Table Of ContentINFORMATION TO USERS
This material was produced from a microfilm copy of the original document. While
the most advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this document
have been used, the quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of the original
submitted.
The following explanation of techniques is provided to help you understand
markings or patterns which may appear on this reproduction.
1. The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the document
photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the missing
page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with adjacent pages.
This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and duplicating adjacent
pages to insure you complete continuity.
2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a large round black mark, it
is an indication that the photographer suspected that the copy may have
moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred image. You will find a
good image of the page in the adjacent frame.
3. When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part of the material being
photographed the photographer followed a definite method in
"sectioning" the material. It is customary to begin photoing at the upper
left hand corner of a large sheet and to continue photoing from left to
right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary, sectioning is
continued again — beginning below the first row and continuing on until
complete.
4. The majority of users indicate that the textual content is of greatest value,
however, a somewhat higher quality reproduction could be made from
"photographs" if essential to the understanding of the dissertation. Silver
prints of "photographs" may be ordered at additional charge by writing
the Order Department, giving the catalog number, title, author and
specific pages you wish reproduced.
5. PLEASE NOTE: Some pages may have indistinct print. Filmed as
received.
Xerox University Microfilms
300 North Zeeb Road
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106
LD3907 m - 4 U Z
Vane, Julia nandle, I9I8-
^ A study of frustration, aggression
end level of aspiration in delin
quent g irls,
v ,118p. tables.
Thesis (Ph.D.) - N.Y.U., Graduate
School, 1951*
Bibliography ;p .llij.-1170
C801l72
1.Frustration. 2.Delinquent g ir ls
3 .D issertations, Academic - N.Y.U,
.
1951
Stall list
Xerox University Microfilms, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106
THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED.
NEW YORK UNIVERSITY
A STUDY OF FRUSTRATION, AGGRESSION
AND LEVEL OF ASPIRATION
IN DELINQUENT GIRLS
A DISSERTATION IN THE DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY
SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF ARTS AND
SCIENCE OF NEW YORK UNIVERSITY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
BY
JULIA RANDLE VANE
NEW YORK, NEW YORK
APRIL 1951
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I should like to express my gratitude and to acknowledge
my indebtedness to Frofessor T.N. Jenkins for his help in outlining
the original problem, for his aid during the development of the
investigation and for his guidance during the evaluation of the
results.
My sinoere thanks go to the Staff of V illa Loretto at
Peekskill. Their active cooperation made this study possible.
I also want to express my appreciation to Dr. T. W.
Brockbank who added to the soope of this study by his psychiatric
evaluations. I fully acknowledge the assistance of the staff of
Catholic Charities Guidanoe Institute who aided and encouraged me.
2 C M £ > o t >
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACK NOWLE DGEMEN T S ................................................................................................. i
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES...............................................................................iv
I. INTRODUCTION
A. PURPOSE...................................................................................................... 1
3. ORIGIN OF PROP LEI I ................................................................................. 1
II. RESEARCH DESIGN
A. SUBJECTS ........................................................................................... 4
I. TESTS ADMINISTERED
1. Wechsler Bellevue ............................................................... 7
2. Rosenzweig P icture-F rustration................................... 7
a. Related Studies................................................................ 7
b. Method of scoring........................................................... 9
c. Control group ................................................................ 9
3. Level of A spiration....................................................................10
a. Related Studies.....................................................................11
b. Task: Rotter B o a rd ......................................... IS
c. Method of scoring ............................................................20
4. Additional Material ...............................................................21
5. Sampling d e s ig n ...........................................................................23
C. PROCEDURE
1. Psychological Interview ...........................................................25
2. Psychiatric Interview ...........................................................25
3. Method of obtaining Rating of B eh av io r.....................26
4. Rating Scales and Check Lists ........................................27
a.Evaluation of Possible Frustrating Factors . . 28
b.Rating of Personal Attractiveness ........................ 33
c.Evaluation of Cause of Commitment .............................34
d.Evaluation of Behavior in Interview s.......................38
e.Rating of Aggressive Behavior in Institution . 43
ii
RESULTS OF MEASURES OF FRUSTRATION AND BEHAVIOR
A. RATINGS OF AGGRESSIVE BEHAVIOR IN INSTITUTION . . . . 49
B. RATINGS OF BEHAVIOR PREVIOUS TO COMMITMENT ................... 51
C. RATINGS OF BEHAVIOR BY PSYCHIATRIST...................................... 52
D. RATINGS OF BEHAVIOR BY PSYCHOLOGIST...................................... 54
E. COMPARISON OF RATINGS BY PSYCHIATRIST AND
PSYCHOLOGIST........................ 56
F. EVALUATION OF POJ. ,IBLE FRUSTRATIN'". FACTORS........................ 57
G. RATING OF PERSONAL ATTRACTIVENESS........................................... 58
H. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS .................................................................. 59
TEST RESULTS
A. ROSEIIZ’./EIG PICTURE FRUSTRATION ............................................... 65
1. Summary ......................................................................................... 65
2. Interpretation............................................................................... 69
U. ROTTER ASPIRATION BOARD.................................................................. 79
1. Summary .................................................................................... 79
2. Evaluation of results ............................................................ 81
3. Interpretation............................................................................... 87
4. Evaluation of scoring method . . . ............................ 91
C. DISCUSSION 0r TEST RESULTS ........................................................ 93
GENERAL DISCUSSION ......................................................................................... 95
GENERAL CONCLUSIONS .........................................................................................
