Psychological Predictors of Aggressive Behavior Among Men and Women

Abstract

This study examined the relationships among attitude toward violence, self-esteem, emotion dysregulation, anger, and aggression in community men and women and male inmates. Overall, 166 community men, 197 community women, and 100 male inmates completed a battery of questionnaires containing self-reported measures. Self-esteem and attitude toward violence were significant predictors of aggressive behavior, with emotion dysregulation mediating the relationship between self-esteem and the criterion variable. Anger mediated the relationship between emotion dysregulation and aggressive behavior only among community people. Among men, inmates reported a more favorable attitude toward violence, lower self-esteem, higher emotion dysregulation, more aggressive behaviors, and a lower tendency to get angry. Women showed a less favorable attitude toward violence, lower self-esteem, higher emotion dysregulation, and a higher tendency for anger than men, while no differences emerged for aggressive behavior. These findings suggest that self-related constructs and emotion regulation strategies represent key processes associated with aggressive behavior among all participants, while the role of anger is more prominent in community people. To reduce aggressive tendencies, treatment and prevention interventions might increase self-esteem, emotion regulation skills, and one’s ability to direct anger toward other goals. Moreover, programs aimed at changing attitudes toward violence could be useful.

Keywords

attitude toward violence self-esteem emotion dysregulation anger aggression

Introduction

Violence is a widespread phenomenon that affects millions of people and has severe effects on individuals’ health and lives (World Health Organization [WHO], 2014). It is a social problem involving subjective, interpersonal, and collective aspects (WHO, 2002), and it concerns all age groups and social classes. Although the terms violence and aggression are sometimes used interchangeably, a distinction between them does exist. While aggression can be defined as any behavior that is intended to harm another person who is motivated to avoid that harm, violence is as a specific form of aggression with the aim of inflicting extreme damage to another person (Anderson & Bushman, 2002). Therefore, violence can be considered as an aggression but not all aggressions can be defined as violence (Howells, Daffern, & Day, 2008)—only acts intended to cause extreme physical harm (van Lange, Rinderu, & Bushman, 2017). In the current study, we focused on aggressive behaviors, which can also include violent acts, to adopt a broad and comprehensive perspective on these issues. Much research has tried to identify antecedents of aggressive behaviors. Specifically, a considerable number of studies have examined the offender’s perspective, highlighting the importance of different psychological processes as potential antecedents of aggressive behavior (DeWall, Baumeister, Stillman, & Gailliot, 2007; Nunes, Herman, Maimone, & Woods, 2015). In the current study, we examined the role of attitude toward violence, self-esteem, self-regulation processes, and anger as predictors of aggressive behavior among community people and inmates. We also considered gender differences in these variables.

Aggressive behavior seems to be associated with a favorable attitude toward violence (Eckhardt, Samper, Suhr, & Holtzworth-Munroe, 2012; Nunes et al., 2015), which is in line with classical theories concerning the link between attitude and behavior (Ajzen, 1991; Ajzen & Fishbein, 1980; Fishbein & Ajzen, 1975). Stith, Rosen, McCollum, and Thomsen (2004) showed that perpetrators of intimate partner violence expressed more positive evaluations of violence in close relationships (Stith et al., 2004) and more biased attitudes toward aggressive stimuli than nonviolent individuals (Eckhardt et al., 2012). Wegner, Abbey, Pierce, Pegram, and Woerner (2015) found that perpetrators with a favorable attitude toward rape could be considered at risk of relapse. Significant gender differences can be identified with respect to attitude toward violence. According to Walker (2005), violence is more expected and more desirable for men than for women, since violent men are considered to be strong and virile. Specifically, men show a more favorable attitude toward violence than women. The prevalence of this attitude seems to be associated with specific behavioral outcomes among men, such as verbal and physical aggressive behavior (Walker, 2005). Walker and Gudjonsson (2006) found that “machismo” (which relates to embarrassment about backing down, justification of violence in response to threat and attack, violence as part of being male and strong, and the weakness associated with fear and nonviolence) was the strongest predictor of violence for men, while a proviolence attitude emerged as the best predictor of violence for women. Violent men tend to have stereotyped concepts of their roles and responsibilities, show masculine norms of dominance, which can make their attitude toward violence more favorable (Tager, Good, & Brammer, 2010).

Empirical evidence concerning the relationship between self-esteem and problematic behaviors (i.e., violent, aggressive, and criminal) is controversial (Ostrowsky, 2010; Walker & Knauer, 2011; Woessner & Schneider, 2013). Some research has highlighted that low self-esteem is associated with a disposition toward violence, delinquency, and aggression in adolescence (Donnellan, Trzesniewski, Robins, Moffitt, & Caspi, 2005; Wallace, Barry, Zeigler-Hill, & Green, 2012) and to intimate violence in adulthood (Papadakaki, Tzamalouka, Chatzifotiou, & Chliaoutakis, 2009). In contrast, other studies have identified a link between high self-esteem and violence (Gillespie, 2005). There are also studies in which no association between self-esteem and violence was shown (Lee, Bell, & Watson, 2007; Ostrowsky, 2010; Walker & Gudjonsson, 2006). To shed light on this issue, Walker and Bright (2009) carried out a systematic review of the literature on the relationship between self-esteem and violent behavior, which suggested that low—rather than high—self-esteem is associated with violence, though this relationship may be less robust in prison populations. Males consistently report higher self-esteem than females (Bleidorn et al., 2016). With respect to the relationship between self-esteem and violence, von Collani and Werner (2005) found that self-esteem was a significant predictor of aggressive behavior in both genders (lower levels of self-esteem predicted higher levels of aggressive behavior), though its effect was larger for women than for men. According to Ostrowsky (2010), gender differences with respect to self-esteem and violent behavior need to be further investigated.

