The main conclusion is that gender has a relatively weak effect on aggression and largely that the effect of gender depends on the social context. The role of gender in aggressive behavior can be better explained through a focus on the context in which the aggression occurs. Other findings indicate that: (1) gender roles are more predictive of aggression than is gender; (2) national origin is a better predictor of self-presentation concerns associated with the use of aggression than is gender; (3) the effect of gender depends on the type of aggression; (4) gender helps to define the nature of relationships and the type of relationship is a predictor of the type of aggression; and (5) while gender differences in the use of psychological aggression are not significant, males and females appear to differ in their motivation for engaging in psychological aggression. The authors thus claim that focusing purely on gender does not completely explain the use of aggression and that gender is likely to be meaningful only within particular social or cultural contexts. In reviewing the relevant research literature, the authors focused on two main issues: (1) how the broad social context affected male and female aggressive responding, and (2) how the immediate context of the relationship between two people affected the forms or extent of their aggressive behavior. In particular, the review focused on: (1) gender roles versus actual gender as predictors of aggression; (2) gender differences in direct and indirect use of aggression; (3) aggression in the context of interpersonal relationships; and (4) gender effects in psychological aggression. References