Introduction Aggression, or behavior that is intended to cause harm (citation), is still a major problem that crosses several demographic

lines. The United States of America (USA) Federal Bureau of Investigation (2002) indicated that while aggression is on the decline, acts of aggression in America are still high and crimes related to aggression are higher than ever (p. 24). The observation is easily verified through simply watching the news, or living in a major metropolitan area of the USA where crime, violence, murder and death occur so often, it isnt news to many anymore. The major question that needs to be addressed is why aggression so high? While current research (Renfrew, 1997; Archer & Gartner, 1984; others) indicates several dimensions to answer the question, a major problem with the research is its application. From what it appears, much of the aggressive research lacks application to several different agegroups, but tries to apply the research to all demographic areas. For instance, the focus on external influences (witnessing or being externally exposed to aggressive or violent acts) for priming the aggressive response (Bennett et al., 2005). While external influences play a major role in aggression in several different areas, a problem is in its application to different age groups; specifically children. Would external influences ultimately play a major role in an aggressive response in children? From a modern context, a hallmark observation of a childs aggressive behavior through external imitation is rooted in Bandura's behavioral observations. Bandura et al. (1961) noted that children imitated aggressive behavior when exposed to an adult figure that is using aggression, with boys producing higher rates of imitation of aggressive behavior versus girls. While the experiment verified imitation as an impetus of aggression in children, several problems exist within the experiment that needs to be challenged. One of which is the focus on

the observable behavior and not the mechanisms behind behavior. Are children innately aggressive or do children learn aggression from external forces? If one were to take the conclusion from Bandura et al. (1961) study, the answer would be yes, that children seem to imitate aggressive behavior. However, other research has emphasized children undergoing an aggressive period not postulated by Bandura et al. (1961). For instance, Connor (2005) argued that not only do all children display aggressive behavior in some degree, but Izard et al. (1995) indicated that infants can recognize anger in a caregivers facial expression. Holmberg (1977) observed that toddlers 12-18 months of age behaved violent (pinching) and disruptive almost all of the time when interacting with other toddlers. Despite the seemingly innate nature of aggression in infants, Hay & Ross (1982) noted the importance of aggression in a means of instilling lessons on children to learn, grow and participate greater socially, with aggressive behavior changing as a child develops (Blewitt & Broderick, 2010; Hay & Ross, 1982). Specifically, the forms of aggressive behavior that changes developmentally are forms of physical violence and verbal aggression. Goodenough (1931) observed that physical aggression in children between the ages of 2-4 years old decreased. Rule (1974) posited that the physical aggression occurs within the 2-4 year old age group is for the child to obtain territory, objects, or privileges from other children. In the decrease of physical forms of aggression, Goodenough (1931) contended that verbal forms of aggression increases within the age group. Hartup (1974) noted that between the school age (512 years), children's verbal aggression decreased and hostile aggression increased. During this developmental period, children tend to engage in hostile aggression as retaliation toward another child for presumed intentional frustration in a goal-directed activity or an insult. Typically, as the

child develops, hostile aggression decreases as different outlets are given for children to exercise and express themselves physically (Parke & Slaby, 1983). While a great deal of evidence points toward not only children displaying innate aggression at several different milestones, it is Hartup (1974) and Parke & Slabys (1983) contention that deserves further investigation. Parke & Slaby (1983) indicated that physical aggression in the form of hostile aggression decreases as a child finds an outlet for their aggressive tendencies. The main problem with Parke & Slaby (1983) contention is it lacks statistical evidence. According to the USA National Center for Educational Statistics (2010), childhood aggression in the form of bullying is still a problem with 2.7 million students being bullied and 2.1 students taking the roll of the bully. Furthermore, 56% of students have witnessed a bullying crime take place beyond the developmental age groups defined by Hartup (1974) and Parke & Slaby (1983). Interestingly, as a result of No Child Left Behind, there is an increase in after school and before school activities that can allow several children to express themselves in various activities. Why is there still aggression amongst children in the 5-12 year old demographic? Despite the conclusions and the body of evidence that favors childhood aggression as a normal process, very little emphasis is given to the development of self-esteem as serving as a catharsis of hostile aggression in children. Arguably, one of the most polarizing areas of psychology is self-esteem. The concept of self-esteem has been an underlying subject of interest spanning various psychological perspectives and noted psychologists throughout history. Through the study of self-esteem, several conclusions have been made about the impact of self-esteem development within an individual's life. Self-esteem is an area of the self that is known to develop early in an individual's formative years having a drastic impact on a child's definition of the self and social

