9.10: Alternate Text Descriptions

Figure 9.3.1: Antisocial Behavior by Childhood Maltreatment and MAOA Activity

This line graph compares antisocial behavior scores across three levels of childhood maltreatment (none, probable, and severe) for two groups: individuals with low MAOA activity and individuals with high MAOA activity.

The horizontal axis shows childhood maltreatment categories: none, probable, and severe. The vertical axis shows the composite index of antisocial behavior (z scores), ranging from approximately −0.5 to 1.0.

For individuals with low MAOA activity, antisocial behavior scores increase substantially as maltreatment severity increases:

• None: approximately −0.25
• Probable: approximately 0.25
• Severe: approximately 1.0

For individuals with high MAOA activity, antisocial behavior scores also increase with maltreatment but to a lesser extent:

• None: approximately −0.12
• Probable: approximately 0.0
• Severe: approximately 0.35

Overall, antisocial behavior is lowest when no maltreatment is reported and highest when severe maltreatment is reported. The increase is much steeper for individuals with low MAOA activity than for those with high MAOA activity, suggesting that low MAOA activity is associated with greater antisocial behavior in the presence of childhood maltreatment.

Figure 9.3.2: Sagittal Brain Diagram Highlighting the Hypothalamus and a Cerebral Cortex Region

This illustration shows a sagittal (side) section of the human head and brain. Most brain structures are visible, including the cerebral cortex, corpus callosum, thalamus, brainstem, cerebellum, and spinal cord.

Two brain regions are highlighted in light gray and outlined with dashed borders:

1. Hypothalamus: A small region located near the base of the brain, beneath the thalamus and above the pituitary gland. It is positioned centrally, just anterior to the brainstem.
2. Cerebral cortex region: A much larger highlighted area occupying a substantial portion of the upper and outer surface of the right side of the cerebrum. The highlighted region extends across portions of the frontal, parietal, and occipital areas of the cerebral cortex.

The figure emphasizes the relative locations and sizes of these two highlighted brain regions. The hypothalamus appears as a small, deep structure near the center of the brain, whereas the cortical region covers a broad area of the outer cerebral surface.

Figure 9.3.3: Mean Shocks Administered by Aggression Level, Experimental Block, and Drug Condition

This figure contains two side-by-side bar charts showing the mean number of shocks administered across four experimental blocks. The vertical axis ranges from 0 to 3 shocks. Orange bars represent participants who received serotonin, and purple bars represent participants who received a placebo.

The left panel shows participants with low self-reported aggression. Shock administration remains very low across all four blocks for both groups. Placebo participants administer slightly more shocks than serotonin participants in the first three blocks. In Block 4, serotonin participants administer approximately 0.4 shocks, compared with approximately 0.25 shocks for placebo participants.

The right panel shows participants with high self-reported aggression. The number of shocks administered increases across successive blocks for both groups, but the increase is substantially greater for placebo participants. Approximate mean shocks administered are:

• Block 1: Serotonin 0.1, Placebo 0.1
• Block 2: Serotonin 0.25, Placebo 0.4
• Block 3: Serotonin 0.35, Placebo 0.9
• Block 4: Serotonin 0.45, Placebo 1.7

Overall, participants with high self-reported aggression administer more shocks than participants with low self-reported aggression. Within the high-aggression group, participants receiving serotonin consistently administer fewer shocks than those receiving a placebo, suggesting an association between serotonin administration and reduced aggressive behavior.

Figure 9.3.5: Hot Sauce Allocation by Priming Condition and Essay Type

This bar chart compares the amount of hot sauce participants allocated under two priming conditions and two essay conditions. The horizontal axis shows the priming condition: Exam control and Mortality salience. The vertical axis shows grams of hot sauce allocated, ranging from 0 to 30 grams. Red bars represent a worldview-threatening essay condition, and blue bars represent a worldview-consistent essay condition.

Under the exam-control condition, participants allocated similar amounts of hot sauce regardless of essay type. Approximately 15 grams were allocated to a worldview-threatening target and about 17.5 grams to a worldview-consistent target.

