Do perpetrators and victims rely on different information when judging whether aggressive behaviors are justified?

Perpetrators perceive their aggressive behaviors as more justified than victims do. This difference in perception may be due to each person relying heavily on their private thoughts and experiences, which effectively means that perpetrators and victims consider different information, and value that information differently, when judging whether an aggressive behavior is justified. The current manuscript contains four studies that tested these ideas. When judging whether an aggressive behavior is justified, perpetrators reported relying heavily on their thoughts and motives (Studies 1-3) and victims reported relying heavily on their experience of being harmed (Study 2). Further, as people considered the perpetrator's thoughts that led to the aggressive behavior, perpetrators, but not victims, became more confident in their judgments (Study 3). Finally, when judging their aggressive behavior, people felt their judgments were less biased than a "typical person's" judgments would be (Study 4). Collectively, these studies demonstrate some of the cognitive reasons that perpetrators and victims disagree on their judgments about whether an aggressive behavior is justified and, consequently, some of the cognitive barriers that need to be overcome for successful conflict resolution to occur.

Perpetrators' folk explanations of their regretted and justified aggressive behaviors.

When people explain why they behaved aggressively, they can refer to their thought process that led to their aggressive behavior - so-called reason explanations - or to other factors that preceded their thought process - so-called causal history of reasons explanations. People's choice of what mode of explanation they give might be affected by whether they want to distance themselves (or not) from their past aggressive behaviors. To test these ideas, participants in the current study (N = 429) either recalled an aggressive behavior they regret or an aggressive behavior they believe was justified. Participants then explained why they behaved aggressively. Mostly, people gave reason explanations for their aggressive behaviors, which is consistent with past research on how people explain intentional behaviors. Further, and as predicted, participants who explained behaviors they believe were justified gave (relatively) more reason explanations and participants who explained behaviors they regretted gave (relatively) more causal history of reasons explanations. These findings are consistent with the idea that participants adjust their explanations to either provide a rationale for, or to distance themselves from, their past aggressive behaviors.

Perpetrators', Victims', and Witnesses' Folk Explanations of Aggressive Behaviors.

Unsurprisingly, victims and perpetrators often view aggressive behaviors differently. The current study examined whether victims, perpetrators, and witnesses also explained aggressive behaviors differently. The current study included 408 participants who recalled a time when they harmed another person (i.e., perpetrator memory), when another person harmed them (i.e., victim memory), and when they witnessed an aggressive behavior (i.e., witness memory). Replicating past research, participants rated their recalled aggressive behaviors from the victim perspective as being more harmful and less justified than they did for their recalled behaviors from the perpetrator perspective. When examining their explanations for the behaviors, participants most often explained their own aggressive behaviors by referring to their mental deliberations that led to their behavior (i.e., reason explanations). In comparison, they referred to background causal factors (i.e., causal history of reasons explanations)-such as personality traits, demographic factors, cultural norms, etc.-more when explaining others' aggressive behaviors, especially when the explanation was from the victim perspective. These findings show the subtleties in how people communicate about their aggressive interactions: When communicating about their own aggressive behaviors, people use modes of explanations that portray their behaviors as sensible, and when communicating about a time when another person behaved aggressively towards them, people use modes of explanations that omit the thought processes that led to those behaviors.

Does Trait Hostility Moderate the Asymmetry in Victim-Perpetrator Perceptions of Aggressive Behaviors?

Victims often perceive aggressive behaviors as being more harmful than do perpetrators-a so-called victim-perpetrator asymmetry. We examined whether this victim-perpetrator asymmetry was especially strong for individuals who were high in trait hostility. In two studies-one where participants recalled actual aggressive experiences and one where participants took the perspective of a person in a vignette-we found that victims who were high in trait hostility, relative to those who were low, viewed aggressive behaviors as being most harmful. We found somewhat inconsistent effects for whether perpetrators viewed the aggressive behaviors as more justified than victims did and whether trait hostility moderated this judgment. Collectively, the current findings show that victims who are high in trait hostility are especially likely to view an aggressive behavior as harmful, which potentially makes conflict resolution difficult for these individuals and increases the likelihood they would retaliate.