behavior (Blewitt & Broderick, 2010). It is believed that children with high self-esteem show positive attitudes, are well adjusted, and generally perform well within a group (Blewitt & Broderick, 2010). On the other hand, children with low self-esteem tend to be negative, maladjusted, prone to quitting, and are depressed (Orth et al., 2009). High correlations are drawn between low self-esteem in children and negative outbursts, such as aggression and violence (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2011). Despite the correlations between low self-esteem and acts of aggression and violence, fervent debate rages between self-esteem as a predictor to violence and aggression in children. However, it is known that self-esteem is important for governing behavior in a childs life. What is to say that self-esteem isnt governing any aggressive response in children? The purpose of the critical literature review is to determine the role self-esteem has in the expression of the aggressive response in school aged children (5-12 years old). The critical literature review will identify the strengths and limitations of self-esteem as a predictor of aggression in school-aged children. The application to aggression research can be crucial for a variety of different reasons. It is one argument that bullying, as a form of hostile aggression, can have a drastic impact on an individuals life, with Connor (2005) arguing that the abused individuals exposed to hostile aggression typically reciprocating violence in several different ways. Research toward aggression using self-esteem as a predictor can inform educators, parents and others as serving as a possible derivation of aggression and focus on measures to decrease hostile aggression when it could be witnessed in several different environments. Despite the various applications and investigation purposes, currently it is believed that self-esteem, while vital to psychosocial development and behavior in an individual's environment, is poorly understood in applying self-esteem as a primary contributor to aggression in children.

Self-Esteem History Self-esteem, as defined by Rosenberg (1965), refers to the self-judgments of personal worth and global feelings of competence and self-acceptance. Despite Rosenberg's definition of self-esteem, self-esteem has become both a biological and psychological subject of investigation that has affected psychology for several decades. William James (1896/1958) was the first psychologist to use the term self-esteem to which he referred to as a self-feeling that depends entirely on what we back ourselves to be and do (p. 54). James also noted that a key task for children's socialization lied in the concept of self-esteem, which aided in the capacity to develop the "self". The development of the self, according to James enhanced a child's ability to adapt to different social settings with a positive expression of the self in a social context (p. 55). By deriving a formula for self-esteem, James identified key components for the development of selfesteem: success and pretensions. Success and pretensions are key concepts that equate selfesteem to a division of praise (success) and pretension (giving an appearance of greater importance). To James, self-esteem was vital to an individual's achievement and success, which were chiefly defined during childhood. While self-esteem became a key feature of several prominent psychologists that followed James, popularization of self-esteem did not occur in the USA until after World War II in exchange for determinants of self from a behaviorist and psychodynamic lens. Despite the scope of self-esteem research being minimal during the early 1900s, several key observations and correlations led to a theoretical basis of the impact of self-esteem on behavior. Horney (1950) argued the connection between neurotic behavior and the derivations of neurosis from a sense of low self-esteem by indicating the individual's nature to introspect after being verbally or physically abused in a social setting. As a result of such low self-esteem, Horney observed

