Children’s aggressiveness and bullying: problems and educational perspectives

FIRST PART
5
AGGRESSIVENESS: COMMUNICATION OR DEVIANCE?
Introduction
The  aggressive  behaviour  never  loses  importance  and  awake  always  the  attention  of  many 
scientists, educators and politicians all around the world.
Many  generations  of  researchers  investigate  and  furnish  their  interpretative  models  of  the 
phenomenon and are searching to discover the reason of aggressive behaviour, factors and solutions 
to stop it.
The fragmentation and mismatch among the various meaning often discourage who wants to study 
the problem.
For a long time the aggressive behaviour were limited into the domestic environment or into peers 
group; today we can find it even at schools and at urban level, the phenomenon assumes a greater 
and relevant dimension. 
In  the  complexity  of  our  society  and  among  all  the  factors  that  influence  this  behaviour,  the 
educational approach must study the aggressive behaviour with new theories. 
6
FIRST CHAPTER
1. DEFINITION OF AGGRESSIVENESS
The word“aggressiveness” is often used as an explanation that includes very different behaviours 
related to emotional status, cognitive processes, dominance, assertiveness and agonism.
It's not easy to find the real meaning of this wordbecause many different things can be intended 
with it; the conflict, the threat, the violent action. Nevertheless the wordcannot be 
eliminated even if, used in a lot of situations, it risks to lose its real meaning2.
As some other common words, “aggressiveness” has a lot of different meanings to fit needs of 
biologists, sociologists, neurologists and psychologists, moralists and psychiatrists. 
In the Latin language it means not only “attack” but also “to accuse”, “to turn to”, “to undertake” 
and  “to  start”.  Accordingly  to  this  also  in  the  Italian  language  “aggressiveness”  has  a  lot  of 
meanings. His analysis cannot ignore the great range of behaviours which is reffered to; “it will be 
important to detect a unique historical meaning of it, this wordis used to qualify both the mass-
media advertising and the repressive parents, both the preach from a pulpit and the arm assault. 
Aggressiveness  of  a  over-protective  mother,  aggressive  the  surgeon  that  prolongs  the  life  of 
someone, aggressive also the individual that runs away in front of life problems...this wordcould 
have not also negative meanings (violence and destruction) but also positive meanings as success, 
vitality. Not only audacity but also cowardliness, not only courage but also fear”3.
The  differences  and heterogeneities  of  these  definitions  depend on  having  considered  different 
points  of view: we can consider the aggressiveness as a part  of the personality,  an instinct,  an 
acquired or an observable behaviour4. 
Staats  defines  aggresiveness  as  an  intentional  behaviour  to  somebody  based  on  a  behaviour's 
function5.
This interpretation is today shared by various researchers, Meazzini describes the aggressiveness as 
a series of deliberated behaviours to produce a damage to people and structures; therefore it's not 
explained  as  an  image,  a  tought  or  another  internal  aspect  of  a  person.  Negative  toughts, 
imaginations and pushes to aggressiveness, if they are not actions or behaviours directed to damage 
someone else, could not be enough to define a person as “aggressive”. 
The  word“behaviour”  includes  both  words  and  actions;  the  aggressive  behaviour  is  sometimes 
2 BONINO S., SCAGLIONE G., “Aggressività e stili educativi familiari” in Psicologia contemporanea, 41, 1980
3 ZIPPO I., L'aggressività, Roma, Bulzoni, 1979, pg. 12
4 MARINI F., MAMELI C., Il bullismo nelle scuole, Roma, Carocci, 1999, pg. 29
5 STAATS A.W., Il comportamento sociale, Firenze, Barbera, 1981, pg. 33
7
explained by cultural and individual criteria, for example, the curses in some cultures are considered 
aggressive behaviours in others not.6 
Bandura7 specifies that a behaviour is defined as “aggressive” in relation to the fisical structure, sex 
and other characteristics of the aggressor and not only regarding the behaviour itself; a boy which 
reacts with strenght to a frustrating situations is accepted, therefore able to defend him and give his 
reasons. If the same aggressive behaviour is made from a girl she becomes an “aggressive girl”8
The same reaction of the aggressed persons is relevant to define a behaviour as “aggressive”; the 
word“intentionally”  denotes  that  an  action  can  be  defined  as  aggressive  only  when  the  action 
produces a damage somebody or something; also in this case it's possible to have interpretative 
problems. The word“damage” can be defined harmful or less in relation to the subject whom the 
action is taken; the concept itself excludes the possibility to determinate objectives parameters of 
evaluation: the tought of the attacked consitutes the only measure of the harmfulness of a behaviour. 