Under the mortality-salience condition, participants allocated substantially more hot sauce to a worldview-threatening target and less to a worldview-consistent target. Approximately 26 grams were allocated in the worldview-threatening condition, compared with about 12 grams in the worldview-consistent condition.

Overall, the greatest amount of hot sauce was allocated when participants were reminded of their mortality and then evaluated a worldview-threatening target. The figure suggests that mortality salience increased negative behavior toward individuals with threatening worldviews while reducing negative behavior toward individuals whose views were consistent with participants' own worldviews.

Figure 9.4.1: Aggressive Responses After Violent and Nonviolent Video Game Play

This bar chart compares aggressive responses among participants who played either a nonviolent video game or a violent video game. The horizontal axis shows three dependent measures of aggression: Do/Say, Think, and Feel. The vertical axis shows the level of aggressive responses on a scale from 0 to 9.

For each measure, participants who played a violent video game scored higher than participants who played a nonviolent video game.

Approximate values are:

• Do/Say: Nonviolent video game, 3.0; Violent video game, 4.9
• Think: Nonviolent video game, 1.6; Violent video game, 2.4
• Feel: Nonviolent video game, 5.5; Violent video game, 7.1

The largest responses for both groups occur in the Feel category, followed by Do/Say, with the lowest scores in Think. Across all measures, the violent video game condition is associated with higher aggressive actions, thoughts, and feelings than the nonviolent video game condition. The figure illustrates a consistent increase in aggression-related responses following exposure to violent video games.

Figure 9.4.2: Pathway from Seeing Violence to Aggressive Thoughts and Violent Behavior

This diagram presents a sequence linking exposure to violence, aggressive thoughts, and violent behavior.

The left column, labeled "Seeing violence," contains three examples of exposure to violence:

• Violent TV
• Violent video games
• Exposure to handguns

An arrow labeled "leads to" connects these examples to the center column, labeled "Aggressive thoughts." The center column contains examples of aggressive thoughts:

• "Shoot"
• "Gun"
• "Hurt"
• "Kill"

A second arrow labeled "which creates" connects aggressive thoughts to the right column, labeled "Violent behavior." The right column contains examples of violent behaviors:

• Retaliating
• Using guns
• Gossip and ridicule

Overall, the figure illustrates a theoretical pathway in which exposure to violent media or weapons is associated with the activation of aggressive thoughts, which in turn may contribute to aggressive or violent actions.

Figure 9.5.1: Path Model Linking Perceptions, Social Goals, and Behavioral Outcomes

This path diagram illustrates relationships between perceptions, social goals, and behavioral outcomes. Rectangular boxes are connected by directional arrows labeled with standardized path coefficients.

Two perception variables appear on the left:

• Self-perception
• Perception of peers

Self-perception is positively associated with Agentic goals (path coefficient = .15).

Perception of peers is positively associated with Communal goals (path coefficient = .43).

Agentic goals are associated with two behavioral outcomes:

• Proactive aggression (positive relationship, .14)
• Prosocial behavior (negative relationship, −.13)

Communal goals are also associated with two behavioral outcomes:

• Prosocial behavior (positive relationship, .30)
• Withdrawal (negative relationship, −.13)

Overall, the model suggests that more positive peer perceptions are strongly related to communal goals, which are associated with increased prosocial behavior and decreased withdrawal. Self-perception is positively related to agentic goals, which are associated with slightly higher proactive aggression and slightly lower prosocial behavior. The figure emphasizes how different social goals may influence distinct patterns of behavior.

Figure 9.5.2: Aggressive Behavior and Testosterone Levels in Northern and Southern Students

This bar chart compares aggressive behavior and testosterone levels between northern and southern students. Red bars represent northern students, and yellow bars represent southern students.

For aggressive behavior, northern students score approximately 35, while southern students score approximately 85.

For testosterone levels, northern students score approximately 6, while southern students score approximately 12.

Overall, southern students show higher levels of both aggressive behavior and testosterone than northern students. The difference between groups is larger for aggressive behavior than for testosterone levels.