Frustration and Aggression
TL;DR: The result is not a mere juxtaposition of uncoordinated viewpoints, but a unity of aim and consistency in presentation which make the multiple authorship almost undetectable as mentioned in this paper, and there can be little doubt that the intimate collaboration of a team of specialists, each with a distinctive training, is a profitable way of examining a problem which has no clear-cut frontiers and which does not fall neatly into one of the conventional compartments of social study.
Abstract: EIGHT members of the Yale Institute of Human Relations have co-operated to produce this book The result is not a mere juxtaposition of uncoordinated viewpoints but a unity of aim and consistency in presentation which make the multiple authorship almost undetectable Whatever judgment one may make about the value of the hypothesis elaborated in the book, there can be little doubt that the intimate collaboration of a team of specialists, each with a distinctive training, is a profitable way of examining a problem which has no clear-cut frontiers and which does not fall neatly into one of the conventional compartments of social study Frustration and Aggression By John Dollard Neal E Miller Leonard W Doob O H Mowrer Robert R Sears, in collaboration with Clellan S Ford, Carl Iver Hovland and Richard T Sollenberger (International Library of Sociology and Social Reconstruction) Pp ix + 150 (London: Kegan Paul and Co, Ltd, 1944) 10s 6d net
Citations
More filters
Book•
01 Jan 1999TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a theory of intergroup relations from visiousness to viciousness, and the psychology of group dominance, as well as the dynamics of the criminal justice system.
Abstract: Part I. From There to Here - Theoretical Background: 1. From visiousness to viciousness: theories of intergroup relations 2. Social dominance theory as a new synthesis Part II. Oppression and its Psycho-Ideological Elements: 3. The psychology of group dominance: social dominance orientation 4. Let's both agree that you're really stupid: the power of consensual ideology Part III. The Circle of Oppression - The Myriad Expressions of Institutional Discrimination: 5. You stay in your part of town and I'll stay in mine: discrimination in the housing and retail markets 6. They're just too lazy to work: discrimination in the labor market 7. They're just mentally and physically unfit: discrimination in education and health care 8. The more of 'them' in prison, the better: institutional terror, social control and the dynamics of the criminal justice system Part IV. Oppression as a Cooperative Game: 9. Social hierarchy and asymmetrical group behavior: social hierarchy and group difference in behavior 10. Sex and power: the intersecting political psychologies of patriarchy and empty-set hierarchy 11. Epilogue.
3,970 citations
Cites background from "Frustration and Aggression"
...So it may be that the mortality salience manipulation is yet another way of inducing an identity threat, of frustrating one’s current goals in one’s life (à la Dollard et al., 1939), or inducing fear of uncertainty.24...
[...]
TL;DR: An interdisciplinary review of evidence about aggression, crime, and violence contradicted the view that low self-esteem is an important cause of violence, finding that violence appears to be most commonly a result of threatened egotism.
Abstract: Conventional wisdom has regarded low self-esteem as an important cause of violence, but the opposite view is theoretically viable. An interdisciplinary review of evidence about aggression, crime, and violence contradicted the view that low self-esteem is an important cause. Instead, violence appears to be most commonly a result of threatened egotismwthat is, highly favorable views of self that are disputed by some person or circumstance. Inflated, unstable, or tentative beliefs in the self's superiority may be most prone to encountering threats and hence to causing violence. The mediating process may involve directing anger outward as a way of avoiding a downward revision of the selfconcept. Only a minority of human violence can be understood as rational, instrumental behavior aimed at securing or protecting material rewards. The pragmatic futility of most violence has been widely recognized: Wars harm both sides, most crimes yield little financial gain, terrorism and assassination almost never bring about the desired political changes, most rapes fail to bring sexual pleasure, torture rarely elicits accurate or useful information, and most murderers soon regret their actions as pointless and selfdefeating (Ford, 1985; Gottfiedson & Hirschi, 1990; Groth, 1979; Keegan, 1993; Sampson & Laub, 1993; .Scm'ry, 1985). What drives people to commit violent and oppressive actions that so often are tangential or even contrary to the rational pursuit of material self-interest? This article reviews literature relevant to the hypothesis that one main source of such violence is threatened egotism, particularly when it consists of favorable self-appraisals that may be inflated or ill-founded and that are confronted with an external evaluation that disputes them. The focus on egotism (i.e., favorable self-appraisals) as one cause of violent aggression runs contrary to an entrenched body of wisdom that has long pointed to low self-esteem as the root of violence and other antisocial behavior. We shall examine the arguments for the low self-esteem view and treat it as a rival hypothesis to our emphasis on high self-esteem. Clearly, there
2,215 citations
TL;DR: Parental corporal punishment was associated with all child constructs, including higher levels of immediate compliance and aggression and lower levels of moral internalization and mental health.
