Rosenzweig's pictorial frustration technique. Rosenzweig frustration test

Brief history of the creation of the methodology : developed in 1945 on the basis of frustration theory. There are modifications of the methodology designed to study attitudes towards national minorities, problems of maintaining peace, etc. In the Patriotic psychodiagnostics, the technique was used for the differential diagnosis of neuroses, when predicting the socially dangerous actions of the mentally ill (N.V. Tarabarina, 1973). An adult, a child and a variant for the diagnosis of adolescents have been developed.

General theoretical provisions : The methodology is based on the theory of frustration developed by S. Rosenzweig (from Latin - deception, vain expectation, frustration).

According to the theory, frustration occurs when the body encounters more or less significant obstacles on the way to satisfying some vital need. Protection of the body in frustrating situations is carried out at three levels:

1) cellular (action of phagocytes, antibodies, etc.),

2) autonomous - protection of the body as a whole from physical "aggressions" (corresponds psychologically to the states of fear, suffering, and physiologically - to the changes that occur in the body during stress),

3) cortical , psychological the level at which the selection of the corresponding types and orientation of personality reactions is carried out.

In addition to imagination and perception as indicators of motivational processes in the design of the test, the principle of correlating motive and barrier was used.

frustration tolerance(FT) - the ability of a person to withstand various kinds of difficulties, the ability to adequately assess the situation that has arisen and foresee a way out of it.

With an increase in the level of personality development, the level of frustration tolerance increases.

Data on the validity and reliability of the method : according to foreign researchers, the reliability coefficient of the retest is 0.60–0.80. Sufficiently high validity, for example, according to the extrapunitiveness parameter, identified independently by the method, is 0.747. The tasks that make up the Rosenzweig test are heterogeneous. Experiences (and actions) in relation to test situations will vary in different circumstances. Rosenzweig was able to identify fairly high rates of retest reliability of the technique: for the adult version of the technique, the coefficients ranged from +0.71 for male subjects (according to the impunity response scale) to +0.21 for female subjects (according to the group conformity rating).

Target : diagnostics of behavioral features in situations associated with the appearance of difficulties, obstacles that impede the achievement of the goal, this test also reveals the features of the subject's aggression.

Application area : There are 2 versions of the technique: a children's version of the technique - from 4 to 14 years old and an adult version of the technique.

Organization : only individually, the required time is 20-30 min.

Brief description of the methodology: The technique consists of 24 drawings, which depict faces in a frustration situation. The situations presented in the text can be divided into two main groups.

1. Situations of "obstacles". In these cases, some obstacle, character or object, discourages, confuses in a word or in some other way. This includes 16 situations.

2. The situation of "accusation". The subject thus serves as object of accusation. There are eight of them.

There is a connection between these types, since the "accusation" situation suggests that it was preceded by the "obstruction" situation, where the frustrator was, in turn, frustrated. Sometimes the subject may interpret the situation of "accusation" as a situation of "obstruction", or vice versa.

Stimulus material : cards with schematic outline drawings, which depict 2 or more people engaged in an unfinished conversation, in a frustrating situation that is created by the presence of an obstacle or accusation. Adult version 24 cards, children - 8 cards. The character on the left speaks words that describe the frustration of one's own or that of another individual. Above the character depicted on the right, there is an empty square in which the subject must enter the first answer that comes to mind.

* If the subject refuses to answer any card, then the card must be put aside, but then returned (no more than two refusals).

Results processing : This technique highlights the following information: three types of reactions, three directions of reactions, group conformity coefficient (GCR), a complete pattern of behavior, trends in the development of behavior over time.

First stage of processing: responses are evaluated in 2 aspects:

1. According to the direction of the reaction, they are divided into:

1) Extrapunitive (E) - the reaction is directed at the environment, the external cause of frustration is condemned and its degree is emphasized, sometimes the resolution of the situation is required from another person.

2) Intropunitive (I) - the reaction is directed at oneself with the acceptance of guilt or responsibility for correcting the situation that has arisen, the frustrating situation is not subject to condemnation.

3) Immunitive (M) - the frustrating situation is seen as something insignificant or inevitable, overcome with time, there is no blaming others or oneself.

2. By type of reaction:

1) (OD) Obstructive-dominant / with fixation on an obstacle (E’, I", M") - obstacles that cause frustration are emphasized, regardless of whether they are regarded as favorable, unfavorable or insignificant

2) (ED) Ego-defensive / with fixation on self-defense (E, I, M) - activity in the form of censuring someone, denying or admitting one's guilt, avoiding reproach, aimed at protecting one's "I"

3) (NP) Need-persistent / permissive / focused on meeting needs (e, i, m) - the constant need to find a constructive solution to the conflict situation in the form of either demanding help from others, or accepting the responsibility to resolve the situation, or confidence that time and the course of events will lead to its resolution.

The corresponding table contains methods for evaluating the answers of the subjects. The grades are recorded on the registration sheet for further processing. It involves the calculation of the GCR indicator, which can be referred to as the "degree of social adaptation." This indicator is calculated by comparing the answers of a particular subject with the "standard", average.

Second phase:

Results Processing Plan:

1. complete the spreadsheet , counting the repetition of each of the characters, then their sum (the sum of the vertical and horizontal should be 24)

- - - - - - - - - - -

* a table of profiles is compiled for each protocol(5 columns and 5 rows), in which values are entered - the number of occurrences of each factor.

** if there is more than one answer to one card, then each scoring factor is assigned a number of points that gives a total of 1 (for example: if 2 answers are received on one card, then each of them is assigned 0.5 points).

- - - - - - - - - - -

2. according to the table translate amounts received in percent

3. write in symbols a complete pattern of behavior .

Complete Behavior Pattern– "Formula" of a person's behavior in stressful situations, consisting of symbols denoting these reactions, written in descending order of their quantitative expression.

