188

British Journal of Social Psychology (2012), 51, 188–196C© 2011 The British Psychological Society

TheBritishPsychologicalSociety

www.wileyonlinelibrary.com

Brief report

Backbiting and bloodshed in books: Short-termeffects of reading physical and relationalaggression in literature

Sarah M. Coyne, Robert Ridge, McKay Stevens, Mark Callister,and Laura StockdaleBrigham Young University, Utah, USA

The current research consisted of two studies examining the effects of reading physicaland relational aggression in literature. In both studies, participants read one of twostories (containing physical or relational aggression), and then participated in one of twotasks to measure aggression. In Study 1, participants who read the physical aggressionstory were subsequently more physically aggressive than those who read the relationalaggression story. Conversely, in Study 2, participants who read the relational aggressionstory were subsequently more relationally aggressive than those who read the physicalaggression story. Combined, these results show evidence for specific effects of readingaggressive content in literature.

Research has found that exposure to media violence can influence subsequent aggressivebehaviour, cognitions, and helping behaviour (e.g., Anderson et al., 2003). However,most research has focused on violence in film, television, or video games. Furthermore,the vast majority of research has focused on physical forms of violence. To furtherexpand research in media violence, the current study examines the understudiedarea of aggression in novels, specifically focusing on physical and relational forms ofaggression.

The majority of adults and adolescents read for pleasure (Associated Press, 2007;Kaiser Family Foundation, 2010) and most research shows positive effects for individualswho read (see Blake & Maiese, 2008; Rangappa, 1993; Wilczynski, 2006). However, toour knowledge, almost all research conducted on the effects of reading have focusedon time spent reading and ability, rather than content. Several media violence studiessuggest that while time spent with the media is important, exposure to violent contentof the media is a superior predictor of actual behaviour (e.g., Anderson, Gentile, &Buckley, 2007). Thus, while the general effects of reading are positive, the effects

∗Correspondence should be addressed to Sarah M. Coyne, School of Family Life, Brigham Young University, JFSB 2087, Provo,UT 84602, USA (e-mail: smcoyne@byu.edu).

DOI:10.1111/j.2044-8309.2011.02053.x

Aggression in books 189

of reading specific types of content (including violence) are less well specified.Previous research has shown that aggression is portrayed frequently in literature(Coyne et al., in press). Accordingly, the primary aim of the current study is to assesswhether there are any differential effects of reading various forms of aggression inliterature.

According to a number of theories, including both the information-processing modeland the general aggression model (GAM) (Anderson & Bushman, 2002; Huesmann,1988), exposure to aggression in literature could activate aggression related scripts,increasing the likelihood that an individual would behave aggressively in the shortterm. Certainly, there is evidence that exposure to aggression in other types ofmedia can increase aggressive behaviour (e.g., Bushman & Anderson, 2001). Otherstudies have measured aggressive behaviour after exposure to aggression in vignettes(e.g., Winstok, 2010; Pronk & Zimmer-Gembeck, 2010). Such vignettes might be thoughtof as ‘ultra-short stories’ as they contain several similarities (e.g., basic plot, characters)with more mainstream literature. However, these should not be thought of as true shortstories as most vignettes are extremely short (less than 100 words) and contain littleif any descriptive detail. Furthermore, aggression vignettes are usually ambiguous, sothe aggressor’s intent is unclear (e.g., Crain, Finch, & Foster, 2005). Also, most vignettestudies do not measure actual aggressive behaviour after reading the vignettes; rather,almost all examine aggressive intentions or cognitions (e.g., Coyne, Archer, & Eslea,2004; Linder, Werner, & Lyle, 2010; cf. van Nieuwenhuijzen et al., 2005). Accordingly,any inference to actual aggressive behaviour is limited.

