You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
This paper discusses a specific peculiarity of acting out—a peculiarity clearly described in the well-known studies of Johnson and Szurek and their collaborators (5), (8), (9), (10), (11), (12), (13). Johnson (5) expresses the essence of this peculiarity thus: "Antisocial acting out in a child is unconsciously initiated, fostered and sanctioned by the parents, who, through a child's acting out, unconsciously achieve gratification of their own poorly integrated forbidden impulses."
This thesis, which I believe holds good for acting out in general, has several implications. The first point is that acting out, although personally motivated, is also a direct action response to stimulation by another person. A second point, similar to the first but not exactly the same, is that the acting-out person, by means of his behavior, aims either to please or to influence another person, or perhaps to do both. A third characteristic is that the influence extended from one person to another in the acting-out situation is largely unconscious, and that many forms of nonverbal communication make this mutual two-way influence possible.
There are many examples of this unconscious influence. A mother, upon hearing of her child's stealing or some other misdemeanor, may disapprove vigorously in words but at the same time display a facial expression undeniably interested and approving. Or a mother, upon hearing of her child's bad behavior at school, may show in her face marked hostility toward the reporting teacher, even though in words she fully agrees that the teacher is right. Or a parent, after scolding or punishing a child for some antisocial act, will repeat to others over and over, as though it