Post on 16-Jan-2023
IRJMSH Volume 5 Issue 2 [Year 2014] online ISSN 2277 – 9809
International Research Journal of Management Sociology & Humanity Page 112
http:www.irjmsh.com
A Comparative Study of Frustration Among Adolescents Boys And Girls
In Relation To Their Certain Cognitive Attributes.
Arti Pasricha
Asstt. Professor
S.P.College of Education
Rewari
The conduct of human nature does not only focus on achieving personal goals (those
things a man aspires to), but also in avoiding the things that are negative and a person feels
threatened by them. It is impossible to always obtain what we want (reaching a goal or running
away from something), because there are moral or physical obstacles that will be in the middle.
This fact is known as frustration. Frustration is a common emotion for teens. Adolescents face
the stress of school, parental expectations, the need to fit in with a peer group and the desire to
find their place in society. Although frustration is a normal part of growing up, learning to cope
with frustration constructively is challenging for some teens. Frustration may be adolescent’s
most significant obstacle in achieving their goals. Now-a-days educators are concerned not only
with the student’s intellectual growth or class achievement but also with their social and
emotional adjustment, defenses, anxiety, neuroticism, introversion, ego-function, self-concept,
and other factors involved in personality development. Indian education Commission observed
that education should no longer be taken as concerned primarily with imparting of knowledge
but with the awakening of the curiosity, the development of the proper interests, attitudes and
values and building of such essential skills and independent study and capacity to think and
judge for oneself. Viewed from this angle demand of modern education rests not only upon the
high academic achievement and growth of intelligence, but also upon the well knit personality of
the students coming out of the educational institutions.
INTRODUCTION
Human behavior is goal oriented and is directed by various environmental forces and
internal qualities (of the individuals) such as their attitudes, aptitudes, interests, likings and
various other personality traits. However, motivated behavior frequently fails to achieve its
object without interruption. Physical or social obstacles intervene, and caused delay or even
complete failure and whenever one is unsuccessful to achieve one’s goals, one become
unsatisfied. With the continued experience of such failure and consequent non satisfaction, one
experiences frustration through the thwarting of motivation and the situation is sometimes said to
create psychological stress. Thwarting may also occur when there is conflict of motivation; when
IRJMSH Volume 5 Issue 2 [Year 2014] online ISSN 2277 – 9809
International Research Journal of Management Sociology & Humanity Page 113
http:www.irjmsh.com
two or more incompatible types of motivated behavior exists which can not be pursued
simultaneously. Frustration is a state of emotional stress characterize by confusion, annoyance
and anger. Interruption to goal seeking behavior causes frustration. The person’s awareness of
his in ability to satisfy his drives and failures to reach the goals he has set for himself makes him
helpless and he suffered from injured pride leading to frustration. Frustration is expressed in
various modes- Aggression, Resignation, Fixation and Regression.
Frustration has been defined as psychological state which results from the blocking of a goal-
directed activity (Kisker, 1964); thwarting of need and desire (Coleman, 1974); as a hypothetical
construct produced either by some type of inhibitory condition or by an excitatory tendency
leading to accumulation of strength (Brown and Farber, 1951). Frustration behavior lacks goal-
orientation, feeling of intensive need deprivation and have a different set of behavior mechanism,
which appears to more or less senseless due to compulsive nature( Chauhan and Tiwari, 1973).
Different individual react to them differently depending upon the circumstances of each
individual. Psychologists have differentiated between Primary Frustration and Secondary
Frustration. Primary frustration is stated to involve the shear existence of an active need,
characterized by tension and subjective dissatisfaction due to the absence of end situation
necessary for quiescence. Secondary frustration is the result of the existence of a more or less
insurmountable obstacle or obstruction in the path of attainment of certain need or goal.
In general, older and more mature people are better able to tolerate obstruction and failure and
adjust to it successfully than are younger, less mature less stable personality. Younger and less
mature people tend more readily to react to failure mal-adaptively. They are less able to think out
an appropriate course of action, and indeed to tolerate any delay of immediate action to achieve
success, or any state of uncertainty. They may try to avoid a situation in which failure is
probable. This naturally occur more in children adolescence.