Child-related attributions of hostile intent and harsh discipline: Moderating effects of anger.

Two studies tested whether attributions of hostile intent (AHI) and anger for ambiguous child behaviors uniquely predict parents' harsh verbal discipline (HVD) and harsh physical discipline (HPD) or whether AHI only predicts harsh discipline when AHI occurs in conjunction with anger, as suggested by the Integrated Cognitive Model of general aggression (Wilkowski & Robinson, 2010, J. Pers., 78, 9-38). Replicating previous studies, the expected positive bivariate relationships between AHI, anger, HVD, and HPD were found in Study 1 (N = 493). However, when AHI, anger, and the AHI by anger interaction were considered simultaneously, patterns of prediction varied by discipline type. For HVD, high levels of AHI, high levels of anger, and the AHI by anger interaction (at high levels of AHI and anger) each were significant predictors. For HPD, low levels of AHI, high levels of anger, and the AHI by anger interaction (at high levels of AHI and anger) were significant predictors, suggesting a possible suppressor effect for AHI. These results were replicated in Study 2 ( N = 503). Thus, there was support for the contention that AHI only predicts harsh discipline when AHI occurs in conjunction with anger with respect to HPD but this was not the case for HVD. Since AHI suppressor effects were observed for HPD in two large sample studies, variables that may account for the AHI suppressor effects and the need for testing more complex interactive predictive models of harsh parenting behaviors are discussed.

Scientific Utopia III: Crowdsourcing Science.

Most scientific research is conducted by small teams of investigators who together formulate hypotheses, collect data, conduct analyses, and report novel findings. These teams operate independently as vertically integrated silos. Here we argue that scientific research that is horizontally distributed can provide substantial complementary value, aiming to maximize available resources, promote inclusiveness and transparency, and increase rigor and reliability. This alternative approach enables researchers to tackle ambitious projects that would not be possible under the standard model. Crowdsourced scientific initiatives vary in the degree of communication between project members from largely independent work curated by a coordination team to crowd collaboration on shared activities. The potential benefits and challenges of large-scale collaboration span the entire research process: ideation, study design, data collection, data analysis, reporting, and peer review. Complementing traditional small science with crowdsourced approaches can accelerate the progress of science and improve the quality of scientific research.

Child maltreatment re-offending in families served by the United States Air Force Family Advocacy Program.

The current study examined child maltreatment re-offending in United States Air Force (USAF) families. In a clinical database containing 24,999 child maltreatment incidents perpetrated by 15,042 offenders between the years 1997 and 2013, 13% of offenders maltreated a child on more than one date (i.e., they re-offended). We explored several offender demographic characteristics associated with who re-offended and found that civilians re-offended at a similar rate as active duty members, males re-offended at a similar rate as females, and younger offenders were more likely to re-offend than older offenders. We also explored incident characteristics associated with who re-offended: Re-offending was more likely if the initial maltreatment was neglect or emotional abuse and re-offenders were likely to perpetrate subsequent maltreatment that was the same type and severity as their initial incident. The current data indicate that young offenders and offenders of neglect and emotional maltreatment are the greatest risk of re-offending. These offender and incident characteristics could be used by the USAF to guide their efforts to reduce re-offending.

Multiple Behavior Descriptions Affect the Acquisitions of STI and STT.

Four studies pursued the idea that spontaneous trait inferences (STIs) involve the formation of both inferential knowledge and associative knowledge while spontaneous trait transferences (STTs) involve only the formation of associative knowledge. These studies varied the type and amount of behavioral information from which perceivers could extract trait information. Experiments 1a and 1b used a modified savings-in-relearning paradigm and demonstrated that repeated presentations of an individual and a behavior description increased the strength of association between the target and implied trait, and this effect did not depend on whether the repeated presentations involved redundant information or new information. In comparison, Experiments 2a and 2b used a trait ratings dependent variable and demonstrated that the effects of repetition were stronger for STI, but not STT, when the added information differed from information that was previously encountered, but not when it was redundant with the previously encountered information.