antisocial feelings of inferiority can be rooted in early childhood experience of rejection leading to one's low self-esteem and neurotic behavior. Similarly, Adler (1956) identified key personality traits that endured as an individual psychologically and argued that negative personality types were highly associated with rejection in childhood. Coopersmith (1967) identified a correlation between self-esteem and frailty, arguing that children who were exposed to domination, rejection, and severe punishment had lower self-esteem than children not exposed to those conditions (p. 45). Coopersmith also noted that children had fewer experiences of love and success became more submissive and withdrawn (p. 50). Rosenberg (1965) also theorized that low self-esteem weakened ties to s As a result of the observations surrounding the impact of self-esteem on child development, emphasis was given to self-esteem and support in elementary schools. For instance, the state of California has commissioned the California Task Force to promote selfesteem and reframe social problem solving. The primary goal of the task force was to promote the well-being of the individual and society (1990) versus reacting to social problems externally. The task force also generated similar conclusions that psychologists have posited regarding selfesteem development by noting the impact of family, school environment, and the effects that low and high self-esteem have on an individual's development. Similarly, other initiatives have been proposed to improve how a child views themselves in pertinent years of child development; such as the National Initiative for Girls on Body Image and Self-Esteem, The Butterfly Foundation whose purpose is to change cultural and policy concerns for the improvement of body image to improve self-esteem, Mentoring USA and the list goes on and on. Self-esteem, while was once stymied by social and psychology due to other popular theories, is back on the forefront as a chief governing force behind an individual's behavior.

The emphasis of self-esteem in a modern context is vital to understanding an individuals behavior. The brief history of self-esteem on an individuals development provided a foundation to understand the impact of possible low self-esteem on an individuals development of the self and on behavior. The observations provided by the above authors and a plethora of other authors even governed public policy and nonprofit organizations to not only raise awareness of selfesteem but improve individual self-esteem in individuals with low self-esteem. From what the previous research provided, necessary objective experiments are needed to determine the proper impact on low self-esteem on an individuals development as well as determining the different methods that may cause low self-esteem. Self-Esteem Development Under normal circumstances, or circumstances in which children are raised under optimal conditions, are healthy, and parents are healthy, young children are identified to have very high self-esteem (Robins et al., 2005; Pullman et al., 2009) which declines over the course of childhood. While there are several reasons for the high self-esteem in early childhood, the main contributor to positive self-esteem lies in the child's views. Blewitt & Broderick (2010) argue that a child's view of self is unrealistically positive. Children as early as 5 years are capable of evaluating their accomplishments in terms of competence and self-worth. As children develop cognitively, the child bases their evaluation of self on external feedback from their environment. Between the ages of 5 and 8, children begin to understand the difference between their real self, or what the child can realistically accomplish, and the ideal self, or how the child wishes to be seen (Demo, 2001, p. 137; Blewitt & Broderick, 2010).

Children process judgment of their worth and competence in several different social areas: physical appearance, social acceptance, scholastic ability, athletic and artistic skills and behavior, parent relationships and peer relationships (Shavelson & Marsh, 1986). The characteristics that seem crucial to the development of self-esteem also extend beyond cultural, racial, gender, and socioeconomic statuses and extend well into adolescence (Blewitt & Broderick, 2010). Social relationships, life experiences, and expectations placed by external motivators and internal motivators affect behavior and increase in the development of global self-esteem. The support that children receives from parents, teachers, and peers is critical because the child uses their praise/criticism as a means of defining their sense of self and their standards and values trough internalization. Other contributors of self-esteem include television and other forms of media (Blewitt & Broderick, 2010). As the child enters school and further develops, self-esteem tends to decrease for a variety of different reasons. One of which is due to the increased negative feedback from parents, teachers, and peers. Throughout the age, what children once considered was great work, for instance, may not be so great given the negative feedback. Furthermore, gender, socioeconomic status and ethnic comparisons also impact self-esteem for children throughout childhood. Despite the negative feedback that children receive and the social comparison received from their peers, Hay & Ross (1982) argued that the criticism may serve as a positive mechanism. While selfesteem is fragile and still in the introductory stages, children begin to learn, grow, and experience new activities through entering school. At the same time, children begin understanding areas in which they excel and areas that cause children great difficulty. In a cyclic way, Marin, Bohanek, & Fivush (2008) argue that the roadblocks of criticism can actually improve a child's selfesteem.