Among other factors that cause frustration in adolescents, there are certain cognitive attributes
that lead to frustration especially in the school setting. Prominent among these are intelligence
and academic achievements. It is of utmost importance for an educator to understand the
dynamic and potentialities of personality traits of the present day frustrated students, for they
may be helped to developed healthy personality traits to become productive and creative
IRJMSH Volume 5 Issue 2 [Year 2014] online ISSN 2277 – 9809
International Research Journal of Management Sociology & Humanity Page 114
http:www.irjmsh.com
members of the society. It is also importance to know the extent to which a person is well
balanced adjusted to his environment as he has to face different kind of problems in hos day to
day life, to a great extent, depends upon the organization of one’s personality structure.
OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY
1. To find out the frustration level of adolescent boys and girls.
2. To compare the frustration levels of adolescent boys at high and low level of academic
achievement.
3. To compare the frustration levels of adolescent girls at high and low level of academic
achievement.
4. To compare the frustration levels of adolescent boys & girls at high and low level of
academic achievement.
5. To find out and compare the frustration levels of adolescent boys at high and low levels
of intelligence.
6. To find out and compare the frustration levels of adolescent girls at high and low levels
of intelligence.
7. To find out and compare the frustration levels of adolescent boys& girls at high and low
levels of intelligence.
HYPOTHESES OF STUDY
1. There is no significant difference in frustration levels of adolescent boys and girls.
2. There is no significant difference in frustration at different levels of academic
achievement of adolescent boys.
3. There is no significant difference in frustration at different levels of academic
achievement of adolescent girls.
4. There is no significant difference in frustration at different levels of academic
achievement of adolescent boys& girls.
5. There is no significant difference in frustration at different levels of intelligence of
adolescent boys.
6. There is no significant difference in frustration at different levels of intelligence of
adolescent girls.
IRJMSH Volume 5 Issue 2 [Year 2014] online ISSN 2277 – 9809
International Research Journal of Management Sociology & Humanity Page 115
http:www.irjmsh.com
7. There is no significant difference in frustration at different levels of intelligence of
adolescent boys &girls.
SAMPLE:
200 students (100 boys & 100 girls) of the age group above 13 years and below 15
years studying in High and senior secondary schools of Mahendergarh District,
Haryana constitute the population. Quota sampling technique was used for this
purpose.
TOOLS USED:
1. Frustration Test developed by N.S.Chouhan and D.GovindTiwari.
2. General mental ability test constructed and standardized by S.Jalota.
3. The mean score of the marks obtained by the subjects in their 8th
standards are being
taken as index scores of the academic achievement.
STATISTICAL TECHNIQUES USED:
To find out the significance of difference, t- value was calculated.
INTERPRETATION:
Table 1: t-test on Frustration (Total Sample)
Groups No. of
Cases
Mean
Value
S.D SED Df t-value Level of
significance
Male 100 150.7833 28.019 3.85 198 0.72 Not
significant Female 100 153.5767 26.413 3.85
The results of the t-test show that with the degree of freedom 198 the t-value is 0.72, which is
statistically not significant. Hence it may be stated that there is no difference of frustration
between the male and the female students.
Table 2: t-test on Academic Achievement (Male Sample)
IRJMSH Volume 5 Issue 2 [Year 2014] online ISSN 2277 – 9809
International Research Journal of Management Sociology & Humanity Page 116
http:www.irjmsh.com
Levels of
Academic
Achievement
No. of
Cases
Mean Value S.D SED Df t-value Level of
significance
Low 72 163.2907 22.766 5.53 198 5.30 Highly
significant High 28 153.5767 26.413
The results of the t test show that with the degree of freedom 198 the t-value is 5.30,
which is statistically highly significant at .01 levels. Hence it may be stated that there is
significant difference of low and high academic achievement of the male students of frustration.
Further the higher mean value of low Academic Achievement indicates that there exists in
negative relationship between Academic Achievement and frustrations so far as the male
students are concerned.