Abstract: Although the merits of parents using corporal punishment to discipline children have been argued for decades, a thorough understanding of whether and how corporal punishment affects children has not been reached. Toward this end, the author first presents the results of meta-analyses of the association between parental corporal punishment and 11 child behaviors and experiences. Parental corporal punishment was associated with all child constructs, including higher levels of immediate compliance and aggression and lower levels of moral internalization and mental health. The author then presents a process– context model to explain how parental corporal punishment might cause particular child outcomes and considers alternative explanations. The article concludes by identifying 7 major remaining issues for future
2,009 citations
Cites background from "Frustration and Aggression"
...Children’s anger at being spanked may cause them to lash back at their parents either as a reflex (elicited aggression) or to try to stop the spanking (operant aggression; Azrin & Holz, 1966; Berkowitz, 1983; Crick & Dodge, 1996; Dollard et al., 1939; Newsom et al., 1983; Ulrich, 1966)....
[...]
TL;DR: A proposed revision of the Dollard et al. (1939) frustration-aggression hypothesis holds that frustrations generate aggressive inclinations to the degree that they arouse negative affect.
Abstract: Examines the Dollard et al. (1939) frustration-aggression hypothesis. The original formulation's main proposition is limited to interference with an expected attainment of a desired goal on hostile (emotional) aggression. Although some studies have yielded negative results, others support the core proposition. Frustrations can create aggressive inclinations even when they are not arbitrary or aimed at the subject personally. Interpretations and attributions can be understood partly in terms of the original analysis but they can also influence the unpleasantness of the thwarting. A proposed revision of the 1939 model holds that frustrations generate aggressive inclinations to the degree that they arouse negative affect. Evidence regarding the aggressive consequences of aversive events is reviewed, and Berkowitz's cognitive-neoassociationistic model is summarized. In 1939, researchers at the Yale University Institute of Human Relations published a small monograph that has had a tremendous impact, directly or indirectly, on almost all of the behavioral sciences. Led by,John Dollard, Leonard Doob, Neal Miller, O. H. Mowrer, and Robert Sears (1939), the group attempted to account for virtually all of human aggression with a few basic ideas. Their book, Frustration and Aggression, quickly attracted considerable attention. Seven articles in one 1941 issue of Psychological Review were devoted to the controversy generated by the monograph, and excerpts from these papers as well as from other related articles were reprinted in a major section of the classic Readings in Social Psychology (Newcomb & Hartley, 1947). Most of the studies investigating the causes and consequences of aggression in the immediately following decades were oriented, to some extent at least, toward issues raised by the Yale group's analysis (see Berkowitz, 1958, 1962; Buss, 1961).
1,932 citations
Cites background or result from "Frustration and Aggression"
...I will now look at these intervening processes, beginning with those that seem to be most compatible with the Dollard et al. (1939) conception, and then turn to some that apparently were not considered by Dollard and his colleagues....
[...]
...In their work, Dollard et al. (1939) seemed to say that the major reason frustrated people do not always attack some available target openly is that they anticipate that such behavior may bring punishment (pp. 32-34)....
[...]
...But more than goal-directedness is involved here; the last part of the Dollard et al. (1939) definition quoted earlier implies that the person/organism had also been making anticipatory goal-consuming (i.e., goal enjoying) responses....
[...]
..."The strongest instigation aroused by a frustration," they held, was to "acts of aggression directed against the agent perceived to be the source of the frust r a t i o n . . . " (Dollard et al., 1939, p. 39)....
[...]