The Psychological Science Accelerator: Advancing Psychology through a Distributed Collaborative Network.

Concerns have been growing about the veracity of psychological research. Many findings in psychological science are based on studies with insufficient statistical power and nonrepresentative samples, or may otherwise be limited to specific, ungeneralizable settings or populations. Crowdsourced research, a type of large-scale collaboration in which one or more research projects are conducted across multiple lab sites, offers a pragmatic solution to these and other current methodological challenges. The Psychological Science Accelerator (PSA) is a distributed network of laboratories designed to enable and support crowdsourced research projects. These projects can focus on novel research questions, or attempt to replicate prior research, in large, diverse samples. The PSA's mission is to accelerate the accumulation of reliable and generalizable evidence in psychological science. Here, we describe the background, structure, principles, procedures, benefits, and challenges of the PSA. In contrast to other crowdsourced research networks, the PSA is ongoing (as opposed to time-limited), efficient (in terms of re-using structures and principles for different projects), decentralized, diverse (in terms of participants and researchers), and inclusive (of proposals, contributions, and other relevant input from anyone inside or outside of the network). The PSA and other approaches to crowdsourced psychological science will advance our understanding of mental processes and behaviors by enabling rigorous research and systematically examining its generalizability.

Sex differences in jealousy: the (lack of) influence of researcher theoretical perspective.

The sex difference in jealousy is an effect that has generated significant controversy in the academic literature (resulting in two meta-analyses that reached different conclusions on the presence or absence of the effect). In this study, we had a team of researchers from different theoretical perspectives use identical protocols to test whether the sex difference in jealousy would occur across many different samples (while testing whether mate value would moderate the effect). In our samples, we found the sex difference in jealousy to occur using both forced choice and continuous measures, this effect appeared in several different settings, and, we found that mate value moderated participant responses. The results are discussed in light of the controversy surrounding the presence of the effect.

Experiencing Instigations and Trait Aggression Contribute to Harsh Parenting Behaviors.

Three studies (total N = 1777 parents) examined whether harsh parenting behaviors would increase when parents experienced an instigation and whether this increase would be especially pronounced for parents who were high in trait aggression. These predictions were tested both when parents' experience of an instigation was manipulated (Studies 1 and 2) and when parents' perceptions of their child's instigating behavior was reported (Study 3). Further, these predictions were tested across a variety of measures of parents' harsh behaviors: (1) asking parents to report their likelihood of behaving harshly (Study 1), (2) using proxy tasks for parents' inclinations to behave harshly (Study 2), and (3) having parents report their past child-directed behaviors, some of which were harsh (Study 3). Both child instigations and parents' trait aggression were consistently associated with parents' child-directed harsh behaviors. However, parents' trait aggression only moderated the extent to which the instigation was associated with their harsh parenting for self-reported physical harsh behaviors (Study 1). The results of the current studies demonstrate that both situational factors, such as experiencing an instigation, and individual difference variables, such as trait aggression, affect parents' likelihood to exhibit harsh behaviors, but found little evidence these factors interact.

Parents' spontaneous evaluations of children and symbolic harmful behaviors toward their child.

Parents' evaluations of children are believed to be a cognitive contributor to their subsequent child-directed harsh or physically abusive behaviors. The current research examined whether parents' (N=100) evaluations of children were moderated by either (a) the child behavior on which the evaluation was based and (b) parents' measured risk for child physical abuse. The study also explored whether parents' evaluations of children were related to their tendencies to symbolically harm their child. The current study also used a novel method to indirectly assess parents' evaluations of children: A modified Affect Misattribution Procedure. Contrary to a priori expectations, negative evaluations of children were stronger for parents who were at low risk, relative to high risk, for child physical abuse. Nonetheless, we observed that high-risk parents were more likely than low-risk parents to inflict symbolic harm onto their child. In an exploratory analysis we observed that parents who formed more overall negative evaluations of children engaged in more symbolic harm to their child. Although high-risk parents were more likely to symbolically harm their child than low-risk parents, this effect does not seem to be due to high-risk parents' negative child evaluations from negative child behaviors.