- - - - - - - - - - -

* There are 3 types of such samples:

1 - frequency of different directions response, regardless of the type of reaction (Ex: E>M>I).

2 - relative frequency types reactions, regardless of their direction (ex: OD>ED>NP).

3 - the frequency of occurrence of three counting factors, regardless of the direction and type of reaction (ex: M'>E>E'=i).

* write out the three most common values; if some values are repeated, then there may be more than three factors.

- - - - - - - - - - -

4. check GCR with key (according to Tarabarina), the number of matches is doubled, then convert them to percentages

Group Conformity Ratio (GCR)– the degree of exposure of the individual to the influence of the group is a mark of social adaptation. The higher the GCR, the more conforming the subject is, dependent on others, less independent, unoriginal in making decisions and implementing them. The lower the GCR, the more positive qualities are developed - independence, independence, originality.

5. count trends . To do this, calculate the occurrence of the character (e, i, m, E, I, M, E’, I”, M’) in the first half of situations (up to 12 inclusive) and in the second half. Then, subtract the smaller number from the larger number, keeping the sign, divide the difference by the sum of the occurrence of this symbol, and convert the resulting number into a percentage.

Behavior trends quantitatively reflect the dynamics of changes in the indicators of the methodology over time. They reflect the strengthening or weakening of a particular psychological characteristic, expressed as a percentage.

6. general interpretation of results:

The subject consciously or subconsciously identifies himself with the frustrated character of each pictorial situation. The interpretation technique includes several stages.

First stage consists in studying GCR, which is an important indicator of the technique. So, if the subject has a low percentage of GCR, then it can be assumed that he often has conflicts (of various types) with the people around him, that he is not sufficiently adapted to his social environment.

Second phase is to analyze the samples.

Starting with third sample because it is the most informative.

predominance:

E' answers speaks of the anxiety of the subject, his inability to quickly assess the changing situation and adequately adapt to it.

I'- speaks of the desire to find positive, favorable moments for them in unfavorably developing circumstances.

M'- indicates a tendency to underestimate the significance of the situation and not attach serious importance to it. At the core this trend may lie one of the following two mechanisms:

1) Attitude to difficulties as "little things in life", as something that does not deserve attention. This is typical for people with a high threshold of stress resistance, emotionally balanced.

2) Characteristic of people who attach super-importance to difficulties and prefer to give up their claims rather than expose themselves to stress. Accompanied by high neuroticism, high emotional imbalance.

* to find out which of the mechanisms is present in the subject, we look at which factor followsM' :

– if any ofNP (e, m, i), then the subject has the first mechanism;

– if any capital letter, then - the second mechanism.

E- reflect the level of aggressiveness of a person. If the answers E too much, this indicates high aggressiveness, strong motivation to maintain one's status at a height, the desire to excel, intolerance to the imposition of someone else's will.

I- speaks of the flexibility, delicacy, upbringing of a person, but excessively high values I may indicate low self-esteem, self-doubt and in their behavior.

M- speaks of a conciliatory position, complacency, non-conflict, the desire to maintain equal friendly relations with others.

e- speaks of a tendency to control other people, claims to submit to their dictates of those around them.

i- speaks of initiative, independence, the desire to rely on one's strength.

m- can talk about the ability to wait out an unfavorable situation, the ability to pause, diplomacy. Very high level m can talk about a passive life attitude.

* if the values of some counting factors are equal or they do not differ much, then we can say that the subject uses a variety of strategies when responding to difficult situations.

Additionally, the analysis of the first two samples is carried out:

First sample:

Dominance extrapunitive reactions(E), especially if these are reactions of an ego-defensive type ( ED), speaks of high self-esteem.

· A large number of intrapunitive reactions (I) indicates a low self-esteem of the subject.

High number impulsive reactions(M) speaks of adequate self-esteem and a conciliatory position.

Second sample:

The predominance of reaction obstructive-dominant type (OD):

– at high values E' says that the subject is frustrated, which means - The results of this survey need further verification.;

– if accompanied by high values M', this indicates the tendency of the subject not to attach serious importance to difficulties.

The predominance of reaction ego-defensive type (ED):

- in combination with high values E, speaks of the strength of the individual;

- if accompanied by high values I, this speaks of weakness, subordination, statements.

The predominance of reactions permission type(NP) speaks of an adequate response to situations, activity, initiative, frustration tolerance of the individual.

In general, it can be added that on the basis of the survey protocol, conclusions can be drawn regarding some aspects of the adaptation of the subject to his social environment. The methodology in no way provides material for conclusions about the structure of personality. It is only possible with a greater degree of probability to predict the emotional reactions of the subject to various difficulties or obstacles that stand in the way of satisfying needs, achieving the goal.

The state of anxiety, dissatisfaction with oneself and others adversely affects the personality, limiting its capabilities and abilities. Therefore, it is so important to correctly diagnose the causes of the state of anxiety, disorder. To do this, you can use several psychodiagnostics, including the Rosenzweig frustration test and its children's version.

Characteristics of the frustration technique of Rosenzweig

Frustration is a tense state of the psyche, which can be caused by various kinds of obstacles on the way to achieving goals. At the same time, barriers can be both objective (which arose not through the fault of a frustrated person) and subjective, that is, artificially contrived. A test for diagnosing this condition was proposed in 1945 by American psychotherapist Saul Rosenzweig.

The goals of testing are:

Diagnostics is valuable because, among other things, it determines overt and covert aggression in character. The frustration test allows you to identify the focus of anger - on yourself or on others. And also find out which way to resolve conflict situations is closer to the child: to blame others, put up with difficulties or look for constructive solutions.