Self-regulating processes seem to be important in determining aggressive behavior as well. Emotion regulation can be defined as the ability to modulate one’s own emotions consciously and unconsciously to respond adequately to the demands of the environment, through the use of appropriate strategies (Bargh & Williams, 2007; Mauss, Bunge, & Gross, 2007; Roberton, Daffern, & Bucks, 2012). The absence of this ability is commonly referred to by the term “emotional dysregulation” (Gratz & Roemer, 2004; Putnam & Silk, 2005); it seems to be significantly related to behavioral problems such as aggression, violence, criminality, and abuse among both adolescents (McLaughlin, Hatzenbuehler, Mennin, & Nolen-Hoekse, 2011; Sullivan, Helms, Kliewer, & Goodman, 2010; Zaremba & Keiley, 2011) and adults, mainly in intimate relationships (Tager et al., 2010). Adaptive emotion regulation strategies, such as reappraisal, emotional clarity, awareness, and emotional acceptance, are important for functional personal, affective, relational, and social adaptation (English, John, Srivastava, & Gross, 2012; Gratz & Roemer, 2004; Gross, 2007). In contrast, maladaptive strategies, such as avoidance of emotions/situations, suppression of emotions/thoughts, and rumination, produce weaker social relationships, lower social functioning, and difficulties in problem-solving (English & John, 2013; English et al., 2012; Henry, Rendell, Green, McDonald, & O’Donnell, 2008; Hong, 2007). Maladaptive emotion regulation strategies seem to play an important role in the activation of aggression and violence (reviewed in Roberton et al., 2012). For instance, Tull, Jakupcak, Paulson, and Gratz (2007) found that the use of avoidance and suppression strategies predicted aggressive behavior. Norstrom and Pape (2010) showed suppressed anger to be associated with individual involvement in violent behavior. Low levels of adaptive emotion regulation strategies seem to be associated with aggressive behaviors as well (Cohn, Jakupcak, Seibert, Hildebrandt, & Zeichner, 2010).

Although both men who abuse their partners (Tager et al., 2010) and female perpetrators of domestic violence (Goldenson, Geffner, Foster, & Clipson, 2007) tend to have difficulties controlling their emotions, many studies have indicated the presence of gender differences in the use of emotion regulation strategies. However, the results are somewhat inconsistent. Bender, Reinholdt-Dunne, Esbjørn, and Pons (2012) found that girls are more likely to lack emotional clarity, show nonacceptance of emotional responses, and have more limited access to emotion regulation strategies; boys reported a greater lack of emotional awareness, while no gender differences emerged in impulse control difficulty and difficulty engaging in goal-directed behaviors. A study by Marin Tejeda, Robles Garcia, Gonzalez-Forteza, and Andrade Palos (2012) showed that girls displayed a greater lack of emotional clarity and nonacceptance of emotional responses than boys, while the authors did not find gender differences with respect to emotional awareness and engagement in goal-directed behaviors. Giromini, Velotti, de Campora, Bonalume, and Cesare Zavattini (2012) highlighted no differences between men and women in emotion dysregulation strategies. In a study by Medrano and Trógolo (2014), gender differences emerged only for emotional clarity, with women showing higher scores than men. Although this body of research has produced some conflicting results, all the studies highlight greater difficulty with emotion regulation strategies for women than for men.

Notably, in a recent study carried out with both male inmates and community-dwelling men, Garofalo, Holden, Zeigler-Hill, and Velotti (2016) examined the relationship among self-esteem, emotion dysregulation, and aggression. Besides confirming the association between low self-esteem and aggression, the authors found support for the role of emotion dysregulation in mediating the association between the two variables. In other words, men with low levels of self-esteem appeared more likely to have problems regulating their emotions, which, in turn, could make aggressive and violent behavior easier. The study by Garofalo et al. (2016) was one of the first to show that emotion dysregulation can be responsible for the association between self-esteem and aggressive behavior not only among offenders but also among the general population. Moreover, the authors showed that anger can play the role of an antecedent of aggressive behavior among community men and offenders; interestingly, men and women do not tend to report differences with respect to anger (Archer, 2004). According to Garofalo et al. (2016), anger can mediate the effect of emotion dysregulation on physical aggression in both groups. Therefore, anger might be responsible for the relationship between dysregulation and aggressive behavior. Nevertheless, the authors did not examine the relationships among self-esteem, emotion regulation, anger, and aggressive behavior among women, so gender differences with respect to these processes remain almost unexplored.

The Current Study

Although many studies have highlighted associations among self-esteem, emotion dysregulation, anger, attitude toward violence, and aggression, there are only a few studies assessing these factors in an integrated and multidimensional research design. A notable exception is the study carried out by Garofalo et al. (2016); however, the authors neither included attitude toward violence in their analyses nor examined the links among self-esteem, emotion dysregulation, anger, and aggression in women.

The present study aimed to extend previous research findings by examining the relationships among attitude toward violence, self-esteem, emotion dysregulation, anger, and aggression among community-dwelling people of both genders and male inmates. Specifically, we hypothesized that self-esteem and attitude toward violence are significant predictors of aggressive behavior, with emotion dysregulation mediating the relationship between self-esteem and the criterion variable (Hypothesis 1), independent of gender. We also predicted that anger could mediate the relationship between emotion dysregulation and aggressive behavior (Hypothesis 2) in both community people and inmates.

In line with the literature, women were expected to have a less favorable attitude toward violence, lower self-esteem, and higher emotion dysregulation than men, while no gender differences with regard to anger were predicted. As we argued above, there are two main pathways through which aggressive behavior can occur: The first one is through self-esteem by way of emotion dysregulation and anger, and the second is through attitude. Therefore, lower self-esteem and problems with emotion regulation, which are predicted among women, might lead to more aggressive behavior; however, women’s attitude toward violence, which is generally predicted to be unfavorable, should reduce the probability that aggression takes place. As a consequence, no differences between men and women with respect to aggression behavior were hypothesized (Hypothesis 3).

As regards differences between community men and inmates, we predicted that inmates would show lower self-esteem, a more unfavorable attitude toward violence, higher emotion dysregulation, higher levels of anger, and greater aggressive behavior (Hypothesis 4).

Method

Participants

Community-dwelling men

Overall, 166 free men in the study had a mean age of 40.5 years (SD = 15.25); 22.9% had completed middle school, 50.6% had completed high school, and 26.5% had a master’s degree. Most were employed (68.1%) and unmarried (50.6%), and all of them lived in Italy.

