The mind behind the trigger
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/08/health/psychology-mass-shootings/index.html
With the rise of mass shootings, it is not uncommon to open a news site and see a new tragedy make the headlines. Indeed, as the F.B.I has confirmed in a NY Times article, mass shootings have been on the rise since 2000. However, when we look at the psychology of the men behind these shootings, psychologists Vandello and Bosson find a mentality that they call “precious manhood”. In essence, “precarious manhood” is the constant struggle among men to prove their manliness, often prompting them to commit acts of violence and aggression in order to do so. This relates to topics we covered in our lectures, specifically the topic on evolutionary game theory, since this type of game theory can also be applied to analyze the equilibrium between passive and aggressive behavior.
Using our knowledge on evolutionary game theory, we can have a little insight into the game that unfolds in the behind behind the trigger. For a man, especially a young man, acts of aggression can be seen as a proof of manliness and therefore yield a high payoff. With this perspective in mind, we can look at the two possible outcomes of aggressive behavior. If a man’s aggressive behavior is met by passive behavior, the aggressive one gets all the payoff in the form of high social status while the passive one gets a negative payoff in the form of humiliation. If this behavior is instead met be aggressive behavior, both parties could potentially get hurt, but in the end due to their violent behavior, the two could still have higher social status. In short, even if both parties clash in their aggression, both of them could still end up with a higher payoff.
On the other hand, we can look at the potential outcomes of passive behavior. If passiveness is met by passiveness, both parties may be safe, but since they didn’t prove their manliness, they still may be ridiculed by society as they feared. Meanwhile, if passiveness is met by aggressive behavior, not only will the passive one get hurt, but he will also lose social status and be humiliated. In sum, passive behavior spells nothing but negative payoff for men.
If we look at the mental grid we created, it is clear that aggressive behavior is an evolutionary stable strategy since being aggressive always yields a much higher payoff compared to that of passive behavior. Ultimately, the issue that is embedded in this mindset is that violence and aggression are necessary in order for men to prove their manliness; once this stereotype is negated, the payoff for aggression will decrease dramatically so that passivity will also be an evolutionary stable strategy. However, this is clearly much easier said then done, since this stereotype is deeply entrenched in our society’s idea of masculinity and manliness.