To our knowledge, only a few studies have examined effects of reading aggressivebehaviour in actual literature. Kirsh and Olczak (2000, 2002a, 2002b), for example,found that participants exposed to extremely violent comic books ascribed more hostileintent and suggested more retaliation in hypothetical relational and physical aggressionscenarios. Again, these studies only examined cognition and intent, as opposed to actualaggressive behaviour. On the other hand, Bushman, Ridge, Das, Key, and Busath (2007)examined the effects of reading scriptural violence on aggression. Participants who readGod-sanctioned violence were subsequently more physically aggressive than those whoread non-sanctioned violence. These studies provide some evidence that reading certaintypes of violence can increase aggressive cognition and behaviour, at least in the shortterm.

These studies have all focused on physical forms of media aggression, and in veryspecific forms of literature (comic books and scriptures). However, according to theGAM, exposure to a media depiction of any type of aggression could potentially have aneffect on subsequent outcomes. It may be that exposure to physical violence in literaturemight prime an individual to engage in physical aggression should the situation permit.However, exposure to other types of aggression in literature may show differentialeffects on behaviour if they prime different constructs in memory. One such example,relational aggression, is defined as behaviour aimed at harming a person’s relationshipsor social standing in the group. Such behaviour is found frequently on television(e.g., Coyne & Archer, 2004; Coyne, Robinson, & Nelson, 2010; Glascock, 2008; Linder& Gentile, 2009) and in films (Coyne & Whitehead, 2008) and several studies have nowfound that exposure to relational aggression in the media can influence subsequentrelational aggression, showing a more specific effect to viewing aggression in the media(Coyne et al., 2004; Coyne et al., 2011; Linder & Gentile, 2009). While a few studiesexamine relational aggression as an outcome or as media content, it is rare for studies toexamine multiple forms of aggression as both content and outcomes. Accordingly, the

190 Sarah M. Coyne et al.

current study aims to examine both physical and relational aggression (as content andoutcome) to assess whether specific effects do exist.

The current research presents two experimental studies intended to fill markedgaps in the literature. Firstly, previous research has focused on very specific types ofliterature (comic books and scriptures). To our knowledge, the current studies representinitial examinations into the effects of reading aggression in more mainstream literature.Secondly, previous research has focused on physically violent content, while the currentstudies will examine both physical and relational aggression content. Thirdly, the currentstudies will examine both physical and relational behavioural outcomes after readingliterature.

STUDY 1: PHYSICAL AGGRESSIONStudy 1 examines the effect of reading two types of aggression on subsequent physicalaggression. Based on the GAM, we hypothesize a specific effect: participants who readphysical aggression literature will be more physically aggressive than those readingrelational aggression.

MethodParticipantsParticipants consisted of 67 (54% female; M age = 20.36 years, SD age = 3.88 years)undergraduate students at a large university in the Western United States. Participantswere recruited in introductory psychology classes and given extra credit for theirparticipation in the study. There were 33 participants in the relational aggressioncondition and 34 in the physical aggression condition. Men and women were splitequally between conditions.

ProcedureThe main procedure consisted of (a) reading a cover story, (b) receiving biographicalsketches from another participant, (c) reading the story and provocation, and (d) playingthe competitive reaction time (CRT) (Bushman, 1995; Taylor, 1967). Each step will bedetailed below.

Cover storyParticipants were told a detailed cover story that they were taking part in a psychologicalstudy on impressions formed between people who have never met face-to-face, but whohave interacted over the Internet. They were told they would play a ‘game’ with anotherindividual who they only met online. They were also told that the primary researcherwas a good friend of a professor in another department at the same university who wastrying to publish a collection of 12 short stories involving college life. Participants weretold that before approaching a publisher, this professor wanted to have current collegestudents read one of the 12 short stories to assess how entertaining and ‘true to life’ eachstory was before deciding whether to include the particular story in her collection. Thus,as a favour to the professor, the primary researcher was having his research participantsread one story before starting the ‘real’ impression formation study. A pilot study with agroup of 10 participants revealed that the cover story and procedures described belowwere highly believable.

