aggressive, impulsive behaviour. But they point out
that other researchers have reported a link between serotonin and aggression
in animals and humans. (In these cases, though, low serotonin levels - not
high - seemed to correlate with aggressive behaviour.) High levels of dopamine
and noradrenaline have also been linked with aggression in animals.

This genetic defect would be the first such link to aggressive behaviour
in humans. 'The results are very hopeful and very promising - but we can't
overconclude from them,' says Gregory Carey, a behavioural geneticist at
the University of Colorado at Boulder. Carey recently reviewed possible
links between genes and aggression for the National Research Council's
investigation into violence.

Ideally, Carey says, the study needs to be verified in another family.
But, to date, the Dutch team knows of no other example of the disorder.

It is also unclear what relevance this very peculiar affliction has
to explaining why some 'normal' people seem more prone to aggression than
others. 'The notion that an 'aggressive gene' has been found is as yet premature,'
says Carey. 'It may be that this gene is responsible for one in a million
cases of aggression in the general population.'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Does the 'aggressive gene' lurk in a Dutch family?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
By ROSIE MESTEL in LOS ANGELES Decades of violence running through a large Dutch family may stem from a defect in a gene crucial for proper brain chemistry, according to a research team in the Netherlands.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
11.02a Genetic Explanations,  Aggression - for AQA spec Alevel Psychology, paper 3

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
11.02a Genetic Explanations, Aggression - for AQA spec Alevel Psychology, paper 3 If you are a student of A-level AQA psychology I have made these videos for you! They are a full set of videos for every part of the AQA specification from 2015 onwards.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Serotonin is a common neuromediator in the brain. It belongs to the group of so-called biogenic amines, relatively simple chemicals that facilitate the transfer of signals between the cells of the body. Although nerve cells that use serotonin for communicating with other cells have been intensively studied, they still remain a bit of a mystery.

There is only small number, around 300,000 or so, of serotonergic neurons in the brain. They are distributed in several nuclei at different brain locations such as hindbrain and midbrain. Although their number is small by brain standards, they have an extensive network of connections with huge number of collateral branches. As a result, serotonergic system reaches almost all areas of central nervous system.
The serotonin system is very complex
Serotonergic neurons are involved in a very broad range of physiological and behavioral processes such as cardiovascular regulation, appetite, pain sensitivity, sexual behavior, mood, respiration, cognition, learning etc. They also play important part in a variety of psychiatric conditions (from anxiety disorders to schizophrenia) as well as behavioral impulse-related disorders (violence, attention deficit disorder, substance abuse, obsessive control, etc.)

In evolutionary terms, the serotonergic system is one of the oldest, and seems to be involved in various inhibitory responses throughout the central nervous system. It opposes most of other neuromediator systems and seems to counterbalance neurological reactions controlled by other neurons. As a results, deficiencies in serotonin production, utilization or sensing can lead to serious changes in the brain functioning in general, and its behavioral aspects in particular.

The outcome of the serotonin release by the neuron depends on the type of receptor it binds to on the corresponding target cell. To date, at least 17 types of receptors responding to serotonin have been discovered. In addition, lots of proteins and enzymes are involved in the biosynthesis and metabolism of serotonin and can directly change its level. Various alterations in corresponding genes affect the levels of serotonin or sensitivity to serotonin and may cause behavioral changes.
Changes in serotonin level can affect behavior
The level of serotonin is controlled by multiple mechanisms. Any changes in the genes involved may lead to serious consequences.

Defects in one of the serotonin receptors, 5-HT 1A, are known to lead to the increased anxiety. The decrease of the level of serotonin generated by the action of enzyme monoaminooxidase A is associated with violent behavior and antisocial personality disorder. Increased level of serotonin during early life, caused by decreased activity of this enzyme, seems to be linked with the higher risk of violent behavior and aggression in the adulthood.

Abnormalities in serotonin signalling are important in development of schizophrenia. Observations of serotonin abnormalities in patients with this condition led to the formulation of serotonin hypothesis of schizophrenia.

Many natural and pharmaceutical compounds acting on serotonin receptors cause a variety of behavioral responses. One serotonin receptor seems to be involved in the mechanism of LSD, one of the strongest hallucinogenic compounds known. Binding with LSD causes general decrease in inhibitory action of serotonergic system. Some similarities between mystical experience and the effects of LSD even made scientists to speculate that changes in serotonin are involved in our perception of religion.
Connections between serotonin level and suicidal behavior
Low levels of serotonin are associated with depression and suicidal behavior. There are many genetic factors leading to decreased level of serotonergic activity in certain areas of the brain. They contribute to the development of various disorders. Researchers think that suicidal behavior can correlate with other characteristics such as aggression and impulsiveness, and some individuals are more vulnerable due to their genetic makeup. Some estimates suggest that genetic factors play a role in 30-50% of suicides.

