 Yesterday, we had discussed up to this point, where we had taken two of the UN reports, trying to suggest that violence, aggressive forms of behavior, they are actually learnt. If you live in a society, where certain things are practiced, you realize that you do not see the problem in terms of practicing those things. Although other societies might not appreciate it or within the society itself, some isolated pockets might not appreciate it, but still a large number of people do not see problem in it. And we saw the example, where women themselves were advocating that, if husbands physically abuse them, they become violent, they become very aggressive, they have a justification. And surprisingly, unwed adolescents, they also started saying yes, yes, there is a reason for doing all this. Today, we are coming to a little different thing. See, till now throughout this course, what we have been doing is that we have been exclusively focusing on the micro aspect of human behavior. For the first time in this course, we are taking a macro view also. And we are not only right now looking at aggressive behavior shown by individual, rather we are also looking at aggressions shown by a large number of people in a group. This type of approach we will also take little later, when we will come to displaced forms of aggressive behavior. Now, you can think of aggression as an approach behavior, that is how you look at such type of behavior in terms of their directionality component of emotion. Emotion, all basic emotions are explained in terms of their valencies, so positive or negative. Remember, when we were talking about emotion, appraisal of emotion and how they facilitate our adjustment, there also we had divided emotion in as goal congruent and goal incongruent emotions. And goal congruent emotions were nothing, they were all positive emotions and all goal incongruent emotions were negative emotions. So, in negative and positive is basically the valency that you can attribute to an emotion. The second part of characteristic that you can attach to the basic emotion is the directionality component. So, whether that state of emotion makes you approach or does it make you withdraw. So, approach, avoidance is the directionality component in emotion and aggression by default is considered to be of the nature, which actually makes you impulsively approach the source of anger. And this approach behavior could be of two types. One can show hostile aggression or one can show something what is called as cultural aggression. Now hostile aggression basically involves anger and behavior, which is basically intended to inflict harm upon either a person or a group or their belongings. So, you develop hostility towards an individual, you would become hostile towards a group or if you do not find the individual or the group, then you start destroying their properties, their belongings. Because you somewhere attach the belongings of an individual or a group as their own properties and therefore, if something which is used by a group say for example, place of worship for example. Now, place of worship usually does not belong to an individual, it is collectively shared by a large number of people who share that type of belief and practice. But when you destroy a place of worship, you are hurting the sentiments of people who actually have invested their belief and practice in that place of worship. And human beings they understand this and therefore, if I cannot show my hostility directly on you, then I will take pleasure in harming your properties, which in turn will psychologically be equally boosting for me, because I have finally created some harm to you. It could be seen in no very small, small forms where say you turn extremely angry and in that state of anger you just go and hit the other individual. When you have a fight between two halls, I think one semester back you had one such phenomenon is that so? Do not tell me no. So, you take pride in getting associated with a hall. So is it hall 2 and is it the G H and somebody had said something so will go in a group and I do not consider that it is a fight between X and Y, but all those who share the space with X and all those who share the space with Y and a big clash. This is common in all academic institutions. In IITs of course, you see it at a very lower magnitude. In the university system usually where you have a large number of student population is staying inside the campus, no it is a huge problem between departments, between hostels, between faculties, so faculties means one group of departments versus the other group of departments, no huge things. And you take pride in doing many things, including the fact that you would like to show your hostile aggression because the examination paper had questions which were not taught to you and hence you go to the principal's office, you do not find the principal and it is a very common scene. You break two, three flower pots there, burning of fire, these tubes, you put tubes and tires on fire and block roads, very common, so these are considered to be hostile aggression and hostile aggression usually has a set pattern, but today what we would also discuss is what is called as cultural aggression. Now cultural aggression may take the form of vigorous attack on other people or situations with an intention of controlling, manipulating or modifying them, so this is not a small form of hostile aggression. In hostile aggression what do we do, say if I turn hostile I just go fire at you and then it is over, cultural aggression is far ahead of it, no. So this is basically a planned vigorous attack on the other group with a much