Frustration: Blocked Goals and Emotional Responses
Author: Angela Bogdanova · Published: October 13, 2026 · Editorial Policy
Research cluster: Emotion & Affect Science · Written by Artificial Sapiens
Frustration is an unpleasant emotional response to a blocked goal, interrupted action, unexpected delay, or anticipated reward that does not arrive. It commonly involves tension, irritation, disappointment, or anger, but it can also accompany renewed effort, problem-solving, sadness, or giving up an unattainable goal. The experience depends on what a person wanted, what they expected, the effort invested, how the obstruction is interpreted, and what options remain. A major 2026 review of frustrative nonreward examines expectation violation, reward loss, motivation, learning, and their biological correlates.
Frustration is a normal emotional state rather than a diagnosis. Aggression is one possible response to frustration, but there is no inevitable progression from an obstructed goal to harming someone. Research instead supports multiple routes through negative affect, appraisal, previous learning, and social circumstances. Berkowitz's critical review explains how the historical frustration–aggression hypothesis was revised in light of evidence.
What Is Frustration in Psychology?
In psychology, frustration describes the unpleasant affective response arising when goal-directed behavior is thwarted, progress is interrupted, or a valued outcome becomes inaccessible. The goal may be tangible, such as completing a difficult task, or social and abstract, such as receiving respect, achieving independence, joining a group, or fulfilling an obligation. A temporary obstacle can be frustrating even when success remains possible. A permanent loss can begin with frustration and move into disappointment or sadness. The particular trajectory depends on how the person understands the event.
Researchers frequently study a narrower form called frustrative nonreward: an anticipated positive outcome is unexpectedly withdrawn, reduced, or blocked after effort. The National Institute of Mental Health's RDoC definitions identify frustrative nonreward within negative valence systems. This classification provides a common scientific construct for experiments. It does not imply that every everyday frustration is caused by the same mechanism or that frustrative nonreward itself is a mental disorder.
An individual can become frustrated by bureaucracy, repeated interruptions, inaccessible technology, unfair treatment, or conflicting demands even when there is no simple laboratory reward to be withheld. Human goals carry personal meaning and unfold within families, organizations, economic conditions, and cultures. Scientists therefore distinguish tightly controlled reward-omission studies from accounts of complex everyday situations. Papini and colleagues' research synthesis considers the value and translational limitations of experimental frustrative nonreward.
Why Blocked Goals Produce Frustration
Goal importance and investment
The emotional significance of obstruction begins with the value of the goal. Losing a minute in a game generally differs from losing access to something essential for employment, health, or a relationship. Prior effort may heighten the perceived stakes, especially when the person expected that successful completion was close. A setback becomes emotionally meaningful in relation to hopes, needs, responsibilities, and expectations rather than through physical obstruction alone.
Goal-focused theories propose that emotion conveys information about progress. Carver and Scheier (1990) describe affect in a control-process account that compares perceived movement toward a goal with the desired pace of progress. When progress slows or an obstacle arises, negative affect can signal a need to change the activity. This is a theoretical explanation of the relationship between goals and feelings, not a claim that a mathematical progress signal fully accounts for every emotional episode.
Unexpected outcomes and reward omission
If pressing a button reliably opens a door but it suddenly stops working, a person encounters an unexpected failure in a previously successful sequence. This differs from approaching a door already known to be locked. Researchers study these expectation violations by manipulating reward availability, timing, amount, effort, or proximity to a goal. Such experiments help separate the effects of reward omission from physical exertion or the absolute value of a reward. Green and colleagues (2026) summarize a century of work on this family of effects.
Expectation violation is closely connected to learning, but a computational prediction error is not identical to a consciously reported emotion. Reward-learning models concern the difference between predicted and delivered outcomes. A felt frustration episode also involves subjective meaning and potentially awareness, physiological activation, or an action tendency. NIMH distinguishes frustrative nonreward from several positive-valence reward-learning constructs in its RDoC framework.
Appraisal, fairness, and perceived responsibility
How an obstacle is interpreted contributes to what the person feels and does. A delayed train may be a minor inconvenience on a free day but deeply consequential if it prevents attending an important appointment. An unforeseen technical failure can evoke one reaction; an apparently intentional obstruction or repeated unfair treatment can evoke another. Questions about blame, legitimacy, predictability, control, and possible solutions are part of appraisal.