Aggression in books 191

Biographical sketchParticipants were then told that upon finishing the story they would play one of twogames. They would be randomly paired with either one or two partners via an onlineselection process. To aid in the impression formation task, participants were also askedto choose a screen name and provide some basic information (e.g., hobbies, favouriterestaurant) to their potential partners. After providing this information, participantsreceived a ‘bio’ of the participant with whom they might play the game. This biowas selected from a pilot study involving 75 participants (65% female) who receivedsix different biographical sketches and six different screen names. Participants wereasked to read each screen name or biographical sketch and imagine that it was a realperson. All bios were rather generic (e.g., hobbies: hanging out with friends). Based onthis information, and using a seven-point Likert scale (1 = not at all, 7 = extremely),participants rated each person on friendliness and likeableness. From this, the gender-neutral screen name ‘335taylor’ and bios rating high on friendliness and likeability werechosen.

Reading the story and provocationAfter receiving the sketch, participants began to read what they thought was one of 12different stories. In reality, they were randomly assigned (using a random number table)to read one of two short stories (one showing physical aggression, one showing relationalaggression) as treatment conditions for the study. Both stories were approximately1,200 words long, representing an amalgamation of several aggressive incidents found inpublished literature (Coyne et al., in press). Both stories involved a new college freshmanwho had just moved into her first dorm room. Her roommate is messy, unhelpful,and rather conceited. The new freshman has an altercation with her roommate overher attitude and untidy habits. Both stories are nearly identical, save for the followingaggressive incident. In the physical aggression condition, the freshman initiates a physicalfight involving slapping, scratching, pushing, and throwing objects. In the relationalaggression condition, the freshman secretly records the roommate breaking some dormrules and threatens to post the video on YouTube. In both conditions, the freshman isrewarded for her behaviour, as the roommate apologizes and promises to try harder tobe a better roommate. A copy of the stories can be obtained by contacting the primaryauthor of the paper.

To ensure that the two stories were as similar as possible, yet showed differencesin aggressive content, one of the two stories was given to 42 independent raters(48% female; M age = 26.48, SD age = 9.36). Each participant read the story andcompleted a questionnaire asking the participant to rate the story on 16 different items onan 11-point scale (see Bushman, 1995 for a similar scale). A MANOVA examined any storydifferences in excitement level (e.g., exciting, interesting), story aggressiveness (bothphysical and relational), and other variables measured (e.g., frightening, humorous). Anoverall effect of story type was revealed, F (11, 30) = 9.80, p < .001, �2 = .78, showingthat the physically aggressive story was rated as more physically aggressive than therelational story, F (1, 40) = 55.47, p < .001, �2 = .58. Additionally, the relationalaggression story was rated as more relationally aggressive than the physical story,F (1, 40) = 73.94, p < .001, �2 = .65. There were no significant differences betweenthe stories on any other measured variable.

After finishing the story, participants were supposed to contact their partners viaan internal messaging system to let them know they were ready to play the game.

192 Sarah M. Coyne et al.

Approximately two-thirds of the way through the story the participant received a friendlymessage from 335taylor that read, ‘looks like i’m done now’. A few more pages into thestory, the participant received another message that read, ‘ok, [participant screen name],or whatever, can u hurry up?!? i have to play this game with u 2. lets get going!’ Thenafter the final page in the story, the participant received an antagonistic message thatread, ‘ok, seriously!! can u hurry up?!? i have stuff to do and you’re wasting my time!!’The purpose of the inflammatory messages was to provoke the participant, and thengive them a potential reason to aggress against ‘335taylor’ at a later time.