Spontaneous trait inference and spontaneous trait transference are both unaffected by prior evaluations of informants.

This article reports results from a study in which participants encountered either (a) previously known informants who were positive (e.g. Abraham Lincoln), neutral (e.g., Jay Leno), or negative (e.g., Adolf Hitler), or (b) previously unknown informants. The informants ostensibly described either a trait-implicative positive behavior, a trait-implicative negative behavior, or a neutral behavior. These descriptions were framed as either the behavior of the informant or the behavior of another person. Results yielded evidence of informant-trait linkages for both self-informants and for informants who described another person. These effects were not moderated by informant type, behavior valence, or the congruency or incongruency between the prior knowledge of the informant and the behavior valence. Results are discussed in terms of theories of Spontaneous Trait Inference and Spontaneous Trait Transference.

Intimate Partner Maltreatment Recidivism in U.S. Air Force Families.

Research has demonstrated that perpetrator characteristics (gender, age, and military status) and incident characteristics (perpetrator substance use and initial incident severity) are associated with intimate partner maltreatment recidivism. This study assessed whether these variables were associated with intimate partner maltreatment recidivism in U.S. Air Force families during a 16-yr period (1997-2013). During the study period, 21% of the intimate partner maltreatment perpetrators in the U.S. Air Force committed more than one incident of maltreatment. In terms of perpetrator characteristics, male perpetrators reoffended more than female perpetrators, younger perpetrators reoffended more than older perpetrators, and active duty perpetrators reoffended more than civilians. Whether a perpetrator was enlisted or an officer was not associated with the likelihood of recidivism. In terms of incident characteristics, substance use (which was mainly alcohol use) during an initial maltreatment incident was associated with recidivism, but the severity of perpetrators' initial maltreatment incident was not. However, for perpetrators who reoffended, the severity of their initial incident was associated with the severity of subsequent incidents. On the basis of these findings, the need for targeted interventions to reduce intimate partner maltreatment recidivism is discussed.

Validating the Voodoo Doll Task as a Proxy for Aggressive Parenting Behavior.

OBJECTIVE: Six studies (N = 1,081 general population parents) assessed the validity of the Voodoo Doll Task (VDT) as a proxy for aggressive parenting behaviors. METHODS: Participants were given an opportunity to symbolically inflict harm by choosing to stick "pins" into a doll representing their child. RESULTS: Individual differences in parents' trait aggression (Studies 1, 2, and 6), state hostility (Study 3), attitudes towards the corporal punishment of children (Study 4), self-control (Study 6), depression (Study 6), and child physical abuse risk (Study 6) were associated with increased pin usage. Further, parents used more pins after imagining their child perform negative behaviors compared to after imagining their child perform positive behaviors (Study 5). A number of demographic variables also were associated with pin usage: Fathers used pins more than mothers and parents' education level was inversely related to pin usage. Finally, on average, parents viewed the VDT as slightly uncomfortable, but not objectionable, to complete (Study 6). CONCLUSIONS: Our evidence suggests that the VDT may serve as a useful proxy for parent-to-child aggression.

Child maltreatment among U.S. Air Force parents deployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom/Operation Enduring Freedom.