Several genetic alterations in the gene for tryptophan hydroxylase were reported to be associated with suicidal behavior. This enzyme is involved in biosynthesis of serotonin, and therefore its genetic alterations can easily affect the level of this mediator. The enzyme exists in two different forms. The higher level of one of them was observed in depressed patients who attempted suicide.

Serotonin transporter is another protein which genetic alterations may cause problems. One of the commonly observed versions of the corresponding gene lacks a significant portion involved in its regulation. Decreased level of serotonin transporter results also correlates with suicidal behavior, although this correlation is not easy to interpret.

The human genome does not have a "suicide gene". Some genetic changes, however, create conditions for higher likelihood of deep depressions and suicides. It seems that many of these changes take place in the genes involved in regulation of serotonin in the brain. Like other psychological disorders, suicidal behavior is linked to complex interaction between genes. It cannot be explained by just one factor. Now we have clear evidences that suicidal tendencies can be passed from one generation to the next. But this only means that individuals with higher genetic predisposition would have a slightly higher probability of committing suicide in the face of adverse life events.

What makes the serotonergic system particularly fascinating for scientists is that it does not seem to have direct control over anything, yet at the same time it is involved in a vast range of behaviors, many of which are basic biological responses to the changes and challenges of the environment.

This complexity presents a serious challenge for developing any drugs targeting psychopathologies linked to altered behavior: by targeting one part of the system we can often inadvertently change lots of other things. This reflects the fact that various aspects of our behavior are closely linked on the basic level of brain structure.
References
Arango V, Huang YY, Underwood MD, & Mann JJ (2003). Genetics of the serotonergic system in suicidal behavior. Journal of psychiatric research, 37 (5), 375-86 PMID: 12849930

Brent DA, & Mann JJ (2005). Family genetic studies, suicide, and suicidal behavior. American journal of medical genetics. Part C, Seminars in medical genetics, 133C (1), 13-24 PMID: 15648081

Goodman N (2002). The serotonergic system and mysticism: could LSD and the nondrug-induced mystical experience share common neural mechanisms? Journal of psychoactive drugs, 34 (3), 263-72 PMID: 12422936

Linnoila M, Virkkunen M, George T, Eckardt M, Higley JD, Nielsen D, & Goldman D (1994). Serotonin, violent behavior and alcohol. EXS, 71, 155-63 PMID: 7518265

Mann JJ, Huang YY, Underwood MD, Kassir SA, Oppenheim S, Kelly TM, Dwork AJ, & Arango V (2000). A serotonin transporter gene promoter polymorphism (5-HTTLPR) and prefrontal cortical binding in major depression and suicide. Archives of general psychiatry, 57 (8), 729-38 PMID: 10920459
Image via Andrea Danti / Shutterstock.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Serotonin is a common neuromediator in the brain. It belongs to the group of so-called biogenic amines, relatively simple chemicals that facilitate the transfer of signals between the cells of the body. Although nerve cells that use serotonin for communicating with other cells have been intensively studied, they still remain a bit of a mystery.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Fluctuations of serotonin levels in the brain, which often occur when someone hasn't eaten or is stressed, affects brain regions that enable people to regulate anger, new research from the University of Cambridge has shown.

Although reduced serotonin levels have previously been implicated in aggression, this is the first study which has shown how this chemical helps regulate behaviour in the brain as well as why some individuals may be more prone to aggression. The research findings were published today, 15 September, in the journal Biological Psychiatry.

For the study, healthy volunteers' serotonin levels were altered by manipulating their diet. On the serotonin depletion day, they were given a mixture of amino acids that lacked tryptophan, the building block for serotonin. On the placebo day, they were given the same mixture but with a normal amount of tryptophan.

The researchers then scanned the volunteers' brains using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) as they viewed faces with angry, sad, and neutral expressions. Using the fMRI, they were able to measure how different brain regions reacted and communicated with one another when the volunteers viewed angry faces, as opposed to sad or neutral faces.

The research revealed that low brain serotonin made communications between specific brain regions of the emotional limbic system of the brain (a structure called the amygdala) and the frontal lobes weaker compared to those present under normal levels of serotonin. The findings suggest that when serotonin levels are low, it may be more difficult for the prefrontal cortex to control emotional responses to anger that are generated within the amygdala.