Table 3: t-test on Academic Achievement (Female Sample)
Levels of
Academic
Achievement
No. of
Cases
Mean Value S.D SED Df t-value Level of
significance
Low 29 163.2326 23.263 5.44
198 3.11 Highly
significant High 71 146.2924 25.684
The results of the t test show that with the degree of freedom 198 the t-value is 3.11, which is
once again statistically highly significant at .01 levels. Hence like the male students female
students having low Academic Achievement are more frustrated in comparison to those who
have High Academic Achievement. Further the higher mean value of low Academic
Achievement indicates that there exists in negative relationship between Academic
Achievement and frustration so far as the female student is concerned.
Table 4: t-test on Academic Achievement (Total Sample)
Levels of
Academic
Achievement
No. of
Cases
Mean Value S.D SED Df t-value Level of
significance
IRJMSH Volume 5 Issue 2 [Year 2014] online ISSN 2277 – 9809
International Research Journal of Management Sociology & Humanity Page 117
http:www.irjmsh.com
Low 101 163.2658 23.380 3.52
198 6.32 Highly
significant High 99 141.0201 26.310
The results of the t-test show that with the degree of freedom 198 the t-value is 6.32, which is
also statistically highly significant at .01 levels. Hence, it may be again safely concluded that
there is significant difference of low and high Academic Achievement in case of total sample as
well. Moreover, the higher mean value of Academic Achievement establishes a negative
relationship between Academic Achievement and frustration. This means that like the male and
female sample taken individually, the total sample register the same opposite trend.
Table 5: t-test on Intelligence (Male Sample)
Levels of
Intelligence
No. of
Cases
Mean Value S.D SED Df t-value Level of
significance
Low 27 139.1575 20.515 5.26 198 3.83 Highly
significant High 73 159.3179 29.721
The higher mean value of intelligence of students with high level of intelligence reflects that
there is intimate relationship between intelligence and frustration on the sample of male
students. In other words, it may be stated that students having high intelligence are more
frustrated in comparison to those male students who have low intelligence.
The higher mean value of intelligence of students with high level of intelligence reflects that
there is intimate relationship between intelligence and frustration on the sample of male
students. In other words, it may be stated that students having high intelligence are more
frustrated in comparison to those male students who have low intelligence.
Table 6: t-test on Intelligence (Female Sample)
Levels of
Intelligence
No. of
Cases
Mean Value S.D SED Df t-value Level of
significance
Low 74 150.7356 21.971 6.63 198 1.02 Not significant
High 26 157.5000 31.208
IRJMSH Volume 5 Issue 2 [Year 2014] online ISSN 2277 – 9809
International Research Journal of Management Sociology & Humanity Page 118
http:www.irjmsh.com
This table reveals that the t-value is 1.02 which is statistically not significant at .01 levels.
Therefore in the case of female students, it may be stated that there is no difference of
frustration at different levels of intelligence of adolescent girls.
Table 7: t-test on Intelligence (Total Sample)
Levels of
Intelligence
No. of
Cases
Mean Value S.D SED Df t-value Level of
significance
Low 101 145.8505 22.089 3.76 198 3.39 Highly
significant High 99 158.5518 30.318
For degrees of freedom 198, the t-value is 3.39, which is, as has been the case in all the samples,
statistically highly significant at .01 levels. Hence, it may b safely concluded that there is
significant difference of low and high intelligence on frustration in the case of total sample.
Moreover, higher mean of high intelligent students reveals that for the total male and female
samples taken together, there exists a close relationship between intelligence and frustration. In
other words, those students who have high intelligence are more frustrated in comparison to
those having low intelligence.
MAIN FINDINGS:
1. There is no difference of frustration between the male and female students.
2. Male students having low academic achievement are more frustrated in comparison to
those who have high academic achievement.
3. Female students having low academic achievement are more frustrated in comparison to
those who have high academic achievement.
4. Total students who have low academic achievement are more frustrated in comparison
to those who have high academic achievement.