In many ways, the development of self-esteem is solely related to the child's presence of social support from primary caregivers and their peers. As infants, children form attachments with their parents or primary caregivers; it is the caregivers/parents that lay the fundamental groundwork of a child's self-esteem (Bowlby, 1988). As the children grow and relate to areas of competence, the parents act as continued support by providing overt and subtle approval, resulting in the children to engage in activities more frequently improving their competency while maintaining positive feelings of themselves (Blewitt & Broderick, 2010). As children extend their support group to their peer group, their views of friendship are similar due to how their parents/caregivers instilled positive and subtle support. So, the child would view a friend as someone who supports them, while adding the dimension of social comparison and reinforcement for the child. Children gauge their success by observing the reactions from their peers, minimizing differences to protect self-esteem, and gaining acceptance into new and different peer groups. From the brief overview of self-esteem formation in childhood, several factors that contribute to a child's self-esteem are extant. The emphasis of the parent/caregiver as the fundamental means of self-esteem formation, the peer group as a means of sustaining selfesteem, teachers serving as instrumental in offering criticism, and media influence are each known to contribute to a child's self-esteem. However, several psychologists (Erikson, 1954; Blewit & Broderick, 2010; Connor, 2005; others) argued if there is an issue within any of the factors that contribute to self-esteem, low self-esteem is identified. A critical analysis of the factors in normal self-esteem development will be analyzed for contributors to low self-esteem to note the relationship between aggression and low self-esteem. Low Self-Esteem & Aggression

Parental Attachment As previously stated, children form attachments with their parents forming the foundation of a child's self-esteem. Attachment theorists (Ainsworth, 1989; Bowlby, 1988) have postulated that an individual's experience of early attachments influence a child's social cognitions in the way they perceive the social and physical world and actions with others. Bowlby (1988) argued that a child's attachment also governs the belief about a child's self-worth and competence. It is suggested that a child with secure attachment with parents or caregivers will perceive themselves as helpful with the caregiver as caring and responsive (Blewitt & Broderick, 2010). What this means is that the child tends to trust a caregiver, who in turn aids the child in building a positive view of the world affecting their behavior in the school age. Conversely, if the attachment between parent/caregiver and child is marked by anger, hostility, mistrust, and insecurity, the child would believe that the world to be as such. As a result, the child will have maladaptive behavior and negative views of self, leading to aggression, delinquency, substance and emotional abuse (Bowlby, 1988; Ainsworth, 1989; Blewitt & Broderick, 2010). Many of the arguments made by attachment theorists are in fact related to a child's selfesteem, in theory pointing a link between aggression and self-esteem using attachment as an impetus. However, have the conclusions been proven objectively and consistently? Two experiments with two completely different cultural demographics explore whether the causative link between parental support, childhood aggression and self-esteem exists. The first experiment, conducted by Ooi et al. (2006) hypothesized children that are identified as having an insecure parent-child attachment elicits more aggressive behaviors, lacked social competence, and exhibited lower self-esteem. A clinical sample consisting of 91 school-aged boys from 8-12 years old who exhibited antisocial and aggressive behaviors were recruited with their parents.

The parents were given the Parenting Stress Index Standard Form [PSI-SF] to identify dysfunctional parenting. The six item Attachment subscale was used as well as the Social stress subscale of the self-report of personality [SRP-BASC] to determine symptoms of stress experienced by children in relation to their social interaction with others. Finally the Rosenbergs self-esteem [RSE] was used to determine the childs self-esteem. Consistent with the hypothesis Ooi et al. (2006) stated, higher quality of parent attachment was associated with lower levels of parent-rated aggression, while lower quality of parenting was related to lower self-esteem and aggression. In a similar experiment, Donnellan et al. (2005) argued a link between low self-esteem and aggression, antisocial behavior, and delinquency through the use of two different experiments. In their first experiment, 292 participants ranging from age 11-14 years old were recruited from two schools in northern California. Self-esteem was measured through the RSE scale and delinquency was measured through the use of a 12-item delinquent scale adapted from other authors. Donnellan et al. (2005) discovered that the delinquent group had lower self-esteem than the non-delinquent group on each self-esteem measure from the RSE scale. Structural equation modeling was used to determine whether supportive parenting and academic achievement were correlated with low self-esteem and delinquency. However, it was discovered that in their experiment, supportive parenting could not explain the relationship between selfesteem and delinquency. Similar results were found in the second experiment that lacked a causative link between self-esteem, delinquency, and supportive parenting in a New Zealand representative sample group (n=812 between ages of 11-13 years old). While the above studies contribute to a growing body of literature to suggest parental/caregiver attachment as the link between low self-esteem and aggression, the conclusion

