روابط مستقیم و غیر مستقیم بین ویژگی های شخصیتی پنج عامل بزرگ و رفتار پرخاشگرانه و خشونت آمیز

Relations between the Big 5 personality traits and aggressive behavior have been studied frequently. However, no work has tested whether that relation is direct or indirect through aggressive attitudes and aggressive emotions. Data from two large samples that used different Big 5 measures examined these effects. Overall, results showed that the paths from Big 5 traits to aggressive behavior depends on both the specific type of aggressive behavior and the Big 5 traits measured. For example, Openness and Agreeableness were both directly and indirectly related to physical aggression, but were only indirectly related (through aggressive attitudes) to violent behavior. Similarly, Neuroticism was both directly and indirectly (through aggressive emotions) related to physical aggression, but not to violent behavior. Theoretical implications and future work are discussed.

Aggression and personality theorists posit that personality variables are important predictors of aggressive behavior (see Anderson & Huesmann, 2003). Indeed, several personality traits are related to aggressive behavior, including, narcissism (Bushman & Baumeister, 1998), impulsivity (Campbell & Muncer, 2009), among others. The predominant overall model of personality has identified the “Big 5” personality factors, traits that repeatedly appear across culture and gender. The predominant social-cognitive models of aggression (e.g., General Aggression Model; GAM) include personality variables, and to some extent explicate psychological processes that link traits to aggression. For example, the GAM postulates that traits can influence aggression through their impact on aggressive emotions or on aggressive cognitions. The present research tested the direct and indirect effects of the Big 5 personality traits (Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism) on aggressive behavior. We used multi-group path modeling from two samples that used different Big 5 measures to test the direct effects of personality on two types of aggression (physical, violent) as well as indirect effects (mediated effects) through aggressive emotions and aggressive attitudes. 1.1. Big 5 and aggression The strongest Big 5 predictor of aggressive behavior is Agreeableness, which is characterized as good-natured, trustful, and cooperative (John & Srivastava, 1999). It is negatively related to self-report and peer-report aggressive behavior (Gleason, Jensen-Campbell, & Richardson, 2004) and violence (Heaven, 1996). Conscientiousness is characterized by being responsible, orderly, and dependable (John & Srivastava, 1999), and tends to be negatively related to aggression (Sharpe & Desai, 2001). Neuroticism, characterized by being easily upset and emotionally unstable (John & Srivastava, 1999), is positively related to aggressive behavior (Sharpe & Desai, 2001). Openness, characterized by being intellectual, polished, and independent-minded (John & Srivastava, 1999), tends to be unrelated to aggressive behavior (e.g., Gleason et al., 2004). Finally, Extraversion is characterized as being talkative, assertive, and energetic (John & Srivastava, 1999) and its relations with aggression are mixed. Sharpe and Desai (2001) found that the correlation between self-reported physical aggression and Extraversion was negative, whereas Gallo and Smith (1998) found a positive relation between Extraversion and physical aggression. 1.2. Incorporating the Big 5 into larger aggression theories It is unknown whether or not the relations between the Big 5 and aggression are direct, or indirect through some learned aggressive outcomes, such as aggressive emotions and aggressive attitudes. GAM (Anderson & Bushman, 2002) posits that repeated interaction with aggression-related stimuli (both real and fictitious) and situations, and subsequent positively reinforced aggressive behavior, is likely to increase one’s aggressive personality through several learned outcomes (e.g., aggressive beliefs, attitudes, and related emotions). Furthermore, in all major social-cognitive models of aggression, momentary accessibility of aggressive emotion and cognitions are key proximal causes of aggressive behavior. Thus, depending on the specific Big 5 trait, GAM would suggest that the Big 5 are related to aggressive behavior because they may either enhance or inhibit the development and chronic accessibility of aggressive emotions and aggressive attitudes. For example, if Agreeableness is negatively associated with aggressive emotions or aggressive attitudes, then it should also be negatively related to aggression. There is strong support for how repeated exposure to aggression-related stimuli and situations is related to aggressive emotions and aggressive attitudes; and how those aggressive outcomes are related to the likelihood of aggressive behavior (Anderson & Bushman, 2002). However, there is a paucity of research on how Big 5 traits are related to these aggressive outcomes. Research has shown that Agreeableness and Conscientiousness are both negatively related to vengefulness (an aggressive emotion), whereas Neuroticism is positively related to vengefulness (McCullough, Bellah, Kilpatrick, & Johnson, 2001). Sharpe and Desai (2001) found that Neuroticism is positively related to anger and hostility (aggressive emotions), whereas Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness are negatively related to these emotions. Anderson et al. (2004) found that Agreeableness and Conscientiousness were negatively related to attitudes towards violence (an aggressive attitude). Thus, this literature suggests that the Big 5 personality traits may be related to aggressive behavior directly and/or indirectly through aggressive emotions and aggressive attitudes. 1.3. Overview of the current research Despite the wealth of literature examining the relations between Big 5 traits and aggressive behavior, it is unknown whether these effects are direct, indirect through aggressive attitudes and aggressive emotions, or some combination of direct and indirect effects. Furthermore, it is unclear whether various routes to aggressive behavior are similar or different across all five personality traits. For instance, some personality traits may be only directly related to aggressive behavior, others may be indirectly related to aggressive behavior, some may be both directly and indirectly related to aggressive behavior, while some may not be related to aggressive behavior. Finally, it is unclear whether these effects differ as a function of different types of aggressive behavior. For instance, the effects of Agreeableness may be stronger for physical aggression than violence, in part because violence in general is harder to predict. 1.4. Primary study Conger, Patterson, and Ge (1995) argued that if one can replicate an effect using different samples and different measures to assess the same theoretical construct(s), then the theoretical underpinnings for such relations are robust to measurement. We tested the relations between Big 5 traits, aggressive emotions, aggressive attitudes, and aggressive/violent behavior with two independent samples using a different measure of the Big 5 for each sample. We chose to focus on aggressive and violent behavior for this study. On the aggression continuum (see Anderson & Huesmann, 2003), physical aggression (e.g., hitting) lies before violent behavior (e.g., hitting with a weapon). Because the potential consequences may be more severe for violent offenders compared to aggressive offenders, the specific relations between the Big 5 and these behaviors may differ.