The technique was adapted for use among citizens of the former USSR by a group of scientists at the Research Institute. V.M. Bekhterev. As a result, two options for tasks appeared: for mature people and for children. Moreover, there are differences only in the content, the form of testing is the same. The projective technique is based on the study of the types of human reactions to the 24 pictures offered to him. They show two or more people having a dialogue; the task of the subject is to come up with a replica of one of the interlocutors.

Procedure for conducting the pictorial frustration test

The use of stimulus material for adults is recommended from the age of 15. The children's version is used to test schoolchildren aged 6 to 13. In the period from 13 to 15 years, both versions of the test can be used.

It is allowed to carry out diagnostics both in group and in individual form. For in-depth analysis, the individual model is more informative, as it makes it possible to evaluate not only the verbal reaction, but also mood, facial expressions, gestures, eye contact, and so on.

Testing of babies is carried out only one on one, while the task of an adult is to record the answers of the child. Subjects aged 10 years and older are asked to fill in the empty field on each of the 24 pictures with a response to the statement of the depicted interlocutor. This must be done as quickly as possible, without thinking too much.

To get a complete picture, the experimenter needs to note all the important nuances - intonation, facial expressions of the subject, and so on.

File: Stimulus material (adult and child version)

Analysis of results

Treatment

Test pictures are divided into two groups according to the nature of the situation:

obstacle - the character is confused, this interferes with understanding the essence of the problem or issue; the task of the subject is to explain the situation (cards No. 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 20, 22, 23, 24);
accusation - the hero without replicas serves as a "whipping boy", which the subject needs to justify (tasks No. 2, 5, 7, 10, 16, 17, 19, 21).

Some situations of accusation can be taken as an obstacle and vice versa. Therefore, it is important to correctly interpret the reactions of the subject. The analysis of the child's remarks is carried out along two vectors:

the direction of the reaction;
type of response.

The first parameter means:

extrapunitive reactions (denoted by the letter E) - hyperbolization of the situation, the need for its resolution by third parties;
intropunitive (I) - the subject takes responsibility for himself, circumstances are perceived as experience;
impulsive (M) - an alarming situation - something inevitable that will pass by itself.

By type of response, the following responses are distinguished:

obstructive-dominant (OD) - the subject constantly focuses on difficulties;
self-protective (ED) - the child tries in every possible way to evade responsibility, protects his "I";
Necessary-persistent (NP) - the test-taker is looking for a constructive solution to the problem.

The ancient Roman historian Publius Tacitus said: "It is human nature to attribute every accident to someone else's fault."

If in the answer the emphasis shifts to obstacles, then a dash (E ', I ', M ') is placed next to the letter of the reaction direction. Answers in which the child makes a bet on self-defense are not marked in any way. When the test subject's remark expresses a desire to satisfy needs, it is marked with a lowercase letter.

The semantic content of the studied factors is presented in the table (the number of the situation is indicated in brackets):

	OD	ED	NP
E	E'. “What am I going to eat?” (one); - “If I had a brother, he could help me” (3); - “I like her even more” (5); - "I want to play with someone too" (6).	E. - “I will sleep, but you won’t, right?” (ten); - “I don’t want to be friends with you” (8); - “But it was you who drove my dog out of the front door” (7); E. - "No, quite a few mistakes" (4); - “I also really want to play, and I have experience” (6); - “No, I didn’t take your flowers” (7).	e. - “You must definitely give me this ball” (16); “Guys, where are you! I need help!”(13); -“Then turn to someone else” (3).
I	I'. - "I really like to sleep" (10); - “I gave in so that you could still catch me” (13); - “No, it doesn’t hurt me at all” (15); “But now it has become much tastier” (23).	I. - “Take it, but I will never take anything without permission again” (2); - “I am ashamed that I prevented you from playing” (6); - “I did very badly” (9); I. - “I didn’t want to push her at all” (9); - “I wanted to get a better look at her, but she accidentally fell” (9)	i. - “Then I will definitely take it to repair” (3); - “I myself want to buy this doll” (5); - “I will gladly give you my baby doll” (9); “I won’t repeat this mistake next time” (10).
M	M'. - “Well, okay, swing to your health!” (21); - “I myself can come to you” (18); - “It will probably not be very interesting there” (18); -"It's already late. It's time for me to sleep" (10).	M. - “Well, if there is not enough money, then you can get by” (5); - “I really am not yet an adult” (6); - "Well, okay, you won this time" (8).	m. - “Now I’ll sleep, and then maybe I’ll go outside” (10); - “I myself will go to rest” (11); “Let's wait another five minutes. It will soon dry up and dry up” (19); - “When you get tired, I will also ride” (21).

So, the subject in situation No. 14 (“Let's wait another five minutes”) showed an impunity reaction (m), the type of which can be defined as “with fixation to satisfy the need” (NP). These answers are standardized: if the child's response matches the sample, then he gets 1 point. The student gave an answer containing a double assessment, one of which coincided with the sample (for example, in situation No. 2, where a girl takes a scooter from a boy, there could also be such a reaction: “You are constantly greedy, so I took it by force”) - 0.5 points are given. Nothing counts for a mismatch.

Those situations for which there are no answers in the table are not taken into account when calculating - these are the so-called "free" solutions.