is a misnomer. For Ooi et al. (2006), while the point is verified through multiple regression analyses, what is to say the low self-esteem is caused by parental attachment and not peer rejection? Furthermore, what are the socioeconomic classes of the parents/sample participants in the study? The two questions, while seemingly unrelated, may provide quite a few holes in Oois experiment. As stated, children do compare each other on a variety of differences amongst each other. What is to say that it is peer rejection that caused other children to make fun of them and therefore the child not being accepted leading to low self-esteem? As the results of Donnellan et al. (2005) experiments provide with an inconclusive relationship between parental attachment, self-esteem, and aggression, some questions should be considered when arguing parental attachment as an impetus of low self-esteem and aggression. Understandably, because Donnellan et al. (2005) didnt specifically use attachment scales to determine supportive parental link nor tried to relate attachment in their results can lend itself some questions that may verify Ooi et al. (2006) experiment. However, it isnt a large stretch to indicate that if a parent is supportive in the childs life currently, the parent may also be a means of support during infancy posing a link between positive attachment scoring? In lieu of that consideration, Donnellan et al. (2005) research shouldnt be dismissed immediately despite the growing literature that may suggest externalizing behavior in children with negative attachment experiences. Media While the impact of media on a child's self-esteem is heavily debated, several authors have indicated that generally the media has a great positive effect on a child's self-esteem. Gerard Jones (2002) also emphasized the importance of the media on a child's self-esteem, but also adds

a new dimension to the debate. Jones argued that children not only need positive, nonviolent media for their self-esteem, but also violent media as a means of aiding individuals with low self-esteem. He contends that children use whatever media content is appropriate to provide for whatever emotional or psychological needs they are experiencing at the moment (Gentile, 2005). To improve his argument, Jones uses his own experience as a father and a psychologist to indicate massive support for his hypothesis. Many of his sources are questionable to say the least. And while Jones' overall arguments can be considered contradictory through his use of "peer" analysis, Jones' argument does provide somewhat a salient point that is further emphasized in other literature; such as the user and gratification model. The uses and gratification model is a systematic model in social sciences used to study how the media influences an audience with regards to behavior, attitudes and beliefs. This theory can be linked to the notion of social belonging and how an audience can be deceived into believing that this concept can be achieved. The tenet underlying this approach to studying audiences was that individuals actively consume and use the media in order to meet certain needs. In reality, with the power belonging in the focus of the media, it can be defined as a tool of subliminal persuasion (O'Sullivan, Dutton, Raymer, 1998). Using this model, Blumer and Katz (1974) concluded that audience's fulfillment of needs came within the broad generalization of four desires: diversion (form of escape from everyday pressure), personal relationships (forming companionship via media personalities, characters, and sociability through the discussion about the media program with other people), personal identity (the ability to compare one's life with the characters, and [or] situations within the media) and surveillance (supply of information of what's going on in the world). It is likely that in combination with the uses and

gratification model, an explanation can be given to Jones (2002) argument surrounding a positive effect of violent media in self-esteem. Despite the positive effects Jones (2002) argued in application of the uses and gratifications model, the issues regarding his hypothesis are paramount when applied in a practical sense. Besides the enormous amounts of evidence that supports the negative effects of violent media on a child (Gentile, 2005), when seeing how Jones derived his personal data, much of it isnt sound experimental design. For instance, Jones (2002) argued that several psychiatrists within the industry observed that violent media can be seen as a tool for coping, but offers zero evidence to indicate the statements. Through the use of himself and others as evidence for his claims, his argument sounds objectivity and as a result his validity isnt clearly established. In fact, much of his assertions are not scientific but based on personal opinion. Still, many aggressive adults have stated that violent media did claim that the violent media makes them feel better through identification and dissociation from their own problems. Jones (2002) argument, while clearly favoring violent media as a means of improving low self-esteem can be viewed in an inaccurate way due to the bevy of research on aggression and self-esteem for children. Despite lacking the impetus of the relationship of each factor, conventional wisdom reminds that media and violence has a drastic impact on individual self-esteem (Gentile, 2005). Peer Rejection While Erikson (1954/1980) emphasized the importance of the peer group in his identity versus role confusion phase (1954/1980), several lines of research have indicated that social identification through an individual's peer group occurs sooner than the projected ages Erikson argued. As stated, the impacts of the peer group on reinforcing identify and developing

