Explosive Matters: Does Venting Anger Reduce or Increase Aggression? Differences in Anger Venting Effects in Violent Offenders

The current study aims to investigate if venting anger reduces or increases aggression. Therefore, we allowed venting anger and measured its effect on aggression after two different anger provocation paradigms in a sample of forensic psychiatric offenders (FPO, N = 45) and penitentiary offenders (PO, N = 22). These provocation paradigms included an Articulated Thoughts in Simulated Situations (ATSS) comprising anger stories, and a harassing body opponent bag (BOB) measuring punching force. To determine aggression pre/post provocation, implicit anger and self-reported aggression was assessed. Further, the relation between provocation paradigm response, aggression, and psychopathy was evaluated. Results indicate that venting anger reduces aggression in FPO, but not in PO, where even evidence for increase in one aggression index was found. Furthermore, groups differed in immediate responses during provocation, with FPO showing significantly more verbal aggressive responses during ATSS but less physically aggressive responses during BOB than PO. Moreover, results show a correlation between automatic cognitive anger biases during provocation and psychopathy in FPO. In PO, aggressive behavioral intentions and anger control problems during provocation were both related to self-reported aggression. For clinical practice, ATSS could be utilized as a paradigm exploring the actual state of specific cognitive biases toward anger

Amygdala connectivity and aggression

Neurobiological models propose that reactive aggression is predicated on impairments in amygdala-prefrontal connectivity that subserves moral decision-making and emotion regulation. The amygdala is a key component within this neural network that modulates reactive aggression. We provide a review of amygdala dysfunctional brain networks leading to reactive aggressive behavior. We elaborate on key concepts, focusing on moral decision-making and emotion regulation in a developmental context, and brain network connectivity factors relating to amygdala (dys)function-factors which we suggest predispose to reactive aggression. We additionally discuss insights into the latest treatment interventions, providing the utilization of the scientific findings for practice.</p

Screening for psychopaths: a validation with norm scores of the Dutch psychopathic personality inventory-screening device

e current study reports validation results for the Psychopathic Personality Inventory (PPI) and its subscales, and for a newly developed PPI-Short Form (PPI-SF) in forensic and non-forensic populations. We also provide criterion refer- ence scores for the PPI and the PPI-SF. In Study 1, we used PPI data from 1,065 participants and supplementary PCL-R data from a subsample of 91 forensic offenders. Mokken scale analysis was used to construct the PPI-SF. In Study 2, PPI-SF and PCL-R data were collected from 60 participants. The study yielded promising but preliminary support for the construct validity of the PPI and the PPI-SF. The PPI-SF is of interest for risk assessment because of its (a) strong relationship with the PCL-R total score and (b) subscales known for their predictive value for violence and criminal recidivism

Anger provocation increases limbic and decreases medial prefrontal cortex connectivity with the left amygdala in reactive aggressive violent offenders

Neurobiological models propose reactive aggression as a failure in emotion regulation, caused by an imbalance between prefrontal cortical control and excessive bottom-up signals of negative affect by limbic regions, including the amygdala. Therefore, we hypothesize a negative correlation between PFC and amygdala activity (pre/post resting-state scans) in violent offenders. In this study resting-state fMRI was administered before and after an emotion (anger and happiness) provocation or engagement task within 18 male violent offenders scoring high on reactive aggression, and 18 male non-offender controls. Research in emotional pre/post resting-state showed altered connectivity by task performance. Therefore, bilateral amygdala region of interest (ROI) whole brain functional connectivity analysis tested dynamic change differences between pre and post resting-state connectivity between groups. Self-reported anger showed a positive significant relationship with medial prefrontal cortex activity in the pre-task scan and significantly increased during the emotion task in both the violent and control group. Imaging results showed a significant decrease in amygdala - medial prefrontal functional connectivity in the violent offenders and an increase in the non-offender controls after the emotion task. The opposite pattern was found for amygdala connectivity with the (para) limbic regions: violent offenders showed increased connectivity and non-offender controls showed decreased connectivity. The present results indicate that reactive aggression might stem from a focus on emotion processing, as indicated by an increase in limbic functional connectivity. The combination of a focus on emotion, along with a lack of medial prefrontal cortex regulation, has the potential to grow out of control e.g. in reactive aggression

Psychopaths know right from wrong but don’t care

Adult psychopaths have deficits in emotional processing and inhibitory control, engage in morally inappropriate behavior, and generally fail to distinguish moral from conventional violations. These observations, together with a dominant tradition in the discipline which sees emotional processes as causally necessary for moral judgment, have led to the conclusion that psychopaths lack an understanding of moral rights and wrongs. We test an alternative explanation: psychopaths have normal understanding of right and wrong, but abnormal regulation of morally appropriate behavior. We presented psychopaths with moral dilemmas, contrasting their judgments with age- and sex-matched (i) healthy subjects and (ii) non-psychopathic, delinquents. Subjects in each group judged cases of personal harms (i.e. requiring physical contact) as less permissible than impersonal harms, even though both types of harms led to utilitarian gains. Importantly, however, psychopaths’ pattern of judgments on different dilemmas was the same as those of the other subjects. These results force a rejection of the strong hypothesis that emotional processes are causally necessary for judgments of moral dilemmas, suggesting instead that psychopaths understand the distinction between right and wrong, but do not care about such knowledge, or the consequences that ensue from their morally inappropriate behavior