Psychology and Pedagogy of Anger by Roy Franklin Richardson (most difficult books to read TXT) 📖

as if this behavior would somehow punish him, and that pleased me a little.” But as a third and final reaction C. observes the following. “I planned to do my work so well that X. would feel sorry for what he had said, I imagined X. complimenting me after it was finished.” The early stage of the emotion above was reported as unpleasant, the final ending in which C. imagines X. complimenting him on his success was a point of marked pleasure. Subject E. who had felt humiliated by X. whom he considered had underestimated him, observed as a final reaction, “I will show him in the next ten years, I am young and can work, and he will see.” Then followed a number of plans for the future. One subject reacts for a moment at times to resentment by day dreams in which he imagines himself a man of wealth and deals out favors to all except his enemy. He even uses his wealth and influence against him. The feeling is rather pleasant in tone till the moment he comes back to a sense of reality. The transition decreases the pleasantness rather suddenly.

Attitudinal Reactions. Attitudinal reactions of a hostile nature are an important part of the anger consciousness. What may be called “resolutional attitudes” frequently occur as one of the final mental reactions in the diminution of the emotion. The resolutional attitude to do something in the future at a more convenient time when the effects will be greater, becomes a convenient substitute for conscious tendencies that require present restraint. The subject definitely settles on a course of action which cannot be carried out at once. The feeling tone of such conscious attitudes is pleasant. It is not unusual to have a settled resolution and come to a definite conclusion in the initial reactive stage of the emotion. Unless the attitude is ready made for the occasion, it appears as one of the final resorts. A characteristic of “nowness” belongs to anger. An attitude that portends to future behavior is secondary, appearing after the possibilities of present reactions are exhausted. Much of the initial restraint in inhibitions is preparatory to the attainment of a settled conclusion; in some cases initial reaction behaves in a trial and error fashion. The results of a number of hostile impulses are imagined and are followed to their end until finally one is selected that seems most fitting. The conclusion reached may be temporary. Although it may be abandoned on the reappearance of the emotion, there is a temporary satisfaction in having attained a conclusive attitude even momentarily. The following case from C. will illustrate. C. became angry on being told of X.’s behavior. He first recalled a number of previous similar instances; second, he transferred the anger momentarily to another person who told him of the offense; third, he imagined himself cutting off all business relations with X. and as a fourth reaction he observes, “I took on a pugnacious attitude and concluded to fight it out according to the rules of the game, and planned what I would do and say to make him come my way.” The attitude of waiting for further developments, biding one’s time, being cautious, is a frequent substitute for rising tendencies demanding present action. Subject E. observes, “I finally came to the conclusion not to lie in wait for the opportunity to get back at the offender, but to be on guard against a future attack, but even after the conclusion was formed it was not at once carried out though it pleased me. I still found myself planning what I would say if the thing should be repeated.” A. angry at X. and Y., finally came to the following hostile conclusive attitude, “They had better be doing nothing like that, I will watch them, and when I get a chance they will hear from me. I will be cautious and sure first, with which final conclusion my anger disappeared.”

THE CONTRARY REACTION

The second general type of reaction to anger is what we have called contrary reaction. The subject suddenly reacts contrary to the emotive tendency of the emotion. He behaves contrary to what he actually wishes at the time. Religion and morals have idealized this type of behavior in its extreme form. “Turn the other cheek,” “Love your enemy,” “Do good to those that hate you,” are exhortations of more than one religion. As compared with the type described above, relatively a small percent of the mental reactions under the influence of anger, as shown by the observations of all the subjects studied, are classed as the contrary reactive type, eighteen percent as compared with seventy one percent.

The contrary reaction is not so rich in versatile behavior as the one just described, in fact it is limited to a few set reactions. The subject suddenly reacts to a state of mind contrary to anger. It may take strong effort to make the change and the attitude is not heartily entered into at first and does not usually occur when the emotion is most intense, but after it is partly diminished, consequently it is usually delayed till a later stage of the emotion. If it appears in the initial stage it precludes a complete development of the emotion. Subject G. has apparently acquired the habit of championing, in the initial stage of the emotion, the offender’s point of view and forestalling the development of anger against persons. His anger is attained most fully against objects and situations. He considers this due to his training in early childhood. E. has developed a partial habit of assuming an attitude of forgiveness toward the offender. C. and A. when in a quandary and unable to find other adequate means of expression, suddenly revert to the contrary reaction. It becomes a habitual device toward close and intimate friends or toward persons with whom it is necessary to get along. After the anger has gone so far, the subject suddenly assumes a friendly attitude as if there were no emotion.

