Related PapersAbstract 1. Views the experience of alienation as a sequential-developmental process which (a) develops in the context of an ongoing relationship between an individual and another person or group of people,(b) involves an unexpected deterioration in the quality of outcomes provided to the individual by the other (s), and (c) persists to the extent that the individual and the other (s) remain spatially or psychologically proximal. Show Every computer user encounters problems with technology. Frustration is a common theme with information technology. Frustration tends to be the result when, for example, a computer application crashes with no warning, taking the last 30 minutes of work with it. As technology rapidly advances, users must deal with the ensuing error messages that invariably result, as well as the gap in knowledge that users face when a new technology or software emerges. The effectiveness of Jane Elliott's well-known “blue-eyes/brown-eyes” exercise in reducing college students’ stereotyping and prejudice was assessed. College students were randomly assigned to either the exercise group or a comparison group. Blue-eyed and brown-eyed exercise participants were given discriminatory versus preferential treatment, respectively; a procedure purportedly designed to sensitize participants to the emotional and behavioral consequences of discrimination. Participation in the exercise was found to be associated with White students (a) indicating significantly more positive attitudes toward Asian American and Latino/Latina individuals, but only marginally more positive attitudes toward African American individuals; and (b) reporting anger with themselves when noticing themselves engaging in prejudiced thoughts or actions—negative affect that theoretically could prove to be either helpful or detrimental in promoting long-term reduction of stereotyping and prejudice. FRUSTRATION and AGGRESSION (F-A) THEORYJohan M.G. van der Dennen In 1939, Dollard, Doob, Miller, Mowrer, and Sears published a monograph on aggression in which they presented what has come to be known as the frustration-aggression hypothesis (F-A). This hypothesis proved to have an immense impact. It appears to have influenced current Western thinking on aggression more profoundly than any other single publication. For more than three decades,
the F-A hypothesis has guided, in one way or another, the better part of the experimental research on human aggression (Cf. Geen, 1972; Zillmann, 1979). Perhaps more importantly, however, the views of aggression that it involves seem to have become widely adopted and accepted; they have become commonplaces. This popular success may have various sources. First the principal hypothesis is uncomplicated and easy to grasp. The theory is generally well structured and clearly articulated, a fact that
again facilitates comprehension. Second, the theory does not involve overly abstract concepts or elaborate procedures. It is very close to common sense - seeming to be built on it. Finally, as Selg (1971) observed, the theory tends to provide a justification for behaving aggressively: 'Being frustrated made me do it!' Like the aggression amnesty provided by instinct notions ('It can't be helped because we're built that way'), although not as strong, this kind of justification can be drawn upon
as a ready-made excuse for uncontrolled (or premeditated) hostile or aggressive actions (Zillmann, 1979). Restrictions of the Frustration-Aggression Theory Although the F-A hypothesis initially was widely accepted without much modification (e.g., Berkowitz, 1958; McNeil, 1959), there were early critics of the universal claims expressed in it. Both Maslow (1941) and Rosenzweig (1944), for example, suggested that frustrations instigate aggression only when they are associated with threat. More recently, Buss (1961)
similarly insisted that the thwarting of a goal reaction in and of itself does not instigate aggression and that in order to evoke aggressive behavior, frustration must involve the element of attack. Buss also stressed the instrumental value of aggression in the overcoming of frustrations. The initial use of the concept of frustration was thus considered to confound thwarting and attack. Berkowitz (1958), for example, initially subsumed insult and attack under the general heading of frustration,
arguing that the various interlocking components could not be separated operationally. Subsequent research showed, however, that the factors in question could be isolated both conceptually and operationally. This research has been competently reviewed by several investigators (e.g., Bandura, 1973a; Buss, 1961). On the basis of his own experiments, Buss (1966b) concluded that "frustration is at best a weak determiner of aggression". Extensions of Frustration-Aggression Theory The application of Miller's (1944) conflict model to aggressive behavior, specifically to the displacement of aggression
onto substitute targets, proved to be a highly influential extension of frustration-aggression theory. Miller (1948, 1959) proposed that both the substitute target and the intensity of the attack directed against it could be predicted on the basis of three antecedent conditions: (a) the strength of the drive that motivates aggression against the original target, (b) the strength of inhibitory response tendencies, and (c) the degree of stimulus similarity between the original and substitute
