The Frustration-Aggression Hypothesis (AQA A Level Psychology): Revision Note

What is the frustration-aggression hypothesis?

• The frustration-aggression hypothesis (FAH)  is based on the concept that frustration will always result in aggression (Dollard, 1939)

• The FAH posits the idea that aggression occurs when a psychological drive to achieve a goal is obstructed in some way

  • E.g., 'This traffic jam means I’m going to be late for work!'

• The FAH draws from the psychodynamic concept of catharsis; i.e., aggression allows us to vent pent-up feelings in the moment, which ultimately helps to reduce the need for further aggression

• A short-term aggressive response works as a kind of ‘safety valve’ against heightened future aggression

  • E.g., blasting your horn at an inconsiderate driver is safer than ramming their car!

• The aggressive response as suggested by the FAH cannot always be expressed directly towards the source of the frustration (displaced aggression)

  • E.g., that boyfriend who stole your favourite band T-shirt is long-gone

• Berkowitz (1969) suggested that frustration will not always lead to aggression: aggressive behaviour is triggered by specific environmental cues

  • E.g., the presence of a gun or knife

Research which investigates the frustration-aggression hypothesis

• Green (1968) – a lab experiment in which participants were asked to complete a jigsaw puzzle under different FAH conditions (an unattainable time limit; an impossible jigsaw; a confederate directing insults at them): the group of participants who had experienced insults from the confederate gave the highest levels of electric shocks to him 

• Marcus-Newell et al. (2000) – a meta-analysis which found robust research support for the FAH

Evaluation of the frustration-aggression hypothesis

Strengths

• There is some good research support for the FAH, with displaced aggression showing particularly reliable results

• The FAH is a valid explanation of reactive aggression

Weaknesses

• Bateson (1941) found that the FAH is not universal: the Iatmul people of New Guinea embraced aggression as a response to frustration compared to the Balinese, who showed no aggression when faced with frustration; hence, the theory lacks external validity

• Lewis & Bucher (1992) questioned the value of catharsis as used in therapeutic settings as a form of anger management, as the venting of frustration via aggression may actually increase the patient’s anger/aggression

Issues & Debates

• The FAH presents a deterministic view of aggression, suggesting that frustration inevitably leads to aggressive behaviour

  • This removes personal responsibility and free will, which is problematic when considering socially unacceptable or violent actions

• The FAH takes a nomothetic approach, aiming to establish universal laws of behaviour — in this case, that frustration leads to aggression across all individuals

  • This overlooks individual differences, such as personality traits, past experiences, or cultural norms, that influence how people respond to frustration

  • Therefore, while useful for creating testable hypotheses, the nomothetic nature of FAH may limit its real-world applicability to diverse individuals