Community-dwelling women

Overall, 197 women in the study had a mean age of 32.7 years (SD = 13.27); 11.7% had completed middle school, 41.6% had completed high school, and 46.7% had a master’s degree. Most participants were unmarried (68.6%). All of them lived in Italy and 44.7% were employed.

Inmates

There were 100 adult male inmate participants in the study, with a mean age of 43.4 years (SD = 12.6). Most had completed middle school (58%) or high school (29%); approximately half were unmarried (51%). Most of the prisoners had been convicted of a highly violent crime (54%), such as murder or sexual offense, 30% had been imprisoned for moderately violent crimes, such as robbery or theft, and 16% for less violent crimes (e.g., drug-related offenses).

Measurements

The participants completed a battery of questionnaires containing self-reported measures of attitude toward violence, self-esteem, emotion dysregulation, anger, and aggressive behavior. They also provided demographic data.

Attitude toward violence

To assess attitude toward violence, participants completed the Italian version (Puddu, Raffagnino, Matera, Nerini, & Stefanile, 2016) of the Acceptance of Violence subscale (AVS) of the Maudsley Violence Questionnaire (Walker, 2005). The AVS is composed of 14 items (e.g., “I enjoy watching violence on TV or in films”) assessing the endorsement of beliefs related to acceptance and enjoyment of violence in society, both in individual behavior and in the media (Walker, 2005); each item is rated as true or false. In this study, the scale was internally consistent for all three groups (community-dwelling women: α = .78; community-dwelling men: α = .77; inmates: α = .72).

Self-esteem

The Italian version (Forsman, Johnson, Ugolini, Bruzzi, & Raboni, 2003) of the Basic Self-Esteem Scale (Basic SE; Forsman & Johnson, 1996) was used to assess self-esteem. The Basic SE contains 22 items (e.g., “I can freely express what I feel”). Items were graded on a 5-point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). In the current study, the scale was highly internally consistent for all three groups (community-dwelling women: α = .86; community-dwelling men: α = .84; inmates: α = .78).

Emotion dysregulation

To assess clinically relevant difficulties in emotion regulation, participants completed the Italian version (Giromini et al., 2012) of the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale (DERS; Gratz & Roemer, 2004). This self-reported measurement is composed of 36 items (e.g., “I am clear about my feelings”). Participants were scored in six categories: Nonacceptance of Emotional Responses (Nonacceptance; six items), Difficulties Engaging in Goal-Directed Behavior (Goals; five items), Impulse Control Difficulties (Impulse; six items), Lack of Emotional Awareness (Awareness; six items), Limited Access to Emotion regulation Strategies (Strategies; eight items), and Lack of Emotional Clarity (Clarity; five items). Participants were asked to indicate how often each item applied to them on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (almost never) to 5 (almost always). In this study, the internal consistency of the DERS was high for all three groups (community-dwelling women: α = .93; community-dwelling men: α = .89; inmates: α = .88).

Anger

Anger was assessed by asking participants whether they ever got angry easily. Responses were graded on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 0 (never) to 4 (always).

Aggressive behavior

Aggressive behavior was measured through a seven-item scale developed by Puddu et al. (2016). Respondents were asked to indicate the probability of reacting if involved in a discussion. The items covered different aggressive behaviors, such as verbal aggression (e.g., “I offend or insult the other”), physical aggression (e.g., “I react physically”), and humiliation (e.g., “I tend to downplay the other”); responses were graded on a 5-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (almost never) to 5 (almost always). The scale showed good internal consistency for community-dwelling women (α = .80), community-dwelling men (α = .82), and inmates (α = .81).

Procedure

Data were collected in two Italian regions (Tuscany and Sardinia) during 2015. Community participants were recruited from public places such as libraries and study rooms using opportunistic sampling techniques. For inmates, questionnaires were administered in a space provided by the prison. Participants were required to be at least 18 years old and were asked to take part in a study on aggressive behavior. Respondents completed all the questionnaires individually or in small groups in the presence of the researcher without received incentives; all took part in the study on a voluntary basis. All the participants provided informed consent prior to completing the questionnaire. Questionnaires were anonymous and no personal identifying data were recorded. Study procedures for the prisoners and the community members were designed in accordance with the American Psychological Association’s guidelines for the ethical treatment of human subjects.

Data Analyses

Descriptive statistics and intercorrelations among all the variables were calculated separately for community men, community women, and inmates. We performed hierarchical linear regression to examine the relationships among self-esteem, attitude toward violence, emotion dysregulation (both in general and with respect to different strategies), anger, and aggressive behavior; we used Sobel test to examine whether mediation occurred. We conducted one-way analyses of variance (ANOVAs) to examine whether community men differed from community women in the assessed variables and to analyze differences between community-dwelling men and prisoners.

Results

Descriptive statistics (means and standard deviations) are reported in Table 1. To test Hypotheses 1 and 2, we performed regression analyses on each group (community women, community men, and inmates). To test the mediating role of emotion dysregulation (Hypothesis 1), we examined the three criteria proposed by Baron and Kenny (1986) in each of the three groups. First, the outcome variable (aggressive behavior) was regressed on the predictor variables (self-esteem and attitude toward violence). Self-esteem and attitude toward violence were significant predictors of aggressive behavior in both men and women (Table 2, Step 1). Among inmates, the effect of attitude was significant (p < .01), while the effect of self-esteem was marginally significant (p = .07).

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics of All the Variables for the Three Groups.

	Community-Dwelling Men (N = 166)	Community-Dwelling Women (N = 197)	Inmates Men (N = 100)
	M (SD)	M (SD)	M (SD)
Self-esteem	3.92 (0.50)	3.67 (0.55)	3.62 (0.59)
Attitude toward violence	0.39 (0.26)	0.22 (0.22)	0.30 (0.29)
Overall emotion dysregulation	1.96 (0.46)	2.19 (0.61)	2.25 (0.58)
Nonacceptance	1.81 (0.72)	2.09 (0.91)	2.39 (0.90)
Goals	2.32 (0.84)	2.71 (0.97)	2.43 (0.91)
Impulse	1.68 (0.63)	1.92 (0.78)	1.95 (0.88)
Awareness	2.41 (0.72)	2.28 (0.72)	2.40 (0.81)
Strategies	1.68 (0.53)	2.05 (0.80)	2.07 (0.75)
Clarity	1.86 (0.72)	2.08 (0.77)	2.23 (0.83)
Anger	1.63 (0.71)	1.81 (0.69)	1.34 (0.98)
Aggressive behavior	1.62 (0.56)	1.67 (0.57)	1.86 (0.76)

Table 2.