Physical aggression: CRT taskAfter reading the entire story, participants took part in a CRT task, which representeda measure of physical aggression (e.g. Anderson & Bushman, 1997; Taylor, 1967).Essentially, this task consists of 25 trials where participants choose from 10 noiselevels (ranging from 0 to 105 db) and 10 noise durations (ranging from 0 to 5 s) tobe administered to the opponent should they show a slower reaction time in a button-pushing contest. The average levels of noise and duration were computed. These scoreswere highly correlated (r = .94) and were averaged to form an overall measure of physicalaggression, with higher numbers suggesting a higher level of aggressive behaviour.

ResultsAn independent samples t-test was conducted to assess the effect of story type (physicalor relational) on physical aggression (using the CRT). Physical aggression did not differby gender of participant, t(59) = 1.45, p = .15. However, the results revealed a significantstory-type effect, t(59) = 2.04, p < .05, d = .51 (effect size corrected for small samplebias as described by Hedges & Olkin, 1985). Specifically, participants who read thephysical aggression story were more physically aggressive (M = 5.00, SD = 2.27) thanthose who read the relational aggression story (M = 3.94, SD = 1.82).

STUDY 2: RELATIONAL AGGRESSIONStudy 1 seems to indicate a specific effect of reading aggression; those participants whoread the physical aggression story were more physically aggressive than those who reada relationally aggressive passage. The purpose of Study 2 was to further examine thesespecific effects. This time, the primary purpose was to assess the specific effects ofreading aggression on subsequent relational aggression. Again, based on the GAM, wehypothesized a specific effect of reading aggression: participants who read relationalaggression literature would be more relationally aggressive than those reading physicalaggression.

MethodParticipants consisted of 90 (50% female, M age = 19.32 years, SD = 2.06) undergraduatestudents, recruited from introductory psychology classes. Again, students received extracredit for their participation. There were 46 participants in the relational aggressioncondition and 44 in the physical aggression condition. Again, there was a fairly evengender split between conditions.

Aggression in books 193

Procedure

Initial procedureThe same cover story was told to participants in Study 2 as was told in Study 1. Participantsagain were asked to provide a biographical sketch. As the relational aggression taskinvolves three people (including the participant), participants received two biographicalsketches from their presumed partners. These bios (‘335taylor’, used in Study 1, and‘soccerfan10’) were selected from the previously mentioned pilot study. The namesand biographical sketches, respectively, did not differ as a function of friendliness,t(74) = 1.36, p = .18; t(74) = .32, p = .75, or likeability, t(74) = .84, p = .41; t(74) = .92,p = .36.

Participants next read one of the two stories previously described (either physicalor relational). Again, participants received messages from their presumed partners atthe same intervals as described in the previous study, with two exceptions. After theinitial message from 335taylor, they received a message from soccerfan10 that read ‘I’mdone now’. We also changed the final message from 335taylor to read, ‘ok, seriously!!can u hurry up?!? i have stuff to do and you’re wasting my time!! i’m not throwing theball to u!’ The Cyberball task, as we will explain next, isn’t as obviously competitive asthe CRT; thus, after pilot testing, this final phrase was considered necessary to provokeparticipants into aggressing.

Relational aggression: CyberballExperimental paradigms of relational aggression are relatively rare. Most existingparadigms involve some contrived task with a real life confederate where participantshave the option to gossip about, exclude, or negatively evaluate another individual(see Coyne et al., 2008; Ostrov, Woods, Jansen, Casas, & Crick, 2004). Behaviour isoften observed and then coded for several relationally aggressive behaviours. However,such tasks are often time intensive, expensive, and subject to experimental bias if theconfederate behaves even slightly differently from one condition to the next. To beconsistent with Study 1, relational aggression was measured via a computer-mediatedtask, which has the benefits of being less time intensive and more consistent acrossconditions. Accordingly, to measure relational aggression in the current study, a virtualball toss computer program called ‘Cyberball’ (see Williams & Jarvis, 2006 for a fulldescription) was modified.

