No abstract

There is no question that the subject of attitude and attitude measurements is important in sociology and social psychology. Social scientists continue to discuss the nature of attitudes in articles like this, to conduct experiments which show that behavior is affected by attitude, and to measure attitudes for theoretical or practical purposes. The problem of what an attitude is and how it functions, nevertheless, persists andas many writers on attitudes likewise point out in their introductory paragraph-little explicit agreement is apparent in the published literature.The purpose of this paper is not to criticize other definitions or usages of the term but systematically, if partially, to relate the concept of attitude to what is known as behavior theory (17). 1 Almost all writers, no matter what their bias, agree that attitudes are learned. If this is so, then the learning, retention, and decline of an attitude are no different from the learning of a skill, a piece of prose, or a set of nonsense syllables; and they must also involve the problems of perception and motivation.Immediately it is necessary to raise and answer the question as to why a simple, commonsense, ubiquitous concept like attitude should be translated into semi-technical jargon. There are at least two answers to the question. The first and less important answer involves scientific methodology: it is 1 The writer is deeply grateful especially to Neal E. Miller as well as to Irvin L. Child, John Dollard, and Mark A. May for their constructive criticisms He has promiscuously and deliberately borrowed some of their ideas and, as an insignificant token of his gratitude, herewith absolves them of any responsibility for the final product.

frustration always leads to some form of aggression" to "frustration produces instigations to a number of different types of response, one of which is an instigation to some form of aggression."One of the more recent and interesting hypotheses concerning frustration and aggression is that presented by Sargent (Paper No. 29), who also criticized the frustration-aggression hypothesis. Sargent believes that frustration involves a sequence of behavior in which there are four important aspects: a) frustration, b) emotion, c) habit or mechanism, and d) overt behavior. Furthermore, he holds that each of these stages is always influenced by two important factors, the person's past experiences and his interpretation of the present situation. Frustration-Aggression/ ""PHE frustration-aggres- X sion hypothesis is anHypothesis Neal E. Miller (with the collaboration of Robert R. Sears, O. H. Mowrer, Leonard W. Doob and John Dollard)attempt to state a relationship believed to be important in many different fields of research. It is intended to suggest to the student of human nature that when he sees aggression he should turn a suspicious eye on possibilities that the organism or group is confronted with frustration; and that when he views interference with individual or group habits, he should be on the look-out for, among other things, aggression. This hypothesis is induced from commonsense observation, from clinical case histories, from a few experimental investigations, from sociological studies and from the results of anthropological field work. The systematic formulation of this hypothesis enables one to call sharp attention to certain common characteristics in a number of observations from Abridged from the Psychological Review, 1941, 48, 337-342. Reprinted by permission of the authors and the American Psychological Association, Inc.

No abstract

HE problem of aggression has many facets. The individual experiences difficulty in controlling his own T temper and often sees others carrying on an unwitting struggle with their hostilities. H e fears justified revenge or writhes at the blow or taunt that appears from an unexpected source. Children are often expert at annoying their elders by sly mischief or a sudden tantrum. Helpless minorities are persecuted. The lynching mob has a grimness and cruelty not to be expected from people who are so gentle and kind in other situations. Primitive tribesmen slay one another and even civilized people are frightened by the prospect of new and increasingly destructive wars. This book represents an attempt t o bring a degree of systematic order into such apparently chaotic phenomena.1. In fact a number of antecedent conditions must sometimes all be present before any instigation occurs.