SIT LiARY ....................................................................................................................
REFERENCES ...............................................................................................................
APPENDIX ....................................................................................................................
iii
LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Table Page
1. Division of Delinquents into Non-aggressive, Medium- 49
aggressive and Aggressive subgroups on the basis of
Rating of Aggressive -ehavior in Institution
.
2 Numerical evaluation of Seriousness of Behavior prior 51
to commitment in Aggressive, Medium-aggressive and
non-aggressive sub groups
3. Interview Ratings of Aggressive, Medium-aggressive and 53
Non-aggressive sub-groups by the Psychiatrist
4. Interview Ratings of Aggressive, Medium-aggressive and 54
Non-aggressive sub-groups by the Psychologist
5. Distribution of Scores of Possible Frustrating Background 57
Factors in Aggressive, Medium and ITon-aggressive groups
6. Distribution of Ratings of Personal Attractiveness in 58
Aggressive, Medium and Non-aggressive groups
7. Scores on the Picture-Frustration Study for the Delinquent 65
Group, Control Group and Rosenzweig1s Norms for Women
8. Critical Ratios between Scores of the Delinquent Group, 65
Control Group and Rosenzweig's Norms
9. Distribution of Scores on the Picture-Frustrat ion Study 68
for Aggressive, Medium, and Non-aggressive Sub-groups
.
10 Critical Ratios between Scores of the Aggressive, Medium 69
and Non-aggressive Groups on the Picture-Frustration Study
.
11 Scores on the Picture-Frustration Study for Delinquents 74
of Below average Intelligence and Delinquents of Average
or above Intelligence
.
12 Results of Performance on the Rotter Aspiration Roari for 79
the Delinquents, Hospital Attendants, and College Women
13. Scores of Delinquent Group when divided into Sub-groups on
basis of Age, Intelligence, and Frustrating background
iv
Table
14. Results of Performance on the Rotter Aspiration Board for 86
Aggressive, Medium Aggressive and Non-aggressive groups
15. D-scores of other groups using the Rotter Aspiration 88
Board
Figure
1. Plan of Rotter Aspiration Board 17
v
- 1-
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
A. PURPOSE OF TEE INVESTIGATION
The purpose of this study is to investigate aggressive
behavior in a group of delinquent girls in order to evaluate the
relationship of aggressive behavior to possible frustrating
baokground factors and personality structure.
B. ORIGIN OF THE PROBLEM
In 1939 Dollard and his associates at Yale published
their -well known book, ’’Frustration and Aggression" (6). In it
they put forth the hypothesis that "aggression is always a
consequence of frustration." In elaborating this theory the
subject of criminality was discussed and related to the basic
postulate of frustration and aggression. This relationship was
summarized as follows» "All of the factors which have been found
to be causally related to crim inality derive this connection
because of implying, directly or indirectly, on the part of the
offending individual either higher-than-average frustration, lower-
than-average anticipation of punishment, or both."
In considering crim inality as "as species of aggression"
which had its origin in frustration, the group stated they were
attempting to provide a common basis for criminal causation to
displace the multiple causation theories that were generally held.
Sinoe the publication of these theories no work appears
to have been done to establish experimentally the association
between crime and the frustration-aggression hypothesis, although
considerable interest has been shown in the relationship of the
hypothesis to other forms of behavior (2, 9, 11, 15, 16, 18, 27,
28, 32).
Despite the lack of experimental evidenoe direotly bear
ing on the relationship of criminality to frustration and aggression,
there has been a tendency on the part of some writers to accept
the association as proven and to consider delinquents and criminals
as aggressive. This attitude is expressed by Plant (45) when he
says, "The delinquent is that child who habitually responds to
serious and prolonged frustration in an aggressive way." Gardner
(36) also supports this viewpoint. He feels "the delinquent act
90 per cent of the time is concerned.. . .with the expression of
aggressive instincts."
In view of the lack of experimental evidenoe of the
relationship of the frustration-aggression hypothesis to criminality
and delinquency and the tendenoy of some writers to assume that the
association exists, researoh into the problem appeared worthwhile.