This study examined child maltreatment perpetration among 99,697 active-duty U.S. Air Force parents who completed a combat deployment. Using the deploying parent as the unit of analysis, we analyzed whether child maltreatment rates increased postdeployement relative to predeployment. These analyses extend previous research that used aggregate data and extend our previous work that used data from the same period but used the victim as the unit of analysis and included only deploying parents who engaged in child maltreatment. In this study, 2% (n = 1,746) of deploying parents perpetrated child maltreatment during the study period. Although no overall differences were found in child maltreatment rates postdeployment compared to predeployment, several maltreatment-related characteristics qualified this finding. Rates for emotional abuse and mild maltreatment were lower following deployment, whereas child maltreatment rates for severe maltreatment were higher following deployment. The finding that rates of severe child maltreatment, including incidents involving alcohol use, were higher postdeployment suggests a need for additional support services for parents following their return from combat deployment, with a focus on returning parents who have an alcohol use problem.

Characteristics associated with incidents of family maltreatment among United States Air Force families.

From 2002 until 2007, the United States Air Force (USAF) revised the process of determining whether incidents of suspected family maltreatment met the criteria for maltreatment. In this study, all reported child maltreatment and partner abuse incidents in the USAF from January 2008 to July 2011 were examined to determine the extent to which characteristics of victims, offenders, and incidents affected whether incidents were determined to have met criteria for maltreatment. For both child maltreatment and partner abuse, alleged incidents in which offenders used substances and more severe incidents were more likely to have met maltreatment criteria than alleged incidents that did not involve offender substance use and less severe incidents. However, characteristics of the persons involved (e.g., age, gender, military status) were generally unassociated with an incident meeting criteria. Consistent with the goals of the criteria revisions, these results suggest that the current USAF criteria are associated with incident characteristics and not with demographic characteristics of the persons involved in the incident.

What difference does a day make? Examining temporal variations in partner maltreatment.

Routine activities (RA) theory posits that changes in people's typical daily activities covary with increases or decreases in criminal behaviors, including, but not limited to, partner maltreatment. Using a large clinical database, we examined temporal variations among 24,460 incidents of confirmed partner maltreatment across an 11-year period within the U.S. Air Force (USAF). Specifically, we created regression models that predicted the number of partner maltreatment incidents per day. In addition to several control variables, we coded temporal variables for days of the week, month, year, and several significant days (e.g., holidays, Super Bowl Sunday), which allowed us to examine the independent influence of these variables on partner maltreatment prevalence. While accounting for the influence of all other study variables, we observed significant increases in partner maltreatment for weekend days, New Year's Day, Independence Day, and Super Bowl Sunday. Similar results were found for partner maltreatment incidents involving offender alcohol/drug use. Furthermore, the proportion of incidents involving offender alcohol/drug use increased on New Year's Day and Independence Day. Consistent with RA theory and data from civilian samples, the current results indicate that certain days are associated with increased incidents of partner maltreatment within the USAF. These findings should be used to inform future preventive efforts.

Spouse abuse among United States Air Force personnel who deployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom/Operation Enduring Freedom.

The authors examined spouse abuse perpetration among all married U.S. Air Force personnel who deployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom/Operation Enduring Freedom. Using Poisson and conditional Poisson regression, they compared rates of spouse abuse perpetration predeployment and postdeployment in the population of married U.S. Air Force personnel who had a combat-related deployment between October 1, 2001 and October 31, 2008 (N = 156,296). Just over 2% (n = 3,524) of deployers perpetrated at least one substantiated incident of spouse physical or emotional abuse within the 308,197,653 days at risk for abuse during the study period. Male deployers perpetrated spouse abuse at approximately twice the rate of female deployers. Regarding changes in rates of spouse abuse perpetration postdeployment versus predeployment among all deployers, the authors found no differences overall; however, several deployer and incident-related characteristics moderated this effect. Rates of emotional abuse, mild abuse, and abuse not involving alcohol were significantly lower postdeployment, whereas rates of moderate/severe abuse and abuse involving alcohol were significantly higher postdeployment. Although the majority of U.S. Air Force deployers did not perpetrate any substantiated incidents of spouse abuse, there was variability in the impact of deployment on spouse abuse rates before versus after deployment. The finding that rates of moderate/severe spouse abuse incidents involving alcohol were higher postdeployment suggests a need for focused prevention/intervention efforts.