The phrase "aggressive outcomes" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used in contexts discussing results or consequences that are forceful, intense, or confrontational, often in a competitive or conflict-related scenario.
Example: "The aggressive outcomes of the negotiations left both parties feeling unsettled and wary of future discussions."
Alternatives: "hostile results" or "forceful consequences".
Ferguson and his team point out that many laboratory-based studies into the effect of media violence have measured aggression in test subjects through "less aggressive outcomes ranging from filling in the missing letters of words through delivering nonpainful noise bursts to a consenting opponent".
They found that, overall, video games do affect the social behaviour of players – violent video game use is linked to an increase in aggressive outcomes and a decrease in prosocial outcomes.
This study used a between subjects, post-test only design to test the effects of video game realism (Doom 1 vs. Doom 3) and a control condition on attention, retention and aggressive outcomes.
While much research on video games has focused on aggressive outcomes, the extant research has not come to consensus on the role of other factors, notably enjoyment, frustration and individual differences amongst players, in mediating the link between violent game play and aggression.
This experimental design uses a mental models approach to examine game features (e.g., controller naturalness), player characteristics (e.g., first person shooter experience, sex, degree of competitiveness) and the game play experience (e.g., perceived game realism, immersion, game failure, frustration and enjoyment) to explain aggressive outcomes.
Results showed that both anxious and oppositional children more frequently perceived ambiguous situations as threatening than did normal controls, with anxious children more often choosing avoidant outcomes and oppositional children more frequently choosing aggressive outcomes [see also 6, 7].
The first one, AML, has a very aggressive outcome and requires immediate therapy, whereas the clinical behaviour of MPN and MDS can be quite indolent.
HER2 positive nonluminal and TN subtypes displayed a very aggressive outcome with early BC specific death within 5 and 10 years, respectively.
In the present study, we analyse the strength of association between clinical prognostic variables and aggressive cancer in order to determine clinically applicable guidelines for identifying aggressive outcome in T1N0M0 invasive breast cancer.
Lack of PR expression in ER+ tumors may be a surrogate marker of aberrant growth factor signaling [ 3] that could be associated with their more aggressive outcome, as has already been described [ 4].
But there is precedent for just such a passive-aggressive outcome.