Using a personality questionnaire, they also determined which individuals have a natural tendency to behave aggressively. In these individuals, the communications between the amygdala and the prefrontal cortex was even weaker following serotonin depletion. 'Weak' communications means that it is more difficult for the prefrontal cortex to control the feelings of anger that are generated within the amygdala when the levels of serotonin are low. As a result, those individuals who might be predisposed to aggression were the most sensitive to changes in serotonin depletion.

Dr Molly Crockett, co-first author who worked on the research while a PhD student at Cambridge's Behavioural and Clinical Neuroscience Institute (and currently based at the University of Zurich) said: "We've known for decades that serotonin plays a key role in aggression, but it's only very recently that we've had the technology to look into the brain and examine just how serotonin helps us regulate our emotional impulses. By combining a long tradition in behavioral research with new technology, we were finally able to uncover a mechanism for how serotonin might influence aggression."

Dr Luca Passamonti, co-first author who worked on the research while a visiting scientist at the Medical Research Council Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit in Cambridge (and currently based at the Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (CNR), Unità di Ricerca Neuroimmagini, Catanzaro), said: "Although these results came from healthy volunteers, they are also relevant for a broad range of psychiatric disorders in which violence is a common problem. For example, these results may help to explain the brain mechanisms of a psychiatric disorder known as intermittent explosive disorder (IED). Individuals with IED typically show intense, extreme and uncontrollable outbursts of violence which may be triggered by cues of provocation such as a facial expression of anger.

"We are hopeful that our research will lead to improved diagnostics as well as better treatments for this and other conditions."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
mrc cognition and brain sciences unit mrc cognition and brain sciences unit trevor robbins trevor robbins anger

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
spotlight on neuroscience behavioural and clinical neuroscience institute (bcni)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
school of the biological sciences behavioural and clinical neuroscience institute (bcni)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Serotonin levels affect the brain's response to anger

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fluctuations of serotonin levels in the brain, which often occur when someone hasn't eaten or is stressed, affects brain regions that enable people to regulate anger, new research from the University of Cambridge has shown.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What are MAO gene mutations?

MAO-A (Monoamine oxidase A) is a critical enzyme involved in breaking down important neurotransmitters such as serotonin, norepinephrine, and dopamine. Males only have one allele since the gene is inherited through from their mother since it is located on the X chromosome. Only females can be heterozygous for this mutation. When a positive MAO-A mutation is combined with a COMT V158M mutation, imbalances in neurotransmitters may be more severe. These imbalances can potentially lead to neuro-psychiatric conditions and symptoms such as Obsessive Compulsive Disorder (OCD), mood swings, and aggressive and/or violent behavior. MAO catalyses the degradation of serotonin, dopamine and norepinephrine.

Note: Doctors have clinically observed that patients with methylation problems (especially those of Autism) often have trouble breaking down neurotransmitters. The high activity version of MAO-A can contribute to major depressive disorder. The significance of this SNP should be interpreted with caution.

MAO Types

There are 2 different types of MAO, these include MAO A & MAO B, the metabolism of dopamine (DA) and other monoamines is generally contributed by both:

MAO A has a higher affinity for serotonin and norepinephrine.

MAO B has a higher affinity for beta-phenylethylamine (PEA).

Both forms of MAO have genes that up-regulate and down-regulate e.g. Fast enzyme = less serotonin or slow enzyme = more serotonin

MAO A & B are X linked genes that are mitochondrial bound, they catalyzes the oxidative deamination of dietary amines, monoamine neurotransmitters and hormones such as:

Indoleamines - Serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine , 5-HT) and Tryptamine

Catecholamines - dopamine, norepinephrine and epinephrine

Trace amines - beta-phenylethylamine, tyramine and octopamine

MAO problems / Symptoms

Serotonin imbalances are common with MAO these include:
Low serotonin (From high MAO)

Aggression

Anxiety / Social anxiety

Carbohydrate craving

Constipation - serotonin is required for control of gut motility as it activates sooth muscle activity.