targets. More specifically, he posited the following relationships: Revisions of Frustration-Aggression Theory There have been several attempts to modify frustration-aggression theory in order to accomodate some of the emerging findings. For example, Barker, Dembo & Lewin (1941) proposed a frustration-regression hypothesis. These investigators had observed a tendency for frustrated children to display 'primitive' behavior patterns. The children's behavior gave the impression of a regression back to an earlier
developmental stage. The reformulation simply emphasized this apparent regression without, however, changing the frustration-aggression relationship specified in the original hypothesis. Similarly, the basic relation between frustration and aggression was not changed by Maier (1949), who proposed a frustration-fixation hypothesis. This hypothesis was developed to deal with the finding that frustrated rats develop a tendency to perform a noninstrumental response very persistently -
such as turning to a particular side. Clearly, these are minor, negligible modifications. The validity of F-A Theory The fundamental assumption of F-A theory was stated categorically by Dollard et al. (1939): "Aggression is always a consequence of frustration". From this statement it is not clear whether frustration is declared to be a necessary, or a sufficient, or both a necessary and sufficient condition of aggression. Clearly, the implications of the three conditions are different. If frustration is a sufficient condition
but not a necessary one, we must expect that aggression always follows frustration but may also occur otherwise. If frustration is a necessary but not a sufficient condition, then aggression cannot occur unless first frustration occurs but need not occur even after frustration. If frustration is a necessary and sufficient condition, then aggression occurs if and only if frustration occurs. Further, "From the point of view of daily observation, it does not seem reasonable to assume that
aggressive behavior of the usually recognized varieties is always traceable to and produced by some form of frustration". Criticism of the Concept of Catharsis (Kaufmann, 1965) The term 'catharsis' in relation to the F-A hypothesis, was originally used to denote an aggressive act
followed by lowered subsequent aggression. This lowering of aggressive drive or, in terms of Miller's (1941) emendation, of instigation to aggression was acribed to a draining away of drive leading to aggression. Rosenbaum & DeCharms (1960) while studying the cathartic effects of vicarious aggression, found that the mere opportunity to respond to a frustrater lowered subsequent derogation of him, even where the original response was not an aggressive one (though this effect was present for
low self-esteem subjects only). The issue of catharsis and the cathartic effect is further confused by conflicting experimental findings. Aggressive behavior has been found to lower subsequent aggression in some instances (Feshbach, 1955; Thibaut, 1950; Thibaut & Coules, I952) but in others has produced an increase in aggression (DeCharms & Wilkins, 1963; Kenny, 1953). Criticisms of F-A theory Frustration-aggression theory soon became accepted by a majority of social psychologists and was
later taken up by other social scientists who used its basic assumptions in the development of the influential deprivation theory of violence and aggression. Whiting (1944) suggested that the culturally relevant overt reactions to frustration may be divided into four classes of social behavior: aggression, submission, dependence, and avoidance. These four classes were found to be adequate to describe overt
frustration-reactions in Kwoma culture, and it is proposed that they may be useful in the analysis of other cultures. Sabini & Silver (1982) have argued that the Yale-school (Dollard et al., 1939) dictum 'frustration produces aggression' has been confused with 'transgression produces anger'. In their social and moral account of anger, Sabini & Silver state: What is another name for frustration theory?The frustration–aggression hypothesis, also known as the frustration–aggression–displacement theory, is a theory of aggression proposed by John Dollard, Neal Miller, Leonard Doob, Orval Mowrer, and Robert Sears in 1939, and further developed by Neal Miller in 1941 and Leonard Berkowitz in 1969.
What is frustration theory in psychology?The frustration-aggression hypothesis states that aggression is a result of frustration. Frustration is any event or stimulus that prevents an individual from attaining a goal and it's accompanying reinforcement quality (Dollard & Miller, 1939).
What is frustrationIf a goal is being blocked, people often become frustrated. If we're feeling very angry at the source of that frustration, we may become aggressive. The frustration-aggression theory states that frustration often leads to aggressive behavior. This theory was proposed by Dollard, Doob, Miller, Mower, and Sears in 1939.
Who developed frustrationOne of the earliest theories of aggression, the frustration-aggression hypothesis, was proposed in 1939 by a group of five Yale psychologists: John Dollard, Neal E. Miller, Leonard W. Doob, Orval H. Mowrer, and Robert R.
|