Hierarchical Linear Regression: Self-Esteem, Attitude Toward Violence, Overall Emotion Dysregulation, and Anger Predicting Aggressive Behavior.

	Community-Dwelling Women (N = 197)	Community-Dwelling Men (N = 166)	Inmates Men (N = 100)
Step 1
Self-esteem	−.23**	−.29***	−.21^†
Attitude toward violence	.31***	.23**	.31**
Step 2
Self-esteem	−.08	−.17	.12
Attitude toward violence	.29***	.23**	.25*
Emotion dysregulation	.22*	.19*	.54***
Step 3
Self-esteem	−.11	−.15	.12
Attitude toward violence	.25***	.19**	.20
Emotion dysregulation	.10	.10	.51***
Anger	.35***	.34***	.19
	∆R² = .11* R² = .29*	∆R² = .11* R² = .27*	∆R² = .03R² = .38

†

p = .07. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Second (Step 2), we regressed the mediator variable (emotion dysregulation) on the predictor variable (self-esteem). Self-esteem was significantly correlated with emotion dysregulation in community men (β = −.62, p < .001), community women (β = −.68, p < .001), and inmates (β = −.71, p < .001). Third, we regressed the outcome variable (aggressive behavior) on the mediator (emotion dysregulation) while controlling for the predictor variables (self-esteem and attitude toward violence; Table 2, Step 3). In this analysis, attitude toward violence and emotion dysregulation were related to aggressive behavior, whereas self-esteem was not; in the three groups, the correlation between self-esteem and aggressive behavior was reduced and was no longer significant, and the amount of variance explained by the model significantly increased.

To assess formally whether mediation occurred, we used Sobel test, which supported Hypothesis 1, indicating that emotion dysregulation mediated the effect of self-esteem on aggressive behavior in both community men (z = −2.03, p < .05) and women (z = −2.40, p < .05). Although the effect of self-esteem on aggressive behavior among inmates was only marginally significant (p = .07), we also tested mediation for this group. The Sobel test yielded a significant result (z = −3.78, p < .001).

Given that emotion dysregulation emerged as a key process in explaining the association between self-esteem and aggressive behavior, we performed further regression analyses to examine the role of different emotion dysregulation strategies (Nonacceptance, Goals, Impulse, Awareness, Strategies, and Clarity). We examined again the three criteria proposed by Baron and Kenny (1986) in each of the three groups. First (Step 1), aggressive behavior was regressed on self-esteem, which was a significant predictor of aggressive behavior in the three groups (community men: β = −.28, p < .001; community women: β = −.24, p < .01; inmates: β = −.30, p < .05). Second (Step 2), we regressed each emotion dysregulation strategy on self-esteem. All the strategies were significantly correlated with self-esteem in community men (–.58 < β < –.30, p < .001), community women (–.64 < β < –.33, p < .001), and inmates (–.60 < β < –.29, p < .01). Third (Step 3), we regressed aggressive behavior on the emotion dysregulation strategies while controlling for the effect of self-esteem (Table 3).

Table 3.

Hierarchical Linear Regression: Self-Esteem and Emotion Dysregulation Strategies Predicting Aggressive Behavior.

	Community-Dwelling Women (N = 197)	Community-Dwelling Men (N = 166)	Inmates Men (N = 100)
Step 1
Self-esteem	−.24**	−.29***	−.30*
Step 2
Self-esteem	−.07	−.23	.12
Awareness	−.03	.07	−.01
Nonacceptance	−.08	−.02	−.01
Impulse	.30**	.37**	.49**
Clarity	.16	−.01	.07
Goals	−.05	−.04	.01
Strategies	.02	−.13	.24
	∆R² = .08 R² = .14*	∆R² = .08* R² = .17***	∆R² = .34* R² = .42*

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

In this analysis, only the Impulse strategy was significantly related to aggressive behavior; this finding was consistent in the three groups. After including the six strategies into the model, in both inmates and community women, the correlation between self-esteem and aggressive behavior was reduced and was no longer significant, suggesting that a total mediation occurred; in community men, it was reduced but remained significant, suggesting that a partial mediation occurred. The amount of variance explained by the model significantly increased in the three groups. The Sobel test indicated that the Impulse strategy mediated the effect of self-esteem on aggressive behavior in community men (z = −2.92, p < .01), community women (z = −2.63, p < .01), and inmates (z = −3.11, p < .01).

To test the mediating role of anger (Hypothesis 2), we examined again the three criteria proposed by Baron and Kenny (1986). As reported above, the predictor variable (emotion dysregulation) was significantly related to aggressive behavior in community men, community women, and inmates (Table 2, Step 1). Next (Step 2), we regressed the mediator variable (anger) on the predictor variable (emotion dysregulation). Emotion dysregulation was significantly related to anger in community men (β = .26, p < .01) and women (β = .37, p < .001) but not in prisoners (β = –.26, p = .10). Last, we regressed the outcome variable (aggressive behavior) on the mediator (anger), with control of the predictor variable (emotion dysregulation); we controlled the effect of attitude and self-esteem as well (Table 2, Step 3). In this analysis, anger was related to aggressive behavior among community men and women, while the association was only marginally significant for inmates (p = .08); given that neither Step 2 nor Step 3 yielded significant results for inmates, we did not go on testing the mediation hypothesis with this group. Among community men and women, the correlation between emotion dysregulation and aggressive behavior was reduced and was no longer significant, suggesting that a total mediation occurred; the amount of variance explained by the model significantly increased. Sobel test indicated that anger mediated the effect of emotion dysregulation on aggressive behavior in community men (z = 2.32, p < .05) and women (z = 3.19, p < .01).