bigger goal and the goal is that I want to control the other people, I want to manipulate other people, I want to modify other people. Most of the episodes of group violence, these things are not good to here, but if you analyze the conflict between different disciples within the same religion, Hinduism had tough fight between the disciples of the Vaishnavites and the Shaivites, no. If you read the history of religion in this country, you will find that it was not only a ideological fight, it went even to a fight of a physical nature. In Islam you, till date you find the fight between the Shias and the Sunnis, protestants and Catholics had long history of conflict and remember all these religions, their internal conflicts were not, it started with ideological differences, difference in terms of practices, but later on it did not remain, did not remain restricted only to the practices, rather it went to a forceful implementation of my way of life. Most of the retaliations you would find that they are of this nature, where the whole tendency is to not only put other person into captive custody, but to ensure that they would lead the life that I want. Now, Saddam Hussein is gone, but if you read the whole history of how the Iraqi forces were trying to manipulate and control the kurdh population, there is a whole long history there, I am not good at history therefore I cannot tell you the nuances of it, but broadly I know that yes, there the whole attempt was know that either you accept my way of life or I threatened that you will lose your life, many such places in the world you would find that after the dictator was no more, people have unearthed mass graves there and these were the people who were in conflict with the powerful individuals on the other side. So, cultural aggression that way is know far more you know dangerous compared to having a hostile form of aggression between two individuals or two groups of individuals, because when you engage in hostile aggression you do not want to manipulate and control the other individual, you do not want to modify the behavior of the individual forever. The worst perhaps in it is very common in war histories, but the worst example know I that comes to my mind is when the Bosnia-Argegovina conflict was on, all the wars have a dark history not only of killing, bloodshed, of atrocities, but also of know sexual crime against women. This is uniform all wars when the Bosnia-Argegovina conflict was on, one of the army officers was later on know made to face trial in the court, because what he had done was something that was unheard of in the history of war. In the war history what you find is that group of women put captive by a group of soldiers engaged in war and they would be used as comfort women for the sexual gratification of the soldiers. This is uniformly true for all wars, but here what happened there was this know decorated officer who took charge of a city of the enemy campsite and then he asked his soldiers to drag all the women to a common place road a square there and said it was an order from the higher authority that now my soldiers would rape the women here on the road. He was a witness know so as a commanding officer he was a witness to it, he gave this command women were raped on the road in open and then all these women were taken into custody they were checked by these military doctors if they have been impregnated or not. All women who later on the doctors confirmed that they are pregnant were kept in custody they were given proper diet so that they can give birth to babies during the trial in the court when he was asked that why did you do this weird act and you know what did he say he said that this is victory forever according to me and how do you define victory forever he said that know when these children will be born they will never ever dare to look at our country because they would know that they are born of this episode I want the whole of the enemy camp to be like that one can go up to this weird extent know now when you decide that you would sprinkle chemical so that people who are in a given geographical locality they will all perish they will all die when you ensure that you will know every Friday when a group of people who do not practice the faith that I believe in when they assemble for a mass prayer I will every Friday I will explode a bomb there okay so in limited court I will kill them okay each weekday a time will come in 30 years when none of my opponent will remain okay when you decide that you will know get rid of your enemies saying that they are your own babies okay these are all the weird forms of no showing aggression okay and this is basically driven by the fact that you want to manipulate control okay the other group now what is interesting is that most of the aggressive behavior are result of social practices that reinforce such activity and therefore it is neither hostile in motivation nor defensive in outcome so basically suggesting the same thing that if you have been born and brought up in a hostile environment in an aggressive environment for you expression of aggression is not defense for you your aggressive behavior is not hostile okay because you know that this is the way of life okay for others it might not be so but for you this is what it is now the primitive reaction to restricted bodily movement is usually frustration okay and frustration no usually will reflect itself into some form of an aggressive retaliation if you look at small babies no just hold their hand firmly means basically you do not allow them the opportunity of free movement of their body part whether it is hand whether it is foot