Skip to main content

Aggression and the Institution of War

  • Chapter
Book cover The Institution of War

Abstract

When one individual intentionally harms another, we describe the behaviour as ‘aggression’. When one nation invades another, we use the same term. Yet, except for the intentional infliction of harm on others, the two phenomena are very different. To understand individual aggression, we have to understand the bases of aggressiveness in individuals, but individual aggression plays only a minor and mostly indirect role in modern war. To understand war we must come to terms with aspects of group functioning as well as individual behaviour. More importantly, we must recognise that war is an institution with numerous constituent roles, and that it is the duties and rights associated with those roles that are primarily responsible for motivating the behaviour of individuals. It follows that if we are to reduce the incidence of war, we must understand the diverse forces that maintain the institution of war. That is the aim of this collection of essays. This introductory chapter attempts to sketch the theoretical background for this view.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Baron, R.A. (1977) Human Aggression (New York: Plenum).

    Google Scholar 

  • Berkowitz, L. (1989) ‘situational influences on aggression’, in J. Groebel and R.A. Hinde (eds), Aggression and War, pp. 91–100 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Brewer, J.M. (1979) ‘Ingroup bias in the minimal intergroup situation: a cognitive-motivational analysis’, Psychological Bulletin, 186, 307–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Doise, W., Deschamps, J-C, and Meyer, G. (1978) ‘The accentuation of intercategory similarities’, In H. Tajfel (ed.), Differentiation Between Social Groups, pp. 159–68 (London: Academic Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Dweck, C.S. and Elliot, E.S. (1983) ‘Achievement motivation’, in E.M. Hetherington (ed.), Mussen Handbook of Child Psychology, Vol. 3, pp. 643–92 (New York: Wiley).

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, J.H. (1986) Aggression and Crimes of Violence (New York: Oxford University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Herbert, J. (1989) ‘The physiology of aggression’, in J. Groebel and R.A. Hinde (eds), Aggression and War, pp. 58–74 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinde, R.A. (1987) Individuals, Relationships and Culture (Cambridge-Cambridge University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hinde, R.A. (1989) ‘Towards integrating the behavioural sciences to meet the threats of violence and war’, Medicine and War, 5, 5–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Parke, R.D. and Slaby, R.G. (1983) ‘The development of aggression’, in E.M. Hetherington (ed.), Mussen Handbook of Child Psychology, Vol. 3, pp. 547–642 (New York: Wiley).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabbie, J.M. (1989) ‘Group processes as stimulants of aggression’, in J. Groebel and R.A. Hinde (eds), Aggression and War, pp. 141–55 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabbie, J.M. (in press). ‘Determinants of instrumental intergroup cooperation’, in R.A. Hinde and J. Groebel (eds), Cooperation and Prosocial Behaviour (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabbie, J.M. and Horwitz, R. (1969) ‘The arousal of ingroup and outgroup bias by a chance to win or lose’, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 223–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabbie, J.M. and Horwitz, R. (1988) ‘Categories versus groups as explanatory concepts in inter-group relations’, European Journal of Social Psychology, 18, 117–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Small, M. and Singer, J.D. (1982) Resort to Arms: international and civil war, 1816–1980 (Beverley Hills: Sage).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutherland, E.H. and Cressey, D.R. (1966) Principles of Criminology (Philadelphia: Lippincott).

    Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H. (1978) Contributions to H. Tajfel (ed.), Differentiation between Social Groups (London: Academic Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Tajfel, H. (1981) Human Groups and Social Categories (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J.C. (1982) ‘Towards a cognitive redefinition of the social group’, in H. Tajfel (ed.), Social Identity and Intergroup Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, J.C. (1984) ‘social identification and psychological group formation’, in H. Tajfel (ed.), The Social Dimension, Vol. 2 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Knippenberg, A.F.M. (1984) ‘Intergroup differences in group perceptions’, in H. Tajfel (ed.), The Social Dimension, Vol. 1, pp. 560–78 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Copyright information

© 1992 Robert A. Hinde

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Hinde, R.A. (1992). Aggression and the Institution of War. In: Hinde, R.A. (eds) The Institution of War. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-349-21707-6_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics