Citation

Caprara GV, Gargaro T, Pastorelli C, Prezza M, Renzi P, Zelli A. Pers. Individ. Dif. 1987; 8(6): 885-893.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1987, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/0191-8869(87)90140-1

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

After inducing hostility toward a confederate by threatening subjects' self-esteem, subjects were then given the opportunity either to deliver shocks (Experiment 1) or to withhold rewards (Experiment 2) from their confederate. Physiological measures were taken prior to the hostility induction, shortly after the induction and, finally, after the opportunity to aggress. Measures of individual differences relating to aggressive behavior were also considered. While the experimental manipulation was the best predictor in the `withholding rewards' condition, measures of dissipation-rumination tendencies and emotional vulnerability were the best predictors in the `shock administration' condition. In both conditions, systolic blood pressure seemed to reflect differences in arousal as a function of the hostility induction procedure, while subjects in the withhold rewards procedure also showed a decrease in systolic pressure after having an opportunity to aggress toward the confederate. It was concluded that not only is the withholding of rewards a more ethically acceptable procedure than shock administration, but it is also more likely to reflect experimental rather than individual difference affects.

Language: en