After finishing the story, participants were led to believe they were playing an onlinevirtual ball toss game with the two other participants (335taylor and soccerfan10),though all tosses were predetermined. In previous research, Cyberball has typicallybeen used as a way to induce feelings of ostracism (see Williams, Cheung, & Choi,2000). However, the current study modified Cyberball in order to measure ostracism(dependent variable), rather than induce it (independent variable).

Ostracism is a clear form of relational aggression (see Williams & Warburton, 2003)and is one behaviour included in most classic pen and paper relational aggressionmeasures (e.g., Bjorkqvist, Lagerspetz, & Osterman, 1992; Crick & Grotpeter, 1995).Instead of ostracizing the participants, Cyberball was programmed so the participantwould get approximately one-third of the throws. The receiver of the participant’ssubsequent throw was then coded. As stated previously, we purposefully gave par-ticipants a reason to aggress against ‘335taylor’. Thus, we operationalized relationalaggression as the degree to which 335taylor was excluded from the ball-throwing task;essentially by throwing the ball more frequently to the other player (soccerfan10).

194 Sarah M. Coyne et al.

A lower number of ball throws to 335taylor indicates a higher level of relationalaggression.

ResultsThe number of times each participant threw the ball to 335taylor (out of a possible 10)was calculated. This did not differ by gender, t(88) = 1.01, p = .85. An independentsamples t-test was conducted to assess the effects of story type on relational aggression.A significant story-type effect was revealed, t(88) = 2. 43, p < .05, d = .52 (again,corrected for small sample bias), with participants reading the relational aggressionstory (M = 4.30, SD = 1.26) showing more relational aggression than those who readthe physical aggression story (M = 4.86, SD = .88).

DiscussionAs a whole, we found that exposure to aggression in literature showed a specific effecton subsequent aggressive behaviour. This supported our hypotheses in both studies.In Study 1, participants who read a story containing physical aggression were muchmore physically aggressive (as measured by the CRT) than those who read relationalaggression. Conversely, in Study 2, participants who read the relational aggression storywere much more likely to be relationally aggressive (in Cyberball) than those who readabout physical aggression.

Combined, these studies extend the media violence literature to show that readingaggression in literature can influence subsequent aggressive behaviour, which tends tobe specific to the type of aggression contained in the story. Though previous studies haveshown an effect of reading physical aggression in comic books (e.g., Kirsh & Olcsak,2000, 2002a, 2002b) and scriptures (e.g., Bushman et al., 2007), to our knowledge, thisis the first study to show that exposure to relational or physical aggression in mainstreamliterature can have a differential effect on aggressive behaviour. These studies support thegeneral aggression model (Bushman & Anderson, 2001), and the information-processingtheory (Huesmann, 1988), which would suggest that in the short term, reading acts ofaggression would activate aggression-related scripts specific to that form of aggression.For example, reading physical aggression would activate like physical aggression scripts,increasing the likelihood that the individual would then behave in a physically aggressivemanner (same for relational aggression).

It should be noted that these results do not answer the question of whether simplyreading aggression in literature (as opposed to non-aggressive content) can increaseaggressive behaviour. Rather our results show a differential effect of reading variousforms of aggression. Future research should compare aggressive content with a non-aggressive control condition to assess whether reading aggressive content can increasean individual’s level of aggression.

It should be noted that the current research had several other limitations. Firstly,participants were provoked in both studies, but it is unknown whether reading aggressivestories would show the same effects in the absence of provocation. Additionally,participants only read short stories; the effect of reading entire novels is likely a distinctexperience and should be examined. Despite these limitations, this study adds to theliterature on media violence by showing that exposure to different forms of aggressionin literature can have a differential effect on subsequent aggressive behaviour. Our studysuggests that novels, as a form of media, should not continue to be ignored in the research

Aggression in books 195

literature, and that attention to the content of books, as opposed to time spent readingmay be one useful avenue of future research.

