This article explores the integration of socio-cognitive and psychodynamic models of aggression, focusing on cognitive control processes and defense mechanisms that influence aggressive reactions. The study analyzes three socio-cognitive models and three psychodynamic models of aggression, comparing their theoretical explanations of aggression sources and influencing processes. It also presents an empirical study involving 32 participants who completed the Hostile Expectancy Violation Paradigm (HEVP), where scenarios described hostile vs. non-hostile social contexts followed by ambiguous aversive behaviors. The N400 effect to critical words that violated expected hostile vs. non-hostile intent was analyzed. Prepotent response inhibition was measured using a Stop Signal Task (SST), and defense mechanisms were assessed with the Defense Style Questionnaire (DSQ-60). Results showed that reactive aggression and hostile intent attribution (HIA) were not significantly correlated with response inhibition but were significantly positively and negatively correlated with image distorting defense style and adaptive defense style, respectively. The article highlights the importance of integrating socio-cognitive and psychodynamic models to understand the complexity of psychological processes influencing reactive aggression. Keywords: aggression, hostile attribution bias, control process, response inhibition control, defense mechanisms, psychological regulation, event-related potentials (ERP).This article explores the integration of socio-cognitive and psychodynamic models of aggression, focusing on cognitive control processes and defense mechanisms that influence aggressive reactions. The study analyzes three socio-cognitive models and three psychodynamic models of aggression, comparing their theoretical explanations of aggression sources and influencing processes. It also presents an empirical study involving 32 participants who completed the Hostile Expectancy Violation Paradigm (HEVP), where scenarios described hostile vs. non-hostile social contexts followed by ambiguous aversive behaviors. The N400 effect to critical words that violated expected hostile vs. non-hostile intent was analyzed. Prepotent response inhibition was measured using a Stop Signal Task (SST), and defense mechanisms were assessed with the Defense Style Questionnaire (DSQ-60). Results showed that reactive aggression and hostile intent attribution (HIA) were not significantly correlated with response inhibition but were significantly positively and negatively correlated with image distorting defense style and adaptive defense style, respectively. The article highlights the importance of integrating socio-cognitive and psychodynamic models to understand the complexity of psychological processes influencing reactive aggression. Keywords: aggression, hostile attribution bias, control process, response inhibition control, defense mechanisms, psychological regulation, event-related potentials (ERP).