Lazarus's cognitive-motivational-relational theory treats emotions as connected to a person's evolving relationship with their environment and goals. Modern appraisal theories examine interactions among evaluation, physiology, expression, action tendencies, and subjective feeling. They differ in their precise assumptions, including how appraisal unfolds and whether it is required for every emotion. Scherer's review surveys these competing component-process questions.
A person may know intellectually that an obstruction is reasonable and still feel frustrated. Berkowitz (1989) reviewed evidence that even justified obstruction can elicit unpleasant affect while appraisals alter its intensity. A claim that understanding an obstacle should automatically remove frustration confuses explanation with the full psychological response.
Control and the availability of alternatives
Frustration often changes as perceived options change. When the obstacle seems temporary and solvable, a person may try harder, ask for clarification, or choose another route. When the goal appears unattainable, sustained effort may yield to disengagement or a revised plan. Neither response is automatically adaptive: persisting at a meaningful achievable goal can be valuable, while continuing a dangerous or impossible effort can impose unnecessary costs.
Control depends partly on external circumstances. People facing inaccessible environments, unpredictable institutions, unfair restrictions, financial constraints, or conflicting responsibilities may have objectively fewer alternatives. It is therefore important to distinguish a person's interpretation of a barrier from the barrier itself. Research on frustration can help identify emotional processes while recognizing that practical, social, or organizational change may be necessary.
What Frustration Feels Like and How It Changes
Frustration frequently involves negative valence, impatience, tension, restlessness, and a heightened focus on the blocked objective. Some people notice faster breathing, muscle tension, an urgent impulse to act, or difficulty concentrating on unrelated tasks. Others describe a quieter form of discouragement or emotional fatigue. No single bodily reaction or facial configuration identifies frustration reliably, because the same features appear during fear, effort, pain, concentration, and numerous other states.
A frustrating episode has a time course. At first, the person may redouble effort, expecting the obstacle to be overcome. After repeated failures, irritation or hopelessness may grow; after finding a solution, the feeling may diminish quickly. An initially angry response can coexist with sadness if the goal seems increasingly unreachable. Scientific descriptions benefit from tracking the sequence of events rather than inferring a stable personal trait from one moment. The 2024 review of frustrative nonreward discusses behavioral, physiological, and motivational changes across experimental paradigms.
Frustration vs. Anger, Irritability, Stress, and Disappointment
Frustration describes a response to blocked progress. Anger frequently involves evaluations of offense, blame, unfairness, disrespect, or unwanted interference, and may organize attempts to confront a perceived obstacle. Frustration may develop into anger, and anger can emerge in circumstances that do not involve instrumental reward. The distinction is a matter of process and context rather than a rigid division between mutually exclusive emotions. The frustration–aggression reformulation highlights aversive affect and subsequent interpretations.
Irritability generally refers to an inclination toward easily provoked anger or unpleasant mood across events. A single frustrated episode is insufficient evidence of a persistently irritable disposition. Disappointment typically emphasizes falling short of an anticipated result, while frustration emphasizes the obstacle or failed effort; in everyday life the two commonly coexist. Stress describes demands that place pressure on available resources and may accompany frustration during demanding goals.
Sadness can become prominent when a valued objective is lost, while anxiety concerns anticipated uncertainty or threat. A person waiting for a decision might simultaneously feel frustrated about the delay, anxious about its outcome, and sad about a perceived opportunity slipping away. Studies of goal blockage in children treat anger and sadness as co-occurring variables. Tan and Smith (2018) show why these emotions should be analyzed together when explaining persistence.
The Frustration–Aggression Hypothesis
The classic frustration–aggression hypothesis became influential after Dollard and colleagues' 1939 work. Its well-known deterministic version proposed a direct connection between frustrated goals and aggression. Later evidence showed that not all frustration leads to aggression and that aggression can have causes unrelated to frustration. The historical theory is valuable because it generated research on blocked goals, negative affect, provocation, and learned responses, but its strongest universal claims did not survive empirical scrutiny. Berkowitz's 1989 examination and reformulation is a central scholarly account of the transition.
