This paper examines how aggression is understood and expressed within Japanese culture, drawing on cross-cultural research comparing Japan with the United States, Israel, and Spain. It explores how collectivist versus individualistic orientations shape the attribution of violent or aggressive acts, how physical contact and emotional display norms differ across cultures, and how Japanese mothers and students perceive aggression differently from their counterparts elsewhere. The paper argues that aggression is never simply positive or negative but is always filtered through cultural frameworks — including norms around face-saving, socialization, and emotional restraint — that vary significantly across societies.
Although the aggressive impulse may be hard-wired into the human brain, the various ways in which cultures define and perceive aggression can be quite subjective. In Japan, for example, direct confrontation is frowned upon, in contrast to the United States, which emphasizes the need to "tell it like it is." Even the agency of aggression is viewed differently in collectivist versus more individualistic societies. As one study found, "American newspapers referred more to the individual involved in each [political or business] scandal, whereas Japanese newspapers referred more to the institution, implying a focus on the group rather than the individual as agent for the Japanese" (Friedman et al., 2007, p. 857).
Cross-cultural comparisons reveal notable differences in how aggression manifests across groups. One study found that "European Americans scored higher on delinquency and sexual behaviors relative to both Asian American groups. As expected, both Asian American groups scored higher on loss of face but also scored higher on acceptance of violence" (Hall et al., 2005, p. 835). In another study comparing Japanese and Spanish undergraduates, "Japanese students reported more physical aggression than their Spanish counterparts, who reported more verbal aggression, hostility, and anger and more expressive representation of aggression" (Ramirez et al., 2001, p. 315).
A comparison of Japanese and Israeli mothers found further divergence: "aggression is perceived by Japanese mothers as a natural and necessary aspect of development, while Israeli mothers perceive the same behaviors as justified mainly as reactions to assault or provocation and as expressing negative emotional states" (Osterweil & Nagano-Nakamura, 1992, p. 263). This difference may be rooted in the history of violence that has affected much of modern Israel, where physical displays of aggression may be seen as necessary but not necessarily natural or healthy.
Such research must be understood within the Japanese cultural context of what constitutes violence. Behaviors considered normal physical interaction in other cultures may be viewed as intrusive or even aggressive in Japan. As one intercultural resource notes, "touching is unwelcome when speaking to a Japanese person, especially touching someone of the opposite sex. Japanese do not shake hands with one another but will with foreigners. Gestures are not an important communication tool in Japanese culture" (Centre for Intercultural Learning, 2009). It has also been observed that public displays of emotion are less accepted in Japan. "Violent outbreaks can happen, though not common, and also they can be displayed more overtly than other feelings such as affection, grudges, or jealousy" (Centre for Intercultural Learning, 2009).
The complexities of how aggression is viewed in Japan demonstrate that aggression is never simply a positive or negative attribute. Physical touching considered friendly in the United States might be regarded as aggressive in Japan, yet aggression itself is regarded in Japan as "normal," even though some forms of violent aggression must be socialized and contained for society to function. Socialization is viewed as a positive value in Japan, even though aggression is often construed in the United States as antisocial. Violence, although uncommon in Japan, is considered less off-putting than other types of emotional display — particularly those of a sexual nature. And violence, compared with other types of negative social experiences such as a "loss of face," is not viewed as negatively, at least according to stated cultural perceptions.
Centre for Intercultural Learning. (2009). Cultural information — Japan. Retrieved from
Friedman, R., Liu, W., Chen, C. C., & Chi, S. S. (2007). Causal attribution for interfirm contract violation: A comparative study of Chinese and American commercial arbitrators. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92(3), 856–864.
Hall, G. C. N., Teten, A. L., DeGarmo, D. S., Sue, S., & Stephens, K. A. (2005). Ethnicity, culture, and sexual aggression: Risk and protective factors. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 73(5), 830–840.
Osterweil, Z., & Nagano-Nakamura, K. (1992). Maternal views on aggression: Japan and Israel. Aggressive Behavior, 18(4), 263–270.
Ramirez, J. M., Andreu, M., & Fujihara, T. (2001). Cultural and sex differences in aggression: A comparison between Japanese and Spanish students using two different inventories. Aggressive Behavior, 27(4), 313–322.
You’re 96% through this paper. Sign up to read the full paper.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.