The  terms  “intentionally”  and  “damage”,  in  any  case,  are  important  in  the  definition  of  the 
aggressiveness. 
1.1. Phenomenology of the aggressive behaviour
To describe the phenomenon, Meazzini 9 proposes a classifications with five different points:
1. Active and passive behaviour
Aggressiveness can be revealed through words and actions that damage the other, in this case it's an 
active behaviour; the passive behaviour includes the actions that bring damage without the direct 
intervention of the aggressor.
2. Direct and indirect behaviour
The direct aggression uses physical, verbal or visual contact between aggressor and aggressed; the 
two  persons  are  in  contact.  The  indirect  aggressive  behaviour  includes  slanders,  gossips  and 
caluminies to others. 
3. Tools in aggressive actions
An  aggressive  behaviour  can  use:  verbal,  metaverbal  or  physical  tools;  in  the  first  case  the 
6 MEAZZINI P., “Scuola e aggressività” in Learning Press, H.D. 18-19, Roma, 1987
7 Cognitive psychology
8 BANDURA A., Teoria socialcognitiva del pensiero e dell'azione morale” in Rassegna di Psicologia, 1, 1996
9 MEAZZNI P., Trattato teorico pratico di terapia e modificazione del comportamento, Pordenone, Erip, 1984
8
language, in the second case posture and mimic and in the third case the physical aggression. 
4. Direction of aggressive behaviour
We can find directed and self-directed actions. The first ones are turned outside, toward persons or 
things,  the result  is  clear.  The aggressive self-directed behaviours instead are  classified as self-
injured behaviours. 
5. Object of the aggressive behaviour
The objects toward which the aggressive behaviour is directed can be an other person, an animal or 
a thing.
9
CHAPTER TWO
THEORETICAL STUDIES
The scientific books about aggressiveness, repeated behaviours and death instinct, called by Freud 
as Thanatos, are limited compared to publications on Eros (life-favoring instinct related to love and 
sexuality). So the teacher would obtain other important informations in other “sciences” related to 
pedagogy: biology, ethology, sociology, psychology, philosophy and ethics.
2.1 The determinism
The determinism believe to previously existing, predeterminated causes to aggressive behaviour. 
Education and individual humans have no influence on the future and therefore on behaviours. We 
can find the origin of the Determinism in eighteenth century. Cesare Lombroso was the pioneer; in 
his  book  “Criminal  man”  (1876)  he  describes  that  individuals  become  criminals  because  of 
abnormal  physical  and  psychic  causes,  he  eliminates  therefore  the  influence  of  free  will  and 
consciousness.  
The “positive school of criminology” declared that object of the law and rights of a society to 
prosecute criminals was not based on the responsibility of the criminal itself but on the danger 
produced.  The measure  of  punishment  should eliminate  the  danger  and not  being  used for  the 
rehabilitation of criminals. 
