Few would disagree that human aggression is a very pressing social problem that leads to violent criminal acts and that it is important to understand the causes of aggression before we can intervene to reduce it. How would a social psychologist approach this phenomenon? How would a social psychologist's approach differ from the approach of a personality psychologist or sociologist?

The Social Psychologist defines aggression based on intents. They see aggression as a behavior that is intended to harm another individual who does not intend to be harmed.

According to social psychologists, Violence is a subset of aggression. It is an aggression that has extreme physical harm as its intent. Aggression does not have to be physical, it can be a verbal or social aggression intended to shatter someone's physical relationships. Social psychologists consider aggression to be basically about self-concern. They see violence as a response to "threat to self". Aggression is a product of the nature of a man and the social situation he surrounds  himself with. Aggression varies with personalities, but it can either be reduced or escalated   through the influence of our social circles.

The sociologist or personality psychologist believes that it is not the individual that perpetuate violence that is solely errant but the society that produces him is responsible for the violent behavior. This is justified by the reason why some communities and nations are more violent and aggressive than others.

well the unjest treatment and discrimination did get faced by the idians and soldiers

explanation:

answer; construals;