Summary table of standardized responses:

Number the situation under study	Age
	6–7 years	8–9 years old	10–11 years old	12–13 years old
1
2	E	E/m	m	M
3		E		E; M
4
5
6
7	I	I	I	I
8		I	I/i	I/i
9
10	M'/E			M
11				I/m
12	E	E	E	E
13	E	E		I
14	M'	M'	M'	M'
15	I'		E'; M'	M'
16		E	M'/E	M'
17		M	m	e; m
18
19	E	E; I	E; I
20			i	I
21
22	I	I	I	I
23
24	m	m	m	M
	10 situations	12 situations	12 situations	15 situations

Interpretation

Determination of the social adaptation of the child

Calculation of GCR based on the responses of children of primary school age:

GCR	Percent	GCR	Percent	GCR	Percent
12	100	7,5	62,4	2,5	20,8
11,5	95,7	7	58,3	2	16,6
11	91,6	6,5	54,1	1,5	12,4
10,5	87,4	6	50	1	8,3
10	83,3	5,5	45,8
9,5	79,1	5	41,6
9	75	4,5	37,4
8,5	70,8	4	33,3
8	66,6	3,5	29,1

GCR Chart for Middle School Children

GCR	Percent	GCR	Percent	GCR	Percent
15	100	10	66,6	5	33,3
14,5	96,5	9,5	63,2	4,5	30
14	93,2	9	60	4	26,6
13,5	90	8,5	56,6	3,5	23,3
13	86,5	8	53,2	3	20
12,5	83,2	7,5	50	2,5	16,6
12	80	7	46,6	2	13,3
11,5	76,5	6,5	43,3	1,5	10
11	73,3	6	40	1	6,6
10,5	70	5,5	36

The GCR calculation helps to determine whether the child is well adapted in society or there are problems

These indicators are interpreted as follows:

12–10.5 (15–13.5) - the child is well adapted in society;
10–8 (13–11) - in general, adaptation is successful, but periodically the test person experiences tension (most often in relationships with adults who are not close relatives - for example, teachers);
7.5–6.5 (10.5–7.5) - situations of frustration often arise, but the child copes with them on his own;
6–4 (7–5.5) - anxiety and tension accompany any undertaking of a student; to overcome obstacles, he needs the help of authoritative adults;
3.5–2 (5–2.5) - the child often experiences anxiety, which sometimes develops into aggression directed at peers;
1.5–1 (2–1) - tension and aggression are directed at everyone around the baby, in order to cope with it, he needs the help of a specialist.

If the percentage is below 50, then it makes sense to talk about insufficient adaptability. In this case, repeated work of the student with stimulus material for the test in question can help. The experimenter will need to analyze possible mismatches with the sample to determine the nature of the frustration. But in this case, a qualified child psychologist should work with the child.

The Rosenzweig frustration test will help to deal with the unknown in a person, namely, to find out what behavior will be in an unpredictable situation, how conflict situations, obstacles and difficulties are tolerated on the way to the goal.

It is easy to pass the Rosenzweig test, it is more difficult to interpret it, but the walking one will master the road!

Purpose of the test
Description
Instructions for the Rosenzweig test
Test material: come test online
Handling test results
Interpretation of the Rosenzweig test
Analysis of results

Rosenzweig's frustration test

Purpose of the test

The technique is designed to study reactions to failure and ways out of situations that impede activity or satisfaction of the needs of the individual.

The test was developed by the American scientist Saul Rosenzweig.

Saul Rosenzweig (February 7, 1907 - August 9, 2004) was an American psychologist, specialist in personality problems, psychological diagnostics, and schizophrenia. Professor at Saint Louis University. Developed .

Test Description

frustration- a state of tension, frustration, anxiety caused by dissatisfaction with needs, objectively insurmountable (or subjectively understood) difficulties, obstacles on the way to an important goal.

The technique consists of 24 schematic contour drawings, which depict two or more people engaged in an unfinished conversation. The situations depicted in the figures can be divided into two main groups.

Situations obstacles". In these cases, some obstacle, character or object discourages, confuses in a word or in some other way. This includes 16 situations.
Images: 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 20, 22, 23, 24.
Situations accusations". The subject thus serves as object of accusation. There are 8 such situations.
Images: 2, 5, 7, 10, 16, 17, 19, 21.

There is a connection between these groups of situations, since the "accusation" situation suggests that it was preceded by the "obstacle" situation, where the frustrator was, in turn, frustrated. Sometimes the subject may interpret the situation of "accusation" as a situation of "obstruction" or vice versa.

The drawings are presented to the subject. It is assumed that "responsible for another", the subject will more easily, more reliably express his opinion and show typical reactions for him to get out of conflict situations. The researcher notes the total time of the experiment.

The test can be applied both individually and in groups. But unlike group research, another important technique is used in individual research: they are asked to read the written answers aloud.

The experimenter notes the features of intonation and other things that can help clarify the content of the answer (for example, a sarcastic tone of voice). In addition, the subject may be asked questions regarding very short or ambiguous answers (this is also necessary for scoring).

Sometimes it happens that the subject misunderstands this or that situation, and although such errors are in themselves significant for a qualitative interpretation, nevertheless, after the necessary clarification, a new answer should be received from him. The survey should be conducted as carefully as possible, so that the questions do not contain additional information.

Instructions for the test

For adults: “You will now be shown 24 drawings. Each of them depicts two talking people. What the first person says is written in the box on the left. Imagine what the other person might say to him. Write the very first answer that comes to your mind on a piece of paper, marking it with the appropriate number.

Try to work as quickly as possible. Take the task seriously and don't joke around. Don't try to use hints either."

Test material - take the Rosenzweig test online

Handling test results

Each of the responses received is evaluated, in accordance with the theory, Rosenzweig, according to two criteria: in the direction of the reaction(aggression) and by type of reaction.

According to the direction of the reaction are divided into:

Extrapunitive: the reaction is directed at the living or inanimate environment, the external cause of frustration is condemned, the degree of the frustrating situation is emphasized, sometimes the situation is required to be resolved by another person.
Intropunitive: the reaction is directed at oneself, with the acceptance of guilt or responsibility for correcting the situation that has arisen, the frustrating situation is not subject to condemnation. The subject accepts the frustrating situation as favorable for himself.
Immunitive: the frustrating situation is seen as something insignificant or inevitable, surmountable “over time, there is no blaming others or oneself.