ReferencesAnderson, C. A., Berkowitz, L., Donnerstein, E., Huesmann, L. R., Johnson, J. D., Linz, D., . . .

Wartella, E. (2003). The influence of media violence on youth. Psychological Science in thePublic Interest, 4, 81–110. doi:10.1111/j.1529-1006.2003.pspi 1433.x

Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (1997). External validity of “trivial” experiments: The case oflaboratory aggression. General Psychology Review, 1, 19–41. doi:10.1037/1089-2680.1.1.19

Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2002). The general aggression model: An integrated social-cognitive model of human aggression. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 27–51.

Anderson, C. A., Gentile, D. A., & Buckley, K. A. (2007). Violent video game effects onchildren and adolescents: Theory, research, and public policy. New York: Oxford UniversityPress.

Associated Press (2007). Poll: One in four adults read no books last year. Retrieved from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20381678/ns/us news-life//

Bjorkqvist, K., Lagerspetz, K., & Osterman, K. (1992). Direct and indirect aggression scales: DIAS.In K. Bjorkqvist & K. Osterman (Eds.), Pro Facultate (4) Scales for research on InterpersonalRelations. Abo, Finland: Abp Akademi University.

Blake, J., & Maiese, N. (2008). No fairytale . . . The benefits of the bedtime story. The Psychologist,21, 386–389.

Bushman, B. J. (1995). Moderating role of trait aggressiveness in the effects of violent mediaon aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 950–960. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.69.5.950

Bushman, B. J., & Anderson, C. (2001). Media violence and the American public. AmericanPsychologist, 56 , 477–489. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.56.6-7.477

Bushman, B. J., Ridge, R. D., Das, E., Key, C. W., & Busath, G. M. (2007). When God sanctionskilling: Effect of scriptural violence on aggression. Psychological Science, 18, 204–207. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01873.x

Coyne, S. M., & Archer, J. (2004). Indirect aggression in the media: A content analysis of Britishtelevision programs. Aggressive Behavior, 30, 254–271. doi:10.1002/ab.20022

Coyne, S. M., Archer, J., & Eslea, M. (2004). Cruel intentions on television and in real life:Can viewing indirect aggression increase viewers’ subsequent indirect aggression? Journalof Experimental Child Psychology, 88, 234–253. doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2004.03.001

Coyne, S. M., Callister, M., Pruett, T., Nelson, D. A., Stockdale, L., & Wells, B. M. (in press). A MeanRead: Aggression in Adolescent English Literature. Journal of Children and Media.

Coyne, S. M., Nelson, D. A., Graham-Kevan, N., Keister, E., Meng, K. N., & Olsen, J. A. (2011).Media depictions of physical and relational aggression: Connections with aggression in youngadults’ romantic relationships. Aggressive Behavior, 37, 56–62. doi:10.1002/ab.20372

Coyne, S. M., Nelson, D. A., Lawton, F., Haslam, S., Rooney, L., Titterington, L., . . . Ogunlaja, L.(2008). The effects of viewing physical and relational aggression in the media: Evidence for across-over effect. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 1551–1554. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2008.06.006

Coyne, S. M., Robinson, S. L., & Nelson, D. A. (2010). Does reality backbite? Physical, verbal,and relational aggression in reality television programs. Journal of Broadcasting & ElectronicMedia, 54, 282–298. doi:10.1080/08838151003737931

Coyne, S. M., & Whitehead, E. (2008). Indirect aggression in animated Disney films. Journal ofCommunication, 58, 382–395. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2008.00390.x

Crain, M. M., Finch, C. L., & Foster, S. L. (2005). The relevance of the social information processingmodel for understanding relational aggression in girls. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 51, 213–249.doi:10.1353/mpq.2005.0010

Crick, N. R., & Grotpeter, J. K. (1995). Relational aggression, gender, and social-psychologicaladjustment. Child Development, 66 , 710–722. doi:10.2307/1131945

196 Sarah M. Coyne et al.

Glascock, J. (2008). Direct and indirect aggression on prime-time network television. Journal ofBroadcasting & Electronic Media, 52, 268–281. doi:10.1080/08838150801992078

Hedges, L. V., & Olkin, I. (1985). Statistical methods for meta-analysis. Orlando, FL: AcademicPress.