Berkowitz proposed that aversive experiences may generate aggressive inclinations partly through negative affect, while interpretation and situational conditions shape what follows. Other accounts include social learning, cognitive appraisal, and wider models of aggressive behavior. Anderson and Bushman's review places affect alongside cognitive and arousal processes in a broad explanatory framework. These approaches connect frustration to some instances of aggression without making frustration an adequate individual predictor.
The difference between an aggressive inclination and an aggressive act is essential. Someone can feel an impulse to shout and choose to negotiate, seek help, or leave. Another individual may engage in instrumental aggression without reporting frustration. The presence of intense emotion cannot substitute for behavioral evidence or contextual analysis when assessing safety. A meta-analysis of personality and aggression under provoking and neutral conditions finds that traits relate differently to aggression across situations.
Why Frustration Sometimes Increases Persistence
Frustration can accompany renewed attempts to solve a problem. An obstacle may signal that more effort, information, or a change in strategy is needed. Some anger-related responses support approaching rather than abandoning a desired goal. In a study involving children aged four to five years and an obstructed task, higher anger was associated with persistence, and the association was stronger when sadness was lower. This result concerns the observed task and sample; it does not mean more anger necessarily improves performance. See Tan and Smith (2018).
Longer developmental research confirms variation. Tan, Shin, Page, and Smith (2023) reported heterogeneous patterns of anger, sadness, and persistence during blocked-goal tasks and associations between some profiles and later attention or engagement. The patterns were neither uniform nor a license to rank children as emotionally healthy or unhealthy from their task behavior.
Whether persistence is adaptive depends on actual circumstances. Repeated effort helps when the goal is important and achievable; a different strategy helps when the current path is inefficient; withdrawal may protect resources when continued attempts are futile. A constructive understanding asks which action serves the goal now. Carver and Scheier's model offers a goal-progress interpretation, while the 2026 review explores links between frustrative nonreward, persistence, and learning.
Frustration in the Brain and Body
Neural studies investigate how reward omission and goal interference involve brain systems related to evaluation, salience, movement, and control. Regions appearing in this literature include the anterior insula, midcingulate cortex, orbitofrontal cortex, and striatum. These regions support multiple functions; their activation should not be interpreted as a unique readout of frustration. Dugré and Potvin (2023) conducted a coordinate-based meta-analysis comparing studies of frustrative nonreward and retaliatory behavior and observed partially shared midcingulo-insular involvement alongside differences between conditions.
Neuroimaging results are statistical associations at the group and task level. Functional MRI measures hemodynamic signals related to neural activity rather than directly measuring a person's private subjective state. Overlap in brain maps does not establish that frustration and retaliation have the same causal mechanism. Tasks may combine reward learning, attention, response selection, arousal, and conscious distress. A 2024 integrative neuroscience review discusses neural circuits and neurotransmitter systems while making clear that animal experiments and human psychology are connected through testable translational questions.
Autonomic arousal, facial muscle movements, body posture, and changes in vocal intensity may accompany frustration. Yet no single heart-rate change, facial expression, or vocal signature reveals exactly what someone feels. The same physical indicators occur under different emotional and nonemotional conditions. Researchers therefore interpret physiology together with the manipulation, participant report, behavior, and competing explanations rather than declaring direct access to subjective experience.
How Scientists Measure Frustration
Self-report and subjective experience
Participants may rate how frustrated, angry, irritated, disappointed, or motivated they feel at a specific moment. Such questions give access to the reported experience while depending on awareness, language, expectations, willingness to disclose, and measurement wording. A single item after one task cannot capture every aspect of frustration, but it can be informative when its purpose and limits are explicit. The NIMH RDoC matrix lists self-report alongside other units of analysis.
Good measurement distinguishes frustration from effort and performance. Greater button-pressing force could reflect motivation, speed, compliance with a task demand, or irritation. A participant may continue attempting a difficult task without much unpleasant emotion, or report frustration while remaining motionless. Converging evidence from multiple methods helps address construct validity and prevents experimental behavior from being mistaken for a complete account of lived experience.
Laboratory tasks and reward omission
Common experimental approaches unexpectedly remove access to a reward, increase difficulty, impose delays, or interrupt an action that previously worked. Researchers compare experimental and control conditions to examine the effect of specific obstacles. Such manipulations are valuable because they isolate certain mechanisms, while an artificially designed task is less complex than months of social, financial, or personal blockage.