According to the type of reaction are divided into:

Obstructive-dominant. Type of reaction "with fixation on an obstacle". Obstacles that cause frustration are emphasized in every possible way, regardless of whether they are regarded as favorable, unfavorable or insignificant.
self-protective. Type of reaction "with fixation on self-defense". Activity in the form of censuring someone, denying or admitting one's own guilt, evading reproach aimed at protecting one's "I", responsibility for frustration cannot be attributed to anyone.
Necessary-persistent. Type of reaction "with fixation on satisfaction of need". A constant need to find a constructive solution to a conflict situation in the form of either asking for help from others, or accepting the responsibility to resolve the situation, or confidence that time and the course of events will lead to its resolution.

The following letters are used to indicate the direction of a reaction:

E - extrapunitive reactions,
I - intropunitive reactions,
M - impunity.

Reaction types are indicated by the following symbols:

OD - "with fixation on an obstacle",
ED - "with fixation on self-defense",
NP - "with a fixation on the satisfaction of need."

From combinations of these six categories, nine possible factors and two additional options are obtained.

First, the researcher determines the direction of the reaction contained in the response of the subject (E, I or M), and then identifies the type of reaction: ED, OD or NP.

Description of the semantic content of the factors used in the evaluation of responses (adult version)

	OD	ED	NP
E	E'. If the answer emphasizes the presence of an obstacle. Example: It's raining heavily outside. My raincoat was very handy" (Fig. 9 ). “And I expected that we would go together with her” ( 8 ). Occurs mainly in obstacle situations.	E. Hostility, censure directed against someone or something in the environment. Example: "the height of the working day, and your manager is not in place" ( 9 ). “Worn-out mechanism, they can’t be made new anymore” ( 5 ). "We're leaving, she's to blame" ( 14 ). E . The subject actively denies his guilt for the misconduct committed. Example: "The hospital is full of people, what do I have to do with it?" ( 21 ).	e. It is required, expected, or explicitly implied that someone must resolve this situation. Example: "All the same, you must find this book for me" ( 18 ). "She could explain to us what's the matter" ( 20 ).
I	I'. The frustrating situation is interpreted as favorable-profitably-useful, as bringing satisfaction. Example: “It will be even easier for me alone” ( 15 ). “But now I will have time to finish reading the book” ( 24 ).	I. Reproach, condemnation is directed at oneself, the feeling of guilt, one's own inferiority, remorse of conscience dominates. Example: “It was me again that I came at the wrong time” ( 13 ). I . The subject, admitting his guilt, denies responsibility, calling for help extenuating circumstances. Example: “But today is a day off, there is not a single child here, and I am in a hurry” ( 19 ).	i. The subject himself undertakes to resolve the frustrating situation, openly admitting or hinting at his guilt. Example: "I'll get out somehow" ( 15 ). "I will do my best to redeem myself" ( 12 ).
M	M'. The difficulties of the frustrating situation are not noticed or are reduced to its complete denial. Example: "Late so late" ( 4 ).	M. The responsibility of a person in a frustrating situation is reduced to a minimum, and condemnation is avoided. Example: “We couldn’t have known that the car would break down” ( 4 ).	m. The hope is expressed that time, the normal course of events will solve the problem, you just need to wait a bit, or mutual understanding and mutual compliance will eliminate the frustrating situation. Example: "Let's wait another 5 minutes" ( 14 ). "It would be nice if it didn't happen again." ( 11 ).

Description of the semantic content of the factors used in the evaluation of responses (children's version)

	OD	ED	NP
E	E'. - "What will I eat?" ( 1 ); - "If I had a brother, he would fix it" ( 3 ); -"And I like her so much" ( 5 ); - "I also need someone to play with" ( 6 ).	E. - "I'm sleeping, but you're not sleeping, right?" ( 10 ); - "I'm not friends with you" ( 8 ); - “And you kicked my dog out of the entrance” ( 7 ); E . - "No, not many mistakes" ( 4 ); - "I can play too" ( 6 ); - "No, I didn't pick your flowers" ( 7 ).	e. - "You must give me the ball" ( 16 ); “Guys, where are you! Help me!"( 13 ); - "Then ask someone else" ( 3 ).
I	I'. - "I'm very happy to sleep" ( 10 ); “I got myself into my hands. I wanted you to catch me" 13 ); “No, it doesn't hurt me. I just pulled off the railing" 15 ); - "But now it has become tastier" ( 23 ).	I. - "Take it, I won't take it without permission anymore" ( 2 ); - "I'm sorry I interrupted you to play" ( 6 ); - "I did bad" ( 9 ); I . "I didn't mean to break it" 9 ); - "I wanted to look, but she fell" ( 9 )	i. - "Then I'll take it to the workshop" ( 3 ); - "I'll buy this doll myself" ( 5 ); - "I'll give you mine" ( 9 ); "I won't do it next time" 10 ).
M	M'. -"So what. Well, swing" ( 21 ); “I won’t come to you myself” ( 18 ); - "It won't be interesting there anyway" ( 18 ); “It's already night. I should already be sleeping." 10 ).	M. - "Well, if there is no money, you can not buy" ( 5 ); - "I'm really small" ( 6 ); - "Okay, you won" ( 8 ).	m. - "I'll sleep, and then I'll go for a walk" ( 10 ); - "I'm going to sleep myself" ( 11 ); "She's going to dry now. Dry" ( 19 ); - "When you leave, I'll rock too" ( 21 ).

So, the answer of the subject in situation No. 14 "Let's wait another five minutes", according to reaction direction is impunitive (m), and according to reaction type- "with fixation on the satisfaction of need" (NP).

The combination of these or those two options is assigned its own literal meaning.