Based on these findings, we examined whether anger could mediate the relationship between specific emotion dysregulation strategies and aggressive behavior. Among the six emotion dysregulation strategies we considered, only Impulse was significantly related to aggressive behavior in community men (β = .34, p < .001), community women (β = .35, p < .001), and inmates (β = .62, p < .001), so that we included only this strategy in subsequent analyses (Baron & Kenny, 1986). Impulse was significantly related to anger in community men (β = .33, p < .001), community women (β = .34, p < .001), and prisoners (β = .42, p < .001). Last, we regressed aggressive behavior on anger, with control of Impulse. In this analysis, anger was related to aggressive behavior among community men and women, while this association was not significant for inmates (Table 4); given that Step 3 did not yield significant results for inmates, we did not go on testing the mediation hypothesis with this group. Among community men and women, the correlation between emotion dysregulation and aggressive behavior was reduced but remained significant, suggesting that partial mediation occurred; the amount of variance explained by the model significantly increased. Sobel test indicated that anger mediated the effect of Impulse on aggressive behavior in community men (z = 3.34, p < .001) and women (z = 3.60, p < .001).

Table 4.

Hierarchical Linear Regression: Impulse and Anger Predicting Aggressive Behavior.

	Community-Dwelling Women (N = 197)	Community-Dwelling Men (N = 166)	Inmates Men (N = 100)
Step 1
Impulse	.62***	.34***	.35***
Step 2
Impulse	.56***	.22**	.23**
Anger	.14	.38***	.35***
	∆R² = .02R² = .40***	∆R² = .13* R² = .24*	∆R² = .11* R² = .23*

p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.

Gender differences (Hypothesis 3) were tested on community men and women through a series of ANOVAs, which revealed a significant effect of gender on overall emotion dysregulation strategies, F(1, 358) = 16.39, p < .001, η² = .04; self-esteem, F(1, 355) = 21.19, p < .001, η² = .06; anger, F(1, 360) = 5.77, p < .05, η² = .02; and attitude toward violence, F(1, 361) = 44.85, p < .001, η² = .11. Specifically, men reported lower scores than women on overall emotion dysregulation strategies and anger, while they reported higher scores on self-esteem and attitude toward violence. No gender differences emerged for aggressive behavior, F(1, 356) = 0.725, p = .40. With respect to emotion regulation strategies, a significant effect of gender was seen on the following strategies: Nonacceptance, F(1, 358) = 10.96, p < .01, η² = .03; Goals, F(1, 358) = 16.43, p < .001, η² = .04; Impulse, F(1, 358) = 10.50, p < .01, η² = .03; Strategies, F(1, 358) = 26.33, p < .001, η² = .07; and Clarity, F(1, 360) = 7.97, p < .01, η² = .02, with community men reporting lower scores than women. The effect of gender on Awareness was not significant, F(1, 358) = 2.76, p = .10.

The ANOVAs showed significant differences between community men and inmates (Hypothesis 4) with regard to overall emotion dysregulation strategies, F(1, 263) = 20.17, p < .001, η² = .07; self-esteem, F(1, 249) = 18.18, p < .001, η² = .07; anger, F(1, 233) = 6.38, p < .05, η² = .03; attitude toward violence, F(1, 264) = 5.92, p < .05, η² = .02; and aggressive behavior, F(1, 233) = 7.24, p < .01, η² = .03. Specifically, inmates reported higher scores than community men on overall emotion dysregulation strategies and aggressive behavior, while they reported lower scores on self-esteem, attitude toward violence, and anger. With respect to emotion regulation strategies, a significant effect of group was seen on Nonacceptance, F(1, 263) = 33.67, p < .001, η² = .11; Impulse, F(1, 263) = 8.63, p < .01, η² = .03; Strategies, F(1, 263) = 25.09, p < .001, η² = .09; and Clarity, F(1, 263) = 14.54, p < .001, η² = .05, with inmates reporting higher scores than community men, but this was not true for Awareness, F(1, 263) = 0.01, p = .95 and Goals, F(1, 263) = 1.04, p = .31.

Discussion

The aim of this research was to examine the associations among attitude toward violence, self-esteem, emotion dysregulation, anger, and aggression by adopting a multidimensional model to investigate both community participants and inmates. With respect to community participants, we analyzed gender differences. Our research hypotheses were partially confirmed. Self-esteem and attitude toward violence were significant predictors of aggressive behavior, with emotion dysregulation (and specifically difficulties in controlling one’s impulsive behaviors) mediating the relationship between self-esteem and the criterion variable, among both community participants and inmates. Anger mediated the relationship between emotion dysregulation and aggressive behavior among community men and women, but not among inmates.

In line with previous studies (Eckhardt et al., 2012; Nunes et al., 2015), a significant association between attitude toward violence and aggressive behavior was confirmed by our findings. Specifically, attitude showed a direct link to behavior, with significant differences between men and women. As shown by previous studies (Walker, 2005; Walker & Gudjonsson, 2006), a proviolence attitude was more common among men than women, suggesting that men’s attitudes are influenced by shared social norms that tend to legitimate violence, which is associated with strength and assertiveness when actuated by men.

The link between self-esteem and aggression, highlighted by previous research (Walker & Bright, 2009), was confirmed. Specifically, our results are in line with those studies that suggested a negative relationship between the two variables; specifically, individuals with low self-esteem seem more likely to show aggressive behavior than individuals with high self-esteem (Donnellan et al., 2005; Wallace et al., 2012). As suggested by Walker and Bright (2009), the relationship between self-esteem and violent behavior was less robust for inmates than for community people. In line with previous findings (Garofalo et al., 2016), emotion dysregulation emerged as a key mediator of the relationship between self-esteem and aggressive behavior. Specifically, problems controlling one’s impulses seemed to be responsible for the association between self-esteem and aggressive behavior. Low self-esteem was associated with greater problems in regulating one’s emotions (specifically in controlling one’s impulses), which was related to more frequent aggressive behavior. Individuals with low levels of self-esteem might lack confidence in their ability to regulate emotions (in particular to control their impulsive reactions), which could make this mechanism more problematic, leading more easily to aggressive reactions. This process was found to be consistent in community men, community women, and male inmates.

The role of anger was relevant for community men and women but not for inmates. In community people, the ease with which a person gets angry was associated with aggression and mediated the relationship between emotion regulation and aggressive behavior: The lower the ability to regulate one’s emotions, the higher the likelihood one gets angry, which might produce aggressive behaviors. Specifically, difficulties in regulating one’s impulses seem particularly relevant in enhancing the experience of anger, which in turn is related to higher levels of aggressive behaviors. In contrast to Garofalo et al.’s (2016) findings, this process does not seem to occur for inmates, for whom the ease with which a person gets angry does not play a significant role in predicting violent behavior.

The findings show that, compared with community men, inmates reported lower self-esteem, higher emotion dysregulation, and more frequent aggressive behaviors, although they presented a lower tendency to get angry. Given that inmates seem to be more prone than community men to using aggressive behaviors when they are angered, no differences in anger emerged between the two groups; we can hypothesize that aggressive behavior is associated with other types of emotions in inmates.

As regards gender differences, women showed a less favorable attitude toward violence, lower self-esteem, higher emotion dysregulation, and greater tendency to get angry; nevertheless, no significant differences between men and women were found with respect to aggressive behavior. We can speculate that some variables that were not considered (e.g., hostility) in the present study might act differently for men and women in influencing violent behavior. Moreover, men and women might differ in the way they express this aggressive behavior; women might be more inclined than men to resort to verbal aggression as well as covert forms of social aggression, such as gossiping or spreading rumors with the aim to cause harm (Björkqvist, Lagerspetz, & Kaukiainen, 1992), while men are more prone to showing higher levels of aggressive physical behavior (von Collani & Werner, 2005).

Maladaptive emotion regulation strategies seem to play an important role in the activation of aggression and violence (Roberton et al., 2012), even though significant differences emerged among the three groups with regard to the specific strategies adopted. Compared with men, women reported higher scores not only on overall emotion dysregulation but also on certain strategies; specifically, women were more likely to show a strong lack of emotional clarity, greater problems in accepting emotional responses, more limited access to emotion regulation strategies, and greater difficulties in both engaging in goal-directed behaviors and controlling impulses. Similar findings emerged for inmates, who showed higher scores on the same strategies, except for difficulties engaging in goal-directed behaviors. In spite of these differences, the three groups showed relevant analogies with respect to the strategy that seems to be responsible for the association between self-esteem and aggressive behaviors. For all the participants, difficulties in controlling impulsive behaviors emerged as the only strategy implicated in the link between self-esteem and aggression; lower levels of self-esteem were related to higher difficulties in controlling one’s impulses, which in turn were associated with greater levels of aggressive behavior.

This research contributes to the growing literature on aggressive behavior by suggesting that self-related constructs, such as self-esteem, and emotion regulation strategies represent key processes associated with aggressive behavior among community men and women and inmates. Nevertheless, these findings should be considered in the context of the limitations of this study. First, all variables were assessed through self-reported measures, which could be affected by social desirability. Second, we did not recruit a comparison group of female inmates, so comparisons between community people and inmates could be analyzed only for men. Third, the cross-sectional design did not allow us to specify the directionality of the links identified among the research variables. Fourth, we focused on the role of anger, but we did not consider how other emotions could be involved in the relationship between dysregulation and aggressive behavior. Fifth, we assessed aggressive behavior as a whole construct, without distinguishing between specific types of aggressive conduct, such as physical or verbal aggression. Finally, we used a single item to assess anger, which might fail to measure the multifaceted construct of anger; future studies should use more valid and articulated measures to capture this complex experience (e.g., Novaco, 1994, 2003).

These findings raise interesting practical considerations. Treatment and prevention modules that increase self-esteem and emotion regulation skills, by improving one’s ability to regulate difficult emotion states more adaptively, may reduce aggressive tendencies. Particularly, preventive programs should enhance one’s ability to control impulses to decrease the likelihood of aggressive behaviors. The same can be said with respect to anger: Specific treatments could be formulated to improve one’s ability to direct anger toward other goals, so that adaptive behaviors aimed at reducing this unpleasant emotion could replace aggressive reactions. Notably, programs aimed at increasing one’s skills in controlling impulsive reactions could be useful also to foster anger management. Anger is a dynamic variable that is responsive to treatment; for instance, cognitive behavioral anger treatment, which has a structured social learning format that is readily adaptable to different populations, has proved to be effective (Novaco, 2013). Furthermore, mindfulness-based interventions may represent a useful strategy to treat aggressive behavior, as they focus on an increased nonjudgmental stance, awareness, and acceptance of one’s emotional experiences (Chambers, Gullone, & Allen, 2009; Gratz & Tull, 2010). Indeed, increased mindfulness seems to be negatively associated with self-reported measures of aggression and anger (Borders, Earleywine, & Jajodia, 2010; Heppner et al., 2008) and positively linked to psychological well-being (Baroni, Nerini, Matera, & Stefanile, 2018).

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Author Biographies

Cristina Stefanile is a full professor in social psychology at the Department of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Italy.

Camilla Matera is an assistant professor in social psychology at the Department of Education and Psychology, University of Florence, Italy.

Amanda Nerini is an assistant professor in social psychology at the Department of Health Sciences, University of Florence, Italy.

Luisa Puddu is an associate professor in social psychology at the Department of Education and Psychology, University of Florence, Italy.

Rosalba Raffagnino is an assistant professor in clinical psychology at the Department Health Sciences, University of Florence, Italy.

References

Ajzen

(1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211.

Ajzen

Fishbein

(1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Anderson

C. A.

Bushman

B. J.

(2002). Human aggression. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 27-51. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135231

Archer

(2004). Sex differences in aggression in real-world settings: A meta-analytic review. Review of General Psychology, 8, 291-322. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.8.4.291

Bargh

J. A.

Williams

L. E.

(2007). On the nonconscious of emotion regulation. In Gross

(Ed.), Handbook of emotion regulation (pp. 429-445). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Baron

R. M.

Kenny

D. A.

(1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 51, 1173-1182. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.51.6.1173

Baroni

Nerini

Matera

Stefanile

(2018). Mindfulness and emotional distress: The mediating role of psychological well-being. Current Psychology, 37(3), 467-476.