individual self-esteem seems to be intertwined for a child's development. Furthermore, previous lines of research have established the impact on peer rejection on a child's self-esteem. For instance, Horney (1950) & Adler (1956) each argued that antisocial and aggressive behavior are linked by feelings of inferiority rooted in rejection and humiliation experiences. Are the points driven by Horney (1950) and Adler (1956) valid objectively? Reijntes et al. (2010) hoped to establish a current line of research and determine the impact of peer rejection on self-esteem and aggression. Participants (n=185) were recruited for a "social networking" system that allowed students to rate each other based on appearance. The scaling used for the online component included positive comments, negative comments, and neutral comments. If the comments received by other participants were negative, then the participant could aggress against the same peers who negatively evaluated them. The results indicated that rejected participants were more likely to "aggress" against other participants who negatively or neutrally ranked them. While the conclusion of the study indicated one established link between peer rejection, aggression, and low self-esteem, it's difficult to conclude that the situation may work for all scenarios. There lacked much information surrounding the mental or medical status of the participants. Would the "aggressive" response be the same if the participants knew each other versus being complete strangers? The study does correlate aggression, self-esteem, and peer rejection, but it seems as if it was just a correlation. The variables were not manipulated, and therefore further research is needed to establish the link between each of the three variables. In a similar study, Morrow et al. (2006) investigated the impact that peer rejection held on aggression and low self-esteem while determining the differing types of aggression that peer rejection mediated. Fifty-seven second grade children (35 boy and 22 girls) participated in the

study to record data on reactive aggression, proactive aggression, depressive symptoms and peer rejection from four main sources: parents, teachers, peers and the participants themselves. Teachers and parents completed three measures for each child, and the children completed six unlimited peer nomination items. The results of the experiment indicated that reactive aggression, or the aggression that is in response to perceived provocation, was positively related to depressive symptoms expressed within the sample population. Uniquely, within the group, peer rejection served as a partial mediator between reactive aggression and depressive symptoms. While the study manipulated peer rejection, self-esteem and aggression, the sample size is quite small, but the conclusion verified general consensus. Peer rejection does have a detrimental impact on an individual's self-esteem, causing children to react externally. High Self-Esteem & Aggression Each of the three factors that reinforce self-esteem, while very important to the development of a childs self-esteem, has their own limitations. The media factor, while heavily argued to have a large effect on self-esteem in terms of child exposure, lacks any cathartic links between low self-esteem and aggression. It is known (through Bandura et al., 1961) that children imitate behavior, but not much research is salient on the detriment of a childs self-esteem. On the other hand, while peer rejection has a detrimental impact on a childs self-esteem, externalizing behavior in the form of aggression is only partially mediated in peer rejected children. The parental attachment factor seems to be the most salient of each of the three factors due to the bevy of research surrounding the effects of non-parental interventions on a childs sense of development both from a biological (Bowlby, 1988) and psychological context. Despite the driven point towards such a point of view, limitations are chiefly established. For instance, as seen in Ooi et al. (2006) experiment, a link between parent involvement and attachment cannot

