http://ethology.

eu/aggressive-behavior-inheritance-and-environment/
Aggressive behaviorinheritance and environment
by Roger Abrantes


These two dogs are both equally self-confident (showing equal dominant behavior). Any aggressive behavior
deriving from this situation will not be reactive-impulsive, but instrumental (photo from dog time.com).

In an earlier blog, we dealt with the definition of aggressive behavior. Today, we will analyze types of
aggressive behavior and their correlation with genetics. Even though we came up with a strong definition of
aggressive behavior, we should not think that all matters are resolved. In the following, to make it shorter,
we will use aggression and aggressive behavior interchangeably. When studying human aggression, it is
common to subdivide it into two types: (1) instrumental aggression, which is purposeful or goal-oriented;
and (2) reactive-impulsive aggression which is elicited by loss of emotional control and often manifests itself
as uncontrollable or inadequate actions.

Let us note that, Aggression differs from what is commonly called assertiveness, although the terms are
often used interchangeably among lay people (as in phrases such as an aggressive salesperson in Quadri
and Vidhates words. They also state, Predatory or defensive behavior between members of different species
may not be considered aggression in the same sense. I would go a step further and claim that these are not
to be considered aggressive behavior in any sense.

This dog shows self-confident (dominant) aggressive behavior. This is instrumental aggressive behavior
(photo from dog-adoption-and-training-guide).

A distinction in types of aggressive behaviors is between (1) pro-active (also controlled and
instrumental) and (2) reactive-impulsive. The former is not an end in itself, only the means to achieve a goal.
There are no strong emotions involved. On the contrary, its effects depend on calculated and well-timed
action. The latter has no goal in itself and is marked by intense emotions. In short, researchers of aggressive
behavior in children have found it useful to distinguish between reactive (impulsive) from proactive
(instrumental) aggression.

Modern frustration-aggression theoryclaims that anger is a reaction to an aversive experience, including
frustration. It emphasizes the importance of moral violation as justifying the expression of aggressive
behavior.

The question is whether we also find these tyes of aggressive behavior in other animals than Homo
sapiens sapiens. Being an evolutionary biologist and a good Darwinist, you know that I am always extremely
suspicious of any statement claiming that any trait is only found in one single species. The odds of that
happening are worse than of winning the big lottery.

This dog shows insecurity and aggressive behavior. This may be reactive-impulsive aggressive behavior, but
may also be learned behavior (photo by petexpertise.com).

Do animals other than humans have morality and will they fight for a cause? This is a difficult question
because as far as I am concerned, I cannot envisage any way of verifying it. In that sense, some would even
call it a meaningless question. Let us analyze the evidence we have. We have evidence that some animals
show empathy and altruism, widely recognized as conditions for morality. Shermer points out that humans
and other social animals share the following characteristics: [] attachment and bonding, cooperation and
mutual aid, sympathy and empathy, direct and indirect reciprocity, altruism and reciprocal altruism, conflict
resolution and peacemaking, deception and deception detection, community concern and caring about what
others think about you, and awareness of and response to the social rules of the group.

However, we can account for all these characteristics in terms of evolutionary costs and
benefits and using models based on evolutionarily stable strategies. We dont need to invent a new
term, morality, to explain that. Therefore: if humans show moral behavior, so do other species albeit
differently. What we might need to concede is that sometimes quantitative differences amount to a
qualitative difference, and hence humans showing these traits in such a high degree justifies us coining a
new term, morality.

This dog (to the right) shows learned aggressive behavior. It may be impulsive-reactive, but it does not need
to be (photo by onegreenplanet.org).

If that is the case (and Im only theorizing), it makes sense to label some human behavior as moral, and to
disregard the possible morality in other animals (unless new discoveries enlighten us differently).

If it does not make sense to analyze the behavior of other animals than humans in terms of morality, then it
follows that we can as well neglect reactive-impulsive aggression caused by violation of moral rules in those
other animals.

However, we cannot dismiss the same behavior caused by loss of emotional control because other
animals than humans can also lose control over their emotions. The difficult part here is, as always, the
term emotion, which is vague and, therefore, one that biologists prefer to do without.

What is an emotion? According to Schacter, an emotion is a [] a positive or negative experience that is
associated with a particular pattern of physiological activity caused by hormones, neurotransmitters,
dopamine, noradrenaline, serotonin and GABA. We find all these in some animals other than humans;
therefore, if we can accept the above definition of emotion, we must concede that if we can show emotional
behavior, so can they.

The only way in which it makes sense when dog people speak of dogs being reactive (meaning they
growl or bite someone) is this: those dogs display reactive-impulsive aggressive behavior. It is still by all
means aggressive behavior, just one type that may or may not exist in some considerable degree in other
animals than humans depending on whether I am right or wrong in my theorizing.

