Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 7-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Proactive and Reactive Aggression: An Analysis of Subtypes Based on Teacher Perceptions

Proactive and Reactive Aggression: An Analysis of Subtypes Based on Teacher Perceptions Examined differences in teachers' perceptions of academic and social behavior in two subtypes of aggression in children identified as proactive and reactive. Subjects were 88 boys, ages 6 to 12 years, referred by teachers to a school-based social skills program for aggressive children. On the basis of median splits on teacher-rated measures of proactive and reactive aggression, children were categorized as: high proactive/high reactive, high proactive/low reactive, low proactive/high reactive, and low proactive/low reactive. As expected, the low proactive/low reactive group was rated as more competent in certain behaviors relative to the high proactive and/or high reactive boys. Mixed-aggressive and low proactive/high reactive children were viewed as highly aggressive and lacking in problem-solving, sharing, and negotiating abilities. Unlike the low proactive/high reactive group, the mixed-aggressive group, although seen as relatively popular and happy, had difficulty keeping out of fights and displayed poor sportsmanship. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Clinical Child Psychology Taylor & Francis

Proactive and Reactive Aggression: An Analysis of Subtypes Based on Teacher Perceptions

Proactive and Reactive Aggression: An Analysis of Subtypes Based on Teacher Perceptions

Journal of Clinical Child Psychology , Volume 21 (3): 8 – Sep 1, 1992

Abstract

Examined differences in teachers' perceptions of academic and social behavior in two subtypes of aggression in children identified as proactive and reactive. Subjects were 88 boys, ages 6 to 12 years, referred by teachers to a school-based social skills program for aggressive children. On the basis of median splits on teacher-rated measures of proactive and reactive aggression, children were categorized as: high proactive/high reactive, high proactive/low reactive, low proactive/high reactive, and low proactive/low reactive. As expected, the low proactive/low reactive group was rated as more competent in certain behaviors relative to the high proactive and/or high reactive boys. Mixed-aggressive and low proactive/high reactive children were viewed as highly aggressive and lacking in problem-solving, sharing, and negotiating abilities. Unlike the low proactive/high reactive group, the mixed-aggressive group, although seen as relatively popular and happy, had difficulty keeping out of fights and displayed poor sportsmanship.

Loading next page...
 
/lp/taylor-francis/proactive-and-reactive-aggression-an-analysis-of-subtypes-based-on-VtHDa9nnh1

References (18)

Publisher
Taylor & Francis
Copyright
Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN
0047-228X
DOI
10.1207/s15374424jccp2103_2
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Examined differences in teachers' perceptions of academic and social behavior in two subtypes of aggression in children identified as proactive and reactive. Subjects were 88 boys, ages 6 to 12 years, referred by teachers to a school-based social skills program for aggressive children. On the basis of median splits on teacher-rated measures of proactive and reactive aggression, children were categorized as: high proactive/high reactive, high proactive/low reactive, low proactive/high reactive, and low proactive/low reactive. As expected, the low proactive/low reactive group was rated as more competent in certain behaviors relative to the high proactive and/or high reactive boys. Mixed-aggressive and low proactive/high reactive children were viewed as highly aggressive and lacking in problem-solving, sharing, and negotiating abilities. Unlike the low proactive/high reactive group, the mixed-aggressive group, although seen as relatively popular and happy, had difficulty keeping out of fights and displayed poor sportsmanship.

Journal

Journal of Clinical Child PsychologyTaylor & Francis

Published: Sep 1, 1992

There are no references for this article.