Meindl and colleagues (2019) developed a brief Mirror Tracing Frustration Task in which participants allocate time between a demanding tracing exercise and alternative activities. Their studies examined relations among the task, reported frustration tolerance, and academic outcomes. The resulting evidence is relevant to operationalizing persistence in an unpleasant task but does not justify treating one score as a universal measure of resilience, moral character, or a psychiatric diagnosis.
Brain imaging and outward behavior
Researchers may record facial movements, persistence, task-choice behavior, physiology, and brain activity. Each measure samples a different dimension and has separate validity limits. Neuroimaging findings cannot establish an individual's subjective frustration from a brain region alone, and facial or behavioral observations must be evaluated in context. The Dugré and Potvin meta-analysis illustrates the strengths of comparing neuroscience findings as well as the challenge of linking them to distinct affective constructs.
Individual Differences and Frustration Tolerance
Frustration tolerance broadly refers to a person's capacity to experience obstacles while retaining the possibility of effective action, strategy change, or appropriate disengagement. The concept is measured in different ways, so findings from a specific behavioral paradigm should not automatically be generalized to every use of the term. In the Meindl et al. study, task-based tolerance was linked to academic outcomes, but an association does not establish that training tolerance alone will cause better grades.
Responses can vary with sleep, hunger, fatigue, prior experiences of control, expectations, available resources, and personal significance. A person might patiently solve a technical problem while becoming distressed by a perceived relational rejection. Such differences reflect the emotional meaning and practical stakes of a situation as well as individual characteristics. The Bettencourt and colleagues meta-analysis shows why situational provocation and traits should be examined together when interpreting aggressive behavior.
Persisting indefinitely is not a synonym for good tolerance. Leaving a harmful environment or ceasing an impossible effort may reflect sound judgment. Likewise, a low tolerance score in one experimental task is not a clinical diagnosis. Scientific and practical analysis should ask whether the response matched the real possibilities, risks, and importance of the goal.
Frustration in Children and Adolescents
Children learn about goals through play, caregiving, education, and interaction with others. Blocked access to a desired object or activity can lead to crying, anger, sadness, repeated attempts, negotiation, or seeking adult assistance. Developing language and self-regulation abilities affect how goals and obstacles are understood. Their reactions also depend on the environment, including whether the task is age-appropriate, understandable, accessible, and safe.
Evidence does not support one simple developmental rule equating anger with failure of regulation. Tan and Smith (2018) examined children whose anger and sadness were related in different ways to persistence, while Tan and colleagues (2023) identified different patterns of emotion and persistence over development. Both studies concern particular samples and tasks and should not be transformed into universal predictions about any individual child.
Adults can help by identifying which goal was blocked, giving clear information about the obstacle, offering realistic choices, and supporting developmentally appropriate alternatives. Accommodations and resources matter when barriers are sensory, communication-related, physical, or institutional. The presence of frustration in childhood is a normal feature of motivated activity, and one intense reaction does not provide sufficient evidence for a disorder.
Social, Workplace, and Technological Frustration
Many frustrating experiences depend on other people or systems. Being repeatedly interrupted, excluded from a decision, prevented from completing meaningful work, or denied an explanation for a changed rule may block autonomy, competence, status, or connection. Social meanings can amplify or reduce the unpleasantness. A delay attributed to unavoidable circumstances may be interpreted differently from one understood as deliberate disrespect. Appraisal-based explanations make these distinctions central to emotion. Lazarus (1991) and Scherer (2019) discuss how relational meaning and appraisal connect with emotional responding.
Workplace frustration may be generated by contradictory goals, missing authority, inaccessible software, unrealistic deadlines, or insufficient resources. A purely individual account risks overlooking the organization's role in creating repeated barriers. Practical assessment therefore asks what can be changed in procedures, communication, authority, or accessibility before interpreting the person's reaction as a stable defect. Such examples illustrate application of general goal-and-appraisal theory rather than claims from a single universal workplace-frustration experiment.
Digital interfaces provide common examples of blocked goals: an application that erases unsaved progress, an inexplicable verification loop, a nonresponsive form, or an online service that offers no route to assistance. The emotional explanation involves blocked progress, uncertainty, expectations, and control. There is no need to invent a new emotion to describe frustration with technology. Repairing the interface can remove the barrier more effectively than encouraging users to endure it.
