|
Address: Е-mail: |
Sergey Enikolopov1,2, Gleb Emelin2,3Hostile Bias: A New Explanation of the Link Between Dispositional Hostility and Physical Aggression
2025.
Vol. 22.
No. 4.
P. 690–705
[issue contents]
The construct of hostile attribution bias—a general a priori tendency to process social signals as hostile — is becoming increasingly prominent in research on aggressive behavior. Contemporary models of hostile bias allow for a detailed analysis of aggressive behavior factors, yet they share a significant drawback: they fail to account for the role of personality traits in hostile bias processes. Incorporating personality dispositions — particularly hostility — as a key predictor of hostile bias appears promising. The main objective of this study is to empirically substantiate the inclusion of personality dispositions (i.e., dispositional hostility) as predictors of hostile bias. The study involved 224 participants aged 18 to 29 years (M = 21.7, SD = 2.7; 61% female). The measures included the Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire and a Hostile Bias Scale developed from a Modified Hostility Scale (G.D. Emelin, S.N. Enikolopov). The Hostile Bias Scale proved to be a reliable and valid psychometric instrument. Path analysis of hostility, hostile bias, and physical aggression confirmed that hostility is a significant direct predictor of hostile bias and an indirect predictor of physical aggression. In turn, hostile bias emerged as a significant direct predictor of physical aggression. These findings can inform the development of interventions targeting aggressive behavior. Using dispositional hostility as an example, the study demonstrates that personality traits can serve as significant predictors influencing hostile bias processes.
Citation:
Enikolopov S., Emelin G. (2025) Vrazhdebnoe iskazhenie: novoe ob"yasnenie svyazi dispozitsionnoy vrazhdebnosti i fizicheskoy agressii [Hostile Bias: A New Explanation of the Link Between Dispositional Hostility and Physical Aggression]. Psychology. Journal of Higher School of Economics, vol. 22, no 4, pp. 690-705
|
|
|