Bender

P. K.

Reinholdt-Dunne

M. L.

Esbjørn

B. H.

Pons

(2012). Emotion dysregulation and anxiety in children and adolescents: Gender differences. Personality and Individual Differences, 53, 284-288. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2012.03.027

Björkqvist

Lagerspetz

K. M. J.

Kaukiainen

(1992). Do girls manipulate and boys fight? Developmental trends in regard to direct and indirect aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 18, 117-127. doi:10.1002/1098-2337(1992)18:2<117::AID-AB2480180205>3.0.CO;2-3

10.

Bleidorn

Arslan

R. C.

Denissen

J. J.

Rentfrow

P. J.

Gebauer

J. E.

Potter

Gosling

S. D.

(2016). Age and gender differences in self-esteem: A cross-cultural window. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111, 396-410. doi:10.1037/pspp0000078

11.

Borders

Earleywine

Jajodia

(2010). Could mindfulness anger, hostility, and aggression by decreasing rumination? Aggressive Behavior, 36, 28-44. doi:10.1002/ab.20327

12.

Chambers

Gullone

Allen

N. B.

(2009). Mindful emotion regulation: An integrative review. Clinical Psychology Review, 29, 560-572. doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2009.06.005

13.

Cohn

A. M.

Jakupcak

Seibert

L. A.

Hildebrandt

T. B.

Zeichner

(2010). The role of emotion dysregulation in the association between men’s restrictive emotionality and use of physical aggression. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 11, 53-64. doi:10.1037/a0018090

14.

DeWall

C. N.

Baumeister

R. F.

Stillman

T. F.

Gailliot

M. T.

(2007). Violence restrained: Effects of self-regulation and its depletion on aggression. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 62-76. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2005.12.005

15.

Donnellan

M. B.

Trzesniewski

K. H.

Robins

R. W.

Moffitt

T. E.

Caspi

(2005). Low self-esteem is related to aggression, antisocial behavior, and delinquency. Psychological Science, 16, 328-335. doi:10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.01535.x

16.

Eckhardt

C. I.

Samper

Suhr

Holtzworth-Munroe

(2012). Implicit attitudes towards violence among male perpetrators of intimate partner violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 27, 471-491. doi:10.1177/0886260511421677

17.

English

John

O. P.

(2013). Understanding the social effects of emotion regulation: The mediating role of authenticity for individual differences in suppression. Emotion, 13, 314-329. doi:10.1037/a0029847

18.

English

John

O. P.

Srivastava

Gross

J. J.

(2012). Emotion regulation and peer-rated social functioning: A 4-year longitudinal study. Journal of Research in Personality, 46, 780-784. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2012.09.006

19.

Fishbein

Ajzen

(1975). Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An introduction to theory and research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

20.

Forsman

Johnson

(1996). Dimensionality and validity of two scales measuring different aspects of self-esteem. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 37, 1-15.

21.

Forsman

Johnson

Ugolini

Bruzzi

Raboni

(2003). Basic SE—Basic Self-Esteem Scale [Valutazione dell’autostima di base negli adulti]. Trento, Italy: Centro Studi Erikson.

22.

Garofalo

Holden

C. J.

Zeigler-Hill

Velotti

(2016). Understanding the connection between self-esteem and aggression: The mediating role of emotion dysregulation. Aggressive Behavior, 42, 3-15. doi:10.1002/ab.21601

23.

Gillespie

(2005). Racial differences in violence and self-esteem among prison inmates. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 29, 161-185. doi:10.1007/BF02885734

24.

Giromini

Velotti

de Campora

Bonalume

Cesare Zavattini

(2012). Cultural adaptation of the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale: Reliability and validity of an Italian version. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 68, 989-1007. doi:10.1002/jclp.21876

25.

Goldenson

Geffner

Foster

S. L.

Clipson

C. R.

(2007). Female domestic violence offenders: Their attachment security, trauma symptoms, and personality organization. Violence and Victims, 22, 532-545. doi:10.1891/088667007782312186

26.

Gratz

K. L.

Roemer

(2004). Multidimensional assessment of emotion regulation and dysregulation: Development, factor structure, and initial validation of the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 26, 41-54. doi:10.1023/B:JOBA.0000007455.08539.94

27.

Gratz

K. L.

Tull

M. T.

(2010). The relationship between emotion dysregulation and deliberate self-harm among inpatients with substance use disorders. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 34, 544-553. doi:10.1007/s10608-009-9268-4

28.

Gross

J. J.

(Ed.). (2007). Handbook of emotion regulation. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

29.

Henry

J. D.

Rendell

P. G.

Green

M. J.

McDonald

O’Donnell

(2008). Emotion regulation in schizophrenia: Affective, social, and clinical correlates of suppression and reappraisal. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 117, 473-478. doi:10.1037/0021-843X.117.2.473

30.

Heppner

W. L.

Kernis

M. H.

Lakey

C. E.

Campbell

W. K.

Goldman

B. M.

Davis

P. J.

Cascio

E. V.

(2008). Mindfulness as a means of reducing aggressive behavior: Dispositional and situational evidence. Aggressive Behavior, 34, 486-496. doi:10.1002/ab.20258

31.

Hong

R. Y.

(2007). Worry and rumination: Differential associations with anxious and depressive symptoms and coping behaviors. Behavior Research and Therapy, 45, 277-290. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2006.03.006

32.

Howells

Daffern

Day

(2008). Aggression and violence. In Soothill

Dolan

Rogers

(Eds.), Handbook of forensic mental health (pp. 351-374). Cullompton, UK: Willan.

33.

Lee

J. M.

Bell

N. J.

Watson

(2007). Situating alcohol use and delinquency within developmental and societal context: The case of Korean youth. Journal of Adolescence, 30, 835-851. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2006.09.005

34.

Marin Tejeda

Robles Garcia

Gonzalez-Forteza

Andrade Palos

. (2012). Psychometric properties of the “Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale” in Spanish (DERS-E) in Mexican adolescents. Salud Mental, 35, 521-526.

35.

Mauss

I. B.

Bunge

S. A.

Gross

J. J.

(2007). Automatic emotion regulation. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 1, 146-147. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00005.x

36.

McLaughlin

K. A.

Hatzenbuehler

M. L.

Mennin

D. S.

Nolen-Hoekse

(2011). Emotion dysregulation and adolescent psychopathology: A prospective study. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 49, 544-554. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2011.06.003

37.

