Direct and indirect aggression tactics as a function of domain-specific self-esteem. (April 2016) - Wyckoff, Joy P.
Abstract: Most studies on aggression focus on direct aggression or fail to distinguish between types of aggression tactics. Similarly, the relationship between self-esteem and aggression is not well understood. The present research examines whether certain domains of self-esteem lead people to differentially employ direct and indirect aggression tactics. Overall, our findings suggest that people who are high in competitive types of self-esteem (mate value and dominance) are less likely to endorse indirect aggression or more likely to endorse direct aggression than those low in competitive types of self-esteem. In an online study, we found that men reported more direct aggression in response to provocation than women, while there was no sex difference in indirect aggression responses. Self-perceived mate value negatively predicted indirect aggression in men but positively predicted direct aggression in women. In a second study, experimentally manipulated mate value predicted indirect aggression in women. Furthermore, self-perceived mate value positively predicted direct aggression in women, while dominance predicted direct aggression in men. In Study 3, a replication of Study 2 using an undergraduate sample, we found that manipulated mate value predicted indirect aggression in men and women. We conclude that particular domains of self-esteem may calibrate preferred aggression tactics. Highlights: In two studies, manipulated mate value predicted female indirect aggression. In two studies, self-perceived mate value predicted female direct aggression. In one study, self-perceived mate value predicted male indirect aggression. In one study, self-perceived dominance predicted male direct aggression. Three studies found a significant sex difference in direct aggression.