Revision Library

revisionlibrary.co.uk

A-Level · Psychology

PSY.OPT18 Ethological and Evolutionary Explanations of Aggression

AQA 7182 · Calculators not allowed · about 60 minutes

Total Marks

Name: _______________________________ Date: ____ / ____ / ______

Answer ALL questions. Show all your working.

Outline what is meant by an innate releasing mechanism (IRM) as used in ethological explanations of aggression. Name key features of an IRM and how it operates in response to environmental cues.

(Total for Question 1 is 2 marks)

Outline what is meant by a fixed action pattern (FAP) in ethology, and give one clear example relating to aggression in a non-human species, explaining why it counts as a FAP.

(Total for Question 2 is 2 marks)

Outline how ritualistic aggression and appeasement displays function in non-human animals and explain their adaptive value in terms of survival and reproductive fitness.

(Total for Question 3 is 3 marks)

Outline Daly and Wilson's evolutionary account of sexual jealousy and cuckoldry risk as an explanation for some types of male aggression in humans. Include the adaptive problem identified and the behavioural responses proposed.

(Total for Question 4 is 4 marks)

Outline an evolutionary explanation for why aggression might be adaptive in gaining resources, status or mates in humans. Give one concrete human example that illustrates this adaptive account.

(Total for Question 5 is 4 marks)

A workplace scenario: Kwame discovers messages suggesting his long-term partner has become emotionally close to a colleague and sometimes meets them outside work. Kwame is distressed and confronts the colleague angrily in front of others, later explaining he feared losing his partner and not knowing whether any sexual infidelity had occurred. Using Daly and Wilson's account of sexual jealousy and cuckoldry risk, explain why Kwame's aggressive confrontation could be interpreted as an evolved adaptive response. Refer to specific elements of the evolutionary explanation in your answer.

(Total for Question 6 is 6 marks)

Outline one piece of cross-cultural evidence that challenges a simple evolutionary account of aggression, and explain why it poses a problem for universal genetic explanations.

(Total for Question 7 is 3 marks)

Explain what is meant by 'β bias' in evolutionary explanations of aggression and give one short example of how β bias might affect conclusions about sex differences in aggression.

(Total for Question 8 is 3 marks)

Explain one methodological problem with extrapolating from animal ethology studies of aggressive fixed action patterns to human aggression. Give a specific reason why the generalisation may be limited.

(Total for Question 9 is 3 marks)

Outline one empirical piece of evidence, from Daly and Wilson or allied research, that supports an evolutionary link between jealousy and male aggression. State the finding and how it supports the evolutionary account.

(Total for Question 10 is 3 marks)

Outline how appeasement displays in animals can reduce escalation of conflict, and give one short contrasting point about how human social institutions can replace or alter the role of such displays.

(Total for Question 11 is 3 marks)

Discuss ethological and evolutionary explanations of aggression. In your answer, refer to the idea of innate releasing mechanisms and fixed action patterns, the evolutionary accounts such as cuckoldry risk and resource/status competition, and consider evaluation points including extrapolation from animals to humans, cross-cultural variation and potential bias in evolutionary theorising.

(Total for Question 12 is 16 marks)

Mark scheme · PSY.OPT18 Ethological and Evolutionary Explanations of Aggression

Question 1

B1 states that an IRM is an internal biological mechanism that responds to specific external stimuli or releasers oe
B1 states that IRMs trigger instinctive behavioural sequences such as fixed action patterns when the releaser stimulus is present oe
Answer: An IRM is an internal, biologically based trigger that responds to particular external stimuli, releasing an innate behavioural response; IRMs detect releaser cues and activate fixed action patterns such as ritualised aggression.

Question 2

B1 defines FAP as an innate, stereotyped sequence of behaviour that, once triggered, runs to completion oe
B1 gives an aggression-related example, e.g. a species-typical threat display or ritual fight with a predictable sequence of actions, and links it to the definition oe
Answer: A FAP is an inherited, stereotyped sequence of behaviour that once triggered runs to completion; for example many bird species perform a fixed threat display of raised feathers, vocal call and approach-retreat movements, a predictable sequence that qualifies as a FAP.

Question 3

M1 describes ritualistic aggression and appeasement as patterned displays, such as threat postures, vocalisations, or submissive gestures that reduce the chance of full fighting oe
A1 explains adaptive value: these displays reduce risk of injury and conserve energy, so individuals survive longer and have better reproductive prospects oe
A1 notes signalling function: displays communicate status, intent or strength, helping resolve disputes without costly fights and so improving fitness oe
Answer: Ritualistic aggression and appeasement are patterned displays, like threat postures or submissive gestures, that resolve disputes without full fighting. They are adaptive because they reduce the risk of injury and save energy, and they communicate status or intent to avoid costly battles, which aids survival and reproductive success.

