ETHOLOGISTS VIEW AGGRESSION AS AN INNATE RESPONSE TO CERTAIN BROAD SITUATIONAL CUES, WHICH MAY BE EITHER LEARNED OR BIOLOGICALLY CODED. SOCIAL LEARNING THEORISTS VIEW AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR AS THE RESULT OF LEARNING, THE AGGRESSIVE RESPONSE BEING MAINTAINED OR EXTINGUISHED AS A RESULT OF DIFFERENTIAL REINFORCEMENT. THE TWO APPROACHES CONVERGE IN TERMS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL NATURE OF THE STIMULI OF AGGRESSION BUT DIFFER IN THEIR CONCEPTS OF THE PROCESSES UNDERLYING AGGRESSIVE RESPONSES. DUE TO THIS CONCEPTUAL DIFFERENCE, THE TWO SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT ORGANIZE ENVIRONMENTAL STIMULI QUITE DIFFERENTLY. CLASSICAL ETHOLOGISTS SEE OVERCROWDING, DEFENSE OF TERRITORY AND/OR PERSONAL SPACE, AND STATUS (DOMINANCE-SUBMISSION HIERARCHIES) AS INSTIGATORS OF AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR. SOCIAL LEARNING THEORISTS VIEW INSTIGATION OF AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR IN TERMS OF REINFORCERS, SUCH AS ATTAINMENT OF TANGIBLE MATERIAL AND SEXUAL PARTNERS, GUARD BEHAVIOR, STATUS, AND DIMINISHED VICTIMIZATION IN PRISON. BOTH THEORIES IDENTIFY DEFENSE OF STATUS AS AN IMPORTANT CAUSE OF VIOLENCE, AND BOTH WOULD RECOMMEND ALTERING METHODS OF ATTAINING STATUS IN PRISONS SO AS TO ELIMINATE VIOLENCE. WITH REGARD TO OTHER INSTIGATORS, THE TWO THEORIES ARE NOT IN DIRECT OPPOSITION, BUT RATHER FOCUS ON DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF THE SAME CONCEPT. IT IS POSSIBLE TO VIEW SITUATIONAL FACTORS IN THE PRISON AS ACCOUNTING FOR A GENERALLY HEIGHTENED READINESS FOR VIOLENT BEHAVIOR AND SOCIAL LEARNING AS ACCOUNTING FOR THE EXPRESSION OF SPECIFIC KINDS OF AGGRESSION. A LIST OF REFERENCES IS INCLUDED.