In the context of the psychological influences on aggression, the frustration-aggression hypothesis states that

The frustration-aggression-displacement theory, which was originally put forth by John Dollard, Neal Miller, Leonard Doob, Orval Mowrer, and Robert Sears in 1939, has since been expanded upon by Neal Miller in 1941 and Leonard Berkowitz in 1969. According to the notion, obstruction or frustration of a person's attempts to achieve a goal leads to aggressiveness.
The original version of the idea said that anger always comes before aggressiveness and that anger is a guaranteed result of anger.
Two years later, Miller and Sears revised the theory to contend that while frustration prompts the impulse to react, aggressiveness is one possible result. As a result, the reformulated hypothesis claimed that while anger may or may not lead to aggressive conduct, anger always precedes violence, making anger a required but not sufficient condition for aggression.
The theory makes an effort to explain why people choose to victimize. It makes an effort to explain the root of violence.
In contrast to aggression, which is described as "an act whose goal-response is injury to an organism (or an organism surrogate)," frustration is described as the "state which exists when a goal-response suffers interference" by Dollard and colleagues. According to the notion, frustration leads to violence, but when the source of the frustration cannot be addressed, the aggression is directed onto a victim.

Learn more about Frustration-aggression hypothesis here brainly.com/question/13122345

#SPJ4