...This statement means, they were quick to note, that (a) "the occurrence of aggressive behavior always presupposes the existence of frustration" and (b) "the existence of frustration always leads to some form of aggression" (Dollard et al., 1939, p. l)....
[...]
TL;DR: Results showed the importance of social identity in predicting collective action by supporting SIMCA's key predictions that affective injustice and politicized identity produced stronger effects than those of non-affective injustice and non-politicized identity.
Abstract: An integrative social identity model of collective action (SIMCA) is developed that incorporates 3 socio-psychological perspectives on collective action. Three meta-analyses synthesized a total of 182 effects of perceived injustice, efficacy, and identity on collective action (corresponding to these socio-psychological perspectives). Results showed that, in isolation, all 3 predictors had medium-sized (and causal) effects. Moreover, results showed the importance of social identity in predicting collective action by supporting SIMCA's key predictions that (a) affective injustice and politicized identity produced stronger effects than those of non-affective injustice and non-politicized identity; (b) identity predicted collective action against both incidental and structural disadvantages, whereas injustice and efficacy predicted collective action against incidental disadvantages better than against structural disadvantages; (c) all 3 predictors had unique medium-sized effects on collective action when controlling for between-predictor covariance; and (d) identity bridged the injustice and efficacy explanations of collective action. Results also showed more support for SIMCA than for alternative models reflecting previous attempts at theoretical integration. The authors discuss key implications for theory, practice, future research, and further integration of social and psychological perspectives on collective action.
1,744 citations
References
More filters
Book•
01 Jan 1999TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a theory of intergroup relations from visiousness to viciousness, and the psychology of group dominance, as well as the dynamics of the criminal justice system.
Abstract: Part I. From There to Here - Theoretical Background: 1. From visiousness to viciousness: theories of intergroup relations 2. Social dominance theory as a new synthesis Part II. Oppression and its Psycho-Ideological Elements: 3. The psychology of group dominance: social dominance orientation 4. Let's both agree that you're really stupid: the power of consensual ideology Part III. The Circle of Oppression - The Myriad Expressions of Institutional Discrimination: 5. You stay in your part of town and I'll stay in mine: discrimination in the housing and retail markets 6. They're just too lazy to work: discrimination in the labor market 7. They're just mentally and physically unfit: discrimination in education and health care 8. The more of 'them' in prison, the better: institutional terror, social control and the dynamics of the criminal justice system Part IV. Oppression as a Cooperative Game: 9. Social hierarchy and asymmetrical group behavior: social hierarchy and group difference in behavior 10. Sex and power: the intersecting political psychologies of patriarchy and empty-set hierarchy 11. Epilogue.
3,970 citations
TL;DR: An interdisciplinary review of evidence about aggression, crime, and violence contradicted the view that low self-esteem is an important cause of violence, finding that violence appears to be most commonly a result of threatened egotism.
Abstract: Conventional wisdom has regarded low self-esteem as an important cause of violence, but the opposite view is theoretically viable. An interdisciplinary review of evidence about aggression, crime, and violence contradicted the view that low self-esteem is an important cause. Instead, violence appears to be most commonly a result of threatened egotismwthat is, highly favorable views of self that are disputed by some person or circumstance. Inflated, unstable, or tentative beliefs in the self's superiority may be most prone to encountering threats and hence to causing violence. The mediating process may involve directing anger outward as a way of avoiding a downward revision of the selfconcept. Only a minority of human violence can be understood as rational, instrumental behavior aimed at securing or protecting material rewards. The pragmatic futility of most violence has been widely recognized: Wars harm both sides, most crimes yield little financial gain, terrorism and assassination almost never bring about the desired political changes, most rapes fail to bring sexual pleasure, torture rarely elicits accurate or useful information, and most murderers soon regret their actions as pointless and selfdefeating (Ford, 1985; Gottfiedson & Hirschi, 1990; Groth, 1979; Keegan, 1993; Sampson & Laub, 1993; .Scm'ry, 1985). What drives people to commit violent and oppressive actions that so often are tangential or even contrary to the rational pursuit of material self-interest? This article reviews literature relevant to the hypothesis that one main source of such violence is threatened egotism, particularly when it consists of favorable self-appraisals that may be inflated or ill-founded and that are confronted with an external evaluation that disputes them. The focus on egotism (i.e., favorable self-appraisals) as one cause of violent aggression runs contrary to an entrenched body of wisdom that has long pointed to low self-esteem as the root of violence and other antisocial behavior. We shall examine the arguments for the low self-esteem view and treat it as a rival hypothesis to our emphasis on high self-esteem. Clearly, there
2,215 citations
TL;DR: Parental corporal punishment was associated with all child constructs, including higher levels of immediate compliance and aggression and lower levels of moral internalization and mental health.
