{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020750988142292492, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.4113924050632916, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The effect of situational contingencies on female retaliative behavior.

Most studies that have found sex differences in aggression have reported that males are more aggressive than females. Recent evidence, however, suggests that the expectation of female nonaggressiveness may be unwarranted. The present study attempted to reconcile these differences by considering the contingencies of female aggression. Thirty females competed in a task designed to measure aggression (a) alone, (b) in the presence of a silent observer, or (c) in the presence of a supportive observer. Results indicated that as provocation increased, women in the private condition responded more aggressively than did women in the public condition. Also, women who responded in the presence of an audience were more aggressive when the observer was supportive than when she was silent. It is concluded that the usual findings of female nonaggressiveness may be attributable to women's expectations of disapproval for aggressive behavior.