be ruled out in terms of a childs externalizing of violence through aggression. Furthermore, when applied as a possible explanation to Bandura et al. (1961) experiment, much does not make sense. From what it appears, the children can be inferred to be high functioning and generally happy. It is the emphasis of happiness that tends to question whether low self-esteem is a proper catharsis to aggression. If anything, Bandura et al. (1961) experiment reminds that abnormally high self-esteem children tend to externalize violence through forms of aggression, if one were to take face validity of the childrens responses. While the argument of having a high self-esteem leading to externalization of aggression through violence is one that seems strange to imagine due to bevy of research surrounding low self-esteem as a possible mediator of violence and aggression, Salmivalli (2001) argued that individuals who are prone to aggressive behavior seems to have high self-esteem. Hughes et al. (1997) studied aggressive and non-aggressive behavior in second and third graders and discovered that aggressive children are more likely to report idealized self-perception when compared to non-aggressive children. According to his analysis, it was found that the participants relationship quality were inflated versus the other children. Despite the discovery of a completely different spectrum of the self-esteem scale, much is not understand. Bushman et al. (2009) concluded that high levels of narcissism and high self-esteem were found to initiate an aggressive response versus individuals with high self-esteem and low narcissism. Finally, in addition to determining the link between low self-esteem and aggression in a child population, Donnellan et al. (2005) also tested the link between high self-esteem and aggression. In their study, however, there lacked a link between high self-esteem and aggression. The major question that should be asked is why hasnt a view focusing a different view of self-esteem become less popular?

Perhaps one reason is how the scientific community views self-esteem. There are a variety of facets of self-esteem that modern psychology does not understand. As recently as 2011, psychologist (insert name) has discovered a genetic basis of self-esteem. In that, new lines of research that are attributed in part to Baumeister (citation) make an absolutely valid point. Too often has self-esteem been related to low self-esteem and not high self-esteem. Instead of focusing on one end of self-esteem, a linear path of self-esteem should be hypothesized covering high self-esteem, normal self-esteem, and low self-esteem. From this linear view of selfesteem, science can focus on the impact of multiple facets of self-esteem on an individuals development and not just one extreme of self-esteem. Application to Social Psychology The application of a self-esteem spectrum to the field of social psychology is bountiful. The current application of self-esteem only views low self-esteem and methods of an individual improving their self-esteem. In many ways, the prevailing view of self-esteem and aggression has gone unchallenged for the necessary success of programs that has spawned as a result. As mentioned, several initiatives and groups have formed with the sole intention of the development of self-esteem where a childs self-esteem can be low. The reason to posit such emphasis is to make the individuals contributing members to society and offer emotional stability. Of course, considering application in terms of social acceptability and emotional well-being, the emphasis of improving low self-esteem through the initiatives serves to provide the advancement of the individual within society as a whole. But, is too much emphasis on low self-esteem the best method? Conclusion

References Adler, A. (1956). The individual psychology of Alfred Adler: A systematic presentation in selections from his writing (H.L. Ansbacher & R.R. Anserbacher, Eds.). New York: Haper. Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1989). Attachments Beyond Infancy. American Psychologist, 44: 709-716. Archer, D., & Gartner, R. (1984). Violence and crime in cross-national perspective. New Haven: Yale University Press. Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, 575-582. Bennett, S., Farrington, D., & Huesmann, L. (2005). Explaining gender differences in crime and violence: The importance of social cognitive skills.. Aggression Violent Behavior, 10, 263-268. Blumler, J. G., & Katz, E. (1974). The Uses of mass communications: current perspectives on gratifications research. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications. Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base: Parent-child attachment and healthy human development. New York: Basic Books Broderick, P. C., & Blewitt, P. (2010). The life span: human development for helping professionals (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson. Connor, D. F. (2005). Aggression and antisocial behavior in children and adolescents: research and treatment. New York: Guilford. Coopersmith, S. (1967). The antecedents of self-esteem. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Demo, D.J. (2001). Self-esteem in children and adolescents. In T.J. Owens, S. Stryker, & N. Goodman (Eds.), Extending self-esteem theory and research (pp. 135-156). New York: Cambridge University Press. Donnellan, M. B., Trzeniewski, K. H., Robins, R. W., Moffit, T. E., & Caspi, A. (2005). Low Self-Esteem is Related to Aggression, Antisocial Behavior, and Delinquency. Psychological Science, 16(4), 328-335. Erikson, E. H. (1954). Identity and the life cycle. New York: Norton. Gentile, D. A. (2005). Media violence and children: a complete guide for parents and professionals. Westport, CT: Praeger. Goodenough, F. (1931). Anger in Young Children. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press. Hartup, W. (1974). Aggression in childhood: Developmental perspectives. American Psychologist, 29, 336-341. Hay, D., & Ross, H. (1982). The social nature of early conflict. Child Development, 53, 105-113. Holberg, M.S. (1977). The development of social interchange patterns from 12 to 42 months: Cross-sectional and short-term longitudinal analyses. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Horney, K. (1950). Neurosis and human growth. New York: Norton. Izard, C., Fantauzzo, C., Castle, J., Hayes, O., Rayias, M., & Putnam, P. (1995). The ontogeny and significance of infants' facial expressions in the first 9 months of life. Developmental Psychology, 31, 997-1013. James, W. (1894). Talks to teachers on psychology: and to students on some of life's ideals.. New York: Dover Publications.