Huesmann, L. R. (1988). An information processing model for the development of aggression.Aggressive Behavior, 14, 13–24. doi:10.1002/1098-2337(1988)14:1〈13::AID-AB2480140104〉3.0.CO;2-J

Kaiser Family Foundation (2010). Generation M2: Media in the lives of 8- to 18- year olds. MenloPark, CA: Kaiser Family Foundation.

Kirsh, S. J., & Olczak, P. V. (2000). Violent comic books and perceptions of ambiguous provocationsituations. Media Psychology, 2, 47–62. doi:10.1207/S1532785XMEP0201 3

Kirsh, S. J., & Olczak, P. V. (2002a). Violent comic books and judgments of relational aggression.Violence and Victims, 17, 373–380. doi:10.1891/vivi.17.3.373.33661

Kirsh, S. J., & Olczak, P. V. (2002b). The effects of extremely violent comic books on socialinformation processing. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 17, 1160–1178. doi:10.1177/088626002237400

Linder, J. R., & Gentile, D. (2009). Is the television rating system valid? Indirect, verbal, and physicalaggression in programs viewed by fifth grade girls and associations with behavior. Journal ofApplied Developmental Psychology, 30, 286–297. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2008.12.013

Linder, J. R., Werner, N., & Lyle, K. A. (2010). Automatic and controlled social informationprocessing and relational aggression in young adults. Personality and Individual Differences,49, 778–783. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2010.06.029

Ostrov, J. M., Woods, K. E., Jansen, E. A., Casas, J. F., & Crick, N. R. (2004). An observationalstudy of delivered and received aggression, gender, and social-psychological adjustment inpreschool: ‘This white crayon doesn’t work . . . .’. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19,335–371. doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2004.04.009

Pronk, R. E., & Zimmer-Gembeck, M. J. (2010). It’s “mean”, but what does it mean to adolescents?Relational aggression described by victims, aggressors, and their peers. Journal of AdolescentResearch, 25, 175–204. doi:10.1177/0743558409350504

Rangappa, K. T. (1993). Effect of reading ability on mathematical performance. Psycho-Lingua,23, 25–30.

Taylor, S. P. (1967). Aggressive behavior and physiological arousal as a function of provocationand the tendency to inhibit aggression. Journal of Personality, 35, 297–310. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1967.tb01430.x

Van Nieuwenhuijzen, M., Bijman, E. R., Lamberix, I. C. W., Wijnroks, L., de Castero, B. O., Vermeer,A., & Mtthys, W. (2005). Do children do what they say? Responses to hypothetical and real-lifesocial problems in children with mild intellectual disabilities and behavior problems. Journalof Intellectual Disability Research, 49, 419–433. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2788.2005.00674.x

Wilczynski, E. L. (2006). Reading and self-esteem in at-risk students. Dissertation AbstractsInternational Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 67, 132.

Williams, K. D., Cheung, C. K. T., & Choi, W. (2000). Cyberostracism: Effects of being ignoredover the Internet. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 748–762. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.748

Williams, K. D., & Jarvis, B. (2006). Cyberball: A program for use in research on ostracism andinterpersonal acceptance. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 38,174–180.

Williams, K. D., & Warburton, W. A. (2003). Ostracism: A form of indirect aggression that canresult in aggression. Revue Internationale de Psychologie Sociale, 16 , 101–126.

Winstok, Z. (2010). The effect of social and situational factors on the intended response toaggression among adolescents. Journal of Social Psychology, 150, 57–76. doi:10.1080/00224540903232290

Received 11 January 2011; revised version received 13 June 2011