{"title":"对心理弹性过程以及攻击的反应性和主动性功能的多样本调查","authors":"John J. Donahue , Brittany Buck , Kapil Chauhan","doi":"10.1016/j.jcbs.2024.100721","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p><span>Both theory and empirical research support the application of the psychological flexibility model to understanding aggressive behavior. However, methodological limitations persist, as studies have generally relied upon a single measure of psychological inflexibility, and measures of aggression typically fail to differentiate aggressive behavior based on function. This limits our ability to understand how specific dimensions of psychological (in)flexibility relate to functional differences in aggression. To extend this line of research, the primary aim of this study was to examine the associations between proactive and reactive aggression, and multiple measures of psychological (in)flexibility processes, across three samples: one undergraduate (</span><em>N</em> = 116) and two online community samples (<em>N</em> = 262 and <em>N</em><span><span> = 317). Further, we examined the unique contribution of psychological (in)flexibility processes in the prediction of aggression, over and above negative affect-related variables. Proactive and reactive aggression was assessed across all samples, with individual samples also responding to various measures of anger, negative affect, negative urgency, experiential avoidance, cognitive fusion, valued living, or a multidimensional measure of psychological flexibility. Correlational and </span>regression analyses revealed that inflexibility processes were generally associated with reactive aggression, but more inconsistent associations were found with proactive aggression in multivariable models. Flexibility processes, on the other hand, exhibited inconsistent and sometimes unexpected associations with aggression. The psychological flexibility model appears useful in understanding different functions of aggressive behavior, however additional research is necessary to clarify the nature of discrepancies within and between samples.</span></p></div>","PeriodicalId":47544,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science","volume":"31 ","pages":"Article 100721"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A multi-sample investigation of psychological flexibility processes and reactive and proactive functions of aggression\",\"authors\":\"John J. Donahue , Brittany Buck , Kapil Chauhan\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jcbs.2024.100721\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p><span>Both theory and empirical research support the application of the psychological flexibility model to understanding aggressive behavior. However, methodological limitations persist, as studies have generally relied upon a single measure of psychological inflexibility, and measures of aggression typically fail to differentiate aggressive behavior based on function. This limits our ability to understand how specific dimensions of psychological (in)flexibility relate to functional differences in aggression. To extend this line of research, the primary aim of this study was to examine the associations between proactive and reactive aggression, and multiple measures of psychological (in)flexibility processes, across three samples: one undergraduate (</span><em>N</em> = 116) and two online community samples (<em>N</em> = 262 and <em>N</em><span><span> = 317). Further, we examined the unique contribution of psychological (in)flexibility processes in the prediction of aggression, over and above negative affect-related variables. Proactive and reactive aggression was assessed across all samples, with individual samples also responding to various measures of anger, negative affect, negative urgency, experiential avoidance, cognitive fusion, valued living, or a multidimensional measure of psychological flexibility. Correlational and </span>regression analyses revealed that inflexibility processes were generally associated with reactive aggression, but more inconsistent associations were found with proactive aggression in multivariable models. Flexibility processes, on the other hand, exhibited inconsistent and sometimes unexpected associations with aggression. The psychological flexibility model appears useful in understanding different functions of aggressive behavior, however additional research is necessary to clarify the nature of discrepancies within and between samples.</span></p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47544,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science\",\"volume\":\"31 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100721\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212144724000012\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212144724000012","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
理论和实证研究都支持应用心理灵活性模型来理解攻击行为。然而,方法论上的局限性依然存在,因为研究通常依赖于单一的心理不灵活性测量方法,而攻击行为的测量方法通常无法根据功能来区分攻击行为。这限制了我们了解心理(不)灵活性的特定维度与攻击行为功能差异之间的关系。为了扩展这一研究方向,本研究的主要目的是通过三个样本:一个本科生样本(N = 116)和两个网络社区样本(N = 262 和 N = 317),检验主动和被动攻击行为与心理(不)灵活性过程的多种测量之间的关联。此外,我们还研究了心理(不)灵活性过程在预测攻击行为方面的独特贡献,以及消极情绪相关变量的作用。我们对所有样本的主动和被动攻击行为进行了评估,各个样本还对愤怒、负面情绪、负面紧迫感、体验性回避、认知融合、有价值的生活或心理灵活性的多维度测量进行了回应。相关分析和回归分析表明,缺乏灵活性的过程一般与反应性攻击行为有关,但在多变量模型中发现,与主动性攻击行为的关联并不一致。另一方面,灵活性过程与攻击行为的关联不一致,有时甚至出乎意料。心理弹性模型似乎有助于理解攻击行为的不同功能,但有必要开展更多研究,以澄清样本内部和样本之间差异的性质。
A multi-sample investigation of psychological flexibility processes and reactive and proactive functions of aggression
Both theory and empirical research support the application of the psychological flexibility model to understanding aggressive behavior. However, methodological limitations persist, as studies have generally relied upon a single measure of psychological inflexibility, and measures of aggression typically fail to differentiate aggressive behavior based on function. This limits our ability to understand how specific dimensions of psychological (in)flexibility relate to functional differences in aggression. To extend this line of research, the primary aim of this study was to examine the associations between proactive and reactive aggression, and multiple measures of psychological (in)flexibility processes, across three samples: one undergraduate (N = 116) and two online community samples (N = 262 and N = 317). Further, we examined the unique contribution of psychological (in)flexibility processes in the prediction of aggression, over and above negative affect-related variables. Proactive and reactive aggression was assessed across all samples, with individual samples also responding to various measures of anger, negative affect, negative urgency, experiential avoidance, cognitive fusion, valued living, or a multidimensional measure of psychological flexibility. Correlational and regression analyses revealed that inflexibility processes were generally associated with reactive aggression, but more inconsistent associations were found with proactive aggression in multivariable models. Flexibility processes, on the other hand, exhibited inconsistent and sometimes unexpected associations with aggression. The psychological flexibility model appears useful in understanding different functions of aggressive behavior, however additional research is necessary to clarify the nature of discrepancies within and between samples.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Contextual Behavioral Science is the official journal of the Association for Contextual Behavioral Science (ACBS).
Contextual Behavioral Science is a systematic and pragmatic approach to the understanding of behavior, the solution of human problems, and the promotion of human growth and development. Contextual Behavioral Science uses functional principles and theories to analyze and modify action embedded in its historical and situational context. The goal is to predict and influence behavior, with precision, scope, and depth, across all behavioral domains and all levels of analysis, so as to help create a behavioral science that is more adequate to the challenge of the human condition.