The  biological  comtemporary sciences  the  genetics,  the  endocrinology and neurophysiology of 
brain and nervous system refuse the simplicistic  explanation;  they support  other  theories  about 
aggressiveness. In the Seville Statement on Violence we read: “It is cientifically incorrect to say that 
humans have a 'violent brain'.” While we do have the neural apparatus to act violently (...)  there is 
nothing in our neurophysiology that compels us to react violently (...). It is scientifically incorrect to 
say that war or any other violent behaviour is genetically programd into our human nature (...).  It is 
scientifically incorrect to say that we have inherited a tendency to make war froma our animal 
ancestors. We conclude that biology does not condemn humanity to war, and that humanity can be 
freed from the bondage of biological pessimism (...) Just as 'wars begin in the minds of men', peace 
also begins in our minds. The same species who invented war is capable of inventing peace.”10
The italian neurologist Rita Levi Montalcini says on 1986 “The perpetuation of wars and massacres 
–  exclusive  activities  of  human  beeing  –  is  really  the  fatal  result  of  a  genetically  trasmitted 
10 “Seville Statement on Violence”, Spain, 1986
10
aggressiveness from father to children; ethologists and sociobiologists think so. In recent years they 
had so many supporters beyong media and press about their theory, it's really not cultural factors to 
emprove such behaviours among people?”11
With  these  words  the  author  argue  against  reductionism  supporting  genetic  factors  and 
cultural/education as import factors in the aggressive behaviour.
Reductionism has an influence on the sociobiology of Wilson. Every human or animal behaviour is 
genetically determinated,  all  social  behaviour  have a  biological  basis.  He argue that  all  human 
behaviour - ethic, religion, altruism, war and violence – are influenced by genes.
“The individual possibilities, the illusion of liberty, the creativity and the education itself have no 
more importance. Biology has her own motto “Quod scripsi scripsi”. The genetically programed 
man enter a Dante's hell, he has to “give up hope”. Wilson declares “Because of our genes, even in 
the  most  free  and egalitarian  future  society where  everybody men  and  wemen  have  the  same 
education and rights, the man continue to have a non equally importance in political life, in business 
and in sciences”.12
2.2. The ethological model
Ethology studies humans in their environment and in relations to other individuals. In the studies on 
aggressiveness ethologists include the intention in the action.13 
Lorenz defines in 1963 the aggressive behaviour in animals a “so-called bad thing”. The animal 
activates  aggressive  behaviours  for  five  purposes:  defence  and  surviving  -  of  himself,  pair  or 
progeny; for food and water supplies; for attractiveness and reproduction;  to preserve territory and 
ensure the survival; to establish a dominance hierarchy. 
Lorenz and Freud support the same vision of aggressiveness: the existence of a mechanism (but non 
instinct) of a spontaneous accumulation of aggressive energy that needs to be discharged. 
This positive evaluation of the aggressive behaviour in animals is compared to human behaviour: 
human being, unlike animals, kills individuals of the same species also if the other gives up, using 
weapons and intelligence; the animal attack another animal only for surviving. The man for Lorenz 
is not a sublime animal.14
Ethologists underline the dangerous comparison between animal and human being; Lorenz ha a 
suspicious view of human life, he warns about the difficulties in becoming a real man: “ Humanity 
11 MONTALCINI “Elogio della imperfezione”, Milan, Garzanti, 1987
12 ROVEDA P., “Tra aggressività costruttiva e problematica” in Pedagogia e vita 3, 1999
13 MARECELLI, BRACCONIERI, Adolescenza e psicopatologia, Milan, Masson, 1996, pg. 58
14 LORENZ K.,On Aggression. San Diego: Harcourt Brace, reprinted in 1966
11
is  unfortunately  what  it  is:  human  is  a  being  devoted  to  sublime,  he  needs  a  pysiological 
organisation of behaviour, he comes to convintion to kill other men in service to sublime”. The 
author proposes to follow the evolution of human being bridging the gap between constructive 
aggressiveness and destructive aggressiveness.
Irenäus Eibl-Eibesfeldt, learner of Lorenz, points out the importance of a cultural innovation. The 
difference between animal and human being is that men are not related to phylogenetic adaptation 
and need therefore an “orthopedic cultural bust”. This idea restrict the image of absolute freedom of 
human being,  but alternative more democratic and constructive ideals  to current aggressiveness 
should be given.15 
2.3.A sociological theory
Sociological theories bring valid interpretations on aggressiveness: human lacks and  environment 
were  we  live  encourage  destructive  and  aggressive  behaviour.  Economical  and  psychological 
family's conditions, the school, the city where we live especially in underdeveloped countries: all 
these factors indicate that a constructive coexistance and peace around the world is an utopia if we 
don't take several measures. 