Medrano

L. A.

Trógolo

(2014). Validación de la escala de dificultades en la regulación emocional en la población universitaria de Córdoba, Argentina [Validation of the Difficulties in Emotion Regulation Scale in the University Population of Cordoba, Argentina]. Universitas Psychologica, 13, 1345-1356. doi:10.11144/Javeriana.UPSY13-4.vedr

38.

Norstrom

Pape

(2010). Alcohol, suppressed anger and violence. Addiction, 105, 1580-1586. doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.2010.02997.x

39.

Novaco

R. W.

(1994). Anger as a risk factor for violence among the mentally disordered. In Monahan

Steadman

H. J.

(Eds.), Violence and mental disorder (pp. 21-59). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

40.

Novaco

R. W.

(2003). The Novaco Anger Scale and Provocation Inventory: Manual. Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services.

41.

Novaco

R. W.

(2013). Reducing anger-related offending. In Craig

L. A.

Dixon

Gannon

T. A.

(Eds.), What works in offender rehabilitation: An evidence-based approach to assessment and treatment (pp. 211-236). Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.

42.

Nunes

K. L.

Herman

C. A.

Maimone

Woods

(2015). Thinking clearly about violent cognitions attitudes may be distinct from other cognitions. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 30, 1322-1347. doi:10.1177/0886260514540329

43.

Ostrowsky

M. K.

(2010). Are violent people more likely to have low self-esteem or high self-esteem? Aggression and Violent Behavior, 15, 69-75. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2009.08.004

44.

Papadakaki

Tzamalouka

G. S.

Chatzifotiou

Chliaoutakis

(2009). Seeking for risk factors of intimate partner violence (IPV) in a Greek national sample: The role of self-esteem. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 24, 732-750. doi:10.1177/0886260508317181

45.

Puddu

Raffagnino

Matera

Nerini

Stefanile

(2016). Per una misura dell’accettazione della violenza [Assessing acceptance of violence]. In Procentese

Esposito

(Eds.), XIV Congresso Nazionale della Sezione di Psicologia Sociale della Associazione Italiana di Psicologia. Proceedings (p. 95). Napoli, Italy: Kaizen Edizioni.

46.

Putnam

K. M.

Silk

K. R.

(2005). Emotion dysregulation and the development of borderline personality disorder. Development and Psychopathology, 17, 899-925. doi:10.1017/S0954579405050431

47.

Roberton

Daffern

Bucks

R. S.

(2012). Emotion regulation and aggression. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 17, 72-82. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2011.09.006

48.

Stith

S. M.

Rosen

K. H.

McCollum

E. E.

Thomsen

C. J.

(2004). Treating intimate partner violence within intact couple relationships: Outcomes of multi-couple versus individual couple therapy. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 30, 305-318. doi:10.1111/j.1752-0606.2004.tb01242.x

49.

Sullivan

T. N.

Helms

S. W.

Kliewer

Goodman

K. L.

(2010). Associations between sadness and anger regulation coping, emotional expression, and physical and relational aggression among urban adolescents. Social Development, 19, 30-51. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9507.2008.00531.x

50.

Tager

Good

G. E.

Brammer

(2010). “Walking over ’em”: An exploration of relations between emotion dysregulation, masculine norms, and intimate partner abuse in a clinical sample of men. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 11, 233-239. doi:10.1037/a0017636

51.

Tull

M. T.

Jakupcak

Paulson

Gratz

K. L.

(2007). The role of emotional inexpressivity and experiential avoidance in the relationship between posttraumatic stress disorder symptom severity and aggressive behavior among men exposed to interpersonal violence. Anxiety, Stress, and Coping, 20, 337-351. doi:10.1080/10615800701379249

52.

van Lange

P. A. M.

Rinderu

M. I.

Bushman

B. J

. (2017). Aggression and violence around the world: A model of CLimate, Aggression, and Self-control in Humans (CLASH). Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 40, e75. doi:10.1017/S0140525X16000406

53.

von Collani

Werner

. (2005). Self-related and motivational constructs as determinants of aggression: An analysis and validation of a German version of the Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 1631-1643.

54.

Walker

J. S.

(2005). The Maudsley Violence Questionnaire: Initial validation and reliability. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 187-201. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2004.04.001

55.

Walker

J. S.

Bright

J. A.

(2009). False inflated self-esteem and violence: A systematic review and cognitive model. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 20, 1-32. doi:10.1080/14789940701656808

56.

Walker

J. S.

Gudjonsson

G. H.

(2006). The Maudsley Violence Questionnaire: Relationship to personality and self-reported offending. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 795-806. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.09.009

57.

Walker

J. S.

Knauer

(2011). Humiliation, self-esteem and violence. Journal of Forensic Psychiatry & Psychology, 22, 724-741. doi:10.1080/14789949.2011.617542

58.

Wallace

M. T.

Barry

C. T.

Zeigler-Hill

Green

B. A.

(2012). Locus of control as a contributing factor in the relation between self-perception and adolescent aggression. Aggressive Behavior, 38, 213-221. doi:10.1002/ab.21419

59.

Wegner

Abbey

Pierce

Pegram

S. E.

Woerner

(2015). Sexual assault perpetrators’ justifications for their actions relationships to rape supportive attitudes, incident characteristics, and future perpetration. Violence Against Women, 21, 1018-1037. doi:10.1177/1077801215589380

60.

World Health Organization. (2002). World report on violence and health. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/violence_injuryprevention/violenceIworld_reportIen/full_en.pdf

61.

World Health Organization. (2014). Global status report on violence prevention 2014. Retrieved from http://www.who.int/violence_injury_prevention/violence/status_report/2014/en/

62.

Woessner

Schneider

(2013). The role of self-control and self-esteem and the impact of early risk factors among violent offenders. Criminal Behaviour and Mental Health, 23, 99-112. doi:10.1002/cbm.1863

63.

Zaremba

L. A.

Keiley

M. K.

(2011). The mediational effect of affect regulation on the relationship between attachment and internalizing/externalizing behaviors in adolescent males who have sexually offended. Children and Youth Services Review, 33, 1599-1607. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2011.04.001