| Eight studies investigated the relationship between implicit theorist ideology of human nature and aggression. Implicit theories of human attributes are dynamic meaning systems used by people to understand, interpret, and predict their social world. A person who believes human nature is fixed is called an entity theorist because s/he perceives personality as a stable entity that does not change. A person who believes human nature is more flexible and malleable is called an incremental theorist because s/he believes personality can change across time or across different situations. The present research extends the implicit theory research into the domain of aggression by identifying how entity theorists perceive and interpret the same events or stimuli differently than incremental theorists based upon the perceiver's underlying implicit theories. Study 1a and 1b investigated trait-based aggression using a wide variety of established measures of aggression and aggression-related constructs. Study 2 then investigated state-based aggression using imagined vignettes as the provocation manipulation. Study 3a through 3c extend this line of research by having the participants experience a real immediate provocation, and also extend this line of research into utilizing a wider range of aggression measures. Study 4a and 4b then directly manipulated implicit theories to test the causal role of implicit theories in aggressive responding. In total, the eight studies tested both trait and state aggression using different paradigms, methodologies, and subject populations. The combined result was consistent support for trait-based aggression, such that entity theorists reported increased anger and hostility after being provoked, increased revenge planning, and increased physical and verbal aggression, but the aggression was only directed at the actual provocateur, not third parties who were innocent or shared a group relationship with the provocateur. In terms of state-based aggression, the combined result was mixed support for implicit theory ideology influencing aggressive responding, such that using imagined vignettes and a real immediate provocation produced the hypothesized relationship between implicit theory ideology and aggression, but the effect did not replicate with new measures of aggression and did not replicate when directly manipulating implicit theory ideology. |
