Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31404138›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychiatry2019

On the Complexity of Aggressive Behavior: Contextual and Individual Factors in the Taylor Aggression Paradigm.

Carmen Weidler, Ute Habel, Philippa Hüpen, Dilsa Akkoc, Frank Schneider, Julie A Blendy, Lisa Wagels

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychiatry, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Carmen WeidlerDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Faculty of Medicine, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Ute HabelDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Faculty of Medicine, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Philippa HüpenDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Faculty of Medicine, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Dilsa AkkocDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Faculty of Medicine, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Frank SchneiderDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Faculty of Medicine, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.
Julie A BlendyDepartment of Systems Pharmacology and Translational Therapeutics, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, PA, United States.
Lisa WagelsDepartment of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, Faculty of Medicine, RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As many paths lead to aggression, understanding which situations and which person-specific traits facilitate or impede aggressive behavior is crucial. Provocation is among one of the most frequently reported predictors of aggressive behavior. However, it remains unclear whether the reaction to provocation is universal across different forms of aggression and whether individuals differ in their reactivity to such signals. Using the Taylor Aggression Paradigm (TAP), we investigated the influence of individual and contextual factors on physical and non-physical aggression in healthy men and women. The impact of trait aggression, sex, provocation, and the success of a competition against a fictitious opponent on aggressive behavior was examined in three different versions of the TAP. While equal provocation and punishment modalities were used in the first two versions, monetary deductions in the first and heat stimulus in the second study, the third experiment used non-physical provocation to trigger physical punishment. Trial-by-trial analyses revealed that provocation, independent of its specific nature, is a strong predictor for aggressive behavior, especially in highly aggressive participants. Although women initially showed less aggression than men, sex differences were diminished under prolonged, increasing provocation when provocation and punishment modality were identical. Only when modalities diverged, women, compared with men, were more hesitant to punish their opponent. These results, thus, extend evidence that women show lower levels of aggression under low provocation. However, high levels of provocation have similar effects on males' and females' reactive aggressive behavior across different forms of aggression. When competing for money, losing against the fictitious opponent was functioning as an additional provocative signal stimulating aggressive responses. Differences in aggressive responding have to be interpreted in the context of the specific type of provocation and aggression that is investigated since these modalities are shown to interact with individual characteristics.

Indexed as

aggressionaggressive behaviorprovocationsex differencesTaylor Aggression Paradigm

Identifiers

PMID31404138
PMCPMC6669806

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.