If the idea of an obstacle dominates in an answer with an extrapunitive, intropunitive or impunitive reaction, the “prim” sign (E’, I’, M’) is added.
The type of reaction "with fixation on self-defense" is indicated by capital letters without an icon (E, I, M).
The type of response "with fixation to meet the need" is indicated by lowercase letters (e, i, m).
Extra- and intropunitive reactions of the self-protective type in situations of accusation have two more additional evaluation options, which are indicated by the symbols E and I.

The emergence of additional counting options E and I due to the division of the test situation into two types. In situations " obstacles» the reaction of the subject is usually directed to the frustrating personality, and in situations « accusations"It is more often an expression of protest, defending one's innocence, rejecting an accusation or reproach, in short, persistent self-justification.

We illustrate all these notations on the example of situation No. 1. In this situation, the character on the left (the driver) says: "I'm sorry that we splashed your suit, although we tried very hard to avoid the puddle."

Possible answers to these words with their evaluation using the above symbols:

E'“How embarrassing.”

I'“I didn’t get dirty at all.” (The subject emphasizes how unpleasant it is to involve another person in a frustrating situation).

M'"Nothing happened, it's a little splashed with water."

E“You are clumsy. You are a fool."

I“Of course I should have stayed on the sidewalk.”

M- "Nothing special".

e"You'll have to clean up."

i"I'll clean it up."

m- "Nothing, dry."

Since the answers are often in the form of two phrases or sentences, each of which may have a slightly different function, they can, if necessary, be denoted by two corresponding symbols. for example, if the subject says: "I'm sorry that I was the cause of all this anxiety, but I will be glad to correct the situation," then this designation will be: II. In most cases, one counting factor is enough to evaluate the answer.

The score for most responses depends on one factor. A special case is presented by interpenetrating or interconnected combinations used for answers.

The explicit meaning of the words of the subject is always taken as the basis of the calculation, and since the answers are often in the form of two phrases or sentences, each of which can have a different function, it is possible to set one counting value for one group of words, and another for another.

The data obtained in the form of literal expressions (E, I, M, E ', M ', I ', e, i, m) are entered in the table.

Next, GCR is calculated - group conformity coefficient, or, in other words, a measure of the subject's individual adaptation to his social environment. It is determined by comparing the responses of the subject with standard values obtained by statistical calculation. There are 14 situations that are used for comparison. Their values are presented in the table. In the children's version, the number of situations is different.

General GCR Chart for Adults

Situation number	OD	ED	NP
1	M'	E
2		I
3
4
5			i
6			e
7		E
8
9
10		E
11
12		E	m
13			e
14
15	E'
16		E	i
17
18	E'		e
19		I
20
21
22	M'
23
24	M'

General GCR table for children

Situation number	Age groups
	6-7 years old	8-9 years old	10-11 years old	12-13 years old
1
2	E	E/m	m	M
3		E		E; M
4
5
6
7	I	I	I	I
8		I	I/i	I/i
9
10	M'/E			M
11				I/m
12	E	E	E	E
13	E	E		I
14	M'	M'	M'	M'
15	I'		E'; M'	M'
16		E	M'/E	M'
17		M	m	e; m
18
19	E	E; I	E; I
20			i	I
21
22	I	I	I	I
23
24	m	m	m	M
	10 situations	12 situations	12 situations	15 situations

If the subject's answer is identical to the standard one, a "+" sign is put.
When two types of responses to a situation are given as a standard response, it is sufficient that at least one of the responses of the subject coincides with the standard. In this case, the answer is also marked with a "+" sign.
If the subject's answer gives a double mark, and one of them corresponds to the standard, it is worth 0.5 points.
If the answer does not correspond to the standard, it is indicated by the sign "-".

The scores are summed up, counting each plus as one and each minus as zero. Then, based on 14 situations (which are taken as 100%), a percentage value is calculated GCR subject.

Adult GCR Percentage Conversion Table

GCR	Percent	GCR	Percent	GCR	Percent
14	100	9,5	68	5	35,7
13,5	96,5	9	64,3	4,5	32,2
13	93	8,5	60,4	4	28,6
12,5	90	8	57,4	3,5	25
12	85	7,5	53,5	3	21,5
11,5	82	7	50	2,5	17,9
11	78,5	6,5	46,5	2	14,4
10,5	75	6	42,8	1,5	10,7
10	71,5	5,5	39,3	1	7,2

Table for converting to GCR percentages for children 8-12 years old

GCR	Percent	GCR	Percent	GCR	Percent
12	100	7,5	62,4	2,5	20,8
11,5	95,7	7	58,3	2	16,6
11	91,6	6,5	54,1	1,5	12,4
10,5	87,4	6	50	1	8,3
10	83,3	5,5	45,8
9,5	79,1	5	41,6
9	75	4,5	37,4
8,5	70,8	4	33,3
8	66,6	3,5	29,1

Table for converting to GCR percentages for children 12-13 years old

GCR	Percent	GCR	Percent	GCR	Percent
15	100	10	66,6	5	33,3
14,5	96,5	9,5	63,2	4,5	30
14	93,2	9	60	4	26,6
13,5	90	8,5	56,6	3,5	23,3
13	86,5	8	53,2	3	20
12,5	83,2	7,5	50	2,5	16,6
12	80	7	46,6	2	13,3
11,5	76,5	6,5	43,3	1,5	10
11	73,3	6	40	1	6,6
10,5	70	5,5	36

quantitative value GCR can be considered as measures of individual adaptation of the subject to his social environment.

Next stage– filling in the table of profiles. It is carried out on the basis of the test's answer sheet. The number of times each of the 6 factors occurs is counted, each occurrence of the factor is assigned one point. If the response of the subject is evaluated using several counting factors, then each factor is given equal importance. So if the answer was rated " Her”, then the value of “ E" will be equal to 0.5 and " e”, respectively, also 0.5 points. The resulting numbers are entered in the table. When the table is complete, the numbers are summed up in columns and rows, and then the percentage of each amount received is calculated.

