Hostile attribution bias in impulsive and premeditated aggression

• We use vignettes to explore hostile attribution bias in subtypes of aggression.
• We compare impulsive aggressors, premeditated aggressors, and non-violent controls.
• Aggressive men were not more likely to attribute hostile intent for ambiguous acts.
• However, they were more likely to be rude, threaten, or use physical force.
• We interpret these verbal and physical reactions as indirect evidence of a bias.

Previous research has demonstrated an association between trait aggression and hostile attribution bias, or the tendency to interpret others’ actions as hostile, yet little research has been devoted to exploring its role in subtypes of aggression. We used hypothetical vignettes to explore hostile attribution bias in impulsive aggressors, premeditated aggressors, and non-aggressive controls. Contrary to our prediction that impulsive aggressors would be more prone to hostile attribution bias, we did not observe direct evidence of this; however, a bias was indirectly evident in the behavior of both types of aggressors. Although they did not specifically articulate feeling as though ambiguous acts were committed with hostile intent, their verbal and physical reactions indicated otherwise. Future research should focus on delineating the full sequence of social cognitions that occur during aggressive encounters in order to determine whether these reactions were produced by common or divergent motivations.