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. 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. Using the technique, one can explore such reactions to a strong stimulus as aggression, displacement, identification, projection, fantasy, regression, apathy, suppression, compensation, fixation, rationalization.
The technique belongs to the class of projective tests. There are 16 situations in which an obstacle is created (stop, discourage, offend, confuse) and 8 situations in which the subject is accused of something. 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.
In total, the technique consists of 24 schematic contour drawings, which depict two or more people engaged in an unfinished conversation. These 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 in themselves are significant for a qualitative interpretation, nevertheless, after the necessary clarification from him, he should. receive a new response. The original answer must be crossed out, but not erased with an elastic band. The survey should be conducted as carefully as possible, so that the questions do not contain additional information.
Instruction for adults : “You will now be shown 24 drawings (application in a separate folder). 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."
Instruction for children: “I will show you drawings (application in separate folders) that show people in a certain situation.
The person on the left is saying something and his words are written on top in a square. Imagine what the other person might say to him. Be serious and don't try to get away with a joke. Think about the situation and respond quickly."
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.
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
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, overcome "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' | EAT' | 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 directions. 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 characteristics of the subject's character.
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.
Sources
- Rosenzweig test. Technique of pictorial frustration (modified by N.V. Tarabrina)/ Diagnostics of emotional and moral development. Ed. and comp. Dermanova I.B. - SPb., 2002. S.150-172.
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 directions. 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 characteristics of the subject's character.
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 that are characteristic of 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)
A brief history of the creation of the technique: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 Russian 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, which served as the basis of the methodology: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: cellular (the action of phagocytes, antibodies, etc.), autonomous - protection of the body as a whole from physical "aggressions" (corresponds psychologically to states of fear, suffering, and physiologically - to changes, occurring in the body during stress), the cortical, psychological 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.
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. Rosenzweigs 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 options for the method:children's version of the technique - from 4 to 14 years and an adult version of the technique.
Organization: You can conduct an examination individually and in a group, the required time is 20-30 minutes.
Examination procedure:standard (if necessary, the time spent by the subject on the answer is recorded).
Brief description of the method:
The technique consists of 24 drawings depicting 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 - drawings No. 1, 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 20, 22, 23, 24.
2. The situation of "accusation".The subject thus serves as object of accusation. There are eight of them: drawings No. 2, 5, 7, 10, 16, 17, 19, 21.
There is a connection between these types, since the "accusation" situation suggests that it was preceded by a "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.
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.
Results processing:This method provides 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.
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) impunity ( M ) - a frustrating situation is considered as something insignificant or inevitable, overcome over time, there is no accusation of others or oneself.
By type of reaction: 1) OD obstructive-dominant / with fixation on the 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 / self-protective (E, I , M ) - activity in the form of censure of someone, denial or admission of guilt, avoidance of reproach, aimed at protecting one's "I" 3) NP need-persistent / permissive / fixated on satisfaction of 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 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 indicator GCR , which can be designated as "the degree of social adaptation". This indicator is calculated by comparing the answers of a particular subject with the "standard", average.
Group conformity coefficient ( GCR ) - the degree of exposure of the individual to the influence of the group, is a metaphor for social adaptation. The higher GCR , the more conforming the subject is, dependent on others, less independent, unoriginal in making decisions and implementing them. The lower GCR , the more positive qualities are developed - independence, independence, originality.
A complete pattern of behavior is a "formula" of a person's behavior in stressful situations, consisting of symbols denoting these reactions, written in descending order of their quantitative expression.
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.
The processing of the results is carried out according to the following plan:
1. fill in the calculation table by counting the frequency of each of the characters, then their sum (this sum vertically and horizontally should be 24)
2. according to the table, convert the received amounts into percentages
3. write down in symbols the complete pattern of behavior in descending order of quantitative representation of each symbol
4. check GCR with the key (according to Tarabrina), the number of matches is doubled, then convert them to percentages
5. calculate 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.
