Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 5, 2026

Author Spotlight: Advancing DNA Extraction from Necrophilic Fly Samples using Simple Technique
Published on: May 3, 2024
Cognitive predictors of reactive and proactive aggression in a forensic sample: A comparison with a non-clinical
Suzanne Brugman1, Jill Lobbestael2, Alexander T Sack3
1Department of Clinical Psychological Science (CPS), Faculty of Psychology and Neuroscience (FPN), Maastricht University, Universiteitssingel 40, P.O. Box 616, 6200 MD Maastricht, The Netherlands.; Forensic Psychiatric Centre Pompestichting, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Abstract:
This study aimed at examining cognitive predictors of reactive and proactive aggression in a forensic-psychiatric (n = 80) and a non-clinical sample (n = 98; Brugman et al., 2015). Three different cognitive predictors were incorporated: (1) attentional bias towards aggressive stimuli (measured with Emotional Stroop task) and towards angry faces (measured with a visual search task); (2) interpretation biases (measured with Aggressive Interpretative Bias Task (AIBT) and a vignette task), and (3) implicit self-aggression association (measured with a Single-Target Implicit Association Task). To measure aggression, the Reactive-Proactive Aggression Questionnaire (RPQ) and the Taylor Aggression Paradigm (TAP) were used. An automatic self-aggression association positively predicted proactive aggressive behavior on the TAP in both samples. Furthermore, this self-aggression association predicted, increased self-reported proactive aggression (RPQ) in the forensic sample only. Pain, injury, and danger interpretations reported on the vignettes, negatively predicted self-reported proactive aggression in both samples. A stronger aggressive interpretation bias on the AIBT predicted more reactive aggressive behavior (TAP) in the non-clinical sample only. Taken together, findings show both common and distinct mechanisms in reactively vs. proactively driven aggressive behavior.
Related Concept Videos
Aggression
Sampling Methods: Sample Types
Solid samples include a variety of substances, such as sediments from water bodies, soil, metals, and biological tissues. Two standard methods for extracting sediments from water bodies are grab sampling and piston coring. Grab sampling involves using a device to collect a discrete sediment sample from the bottom of a water body with minimal disturbance. Grab samples do not always represent the entire area due to...
Sampling Plans
Random sampling is a method where each member of the population has an equal chance of being selected for the sample. It involves selecting individuals randomly, often using random number generators or lottery-type methods. For example, when analyzing the properties of a...
Sample Handling
Samples should be transported carefully from collection points to the laboratory. They should be properly sealed and clearly labeled to prevent cross-contamination. To preserve the sample integrity, optimal temperature conditions during transport are essential. This could involve using...
Sampling Theorem
Bandpass Sampling
A bandpass signal has a spectrum with a lower frequency limit, denoted as ω1, and an upper frequency limit, denoted as ω2....