Recognizing and identifying reactive-impulsive aggression correctly may be advantageous because
research shows that it may be easier deterred than instrumental aggressive behavior. Reactive-impulsive
aggression appears to result from a distorted perception of competition, not realizing that there are evading
routes, and enhanced by the inability to control the associated emotions. There is also evidence that reactive-
impulsive aggression (contrary to instrumental aggression) is related to low levels of serotonin in the brain.
On the other hand, classifying all canine aggressive behavior as reactive-impulsive, as it seems to be the
practice these days, may be a fatal mistake with extremely severe consequences.

A dog displaying aggressive behavior can show it self-confidently (what we, ethologists, call dominant
behavior) or insecurely (showing submissive behaviornot fearful). The former is excluded from being
reactive-impulsiveit is instrumental and goal-oriented. The latter may be if the dog does not realize that a
clearer display of submissive behavior or flight would solve the problem. This kind of aggressive
behavior may be: (1) the consequence of poor imprinting and socialization (the dog simply didnt learn how
to solve social conflicts), (2) the result of inadvertently reinforced behavior. Dog owners reinforce their dogs
reactive-impulsive aggressive behavior attempting to do what they call calming down the dog. The dog
growls, they say, quiet (or similar), the dog looks at them, and they reinforce that with a treat and a good
job. It doesnt take many repetitions for the dog to learn that displaying aggressive behavior provides it with
attention and food.

The term reactive does not belong to ethology, which classifies behavior by function. I dont know how
it came into dog training, but I suspect a psychologist introduced it and people liked it because apparently it
sounded better to say, My dog is reactive than My dog shows aggressive behavior. Ironically, the term
places the full responsibility for the unwanted behavior on the ownersreactive-impulsive aggression is
either the result of poor imprinting/socialization or of inadequate training.

Is aggressiveness inherited?

Heritability studies attempt to determine whether a trait passes from parent to offspring. Some genetic
lines in many species of birds, dogs, fish, and mice seem to be more prone to aggression than others.
Through selective breeding, we can create animals with a tendency to show more aggressive behavior.

Some aggressive behavior is evolutionary advantageous, and some is not and may be an impediment
to social cohesion. Maynard Smith says that it is not surprising for aggressiveness to have a strong genetic
correlation given the high likelihood of both potentially positive and negative selective discrimination
throughout evolution.

Research has uncovered many factors that contribute to aggressive behavior. Disruption of the
serotonin system is a highly significant feature in predisposing aggression. There is a correlation between
testosterone levels and aggression. Extremely low levels of blood sugar (hypoglycemia) may elicit
physiological changes and aggressive behavior.

Most researchers agree that we must consider the influence of genes, not in isolation, but as
functioning in the whole genotype, as well as the effect of the environment. Future research in the genetics
of aggressive behavior may very well focus on epigenetic factors.

Doubtless, most behavior traits, except simple reflexes, contain a genetic plus an environmental
component. No behavior will develop without the appropriate genetic blueprint and no behavior (again except
for a few simple patterns) will show in the absence of the right environmental stimuli.

It is probable that each individual filters and selects stimuli from a wide range in its habitat according to
its genetics, thereby creating its uniqueness of experiences. As Bock and colleagues say, we create our own
environment. I have no reason to suspect that the same does not happen with other animals.

References

Akert, R. M., Aronson, E., & Wilson, T.D. (2010). Social Psychology (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
Blair R. J. R. (2004) The roles of orbital frontal cortex in the modulation of antisocial behavior. Brain
Cogn55:198208.
Bock, Gregory R. and Goode, Jamie A. (eds.) (1996). Genetics of Criminal and Antisocial Behavior.
Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Craig, I. W., Halton, K. E. (2009). Hum Genet (2009) 126:101113
Javeed, Q. S. and Vidhate. N. J. (2012). A Study Of Aggression And Ego Strength Of Indoor Game Players
And Outdoor Game Players. Indian Streams Research Journal, Volume 2, Issue. 7, Aug 2012.
Maynard Smith, J, Harper, D. G. C., Brookfeld, J. F. Y. (1988) The Evolution of Aggression: Can Selection
Generate Variability? Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci 319:557570
McCauley, C. (2000) Some Things Psychologists Think They Know about Aggression and Violence.
In Teaching About Violence, Vol 4. Spring 2000)
Miles DR, Carey G (1997) Genetic and environmental architecture of human aggression. J Pers Soc
Psychol72:207217.
Nelson, Randy Joe (ed.) (2006). Biology of Aggression. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Schacter, Daniel L. (2011). Psychology Second Edition. New York: Worth Publishers.
Shermer, M. (2004). The Science of Good and Evil. New York: Times Books.
Siever LJ (2008) Neurobiology of aggression and violence. Am J Psychiatry 165:429442
Tremblay R. E., Hartup W. W., Archer, J. (2005) Developmental origins of aggression. Guildford Press, New
York.
Yamamoto H, Nagai K, Nakagawa H (1984) Additional evidence that the suprachiasmatic nucleus is the
center for regulation of insulin secretion and glucose homeostasis. Brain Res 304:237241.