There are various conditions under which this sort of mental reaction to anger occurs. It is a frequent device in a social situation when there is rising anger and it becomes necessary to adopt a sudden and quick control. It is forced upon the subject to meet a sudden crisis. He may at once assume an over-friendly or over-polite behavior, when in reality he would like to behave in a hostile manner. A little over-solicitude for the offender may be conspicuously displayed. A few cases will illustrate. B. was met on the stairs by his landlady, who requested him not to write on his machine after ten o’clock, also to put on his slippers on coming home late before ascending the stairs. He observes, “Before she had finished I felt uncomfortable and was vaguely aware of the inconvenience that these limitations would cause me. I recalled that she had said that I could use the typewriter all I wished when I took the room; I found myself becoming angry, but at once I took the attitude of excusing her. I noted that she looked tired while she was talking, and thought perhaps I had kept her awake. I then said with an extra pleasant tone, ‘That is all right, I am very glad you speak of it, I wish you had told me before.’ The pleasantness was assumed, I did not feel pleasant as I spoke, I was still mildly angry. Five minutes later I recalled what she had said and began to get angry again, but at once imaged her tired appearance and excused her as before.” A.’s observation illustrates further. A. was humiliated and angry at X.’s statement. “I wanted to say something cutting, several hostile remarks appeared which were inhibited one after the other. I felt extremely confused and unpleasant but I suddenly began to agree with X. I told him in an over-polite manner he was quite right and that I was glad he had mentioned it. In reality I did not agree with him nor was I glad.” A. states that on leaving the presence of X. the emotion reappeared many times in the course of the next half day and in no case did he find any excuse for X.’s behavior but blamed him severely. When the contrary reaction is resorted to as a device to gain quick control, it is reported as unpleasant. The emotion reappears again and is usually followed by unpleasant feelings, but when it is not forced upon the subject and is entered into spontaneously with zest, as a means of finding some sort of satisfaction for the emotional restraint, it is accompanied by pleasant feelings. Subject A. sometimes takes keen delight in assuming a dignified attitude toward an offender and treating him rather friendly as if he were far above getting angry. He states, “I always feel I am victor, that I am master of the situation, and it is pleasing when I do this.” It may be said that whenever the attributive reaction is satisfactory, the contrary reaction is not resorted to. The latter type occurs for the most part when the subject is mentally obstructed and there seems nothing else to be done but to ally himself heartily with the opponent for the moment until the storm of his mental stress is passed. Subject J. in a situation, when it would be rude to display his anger, observes, “Each time I found myself becoming angry at X.’s remarks, I would take a negative attitude toward the rising impulse and laugh quite good naturedly at his statement. The laugh was not forced, I entered into it heartily.” Subject C. finds himself at times suddenly laughing at the most commonplace remarks when mildly angry at an offence. It is a common device of subject B. to burst out laughing at his behavior when mildly angry, as if he were merely a spectator of his emotion and not a partaker of it. “I recalled the offensive behavior of X. which had happened two hours before. I found myself in an emotion of slight anger, followed by an explosive, ‘Damn that X.’ There was present much motor tension in arms and face muscles, then noting my angry demonstrations I laughed outright at myself and felt pleased.” The anger disappeared entirely with the act. It is frequently reported that a sudden pause in the midst of unpleasant anger to introspect, is pleasant when attention is directed to the behavior, but when attention passes to the situation exciting the emotion, anger tends to be reinstated again. Observations like the following are reported: “Pausing to observe my emotion, my whole behavior seemed so ludicrous that I had to laugh.” The subject may suddenly assume his opponent’s point of view, find a number of probable excuses for his behavior and at times actually imagine himself as champion for his enemy against himself. He does this heartily at times when there is no outside compulsion and derives a feeling of pleasure in the act. The contrary reaction may be hostilely resorted to in some instances. The subject is aware that his aim is to humiliate his opponent by making him ashamed and sorry; but it is usually reported that, after he has assumed the over-friendly attitude with its hostile intent, there is a self-satisfaction in the sudden breaking up of the unpleasant conscious restraint. Subject D. observes, “I knew I was doing the favor to make him feel ashamed; watching him, I saw he was not ashamed in the least but I continued my friendliness and felt pleased in doing it. There was no regret when I saw that he did not take the matter as I had at first wished.” In the contrary reaction, a joke or witticism may be employed, but it has an entirely different