What is frustration-aggression theory?

Fact Checked

Under review

Where does aggression originate? There are multiple approaches, but in this article we will focus on the frustration-aggression theory.

The theories that attempt to explain aggression are multiple and, at least in appearance, logical. On this occasion you will be able to meet the theory of frustration-aggression, one of the most popular in its historical moment and the basis for other more current ones.

This theory gives a perhaps too simple explanation to the question of aggression, but its author was able to create a statement applicable to practically all situations of violence. Has your curiosity been piqued? Keep reading.

What is frustration-aggression theory?

This theory was formulated by John Dollard and Neal Miller, two psychologists from the school of behaviorism who wanted to theorize about the causes of aggression. Back in 1939 they formulated the theory of frustration-aggression, in which this behavioral tendency once again reduces one of the basic processes of behavior in society to stimulus-response: violence.

However, Dollard’s psychoanalytic background moved them to look for a theory that would take advantage of the strengths of both theories.

What does the frustration-aggression theory postulate?

The main hypothesis is that aggression is always a consequence of frustration and this also works the other way around: frustration always leads to some type of aggression. With these simple premises, Dollard and his collaborators sought to make predictions about when people did it and against whom.

But how do frustration and aggression work? Below you can read how these authors described the two processes separately.

Read Also: "They don't value my work": what to do?

The frustration

In this theory, Frustration is understood as an interference in the sequence of behavior, that is, a person becomes frustrated if they do not get their desires to materialize. This can happen for reasons I will list later.

For example, if a child is given a bag of candy while watching a movie and is suddenly taken out of the room and the bag is taken away from him, he will not be able to complete either action. And he’s probably frustrated, of course.

The theory also postulates that the greater the frustration, the more intense the resulting aggression. If someone cuts in line at the supermarket, for example, the probability that he will be singled out or recriminated increases or decreases depending on the position he has accessed or attempted to access.

Furthermore, he says that aggression releases frustration, it accumulates. Thus, there comes a point where any small frustration can lead to intense aggression, a product of this accumulation.

The agression

Within the frustration-aggression theory, Aggression is behavior whose objective is to harm the person at whom it is directed. Aggression can be physical or verbal, direct or indirect.

However, Aggression does not always reach the person who directly generated it. In these cases, displaced aggression is resorted to, which consists of exercising violence on another target that shares some similarity with the original. Furthermore, if direct violence is hindered or prevented, indirect violence – such as spreading rumors or making fun of someone – will be resorted to.

Later, a study showed that Those with high but unstable self-esteem quickly show hostility in the face of frustrationbecause they are continually on guard.

The Ramifications of Frustration-Aggression Theory

After this theory, many others emerged trying to develop its weak points. Ted Gurr, for example, applied this theory to the way social unrest occurs as people’s aspirations and hopes are frustrated.

On the other hand, Engebretson postulated in 1989 that those who are allowed to vent their anger in any way they choose will be less activated later than those who are repressed. Does this mean that aggression must be allowed as a form of catharsis? The most obvious answer is no, but the debate is still open today.