Profile table

	OD	ED	NP	sum	%
E
I
M
sum
%

Table for converting profile scores to percentages

score	Percent	score	Percent	score	Percent
0,5	2,1	8,5	35,4	16,5	68,7
1,0	4,2	9,0	37,5	17,0	70,8
1,5	6,2	9,5	39,6	17,5	72,9
2,0	8,3	10,0	41,6	18,0	75,0
2,5	10,4	10,5	43,7	18,5	77,1
3,0	12,5	11,0	45,8	19,0	79,1
3,5	14,5	11,5	47,9	19,5	81,2
4,0	16,6	12,0	50,0	20,0	83,3
4,5	18,7	12,5	52,1	20,5	85,4
5,0	20,8	13,0	54,1	21,0	87,5
5,5	22,9	13,5	56,2	21,5	89,6
6,0	25,0	14,0	58,3	22,0	91,6
6,5	27,0	14,5	60,4	22.5	93,7
7,0	29,1	15,0	62,5	23,0	95,8
7,5	31,2	15,5	64,5	23,5	97,9
8,0	33,3	16,0	66,6	24,0	100,0

The percentage ratio E, I, M, OD, ED, NP obtained in this way represents the quantitative features of the subject's frustration reactions.

Based on the numerical data profile, three main samples and one additional sample are generated.

The first sample expresses relative frequency of different directions of response, regardless of its type. Extrapunitive, intropunitive and impunitive responses are arranged in order of their decreasing frequency. For example, frequencies E - 14, I - 6, M - 4, are written E\u003e I\u003e M.
The second sample expresses relative frequency of response types regardless of their direction. Signed characters are written in the same way as in the previous case. For example, we got OD - 10, ED - 6, NP - 8. Recorded: OD > NP > ED.
The third sample expresses the relative frequency of the three most common factors, regardless of the type and direction of the response. For example, E > E' > M are written.
The fourth additional pattern includes comparison of answers E and I in situations of "obstacle" and situations of "accusation". The sum of E and I is calculated as a percentage, based also on 24, but since only 8 (or 1/3) test situations allow the calculation of E and I, the maximum percentage of such answers will be 33%. For interpretation purposes, the percentages received may be compared to this maximum number.

Trend Analysis

Trend analysis is carried out on the basis of the subject's answer sheet and aims to find out whether there has been change in reaction direction or reaction type subject during the experiment. During the experiment, the subject can noticeably change his behavior, moving from one type or direction of reactions to another. The presence of such changes indicates the attitude of the subject to his own answers (reactions). For example, the reactions of the subject of an extrapunitive orientation (with aggression towards the environment), under the influence of an awakened sense of guilt, can be replaced by answers containing aggression towards himself.

Analysis involves revealing the existence of such tendencies and finding out their causes, which may be different and depend on the nature of the subject.

Trends are written in the form of an arrow, above which a numerical assessment of the trend is indicated, determined by the sign "+" (positive trend) or the sign "-" (negative trend), and calculated by the formula:

(а-b) / (а+b), where

« a» - quantitative assessment of the manifestation of the factor in the first half of the protocol (situations 1-12),
« b» - quantitative assessment in the second half (from 13 to 24).

A trend can be considered as an indicator if it is contained in at least four responses of the subject, and has a minimum score of ±0.33.

Analyzed five types of trends:

Type 1. The direction of the reaction in the graph is considered OD. For example factor E' appears six times: three times in the first half of the protocol with a score of 2.5 and three times in the second half with a score of 2 points. The ratio is +0.11. Factor I' appears in general only once, the factor M' appears three times. There is no type 1 trend.
Type 2 E, I, M.
Type 3. Factors are considered similarly. e, i, m.
Type 4. The directions of reactions are considered, not taking into account the graphs.
Type 5. Cross-trend - consider the distribution of factors in three columns, without considering the direction, for example, considering the column OD indicates the presence of 4 factors in the first half (score marked 3) and 6 in the second half (score 4). The graphs ED and NP. In order to identify the causes of a particular trend, it is recommended to conduct a conversation with the subject, during which, with the help of additional questions, the experimenter can obtain the necessary information of interest to him.

Interpretation of test results

First stage interpretation is to study the GCR, the level of social adaptation of the subject. Analyzing the obtained data, it can be assumed that the subject, having low percentage of GCR, often conflicts with others, because it is not sufficiently adapted to its social environment.

Data concerning the degree of social adaptation of the subject can be obtained using a repeated study, which consists in the following: the subject is repeatedly presented with drawings, with a request to give in each task such an answer that, in his opinion, would need to be given in this case, i.e. "correct", "reference" answer. The “index of mismatch” of the answers of the subject in the first and second cases provides additional information about the indicator of the “degree of social adaptation”.

At the second stage, the obtained estimates of six factors in the table of profiles are studied. are revealed stable characteristics of the subject's frustration reactions, stereotypes of emotional response, which are formed in the process of development, upbringing and formation of a person and constitute one of the characteristics of his individuality. The reactions of the subject can be directed to its environment, expressed in the form of various requirements for it, or on himself as the culprit of what is happening, or a person can take a kind conciliatory attitude. So, for example, if in a study we get a test score of M - normal, E - very high and I - very low, then on the basis of this we can say that the subject in a frustration situation will respond with increased frequency in an extrapunitive manner and very rarely in intropunitive. That is, we can say that he makes high demands on others, and this can serve as a sign of inadequate self-esteem.

Estimates regarding types of reactions have different meanings.