Jones, G. (2002). Killing monsters: our children's need for fantasy, heroism, and make-believe violence. New York: BasicBooks ;. Marin, K.A., Bohanek, J.G., and Fivush, R., (2008). Positive Effects of Talking About the Negative: Family Narratives of Negative Experiences and Preadolescents Perceived

Competence. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 18 (3), 573-594. Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2011). Attachment, anger, and aggression. In P. R. Shaver, M. Mikulincer, P. R. Shaver, M. Mikulincer (Eds.) , Human aggression and violence: Causes, manifestations, and consequences (pp. 241-257). American Psychological Association. Morrow, M. T., Hubbard, J. A., McAuliffe, M. D., Rubin, R. M., & Dearing, K. F. (2006). Childhood aggression, depressive symptoms, and peer rejection: The mediational model revisited. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 30(3), 240-248. Ooi, Y. P., Ang, R. P., Fung, D. S., Wong, G., & Cai, Y. (2006). The Impact of Parent-Child Attachment on Aggression, Social Stress, and Self-Esteem. School Psychology International, 27, 552-566. Orth, U., Robins, R. W., Trzesniewski, K. H., Maes, J., & Schmitt, M. (2009). Low selfesteem is a risk factor for depressive symptoms from young adulthood to old age. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 118(3), 472-478. Pullmann, H., Allik, J., & Realo, A. (2009). Global Self-Esteem Across the Life Span: A CrossSectional Comparison Between Representative and Self-Selected Internet Samples. Experimental Aging Research,35(1), 20-44. Parke, R.D., & Slaby, R.G. (1983). The development of aggression. In P.H. Mussen (Series Ed.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol. IV (4th ed.), (pp. 547-641). New York: Wiley &

Sons. Reijntjes, A., Thomaes, S., Kamphuis, J. H., Bushman, B. J., de Castro, B. O., & Telch, M. J. (2011). Explaining the paradoxical rejection-rejection. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 37, 955-963. Renfrew, J. W. (1997). Aggression and its causes: a biopsychosocial approach. New York: Oxford University Press. Rosenberg, M. (1965). Society and the adolescent self-image (Third Printing. ed.). Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press. Robins, R. W., Trzesniewski, K. H., Tracy, J. L., Gosling, S. D., & Potter, J. (2002). Global selfesteem across the life span. Psychology And Aging, 17(3), 423-434. Sullivan, T., Dutton, B., & Rayner, P. (1998). Studying the media: an introduction. London: Edward Arnold ;. Shavelson, R.J., & Marsh, H.W. (1986). On the structure of self-concept. In R. Schwarzer (Ed.), Anxiety and cognitions. Hillsdale, NJ: Erthaum. Toward a state of esteem the final report of the California Task Force to Promote Self-esteem and Personal and Social Responsibility.. (1990). Sacramento: California Department of Education. United States Department of Justice. (2002). Crime in the United States. Washington, D.C.: U.S. G.P.O.. Wit, J. d., Hartup, W. W., & Rule, B. (1975). The hostile and instrumental functions of human aggression. Determinants and origins of aggressive behavior (pp. 125-145). The Hague: Mouton.