Depression - worse during winter

Impulsive tendencies

Insomnia

Low pain tolerance

Low self esteem

Obsessive compulsive disorder

Panic disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder

Poor dream recall

Social phobia

Possible deficiencies in B1, B6, FAD, B5, niacin, L-tryptophan, zinc, 5-HTP, SAM

High serotonin (From low MAO)

Aggressive behaviour

Antisocial behaviour

Confusion

Extreme agitation

GI distress / nausea

Muscle twitching

Possible deficiencies B6, FAD, B5, BCAA, progesterone

Possible MAO inhibitors

Agrimony

Angelica Archangelica (not for diabetes)

Barbery

Bilberry (Vaccinium myrtillus)

Celery (apium graveolens)

Coffee

Coriander

Curcumin

Echinacea

Evening Primrose

St Johns Wort

Uva Ursi

MAO Neurotransmitter Pathway: Serotonin & Dopamine

MAOA A16535C

MAOA A85020G

MAOA C42794T

MAOA G3638A

MAOA R297R/G492T

MAOA T1011C/1460C

MAOA T89113C

MAOB A118723G

MAO COMT Activity

MAOA A16535C

MAOA A85020G

MAOA C42794T

MAOA G3638A

MAOA R297R/G492T

MAOA T1011C/1460C

MAO T89113C

MAOB A118723G

Looking for MAO gene mutation treatments, contact us here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
MAO gene mutation & symptoms of MAO, testing & treatments for MAO

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
MAO-A (Monoamine oxidase A) is a critical enzyme involved in breaking down important neurotransmitters such as serotonin, norepinephrine, and dopamine. Males only have one allele since the gene is inherited through from their mother since it is located on the X chromosome. Only females can be heterozygous for this mutation.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Specifically, monoamine oxidase A is involved in the breakdown of the neurotransmitters serotonin, epinephrine, norepinephrine, and dopamine. Signals transmitted by serotonin regulate mood, emotion, sleep, and appetite. Epinephrine and norepinephrine control the body's response to stress. Dopamine transmits signals within the brain to produce smooth physical movements.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Biological Explanations of Aggression The role of neural and hormonal mechanisms in aggression. Describe & evaluate how neural & hormonal mechanisms influence...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Fluctuations of serotonin levels in the brain, which often occur when someone hasn't eaten or is stressed, affects brain regions that enable people to regulate anger, new research from the University of Cambridge has shown.

Although reduced serotonin levels have previously been implicated in aggression, this is the first study which has shown how this chemical helps regulate behaviour in the brain as well as why some individuals may be more prone to aggression. The research findings were published September 15, in the journal Biological Psychiatry.

For the study, healthy volunteers' serotonin levels were altered by manipulating their diet. On the serotonin depletion day, they were given a mixture of amino acids that lacked tryptophan, the building block for serotonin. On the placebo day, they were given the same mixture but with a normal amount of tryptophan.

The researchers then scanned the volunteers' brains using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) as they viewed faces with angry, sad, and neutral expressions. Using the fMRI, they were able to measure how different brain regions reacted and communicated with one another when the volunteers viewed angry faces, as opposed to sad or neutral faces.

The research revealed that low brain serotonin made communications between specific brain regions of the emotional limbic system of the brain (a structure called the amygdala) and the frontal lobes weaker compared to those present under normal levels of serotonin. The findings suggest that when serotonin levels are low, it may be more difficult for the prefrontal cortex to control emotional responses to anger that are generated within the amygdala.

Using a personality questionnaire, they also determined which individuals have a natural tendency to behave aggressively. In these individuals, the communications between the amygdala and the prefrontal cortex was even weaker following serotonin depletion. 'Weak' communications means that it is more difficult for the prefrontal cortex to control the feelings of anger that are generated within the amygdala when the levels of serotonin are low. As a result, those individuals who might be predisposed to aggression were the most sensitive to changes in serotonin depletion.

Dr Molly Crockett, co-first author who worked on the research while a PhD student at Cambridge's Behavioural and Clinical Neuroscience Institute (and currently based at the University of Zurich) said: "We've known for decades that serotonin plays a key role in aggression, but it's only very recently that we've had the technology to look into the brain and examine just how serotonin helps us regulate our emotional impulses. By combining a long tradition in behavioral research with new technology, we were finally able to uncover a mechanism for how serotonin might influence aggression."

Dr Luca Passamonti, co-first author who worked on the research while a visiting scientist at the Cognition and Brain Sciences Unit of the Medical Research Council in Cambridge (and currently based at the Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (CNR), Unità di Ricerca Neuroimmagini, Catanzaro), said: "Although these results came from healthy volunteers, they are also relevant for a broad range of psychiatric disorders in which violence is a common problem. For example, these results may help to explain the brain mechanisms of a psychiatric disorder known as intermittent explosive disorder (IED). Individuals with IED typically show intense, extreme and uncontrollable outbursts of violence which may be triggered by cues of provocation such as a facial expression of anger.

"We are hopeful that our research will lead to improved diagnostics as well as better treatments for this and other conditions."

