China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Beyond restraint
Published in Bernadette McSherry, Yvette Maker, Restrictive Practices in Health Care and Disability Settings, 2020
Rebecca Fish and Chris Hatton interviewed 16 women with intellectual disabilities who had been physically restrained while living in a forensic locked unit in England, and ten staff members who worked with them. Staff in that study characterised women’s behaviour as ‘relational aggression’, which the authors explain ‘was considered to be more difficult to deal with than the type of aggression shown by male service users’, and often justified the use of physical restraint (Fish and Hatton 2017: 796). Esther Wilcox, WM Finlay and Jane Edmonds earlier explored the discourses surrounding the ‘challenging behaviour’ of women and men with a learning disability in England via interviews with ten paid carers. Most of the women discussed in the study were constructed by the paid carers as ‘either manipulative or attention-seeking’ (Wilcox, Finlay and Edmonds 2006: 209). These constructions of women’s behaviour as a consequence of ‘flawed character’ led to responses to ‘outbursts’ that emphasised control over the service user (Wilcox, Finlay and Edmonds 2006: 210).
Social Psychology
Published in Mohamed Ahmed Abd El-Hay, Understanding Psychology for Medicine and Nursing, 2019
Males are historically believed to be generally more physically aggressive than females, and men commit the majority of murders in the United States. This is one of the most evidenced behavioral gender differences, and it has been found across many different age groups and cultures. Males are quicker to feel aggression and more likely than females to express their aggression physically. When considering indirect forms of aggression, such as relational aggression and social rejection, some scientists argue that females can be quite aggressive, although female aggression is often expressed less physically. The approaches that women use to express aggression vary from culture to culture. Whether this gender difference in aggression is a result of nature (such as biology, genetics, or hormonal differences) or nurture (such as gender roles and socialization) continues to be debated.
The Traumatized Couple
Published in Len Sperry, Katherine Helm, Jon Carlson, The Disordered Couple, 2019
The trauma recovery process includes establishing safety for the survivor, reconstructing the traumatic story, and restoring the connection between the trauma survivor and community (Oseland et al., 2016). The most critical and foundational component of effective treatment of trauma is establishing safety and stability. In couple therapy, this need requires the additional emphasis on the therapeutic relationship and process as safe and stable for both the survivor and partner. Trauma survivors struggle to regulate emotion, which can lead to increased levels of relational conflict (Oseland et al., 2016). Additional issues leading to relationship conflict include reduced capacity for adaptability, role disruption, boundary shifts, and changes in the relationship dynamic. For these reasons, safety and stability within the therapeutic relationship prior to addressing the trauma is essential (Oseland et al., 2016). Gaining control over maladaptive behaviors like self-harm, suicidality, substance use, and relational aggression is another important component to the therapeutic process. Survivors must feel a sense of control in making decisions during the treatment process in order to take ownership of the recovery process. A failure to establish safety, security, stability, and control may result in re-traumatization or an exacerbation of trauma symptoms (Oseland et al., 2016). Establishing safety and stability demands a level of ongoing crisis management in the therapeutic process, depending on how recently the trauma occurred and the severity of the PTSD. This process should not be rushed.
Relational Aggressors’ Coping: The Moderating Role of Empathy
Published in Journal of School Violence, 2019
Constantinos M. Kokkinos, Ioanna Voulgaridou
Relational aggression (RA; referring to the cause of harm to others by manipulating peer relationships; Voulgaridou & Kokkinos, 2015) increases during preadolescence, since as individuals advancing in their socio-cognitive abilities may use subtler aggressive forms (Zimmer-Gembeck, Trevaskis, Nesdale, & Downey, 2014). Various models of aggression stress its cognitive base, such as the cognitive neo-association theory (Berkowitz, 1990) positing that harsh experiences influence negative affect, and in turn, trigger distinct thoughts, memories, expressive motor reactions, and physiological responses linked to fight tendencies (Zhou & Wu, 2017) or the more recent integrative cognitive model of trait anger and reactive aggression (Wilkowski & Robinson, 2010) identifying cognitive processes, such as rumination, that are supposed to determine individual differences in anger and reactive aggression. Coping, defined as ongoing cognitive and behavioral efforts to manage psychological stress (Lazarus, 1993), could be a significant aspect in aggression due to individuals’ potential difficulties to manage negative emotions and stress. If individuals use maladaptive strategies to cope with the negative impact of trauma, rudimentary feelings of anger could increase (Berkowitz, 1990), and the prevalence of violent behaviors could arise.
Measuring relational and overt aggression by peer report: A comparison of peer nominations and peer ratings
Published in Journal of School Violence, 2019
Krista R. Mehari, Tracy Evian Waasdorp, Stephen S. Leff
Peer-targeted aggression may take different forms. Overt aggression includes physical aggression (e.g., pushing, hitting, kicking) and verbal aggression (e.g., mocking, name-calling; Martin & Huebner, 2007). Relational aggression, which targets an individual’s social relationships, status, and reputation, is a form of aggression that can involve rumor spreading and deliberately excluding or socially isolating another person (Crick & Grotpeter, 1995). There is a significant, moderate correlation between overt and relational aggression (Sullivan, Farrell, & Kliewer, 2006; Underwood, Beron, & Rosen, 2009), but prior research has shown that there may be differences in how each form of aggression relates to children’s psychosocial adjustment, including academic achievement, delinquency, social adjustment, and depressive symptoms (e.g., Preddy & Fite, 2012; Putallaz et al., 2007; Van der Wal, de Wit, & Hirasing, 2003). These findings provide support for measuring overt and relational aggression separately, and thus, for separately exploring the best way to measure each form of aggression in this study.
Bullying victimization-perpetration link during early adolescence in South Korea: applying the individual trait approach and opportunity perspective
Published in Journal of School Violence, 2019
Other scholars have examined whether predictors of bullying (e.g., risky behaviors and low self-control) are correlated with bullying victimization (Sullivan et al., 2016; Turanovic & Pratt, 2014). Salmivalli and Helteenvuori (2007) found that reactive aggression predicted higher future levels of peer victimization among boys. Another study also reported that relational aggression predicted increases in relational victimization among girls (Ostrov, 2008). A more recent, short-term longitudinal study investigated the association between peer victimization and aggression subtypes in early childhood (Ostrov, Kamper, Hart, Godleski, & Blakely-McClure, 2014). Findings suggest that relational aggression predicted decreases in relational victimization. However, reactive relational aggression was found to predict increases in relational victimization.