Bad news, bad times, and violence: The link between economic distress and aggression.
Abstract
Objective: The current research applied the general aggression model (GAM) to explain the relation between negative societal changes (e.g., indicators of a poor economy) on aggression-related outcomes. One correlational and one experimental study tested the relationships between these variables as well as possible mediating mechanisms. Method: In Study 1 (N 193), participants completed several measures to assess aggression, stress from current economic crises, and trait hostility. In Study 2( N 101), participants were randomly assigned to view stressful news videos (clips suggesting the economy is poor) or neutral news videos prior to completing state measures of stress and hostility. Results: Study 1 found significant positive relations between stress from negative societal changes and aggression, mediated by hostility. Study 2 showed that viewing stressful news videos increased state hostility, which was mediated by state levels of stress. Conclusions: Overall, results suggest that indicators of poor economic times are related to aggression and hostility. These findings offer theoretical implications for the utility of the GAM in explaining how societal-level shifts in economy-related variables can influence aggression levels at the individual level.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Exposure to distressing economic news instigates aggression.
“researchers continue to demonstrate how previously-unexplored influences, such as exposure to distressing economic news, instigate aggression (Barlett & Anderson, 2014).”
From An Integrative Terror Management Theory Perspective on Media Effects: A Model and 12 Hypotheses for Research (2016) · cites this paper as Barlett & Anderson, 2014
Cites
Anderson, C. A., Shibuya, A., Ihori, N., Swing, E. L., Bushman, B. J., Sakamoto, A., Rothstein, H. R., & Saleem, M. (2010) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0018251 · Cited by 2,048 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Hopwood, T. L., & Schutte, N. S. (2017) · Psychology of Violence · doi:10.1037/vio0000056 · Cited by 106 · see citing works
Perloff, R. M. (2016) · Studies in Media and Communication · doi:10.11114/smc.v4i1.1600 · Cited by 15 · see citing works
Wang, T., Wang, X., Jiang, T., Wang, S., & Chen, Z. (2021) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph18063170 · Cited by 9 · see citing works
- Authors
- Barlett, C. P., & Anderson, C. A.
- Venue
- Psychology of Violence
- Published
- 2014-07
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 309-321
- ISSN
- 2152-081X (ISSN-L)
- 2152-0828
- OpenAlex
- W2104428320
- Cited by
- 13
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2
- FWCI
- 2.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Psychology of Violence (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Bullying, Victimization, and Aggression
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
- Keywords
- economic hardship, aggression, hostility, stress, General Aggression Model, business news, economic crisis
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review