Full text unavailable

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.

PAQ 12:604-606 (1943)

Effects of Frustration: Symposium at the Meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association at Atlantic City, April 5, 1940. Psychological Rev., XLVIII, 1941, pp. 337–366.

Author: Siegfried Bernfeld

Abstract

1Neal E. Miller (with the collaboration of Robert R. Sears, O. H. Mowrer, Leonard W. Doob and John Dollard).
The Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis.
The Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis referred to in this symposium was presented 1939 in the book of J. Dollar, L. W. Doob, N. E. Miller, O. H. Mowrer and R. R. Sears: Frustration and Aggression. One of the statements reads, 'that the occurrence of aggression always presupposes the existence of frustration and contrariwise, that the existence of frustration always leads to some form of aggression'. Miller rephrases the second half of this statement as, 'frustration produces instigations to a number of different types of responses, one of which is an instigation to some form of aggression'. The instigation does not imply the actual occurrence of aggression, which may be inhibited.
2Robert R. Sears.
Non-Aggressive Reactions to Frustration.
Sears briefly surveys various nonaggressive reactions, analyzing them in terms of instigation, instrumental acts, goal responses. He stresses two problems of immediate significance from a research standpoint: (1) the problem of discovering the total repertory of frustration reactions available to any individual. (2) The determination of the specific factors which cause one kind of frustration reaction rather than another. 'Surprisingly few hypotheses have been suggested by psychoanalytic researchers.' The little material produced by experimenters is reviewed.
3Saul Rosenzweig.
Need-Persistive and Ego-Defensive Reactions to Frustration, as Demonstrated by an Experiment on Repression.
The author distinguishes two types of reactions to frustration. The first—'need-persistive'—serves to fulfil the frustrated need in spite of momentary obstructions. The other—'ego-defensive'—serves to protect the integration of the personality if and when the latter is threatened by the frustratung situation. The relationship of this distinction to psychoanalytic concepts is obvious and is clearly discus

PAQ 12:604-606 (1943)

Effects of Frustration: Symposium at the Meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association at Atlantic City, April 5, 1940. Psychological Rev., XLVIII, 1941, pp. 337–366.

Author: Siegfried Bernfeld

Abstract

1Neal E. Miller (with the collaboration of Robert R. Sears, O. H. Mowrer, Leonard W. Doob and John Dollard).
The Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis.
The Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis referred to in this symposium was presented 1939 in the book of J. Dollar, L. W. Doob, N. E. Miller, O. H. Mowrer and R. R. Sears: Frustration and Aggression. One of the statements reads, 'that the occurrence of aggression always presupposes the existence of frustration and contrariwise, that the existence of frustration always leads to some form of aggression'. Miller rephrases the second half of this statement as, 'frustration produces instigations to a number of different types of responses, one of which is an instigation to some form of aggression'. The instigation does not imply the actual occurrence of aggression, which may be inhibited.
2Robert R. Sears.
Non-Aggressive Reactions to Frustration.
Sears briefly surveys various nonaggressive reactions, analyzing them in terms of instigation, instrumental acts, goal responses. He stresses two problems of immediate significance from a research standpoint: (1) the problem of discovering the total repertory of frustration reactions available to any individual. (2) The determination of the specific factors which cause one kind of frustration reaction rather than another. 'Surprisingly few hypotheses have been suggested by psychoanalytic researchers.' The little material produced by experimenters is reviewed.
3Saul Rosenzweig.
Need-Persistive and Ego-Defensive Reactions to Frustration, as Demonstrated by an Experiment on Repression.
The author distinguishes two types of reactions to frustration. The first—'need-persistive'—serves to fulfil the frustrated need in spite of momentary obstructions. The other—'ego-defensive'—serves to protect the integration of the personality if and when the latter is threatened by the frustratung situation. The relationship of this distinction to psychoanalytic concepts is obvious and is clearly discus