Question 4

M1 states that sexual jealousy evolved to protect paternity certainty and reduce the risk of cuckoldry oe
A1 explains that males face higher reproductive costs from investing in unrelated offspring, so mechanisms to detect and deter infidelity would be adaptive oe
A1 identifies behavioural responses such as mate-guarding, vigilance for infidelity cues, and sometimes aggressive or retaliatory behaviour toward rivals or unfaithful partners oe
A1 links the account to Daly and Wilson's emphasis on evolved psychological mechanisms sensitive to cues of cuckoldry risk oe
Answer: Daly and Wilson argue sexual jealousy evolved to protect paternity certainty by motivating mate-guarding, vigilance for infidelity cues and, in some cases, aggression to deter rivals or punish unfaithful partners. Because raising unrelated offspring imposes high fitness costs on males, such responses would have been favoured by selection.

Question 5

M1 states that aggression can increase access to resources, social status or mating opportunities, which can improve reproductive success oe
A1 explains that individuals who secured resources or status would have had better survival or mating prospects and so such tendencies could be selected for oe
A1 gives a concrete human example, e.g. male-male physical competition for mates or status fights that gain access to resources or higher social standing oe
A1 links the example to reproductive advantage, e.g. higher status leading to more mating opportunities or better provision for offspring oe
Answer: Aggression can be adaptive because it may secure resources, status or mates, improving reproductive success. For example, male-male competition that results in higher social status can lead to more mating opportunities and better ability to provide for offspring, which would be favoured by selection.

Question 6

M1 identifies the key feature of Daly and Wilson's account applied to the scenario, e.g. fear of cuckoldry or threat to paternity certainty as the adaptive problem oe
A1 explains that aggression or mate-guarding behaviours would be predicted where cues suggest partner's emotional closeness to another, as these cues may have indicated infidelity risk in ancestral environments oe
A1 links Kwame's public confrontation to a deterrent function, showing aggressive action might reduce rival access or signal commitment, consistent with evolved mate-retention strategies oe
M1 considers male-specific costs: explains that males face the unique adaptive problem of paternity uncertainty which can lead to stronger jealousy-based aggression in some contexts oe
A1 applies this to Kwame by noting his distress at possible loss of reproductive opportunity and how aggression could be a proximate behavioural response aimed at protecting that opportunity oe
A1 may note limitations briefly, e.g. modern social norms can make such aggression maladaptive today, but this does not contradict the evolutionary explanation for why the impulse arose oe
Answer: Kwame's angry confrontation can be interpreted with Daly and Wilson's account as an evolved mate-retention response to cues suggesting possible infidelity, addressing the adaptive problem of paternity uncertainty. Emotional closeness or secret meetings may be perceived as cues of cuckoldry risk; aggressive deterrence can reduce rival access and signal commitment. Because males historically faced costs from investing in unrelated offspring, such aggression would have been selected as a proximate mate-guarding tactic, although in modern society the behaviour may be maladaptive or socially unacceptable.

Question 7

M1 identifies genuine cross-cultural evidence, e.g. societies where rates or forms of aggression differ markedly from the patterns predicted by a simple evolutionary account oe
A1 explains why this challenges universality, e.g. cultural norms, social structure or resource distribution can change the expression of aggression and so a purely genetic explanation is insufficient oe
A1 may give an example such as lower rates of lethal male violence in certain egalitarian or matrilineal societies, undermining a claim that male violence is universally inevitable oe
Answer: For example, some societies show low rates of lethal male violence or different forms of conflict resolution, which suggests cultural norms and social organisation shape aggression. This challenges a universal genetic account because it shows the expression of aggression varies with culture and context rather than being fixed across humans.

Question 8

M1 defines β bias correctly, e.g. ignoring or minimising sex differences and assuming male-based findings generalise to females oe
A1 gives a relevant example, e.g. evolutionary accounts focusing on male-male competition may assume female aggression is the same or marginal, overlooking female-specific strategies such as indirect aggression oe
A1 explains consequence: this can lead to incomplete theories and misinterpretation of data about aggression across sexes oe
Answer: Beta bias is the tendency to assume male-based research or theories apply equally to females. For example, if evolutionary accounts emphasise male-male physical competition, they may overlook female strategies like indirect aggression or context-dependent aggression, producing incomplete or biased conclusions.