This study was supported by the James S. McDonnell Foundation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
psychology research; mental health research; nervous system; brain tumor; disorders and syndromes; neuroscience; anger management; depression

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Serotonin levels affect the brain's response to anger

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fluctuations of serotonin levels in the brain, which often occur when someone hasn't eaten or is stressed, affects brain regions that enable people to regulate anger, new research from the University of Cambridge has shown.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Brain - Aggression, Violence, and the Brain

# data[].attributes.body
BPS

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Mock jury study - will behavioral genetic evidence get defendants off the hook? | BPS Beta Site

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For a new study in Behavioral Sciences and the Law, Natalie Gordon and Edie Greene presented 600 mock jurors (half were students, half were from the wider community) with a detailed trial summary based on a real US murder trial in which the defendant, already in jail for an earlier crime, had murdered his cell-mate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Konrad Lorenz: On Aggression and World War II

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Uploaded by Kyle Grierson on 2015-12-08.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Aggression vs. Altruism: Crash Course Psychology #40

# data[].attributes.body
part 2

# data[].attributes.body
Part 1

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Are You Good Or Evil -  BBC Horion Documentary

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Are You Good Or Evil - BBC Horion Documentary * Please subscribe : https://goo.gl/Q8SWYV * Like Fanpage : https://www.facebook.com/bbcdocuemtar... * Twitter : https://twitter.com/HorionOne. What makes us good or evil? It's a simple but deeply unsettling question. One that scientists are now starting to answer.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The common assumption about testosterone is that it makes us more aggressive and competitive. But is this the entire story? Perhaps the effect of testosterone on behavior depends on our social rank.

To find out, my collaborators and I recruited male members of a Japanese university's rugby team and had them play a game to test their cooperativeness. The results of our study were published today in the journal Scientific Reports.

An ultimatum

Before their regular practice we had the team members drool into a cup (nice!) so that we could test their saliva for testosterone. Then came the interesting part of the study. We had the men play a series of ultimatum games. The ultimatum game (or UG for short) is a commonly used task in economic research. It works like this. One player is the Proposer. He is given a pot of money and told to decide how much of that pot to offer to his opponent, the Responder. He can offer none, all, or any percentage in between. Next, the Responder decides to accept or reject the Proposer's offer. If he accepts, he receives the money offered by the Proposer, and the Proposer keeps the rest. But if the Responder rejects the offer, neither player gets any money.

As you can see, it's in the Proposer's best interest to not make too stingy an offer. If he does, he is very likely to be rejected and receive nothing! But he can probably get away with offering a little less than half, because the Responder may feel that 40 percent or even 30 percent of the pot is better than nothing.

The hierarchy

Normally, in a study like this, the opponents have no prior acquaintance. But in our study, all the players knew who was top of the pecking order. And in Japanese university sports teams, the hierarchy is rigidly enforced. According to my Japanese colleagues, players in their senior year wield almost absolute power over their subordinates, and freshmen have to follow every order of their superiors.

Now, we didn't tell the players who their opponents were: All the games were anonymous. But we did tell them the rank of their opponents. Everyone had the chance to play both as Proposer and Responder.

So how did the players' rank and their testosterone influence their performance in the UG?

Results

Some players offered very little of the pot to their opponent, but only accepted a proposal if it was large: We describe these dominant players as low in "willingness to acquiesce." Other players offered a big share of money, and were happy to accept a small offer in return: These men were high in "willingness to acquiesce."

We found that senior players with high levels of testosterone were less willing to acquiesce. This is what we would expect from folk theories about testosterone: high T equals more dominance.

However, among lower ranked players, higher testosterone levels were associated with greater willingness to acquiesce! What's going on?

Sensitivi-T

We think that testosterone primes men to attend to their position in the social hierarchy. Take a man who has high levels of testosterone: If he is atop the pecking order, his high levels of T encourage him to take advantage of his exalted position. He offers less and takes more.

However, if that same man recognizes that he is on the bottom rung of the ladder, his high T instead promotes strategic submission. He offers more and takes less, perhaps in the hope that this will appease his more powerful peers and aid his eventual rise to the top of the heap.

Men with low testosterone may not be so politically minded, and their social rank is not so relevant to their decisions to submit to or dominate their rivals.
If you liked this article, you might enjoy my podcast: The Psychology of Attractiveness Podcast.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Does Testosterone Really Just Make Men Aggressive?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The common assumption about testosterone is that it makes us more aggressive and competitive. But is this the entire story? Perhaps the effect of testosterone on behavior depends on our social rank. To find out, my collaborators and I recruited male members of a Japanese university's rugby team and had them play a game to test their cooperativeness.