6. general interpretation of results
|
Extrapunitive reactions |
intrapunitive reactions |
Immunitive reactions |
|
OD |
E' Extrapeditive The presence of a frustrating obstacle is persistently emphasized |
I' Itrapeditive The frustrating obstacle is not perceived as such, it even seems useful, beneficial |
M' impedive Obstruction, etc. is minimized or completely negated |
ED |
Extrapunitive A person or an object of the surrounding world is accused Subject aggressively denies responsibility |
intrapunitive The subject blames only himself for everything IThe subject admits his guilt, but does not see a special crime in the committed |
Immunitive The situation is inevitable, the "frustrator" is relieved of all responsibility |
NP |
Extrapersistent Someone else is expected to take care of the problem |
intrapersistent Subject offers compensation options |
Imperative "Time is the best healer" |
Brief description of the scales:see ""results processing"" and table.
Algorithm for constructing a diagnosis and features of the interpretation of the methodology:
The subject consciously or subconsciously identifies himself with the frustrated character of each pictorial situation. The interpretation technique includes several stages.
The first stage is to study 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.
The second step is to examine the scores of the six factors in the profile table. Estimates regarding the direction of reactions (E, I , M) have meanings arising from theoretical ideas about frustration.
So, for example, if we get a test score M - normal, E - very high, 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 an intropunitive manner. That is, it can be assumed that he makes increased demands on others, and this may serve as a sign of inadequate self-esteem.
Estimates regarding types of reactions have different meanings. The OD score (type of reaction “with fixation on an obstacle”) shows the extent to which the obstacle frustrates the subject. So if we got a higher grade OD , then this suggests 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 a weak, vulnerable person. The subject's reactions are focused on protecting his "I". Rating NP - a sign of an adequate response, an indicator of the degree to which the subject can resolve frustration situations.
The third stage of interpretation is the study of trends. It can be of great importance 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 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.
Literature:
Fundamentals of Psychology: Workshop / Ed.-Comp. L.D., Stolyarenko.- Rostov n / D: "Phoenix", 2001.
Scales: extrapunitive, intropunitive, inpunitive reactions; fixation on self-defence, fixation on an obstacle, fixation on the satisfaction of a need
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.
Instructions for the test
“I will show you drawings of people in a certain situation.
The person on the left is saying something and his words are written on top in a square. Imagine what the other person might say to him. Be serious and don't try to get away with a joke. Think about the situation and respond quickly."
Test
Processing and interpretation of test results
Each of the answers received is evaluated, in accordance with the theory of Rosenzweig, according to two criteria: according to the direction of the reaction (aggression) and according to the 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, overcome "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 |
|
HER'. If the answer emphasizes the presence of an obstacle. Example: "It's raining outside. My raincoat was very handy” (Fig. 9). “And I expected that we would go together” (8). Occurs mainly in obstacle situations. |
E. Hostility, censure directed against someone or something in the environment. Example: "the middle of the working day, and your manager is not in place" (9). “A worn-out mechanism, they can’t be made new anymore” (5). “We are leaving, she is to blame” (14). E. The subject actively denies his guilt for the wrongdoing. Example: “The hospital is full of people, why am I here?” (21). |
e. It is required, expected, or explicitly implied that someone must resolve the situation. Example: "Anyway, you must find this book for me" (18). “She could explain to us what the matter is” (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 I who came at the wrong time again” (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 atone for my guilt" (12). |
|
MM'. 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 who has fallen into a frustrating situation is reduced to a minimum, 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: “Wait another 5 minutes” (14). "It would be nice if it didn't happen again." (eleven). |
Description of the semantic content of the factors used in the evaluation of responses (children's version)
| OD |
ED |
NP |
|
HER'. - "What will I eat?" (one); - “If I had a brother, he would fix it” (3); - “I like her so much” (5); - "I also need to play with someone" (6). |
E. - "I'm sleeping, but you're not sleeping, right?" (ten); - "I'm not friends with you" (8); - “And you kicked my dog out of the entrance” (7); E. - "No, not many mistakes" (4); - "I also know how to play" (6); - "No, I didn't pick your flowers" (7). |
e. - "You must give me the ball" (16); “Guys, where are you! Save me!”(13); - "Then ask someone else" (3). |
|
