Frustration tolerance

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Frustration tolerance is a personality trait that describes the individual's ability to face a frustrating situation when reaching a desired goal and the resulting psychological tensions that result from external setbacks, disadvantages or disappointed expectations (external frustrations ) as well as the non-satisfaction of instinctual wishes (inner frustrations ) , to endure and to deal with it constructively over a long period of time without distorting the objective factors of the situation.

Saul Rosenzweig coined the term in 1938 . People with a low tolerance for frustration tend to abandon tasks quickly if unexpected resistance is in the way or if the desired success does not occur. Frustration tolerance is acquired to a certain extent in the course of the individualization or socialization process and can be determined using the picture frustration test.

Low frustration tolerance indicates ego weakness . Through learning processes, the frustration tolerance can be strengthened, taking into account the reality principle, for example by delaying or reducing reward. Individuals with a low tolerance for frustration tend to be more strenuous or avoidance behaviors as well as more aggressive forms of behavior. On the other hand, the stronger the tolerance for frustration, the less aggressive forms of behavior can be found.

There are basically the following three possibilities, depending on how the person concerned constructs the cause-effect relationships and how aggressions from experiences of frustration show up in observable behavior:

  • In the Extrapunitive frustration reaction , external factors as causes of frustration, for example other people, are made responsible and the aggressions are directed outwards.
  • In case of Intropunitive frustration reaction identifies the causes of the frustration in oneself and directs the aggressions inward.
  • In the impunitive n frustration reaction, the causes of frustration are trivialized or denied, and aggression is denied.

From an experimental point of view, it is not easy to distinguish between the intensity of the tensions actually triggered in the individual on the one hand and the behavior triggered by the tensions on the other. The reason why one person endures a frustrating situation longer (i.e. does not show any behavior that indicates increased stress) than another can be, on the one hand, that this person can compensate for the experienced frustrating situation with the corresponding expectation of future need fulfillment (i.e. they Has learned to delay the reward ), or on the other hand it can simply result from the fact that the person does not experience the presented situation from the outset as as frustrating as the comparison person.

The outcome of a test to measure frustration tolerance will therefore be sensitive to the extent to which the test conditions influence the subject's learned delay in reward. If the test confronts the test person with signals that impair his expectation of a deferred need fulfillment, only those people will appear to be more frustration-tolerant who have a lower sense of frustration in the presented situation from the outset.

See also

Individual evidence

  1. Harlich H. Stavemann, Yvonne Hülsner: Integrative CBT for Frustration Intolerance: Anger disorders and procrastination. Diagnosis - treatment plan - therapy concept. Beltz Verlag, 2016, ISBN 978-3-621-28357-1 .
  2. a b Uwe Henrik Peters: Lexicon of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, Medical Psychology . Edition: 6, 2007, p. 200.
  3. ^ S. Rosenzweig: A general outline of frustration. Journal of Personality (1938) 7, pp. 151-160. doi: 10.1111 / j.1467-6494.1938.tb02285.x.
  4. MV, Jr. Taylor: Internal consistency of the scoring categories of the Rosenzweig Picture-Frustration Study. In: Journal of Consulting Psychology , 16 (2), 1952, pp. 149-153. doi: 10.1037 / h0062320
  5. Kevin M. Mitchell: The Rosenzweig picture-frustration study as a measure of reaction to personal evaluation . In: Journal of Projective Techniques and Personality Assessment , December 1, 1967, Vol. 31, Issue 06, pp. 65-68, doi: 10.1080 / 0091651X.1967.10120434.
  6. ^ Richard H. Walters, Misha S. Zaks: Validation Studies of an Aggression Scale. The Journal of Psychology, April 01, 1959, Vol. 47, Issue 02, pp. 209-218, doi: 10.1080 / 00223980.1959.9916321.
  7. ^ Anton Meyer (Ed.): Service Marketing: Impulse for Research and Management, Deutscher Universitätsverlag 2004, p. 310. online here
  8. ^ Richard H. Walters, Misha S. Zaks: Validation Studies of an Aggression Scale . In: The Journal of Psychology , (1959) 47: 2, pp. 209-218, doi: 10.1080 / 00223980.1959.9916321.
  9. Klaus-Peter Wiedmann: Foundation of Marketing - behavioral knowledge . Gabler Edition Wissenschaft, 2004, p. 71.
  10. ^ FP Gatling: Frustration reactions of delinquents using Rosenzweig's classification system . In: The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 45 (4), 1950, pp. 749-752, doi: 10.1037 / h0059664
  11. ^ FP Gatling: Frustration reactions of delinquents using Rosenzweig's classification system . In: The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 45 (4), 1950, pp. 749-752, doi: 10.1037 / h0059664
  12. Jules D. Holzberg, Rita Posner: The Relationship of Extrapunitiveness on the Rosenzweig Picture-Frustration Study to Aggression in Overt Behavior and Fantasy. In: American Journal of Orthopsychiatry , 21, pp. 767-779. doi: 10.1111 / j.1939-0025.1951.tb00027.x.