Abstract: Although the merits of parents using corporal punishment to discipline children have been argued for decades, a thorough understanding of whether and how corporal punishment affects children has not been reached. Toward this end, the author first presents the results of meta-analyses of the association between parental corporal punishment and 11 child behaviors and experiences. Parental corporal punishment was associated with all child constructs, including higher levels of immediate compliance and aggression and lower levels of moral internalization and mental health. The author then presents a process– context model to explain how parental corporal punishment might cause particular child outcomes and considers alternative explanations. The article concludes by identifying 7 major remaining issues for future
2,009 citations
TL;DR: A proposed revision of the Dollard et al. (1939) frustration-aggression hypothesis holds that frustrations generate aggressive inclinations to the degree that they arouse negative affect.
Abstract: Examines the Dollard et al. (1939) frustration-aggression hypothesis. The original formulation's main proposition is limited to interference with an expected attainment of a desired goal on hostile (emotional) aggression. Although some studies have yielded negative results, others support the core proposition. Frustrations can create aggressive inclinations even when they are not arbitrary or aimed at the subject personally. Interpretations and attributions can be understood partly in terms of the original analysis but they can also influence the unpleasantness of the thwarting. A proposed revision of the 1939 model holds that frustrations generate aggressive inclinations to the degree that they arouse negative affect. Evidence regarding the aggressive consequences of aversive events is reviewed, and Berkowitz's cognitive-neoassociationistic model is summarized. In 1939, researchers at the Yale University Institute of Human Relations published a small monograph that has had a tremendous impact, directly or indirectly, on almost all of the behavioral sciences. Led by,John Dollard, Leonard Doob, Neal Miller, O. H. Mowrer, and Robert Sears (1939), the group attempted to account for virtually all of human aggression with a few basic ideas. Their book, Frustration and Aggression, quickly attracted considerable attention. Seven articles in one 1941 issue of Psychological Review were devoted to the controversy generated by the monograph, and excerpts from these papers as well as from other related articles were reprinted in a major section of the classic Readings in Social Psychology (Newcomb & Hartley, 1947). Most of the studies investigating the causes and consequences of aggression in the immediately following decades were oriented, to some extent at least, toward issues raised by the Yale group's analysis (see Berkowitz, 1958, 1962; Buss, 1961).
1,932 citations
TL;DR: Results showed the importance of social identity in predicting collective action by supporting SIMCA's key predictions that affective injustice and politicized identity produced stronger effects than those of non-affective injustice and non-politicized identity.
Abstract: An integrative social identity model of collective action (SIMCA) is developed that incorporates 3 socio-psychological perspectives on collective action. Three meta-analyses synthesized a total of 182 effects of perceived injustice, efficacy, and identity on collective action (corresponding to these socio-psychological perspectives). Results showed that, in isolation, all 3 predictors had medium-sized (and causal) effects. Moreover, results showed the importance of social identity in predicting collective action by supporting SIMCA's key predictions that (a) affective injustice and politicized identity produced stronger effects than those of non-affective injustice and non-politicized identity; (b) identity predicted collective action against both incidental and structural disadvantages, whereas injustice and efficacy predicted collective action against incidental disadvantages better than against structural disadvantages; (c) all 3 predictors had unique medium-sized effects on collective action when controlling for between-predictor covariance; and (d) identity bridged the injustice and efficacy explanations of collective action. Results also showed more support for SIMCA than for alternative models reflecting previous attempts at theoretical integration. The authors discuss key implications for theory, practice, future research, and further integration of social and psychological perspectives on collective action.
1,744 citations