and then you realize that the baby will start no making attempts to free himself or herself and if you still do not allow dad the baby will start crying okay and here crying is basically asking for an external help because I want to enjoy the freedom of free bodily movement this is something that you realize to be true for all animals no all animals would love to be free okay and therefore we should revisit our whole construct of having pets okay or even putting them into some captive location what usually happens is that gradually with more and more of the worldly experience you realize that the form of aggression the reflection of frustration and aggression gradually changes okay in the beginning you remember we had discussed in the definition that it could be action oriented it could be verbal it could be even symbolic okay later on we will know even discuss no there could be a case of displacement of anger okay that you are angry at me but you shout at somebody else so you displace your anger even those possibilities are there but then this whole idea of enjoying freedom is something that we never lose and my guess is perhaps this is the reason perhaps why human beings in their whole history wherever they were they develop this strategy of handcuffing people so if you violate the norm those who have the authority of implementing the norms they will get you handcuffed okay you would be put in prison so basically it is telling you that you won't be given the freedom of free bodily movement okay you won't be given the freedom of say enjoying your autonomy of expression freedom of movement okay freedom of movement is something that you would realize people usually do not want to compromise with okay and therefore you realize that more and more of frustration gradually comes when you start cutting off these freedom so if you do not allow people to express themselves if you do not allow people to move the way they want okay you realize that it becomes a source of frustration for people okay if you are told that do not it is an advisory that do not carry mobile phones to the classroom okay advisory means this is just no a piece of suggestion you are free to accept it you are free not to accept it okay I am sure that all of you will try to avoid this advisory you are told that you are supposed not to carry mobile phones to the class this is an office order okay and still you would realize that group of students would try their best carrying the mobile phone this is true even in the jails also no you have rates in the jails where you have SIM card batteries mobile phones confiscated by the jail authorities something which is not allowed is found so this basically means that when you restrict the freedom of individuals they developed certain degree of frustration and in their attempt to bypass the frustration to get rid of it they might use the other strategies and now we come to an interesting hypothesis given by doh lord and his colleagues very old hypothesis called frustration aggression hypothesis which basically says that you have sources in your environment that frustrates you and your frustration actually fuels your aggression okay so it explains frustration as the state that emerges when circumstances interfere with a goal response so you have a goal to achieve okay and while you are processing toward your goal a barrier is put in between this barrier irritates you and the moment you are frustrated it adds to your anger okay other studies who have tried to know validate if frustration aggression hypothesis is true have found very interestingly that this frustration aggression relationship it is contingent upon your proximity to the goal how close you are to the goal so if I am just at the starting point I have just started and there was a barrier then I am not that frustrated and therefore I am not that aggressive but if I come close to the goal and then you put a barrier then it is a great source of aggression to me and therefore I become more angry coming to when I was explaining question to her know that why I do not compute average okay if you are know if this the contingency between the two the the goal and the frustration if it is no the distance is far off so today if I do not tell you what the average was but you see only the score or happy at least I had thought that even the corrected answer sheet won't come finally it has come back something is there if not 27 if not 30 at least 10 but something is there and the day when you are given the class average you forget what you got okay so you might remember I got something it is no 6.7 less than the average but it is okay but if you are given score you are given average then immediately you start getting involved into all types of conclusions this is basically the proximity situation know so the more and more proximity what to the goal higher is their degree of frustration I would like to deviate a bit there are very interesting studies in one of the interesting areas of psychology which is still very under researched aviation psychology okay now aviation psychology is still know it is a very very nice primitive phase not very good research is not well researched good research is but not well researched one very interesting example comes to my mind from the aviation psychology research this is in terms of the man machine interfaces know so when the pilot and the copilot when they fly their planes okay and their flight meets an accident now accident analysis has revealed two very interesting things from a psychological viewpoint one if the pilot is too dominant in nature so personality characteristics wise if the copilot is submissive