This week in social psychology class we were talking about aggression, commonly defined as physical or verbal behavior intended to physically or psychologically hurt someone. We noted historical trends in violence and societal and cultural factors that can influence aggression, and, in passing, we pointed to the new online environments where aggression can manifest in many ways, for example, through cyberbullying, hate speech, trolling, political incivility, flaming, and harassment. Understanding the problem of aggression online is challenging, but it’s useful to begin with one of the foundational accounts of aggression in the social psychology literature: the frustration-aggression hypothesis.

Way back in 1939, Dollard and colleagues proposed the frustration-aggression hypothesis. They argued that aggression is always a consequence of frustration and frustration always leads to some form of aggression. The theory was hotly contested and modified across decades of research: experiments didn’t support the very strong claim that frustration always leads to aggression, or, indeed, that aggression is always a consequence of frustration. For example, sometimes frustration is understandable and may cause irritation but not aggression (e.g., when a person continuously interrupts a meeting we are attending because their hearing aid is malfunctioning).

A recent synthesis by Kruglanski and colleagues suggests that frustration only leads to aggression under specific conditions. They argue that aggression is a primordial means of asserting power and dominance in response to perceived threats to one’s sense of “significance” or “mattering”. When individuals experience a loss of significance (e.g., through humiliation, exclusion, or failure) they may react aggressively to demonstrate their value. As such, frustration is more likely to lead to aggression when frustrations impinge on one’s sense of significance, particularly in situations where there is limited opportunity to reflect or moderate aggressive impulses through non-aggressive behaviours. Kruglanski and colleagues also note that opportunities for “significance gain” can increase aggressive impulses. As such, frustration is not the only trigger – even in the absence of frustration, bullies may behave in an aggressive manner to increase their feelings of power and significance in the social group.

In relation to online aggression and incivility, two recent studies highlight a problematic disposition that can distort a person’s sense of significance: narcissism. The key problem here is the way in which people with high levels of narcissism strive to maintain their “significance”. Narcissism involves a preoccupation with self-image, high self-esteem, a desire for admiration and recognition from others. Narcissism is associated with exaggerated feelings of self-importance, a sense of privilege, and a tendency to manipulate others in social interactions. Narcissists generally seek external attention and approval, believing themselves to be superior and capable compared to others. How does this relate to online aggression and incivility?

Study Findings

In the first study, Rong and Chu hypothesized that higher levels of narcissism would be related to higher levels of online aggression toward celebrities (i.e., individuals who are notable for having achieved something significant or possessing a status that attracts public attention). Rong and Chu argued that feelings of “relative deprivation” arise within people high in narcissism when they compare themselves to celebrities. Celebrities are thus perceived as a threat to self-esteem, and people higher in narcissism may engage in more aggressive behaviors online to restore their self-esteem. Rong and Chu further hypothesised that empathic self-efficacy (i.e., an individual’s belief in their ability to understand and respond effectively to the emotions and needs of others) would moderate the relationship between narcissism and relative deprivation, specifically, by helping narcissists alleviate negative emotions arising from social comparisons.

In a sample of 832 university students in China, using a survey-based structural equation modelling approach, Rong and Chu found a positive association between narcissism and online celebrity aggression. Students with higher levels narcissism reported higher levels of relative deprivation when comparing themselves to celebrities. Higher levels of relative deprivation in turn predicted higher frequency of online aggression toward celebrities (e.g., criticizing the physical appearance of a celebrity online; adapting online videos or photos of a celebrity in a negative or embarrassing way). As predicted, people with higher empathic self-efficacy were better at managing their feelings of relative deprivation.

The second study by Mungall, Pruysers, and Blais surveyed a large sample of 1,725 people living in Canada, aged between 19 and 80 years old. The key outcome variable of interest was online political incivility, which is reported to be rising. The participants in this study reported on how often when communicating with others online they use language that is vulgar, describe others in ways that they would not want to be described themselves, verbally threaten others, and use negative stereotypes to describe others. Statistically controlling for a range variables that have been found to predict incivility in previous studies, including political and sociodemographic factors, and social media use, Mungall, Pruysers, and Blais found that two different dimensions of narcissism — grandiose narcissism and vulnerable narcissism — predicted higher levels of political incivility. While grandiose narcissism is characterised by a sense of superiority, a strong need for admiration, and high self-esteem, vulnerable narcissism is characterised by feelings of insecurity, sensitivity to criticism, and a fragile self-esteem. Together, these dispositions may prompt defensive and aggressive behaviors in response to perceived threats to self-image and self-esteem, and both were strong, independent predictors of political incivility in this study.

Transforming perceptions of “significance”

Narcissism is a curious disposition. It reflects a problematic perspective in relation to one’s personal significance – it prompts a narrow range of behaviours, centred on self-image, self-esteem, self-importance, and privilege. It distorts interpersonal relations and can be a key factor driving interpersonal aggression. As noted by Kruglanski and colleagues, in the interpersonal realm, the dynamics of perceived “significance loss” and “significance gain” are central to understanding aggression. Aggression reduces “significance loss” and accomplishes “significance gain” via the demonstration of dominance and power over others; but, naturally, as noted by Kruglanski and colleagues, there are many nonaggressive paths to restoring, upholding, and boosting our sense of significance (e.g., the many moral, aesthetic, and economic values in action that are positively reinforced in our interpersonal world). Naturally, we don’t have to respond to humiliation, exclusion, or failure with aggression – we can restore our sense of significance in countless other ways.

Consistent with Kruglanski and colleagues, there are also many paths to self-esteem and many perspectives other than narcissism that operate to uphold our self-esteem. While the large group dynamics online may make us feel insignificant and excluded at times, and while aggression and incivility we observe or experience online might be perceived as humiliating and as a collective failure of our society, we can certainly perceive other things, and we can foster other enduring and stable perspectives. For example, we can perceive the oneness of life and our fundamental connection to everyone and everything. This view, this disposition, when it becomes dominant, changes everything, including the way in which the self and “significance” are experienced.