Question 9

M1 identifies a methodological or conceptual problem, e.g. differences in cognitive complexity, social learning, language and conscious decision making in humans compared with animals oe
A1 explains why this limits extrapolation, e.g. human aggression is often mediated by culture, moral reasoning and complex social institutions that animal models do not capture oe
A1 may give a concrete example, e.g. ritual displays in birds are innate and stereotyped, whereas human displays and violence are context-sensitive and subject to norms and laws oe
Answer: Animal FAPs are useful models, but humans differ in cognitive complexity, social learning and language, so human aggression is more influenced by culture, moral reasoning and institutions. Therefore simple extrapolation from animal ritual displays to human violence can be misleading.

Question 10

M1 states a genuine empirical finding, e.g. higher rates of male violence associated with suspected infidelity or evidence that men show more distress at sexual infidelity compared with women in some studies oe
A1 links the finding to the evolutionary claim, e.g. men are more likely to respond aggressively to perceived sexual infidelity because of paternity uncertainty and the costs of cuckoldry oe
A1 may note the study/source, e.g. Daly and Wilson's comparative analyses of homicide or survey evidence on reactions to sexual versus emotional infidelity oe
Answer: For example, Daly and Wilson report patterns where male violence is often triggered by suspected partner infidelity and survey evidence shows men report greater distress at sexual infidelity than women, supporting the idea that paternity uncertainty underlies some male aggression.

Question 11

M1 outlines how appeasement displays, such as submissive postures or grooming, signal non-threat and reduce the need for physical fighting oe
A1 explains adaptive outcome: reduces injury risk and conserves energy, settling disputes via communication rather than force oe
A1 gives contrasting human point: social institutions, laws or mediation can fulfil a similar conflict-reducing role and can make overt appeasement displays less necessary or change their form oe
Answer: Appeasement displays signal non-threat and help resolve conflicts without fighting, reducing injury and saving energy. In humans, institutions like legal systems or formal mediation can replace or modify these functions, reducing the reliance on instinctive appeasement behaviours.

Question 12

Level 4 (13-16): Knowledge of ethological and evolutionary explanations is accurate and detailed. Discussion is thorough and balanced, integrating AO1, AO2 and AO3 material effectively. Evaluation considers strengths and limitations with clear, developed reasoning and relevant evidence. Counterarguments and applications are addressed and specialist terminology is used accurately.
Level 3 (9-12): Knowledge of the explanations is sound, with clear description and some detail. Discussion includes relevant evaluation and some integration of evidence, but may be less developed in places. Application to human behaviour is present and mostly appropriate. Specialist terms are used correctly.
Level 2 (5-8): Some relevant knowledge of ethological or evolutionary accounts is present but limited. Discussion and evaluation are basic or partially developed. Application to humans is attempted but may be superficial or occasionally inaccurate. Answer may show limited organisation.
Level 1 (1-4): Knowledge is very limited and answer tends towards unsupported assertions or lists. Evaluation is minimal or absent. Little or no relevant application is provided. Specialist terminology is largely missing or used inappropriately.
Level 0 (0): No creditable content.
Indicative content:
- AO1: Ethological concepts include innate releasing mechanisms (IRMs) that detect specific external releasers and activate fixed action patterns (FAPs), innate stereotyped sequences of behaviour. In animals these explain ritualised fighting and appeasement displays.
- AO1: Evolutionary explanations argue aggression can be adaptive by securing resources, status and mating opportunities, and that specific forms such as male sexual jealousy evolved to reduce cuckoldry risk, as argued by Daly and Wilson.
- AO2: Application to humans includes mate-retention behaviours, male-male competition for status and resources, and culturally variable expressions such as honour-related aggression in some contexts. Describe how an IRM/FAP model might map onto human ritualised aggression such as formalised duels or status displays.
- AO3: Strengths include explanatory power for cross-species similarities, the ability to generate testable hypotheses and empirical support such as correlations between suspected infidelity and male violence in some datasets.
- AO3: Criticisms include the problem of extrapolating from animals to humans because humans have culture, complex cognition and social institutions that alter behaviour; animal FAPs are more rigid than human actions which are flexible and learned.
- AO3: Cross-cultural evidence shows wide variation in forms and frequency of aggression, challenging simplistic universal genetic claims; some societies have low levels of lethal violence, suggesting cultural moderators.
- AO3: Beta bias and gender issues: many evolutionary accounts emphasise male competition and may underplay female strategies or context-dependent female aggression, risking biased theorising.
- AO3: Ethical and practical implications: evolved tendencies may be used to justify aggression unless tempered by recognition of cultural and moral controls; modern social costs can make formerly adaptive behaviours maladaptive.
- AO3: Balanced conclusion might argue ethological and evolutionary accounts offer valuable frameworks but must be integrated with social, cultural and individual explanations for a full account of human aggression.

Ethological and Evolutionary Explanations of Aggression - Worksheets, Questions and Revision