I I'. - “I am very pleased to sleep” (10); “I got myself into my hands. I wanted you to catch me” (13); “No, it doesn't hurt me. I just slid 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 prevented you from playing" (6); - "I did bad" (9); I. - "I didn't want to break it" (9); - “I wanted to look, but she fell” (9) |
i. - “Then I will take it to the workshop” (3); - “I will buy this doll myself” (5); - "I'll give you mine" (9); “I won’t do it next time” (10). |
|
MM'. -"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); - "Well, you won" (8). |
m. - “I’ll sleep, and then I’ll go for a walk” (10); - "I'll go to sleep myself" (11); "She's going to dry now. Dry" (19); - “When you leave, I will also sway” (21). |
So, the response of the subject in situation No. 14 “Let's wait another five minutes”, according to the direction of the reaction is impunitive (m), and according to the type of reaction - “with fixation to satisfy the 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 a self-protective type in situations of accusation have two more additional evaluation options, which are denoted by the symbols E and I.
The appearance of additional options for counting E and I is due to the division of the test situation into two types. In situations of "obstruction" the reaction of the subject is usually directed at the frustrating person, and in situations of "accusation" it is more often an expression of protest, defending one's innocence, rejecting the accusation or reproach, in short, persistent self-justification.
Let's illustrate all these designations 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 unpleasant it is."
. 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, he is 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."
. 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 caused all this anxiety, but I'll 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 for counting, 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 - the coefficient of group conformity, 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
6e
7 E
8
9
10 E
11
12 E m
13th
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
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'; MM'
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
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%), the percentage value of the GCR of the subject is calculated.
Adult GCR Percentage Conversion Table
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 Percentage GCR Percentage GCR Percentage
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 Percentage GCR Percentage GCR Percentage
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 quantitative value of GCR can be considered as a measure of the subject's individual adaptation to his social environment.
The next step is to fill in the profile table. 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 “E”, 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
Point Percent Point Percent Point 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 the 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 the relative frequency of response types regardless of their directions. 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 frequently occurring factors, regardless of the type and direction of the response. For example, E > E' > M are written.
. The fourth additional sample includes a comparison of responses E and I in situations of "obstruction" 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 response sheet and aims to find out whether there was a change in the direction of the reaction or type of reaction of the 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 characteristics of the subject's character.
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.
Five types of trends are analyzed:
Type 1. The direction of the reaction in the OD graph is considered. 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. The factor I' appears only once in total, the factor M' appears three times. There is no type 1 trend.
. Type 2. Factors E, I, M are considered similarly.
. Type 3. Factors e, i, m are considered similarly.
. Type 4. The directions of reactions are considered, not taking into account the graphs.
. Type 5. Transverse trend - consider the distribution of factors in three columns, without regard to direction, for example, consideration of the OD column indicates the presence of 4 factors in the first half (score indicated by 3) and 6 in the second half (score 4). The graphs ED and NP are considered similarly. 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 data obtained, it can be assumed that a subject with a low percentage of GCR often conflicts with others, since he is not sufficiently adapted to his 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”.
On the second stage, the obtained estimates of six factors in the table of profiles are studied. Stable characteristics of the subject's frustration reactions, stereotypes of emotional response are revealed, which are formed in the process of development, upbringing and formation of a person and constitute one of the characteristics of his personality. The reactions of the subject can be directed to his environment, expressed in the form of various requirements for it, or to himself as the culprit of what is happening, or a person can take a kind of conciliatory position. 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 interpretation - the 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 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 the need, achieving the goal.
