Exploring predictors of aggressive intrusive thoughts and aggressive scripts: Similarities and differences in phenomenology

Abstract

Experiencing a thought about harming or injuring another person is commonly reported by the general population. Aggressive intrusive thoughts (AITs) and aggressive scripts are two constructs commonly used to define the experience of thinking about harming another person. However, they are generally investigated separately and with two significantly different population groups; respectively, individuals with obsessive-compulsive disorder and people with a history of violent behavior. AITs and aggressive scripts are assumed to have very different implications for violence risk assessment, but conceptual overlap and an absence of empirical research renders this assumption premature. Using a battery of self-report measures, this study aimed to investigate the differential predictors of AITs and aggressive script rehearsal in a nonclinical sample. Additionally, using regression analyses, the predictors of self-reported aggressive behavior were explored in a sample of 412 adults (73% females; Mage = 31.96 years, SD = 11.02). Violence-supportive beliefs and frequency of anger rumination predicted the frequency of aggressive script rehearsal, and aggressive script rehearsal, anger rumination, and violence-supportive beliefs predicted a history of aggressive behavior. In contrast, obsessive beliefs were predictive of AITs, and only AITs were related to ego-dystonicity. Both AITs and aggressive script rehearsal were related to the use of thought control strategies. These findings support the contributions that maladaptive beliefs have in the experience of aggressive scripts and AITs. Beliefs about violence, a history of aggressive behavior, and ego-dystonicity appear to differentiate aggressive scripts from AITs.