Being hot-tempered: Autonomic, emotional, and behavioral distinctions between childhood reactive and proactive aggression Angela Scarpa a, *, Sara Chiara Haden b , Akiho Tanaka a a Department of Psychology, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, 109 Williams Hall, Blacksburg, VA 24061-0436, United States b Department of Psychology, Long Island University, 1 University Plaza, Brooklyn, NY 11201, United States Based on the distinction between defensive and predatory aggression in the animal literature (e.g., Moyer, 1976), two corresponding dimensions of aggression in children have been identified (Vitiello and Stoff, 1997). Reactive aggression (RA) is a visceral defensive response to perceived threat or provocation within the context of associated intense fear, anger, or frustration (i.e., hot-tempered). Proactive aggression (PA), on the other hand, involves a relatively non-emotional display of aggression used to intimidate others or to obtain a specified goal (i.e., cold-tempered). It is more often pre-meditated and manipulative. Proactive and reactive aggressive behaviors are often highly correlated in children, and this correlation has been explained in two ways. First, the two functions often co-occur within aggressive individuals; second, questionnaires may confound form with function, such that common properties of physical/overt forms of aggression may be captured rather than the motivational distinctions between reactive and proactive aggression (Card and Little, 2006; Polman et al., 2007). Despite the intercorrelation, several investigators have found the distinction to be reliable and to be related to a variety of social and cognitive variables (Kempes et al., 2005; Merk et al., 2005). For example, using confirmatory factor analysis, Poulin and Boivin (2000) found that a two-factor model of proactive and reactive aggression fit the data better than a one-factor model, and each factor contributed uniquely to predictions of peer reports of the child’s aggression. Further, the two-factor model has been found to be consistent across gender and age (Kempes et al., 2006). As such, it may be important to understand the different risks and causal pathways of these two factors, RA and PA. The current study was undertaken to examine the autonomic, emotional, and behavioral distinctions between these two functions of child aggressive behavior. 1. Theoretical models RA and PA have been explained by two primary theoretical models. Specifically, RA is rooted in the frustration–anger theory of aggression (Dollard et al., 1939; see Vitaro et al., 2006 for review) such that the motive is to react to the anger–frustration stimulus and injure the perpetrator of the real or perceived threat or provocation. Thus, RA is often described as ‘hot-tempered,’ capturing the essential feature of strong negative emotion. In contrast, PA is considered to be more instrumental or goal-driven in nature. It is often planned or pre-meditated, and is described as ‘cold-tempered’ due to a general lack of emotional arousal. Rather Biological Psychology 84 (2010) 488–496 ARTICLE INFO Article history: Received 15 October 2008 Accepted 17 November 2009 Available online 24 November 2009 Keywords: Reactive aggression Proactive aggression Autonomic nervous system Behavior problems ABSTRACT Reactive aggression (RA) is an angry response to perceived provocation. Proactive aggression (PA) is a pre-meditated act used to achieve some goal. This study test hypotheses that (1) individuals high in RA and PA will differ in resting levels of autonomic arousal and (2) RA will be related to emotional and behavioral problems, while PA only to behavioral problems. Parents of 68 children (age 6–13) reported on child symptoms, reactive/proactive aggression, and behavior problems. Resting heart rate (HR), skin conductance (SC), and HR variability (HRV) were measured in 42 of the children. RA was significantly related to decreased HRV and a trend for decreased SC, while PA was significantly related to increased SC and HRV. RA was significantly related to increased internalizing behaviors and attention deficits, while PA was significantly related to increased hyperactivity/impulsivity and delinquent behavior problems. Findings support a distinction between child reactive (hot-tempered) and proactive (cold-tempered) aggression in autonomic, emotional (i.e., internalizing problems), and behavioral (i.e., attention deficits, hyperactivity/impulsivity, and delinquent behavior) functioning, and are discussed in relation to theories of antisocial behavior. ß 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. * Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 540 231 2615; fax: +1 540 231 3652. E-mail address: ascarpa@vt.edu (A. Scarpa). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Biological Psychology journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/biopsycho 0301-0511/$ – see front matter ß 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.biopsycho.2009.11.006