5. Male students having high intelligence are more frustrated in comparison to those who
have low intelligence.
6. There is no difference of frustration at different levels of intelligence of adolescent girls.
7. Total students having high intelligence are more frustrated in comparison to those who
have low intelligence.
CONCLUSION
IRJMSH Volume 5 Issue 2 [Year 2014] online ISSN 2277 – 9809
International Research Journal of Management Sociology & Humanity Page 119
http:www.irjmsh.com
The first and basic goal of education is to develop a healthy and wholesome personality.
Education is the most effective solution to ease the frustration of aspiration among young
people. School and society plays an important role to reduce frustration among adolescents.
School is responsible for molding the behavior of the child with help of various
programmes. To enable students to compete in the present era of science and technology,
they are to be trained in proper direction in select to various vocational and professional
courses achievement of an individual age considered to be of immense value. The present
study throws adequate light upon the selected variables- frustration, intelligence and
academic achievement of the adolescents by establishing relationships and their relative
importance in the field of education. It has also been found that high frustrated adolescents
have showed significant difference on various cognitive factors.
We have to make separate arrangements for teaching sensitive students and those students
who get easily frustrated. It has also reflected that low frustrated students are more
intelligent than the high frustrated students. Thus they show significant difference on
intelligence i.e. on its various aspects. Therefore, the educationists should keep
intelligence as a screening device while admitting the students for various streams. The
low frustrated students have better academic achievement in comparison to the highly
frustrated students. The highly frustrated students are slow in learning and suffer from
anxiety and aggression. It is also essential to note that intelligence; academic
achievement, aggression and personality traits are responsible for frustration among
adolescents. We can also improve the tolerance to frustration, which is the level of
internal strength and balance that allows an individual to keep fighting for achieving the
goal he has set without being afraid of failure or frustration. An individual with a low
tolerance to frustration has a special sensibility for those things that are not nice. They
can be frequently found in a bad mood, sad, feeling anxiety or just angry because of the
bad luck they have had to face in life. The knowledge is also likely to be helpful to
teacher and educational administrators in their sympathetic understanding of the fact that
the unruly behavior of the students of certain categories is mainly rooted in their
unhealthy personality traits and needs proper psychological treatment rather than punitive
measures.
IRJMSH Volume 5 Issue 2 [Year 2014] online ISSN 2277 – 9809
International Research Journal of Management Sociology & Humanity Page 120
http:www.irjmsh.com
REFERENCES
Aggarwal , Y.P, Statistical methods concepts, Applications and Computation,
Sterling Publishers, New Delhi, 1986
Bandura, A and Walters, R.H. (1959), Adolescent Aggression, New York: Ronald.
Berkowitz,L.(1964), Encyclopedic Dictionary of Psychological Terms, New Delhi:
M.D. Publications.
Best, J.W. (1987) Research in education, Prentice Hall USA
Bhattacharya, P.N. (1976) A text-Book of Psychology, New Delhi, Sterling Publishers
Ltd.
Butcher, H.J. Human Intelligence; Its Nature and Assessement, Methew and Co.,
London, 1962, 1972.
Buch M.A. (1983) Research in Education, Baroda
Cattell, R.B.91950) Personality; A Systematic, Theatrical and factual study, Nw York
McGraw Hill Book Co.
Coville W.J.(1963) Abnormal Psychology Barmer and Lourie, New York.
Crow L.D. and Crow A(1956) Understanding our behavior, Algered Knoff, New York.
Freud McKinney(1966) Psychology of personal adjustment. John Wiley and sons.
Inc. New York, London, Sydney
Garrett, H.E(1973)., Statistics in Psychology and Education, Vakils, Feffer and
Simons, Bombay
Good C.V. (1959) Introduction to educational Research Appleton Century Crafts,
New York.
J.F. Cuiord (1978), Fundamental statistics in Psychology and education, McGraw Hill
Ltd.
Kuhlen R.G.(1952) The psychology of adolescent development, Harper and Bros,
New York.
Walia, J.S. Foundation of Educational psychology, Paul Publishers, Jalandhear.