Grade OD(type of reaction “with fixation on an obstacle”) shows to what extent the obstacle frustrates the subject. So, if we got an increased OD score, then this indicates that in frustration situations the subject is dominated more than normally by the idea of an obstacle.
Grade ED(type of reaction "with a fixation on self-defense") means the strength or weakness of the "I" of the individual. An increase in ED means a weak, vulnerable person. The subject's reactions are focused on protecting his "I".
Grade NP- a sign of an adequate response, an indicator of the degree to which the subject can resolve frustration situations.

Third stage of interpretation- study of trends. The study of tendencies can go a long way in understanding the attitude of the subject to his own reactions.

In general, it can be added that on the basis of the survey protocol, conclusions can be drawn regarding some aspects of the adaptation of the subject to his social environment. The methodology in no way provides material for conclusions about the structure of personality. It is only possible to predict with a greater degree of probability emotional reactions of the subject to various difficulties or obstacles that get in the way of satisfying a need, achieving a goal.

Analysis of test results

The subject more or less consciously identifies himself with the frustrated character in each situation of the technique. On the basis of this provision, the response profile obtained is considered characteristic of the subject himself.

The advantages of S. Rosenzweig's technique include high retest reliability, the ability to adapt to different ethnic populations.

S. Rosenzweig noted that the individual reactions recorded in the test themselves are not a sign of “norm” or “pathology”, in this case they are neutral. Significant for interpretation are total indicators, their overall profile and compliance with standard group standards. The last of these criteria, according to the author, is a sign of adaptability of the subject's behavior to the social environment. The test indicators do not reflect structural personality formations, but individual dynamic characteristics of behavior, and therefore this tool did not imply psychopathological diagnostics.

However, a satisfactory distinguishing ability of the test in relation to groups of suicides, cancer patients, maniacs, the elderly, the blind, and stutterers was found, which confirms the expediency of its use as part of a battery of tools for diagnostic purposes.

It is noted that high extrapunity in the test is often associated with inadequate increased demands on the environment and insufficient self-criticism. An increase in extrapunitiveness is observed in subjects after social or physical stress exposure.

Among the offenders, apparently, there is a camouflage underestimation of extrapunitiveness relative to the norms.

An increased indicator of intropunity usually indicates excessive self-criticism or insecurity of the subject, a reduced or unstable level of general self-esteem.

The dominance of the reactions of the impulsive direction means the desire to settle the conflict, hush up the awkward situation.

The types of reactions and the GCR indicator, which differ from the standard data, are typical for persons with deviations in various areas of social adaptation.

The trends recorded in the protocol characterize the dynamics and effectiveness of the subject's reflexive regulation of his behavior in a situation of frustration.

When interpreting the results of applying the test as the only research tool, one should adhere to the correct description of the dynamic characteristics and refrain from conclusions that claim to be of diagnostic value.

The principles for interpreting test data are the same for the children's and adult forms of the S. Rosenzweig test.

It is based on the idea that the subject consciously or unconsciously identifies himself with the character depicted in the picture and therefore expresses the features of his own “verbal aggressive behavior” in his answers.

As a rule, in the profile of most subjects, all factors are represented to one degree or another. A "complete" profile of frustration reactions with a relatively proportional distribution of values by factors and categories indicates a person's ability to flexible, adaptive behavior, the ability to use various ways to overcome difficulties, in accordance with the conditions of the situation.

On the contrary, the absence of any factors in the profile indicates that the appropriate modes of behavior, even if they are potentially available to the subject, are most likely not to be implemented in situations of frustration.

The profile of frustration reactions of each person is individual, however, it is possible to identify common features inherent in the behavior of most people in frustrating situations.

An analysis of the indicators recorded in the profile of frustration reactions also involves a comparison of the data of an individual profile with standard values. At the same time, it is established to what extent the value of the categories and factors of an individual profile correspond to the average group indicators, whether there is an exit beyond the upper and lower limits of the allowable interval.

So, for example, if in an individual protocol there is a low value of category E, a normal value of I and a high M (all in comparison with normative data), then on the basis of this we can conclude that this subject in situations of frustration tends to downplay the traumatic, unpleasant aspects of these situations and to inhibit aggressive manifestations addressed to others where others usually express their demands in an extrapunitive manner.

The value of the extrapunitive category E exceeding the norms is an indicator of the increased demands made by the subject on others, and can serve as one of the indirect signs of inadequate self-esteem.

The high value of the intropunitive category I, on the contrary, reflects the subject's tendency to make excessively high demands on himself in terms of self-accusation or taking on increased responsibility, which is also considered as an indicator of inadequate self-esteem, primarily its decrease.

If the 0-D score exceeds the established normative limit, then it should be assumed that the subject tends to over-fixate on the obstacle. It is obvious that the increase in the 0-D score occurs due to a decrease in the E-D N-P scores, i.e., more active types of attitude towards the obstacle.

The E-D score (fixation on self-defense) in the interpretation of S. Rosenzweig means the strength or weakness of the "I". Accordingly, an increase in the E-D indicator characterizes a weak, vulnerable, vulnerable person, forced in situations of obstacles to focus primarily on protecting his own "I".

The N-P score (fixation on meeting the need), according to S. Rosenzweig, is a sign of an adequate response to frustration and shows the extent to which the subject shows frustration tolerance and is able to solve the problem that has arisen.

The overall assessment of the categories is supplemented by a characteristic for individual factors, which makes it possible to establish the contribution of each of them to the total indicator and more accurately describe the ways the subject reacts in situations of obstacles.

An increase (or, conversely, a decrease) in a rating for any category may be associated with an overestimated (or, accordingly, underestimated) value of one or more of its constituent factors.

(Visited 182 times, 1 visits today)

Characteristics of the frustration technique of Rosenzweig

The goals of testing are:

Procedure for conducting the pictorial frustration test

To get a complete picture, the experimenter needs to note all the important nuances - intonation, facial expressions of the subject, and so on.

File: Stimulus material (adult and child version)