Sociology  becomes  a  scientific  and  systematic  study of  the  society   based  on  documentation 
(descriptive  approach)  and on thinking  (interpretative  sociology),  both  have  the  conflict  as  the 
starting point to achieve peace. The conflict moves from the macrosocial environment to daylife 
and it is related to interactions with other people. The common saying “my freedom ends where 
yours begins” seems to go to a culture of narcissism (Lasch) or in a weak attitude (Vattimo) towards 
him/herselves and other individuals.16 More than thirty years ago Marcuse noted the progress of this 
style of life. “Where the whole environment becomes aggressive, the individual has to adapt him to 
the environment, it becomes itself more aggressive, more flexible and submitted”17
Social  psychology researches  lay emphasis  on  violence  between  adults  and  children,  men  and 
wemen. They consider blackmail and violence from children to parents, to teachers, to friends and 
assume that psycho-social factors and type of relationships established in the family, in the school 
and in the environment are the main relevant causes of “bullying” and aggressiveness. The child 
becomes “omnipotent” and than “insolent” since the first classes. Its relationships are lacking or 
inexistent. Sociology can bring a large contribute on theories but there is the danger to become the 
15  EIBL-EIBESFELDT I., Ethology of War, 1975
16 ROVEDA P., “tra aggressività e problematica” in Pedagogia e vita 3, 1999
17 MARCUSE H., “L’aggressività nella società industriale”, in CUTLER D.R. (a cura di), La
religione oggi, Milano, Mondadori, 1972, pg. 345
12
only explanation forgetting the complexity of human being: environment could be the manufacturer 
of the person abstracting from individuality. Every “ism” (biologism, psychologism, sociologism) is 
reductive, it confuses a conditioning with a determinism and block any educational approach.
2.4 The behaviourism
Watson and Skinner thought that psychology shouldn't have a global vision of human being but 
consider  stimuli  and  reinforcements  to  produce  goal-directed  behaviour  in  relation  to  the 
environment. The behaviourism reduces the pedagogy to a operant, systematic conditioning from 
adult  to child,  emphasis  the role  of mass  media in aggressiveness and gives importance to the 
dictators  wishes.  The  individuality  has  little  importance  in  the  social  life.  Nevertheless,  the 
behaviourism can be useful to think about education and aggressiveness. 
The frustration-aggression hypothesis
Dollard posited that “the occurrence of aggressive behaviour always presupposes the existence of 
frustration  and,  contrariwise,  that  the  existence  of   frustration  always  lead  to  some  form  of 
aggression”,  frustration  was  specified  has  the  thwarting  of  a  goal  response  of  somebody  to 
someone.18 This  theory  had  several  critics  because  it  was  not  founded  on  a  descriptive 
fenomenology and has no scientific explanations.
Miller changed the theory supporting that frustration instigates behaviour that may or may not be 
hostile or aggressive; everybody can react to frustration in a different way, not only with aggression. 
Instead of “frustration” Staats propose to use the word“negative emotional response”. Therefore the 
aggressiveness is not the response to frustration but a behaviour consequently to an bad situation.
Social learning theory19
Social learning theory focuses on the learning that occurs within a social and cognitive context and 
self monitoring. Every person has a limited biological structure and genetical factors are relevant in 
learning. The aggressive behaviour is learned by observing and imitating parents and friends and 
mass media; the environment and expectation of other people encourage negative behaviours.
Individuals  have  to  demonstrate  what  they  have  learned,  therefore  they  reproduce  the  same 
behaviour.  Awareness  and  expectations  of  future  reinforcements  can  have  a  major  effect  on 
18 DOLLARD J., DOOB I.,MILLER N., Frustration and aggression, 1939, Yale University Press, ISBN 0300004281
19 BANDURA A., Social learning theory, New York, Englewood Cliffs,1977, pg. 98
13