and the pilot is aggressive dominant okay this can lead to an accident because there is a greater failure of coordination between the two so the input that the flight engineer and the copilot gives to the captain has a tendency to overrule it okay and two very interesting example from other research is that when the flights take off and when the pilots put the flight on the autopilot mode and when they watch the computer generated outcomes of the flight mechanism it has been realized that till halfway okay so if I have to travel from this place to that end okay till halfway the pilots show the tendency of accepting the outcome of the computer generated outcomes okay so if you will temperature balance aerodynamic outcomes know so you accept whatever the computer generated outcome shows you on the screen but if you cross halfway means you are more close to the landing port okay you have a tendency to recheck whether the computer is giving the correct outcome or not okay and that's the reason why you realize that most of the air crashes takes place after the flight has completed half its journey because after taking off if there is a possibility is the pilot show a tendency to return back to their place of origin okay but after halfway okay unless it is you know very very glaringly visible to the pilots that it will crash and therefore they will search for the nearby airports okay there is a tendency of negating refuting or doubly checking the outcomes of the computer generated systems okay so again it comes to how close you are to the goal more closer you are to the goal the more it frustrates you the far off you are you say chalo cholo here you leave it okay so if you are told that you have to qualify J and right in class 1 you are told this okay and you fail class 1 examination it won't hurt you okay J is too far off who knows what it is okay but say class 12 quota or Hyderabad two years there okay and then missed by few ranks no it's a great source of displeasure great source of discomfort okay so this is what frustration aggression hypothesis research shows that the more and more closer you are to the goal and the barrier doesn't allow you to achieve it higher is the degree of frustration higher is the degree of frustration more and more aggressive you become okay now as our behavior is susceptible to conditioning it is found at events sites sound or even the view in its form of signal related to the source of frustration can trigger a anger so it's not that if you have the barrier it should be a glaringly visible barrier okay so it could be even something that is a remotely connected to it that can also trigger that great sense of discomfort in you not a good example to quote here in the class there was a place in the northern part of India long back long long back when India had periodic history of communal riots every four six months there would be some communal riot in some part of India there was a sudden explosion of a communal riot in that locality many people died okay and then later on the superintendent of police of that very district was charged with the fact that he was basically you know taking sides of the majorities okay because what according to some of the reports what he had done was he asked the majority group to withdraw the aggressive minority was one side and then he asked the police force to open fire and many people died many many things took place and as you know how the court of law works in our country and how the civil servants they escape many many things okay they have the what to call certain things in their service that safeguards them against many many things so all that thing happened later on he confessed to somebody I would not disclose all those details he later on confessed to somebody that I do not regret what I did and he said that my elder brother was also a superintendent of senior superintendent of police when he was posted somewhere in western part of Uttar Pradesh and again during a communal riot he according to his story one of somebody from the minority group had come and assassinated his elder brother the senior superintendent of police at that time was killed in one of the riots here in western UP the younger brother later on becomes a police officer is posted far off minimum now 900 1000 kilometer away from that place okay ask the police force to open fire on one group and later on rationalizes that I do not regret giving such orders I have lost my own brother in one such communal riot now his brother was dead long back 17 years back okay brother was not there the same group of people who stabbed his brother was not there in this group but then you have that strong association so this is what it says no that it could be sight oh this is the same group this was the group that had killed my elder brother similar type of situation communal riot oh so same sound no there are some slogans oh the same slogan okay but very interestingly would realize that no such type of slogans for example need not always become the source of frustration for you it can no fuel energy in you also take for example when you have the group of armed forces okay and because they are in our country they are divided into regiments each regiment had its own slogan no for example no Har Har Mahadev for one regiment okay Jai Mahbhavani for the other regiment okay now you have these are basically religiously colored type of slogans but they are used by the armed forces and every time they do it okay before they take up their arm for fighting the enemy okay so this was all about this hypothesis how frustration and aggression gets club when we meet tomorrow we will continue with it