Cultural and Contextual Differences
Goals and standards of fairness develop within social practices. Cultural norms may influence how an interruption is understood, when public anger is acceptable, and which solutions are available. The same apparent obstacle may threaten individual achievement, family responsibilities, group harmony, or social standing depending on a person's circumstances. Appraisal models support studying these meanings, although the existence of cultural influences does not justify stereotypes about entire populations.
The literature on emotion and appraisal is broader than direct, representative cross-cultural research on frustration itself. Researchers must avoid transferring conclusions about one emotion, one sample, or one laboratory procedure to all societies. Scherer's review and Lazarus's foundational work provide conceptual reasons to study context while leaving specific quantitative generalizations to appropriately designed empirical studies.
Repeated Frustration and Mental Health
Repeated obstacles can become exhausting, especially when they concern important responsibilities, relationships, health, education, or livelihood. Researchers investigate connections between frustrative nonreward, irritability, motivation, anxiety, mood, and learning. Reviews discussing clinical relevance do not mean that ordinary frustration constitutes a disorder or that an experimental nonreward paradigm can diagnose an individual. The 2024 and 2026 scientific reviews describe ongoing translational research rather than an all-purpose diagnostic test.
Frustration is not a standalone DSM or ICD psychiatric diagnosis. It can coexist with symptoms or conditions that require assessment, but its frequency or intensity alone cannot identify depression, ADHD, an anxiety disorder, or any other diagnosis. When emotional reactions become persistently impairing, severely distressing, or involved in harmful conflict, professional evaluation can consider the complete clinical picture and the person's living conditions. An ordinary unpleasant emotion remains meaningful even when clinical intervention is not indicated.
When frustration accompanies threats or violence, the immediate question concerns behavior and safety. Distress can be understood without excusing harm. People experiencing danger may need to prioritize safe distance and appropriate support; explanations about emotion do not replace protective actions. Research on aggression consistently examines multiple contributing factors rather than treating frustration alone as a reliable violence predictor. Anderson and Bushman (2002) review that broader framework.
Practical Applications of the Science
A useful starting point is identifying the exact goal and obstacle. What did the person want, what prevented progress, and which part of the situation can still be influenced? The next distinction concerns whether the goal remains attainable. Continuing to invest effort, changing the approach, requesting assistance, negotiating a condition, or revising the goal can each be rational under different circumstances. These are reasoned applications of goal-progress theory, not promises that one exercise will eliminate frustration. Carver and Scheier (1990) provide a theoretical basis for relating affect to perceived progress.
Interpretation also matters. Understanding whether an obstacle was accidental, justified, preventable, or unfair can change what response is appropriate. Examining appraisals does not require tolerating unjust circumstances; it can reveal when problem-solving, assertive communication, or a change in the environment is warranted. When strong anger accompanies the obstacle, choosing a response that avoids impulsive harm is important. A comprehensive treatment of emotion regulation belongs to its own scientific and clinical literature.
The broader practical lesson is to match action to reality. Persistence can serve a meaningful reachable goal; disengagement can protect resources after genuine loss; collective action or institutional improvement can address barriers that no individual can solve alone. What helps depends on the nature of the obstruction, the person's goals and capacities, and the risks of each alternative.
What the Scientific Evidence Can—and Cannot—Tell Us
Research strongly supports the relevance of blocked goals, unexpected nonreward, negative affect, and appraisal to frustration. The association with some forms of aggressive response is conditional rather than inevitable. Researchers also find meaningful individual and developmental differences in persistence and emotional reactions. Berkowitz (1989), Tan et al. (2023), and Green et al. (2026) illustrate the range of historical, developmental, and contemporary evidence.
Unresolved problems concern differences among experimental definitions, the generalizability of laboratory tasks, and the separation of subjective feeling from physiology and behavior. The presence of similar brain activations does not prove identical causes or provide a reliable emotion detector. An observed association between frustration tolerance and outcomes does not alone establish causal benefits of changing tolerance. Scientists need representative samples, convergent measures, longitudinal designs, and careful attention to culture and external barriers. Dugré and Potvin (2023) and Meindl et al. (2019) show how useful conclusions depend on the methods used.
Frequently Asked Questions
What causes frustration?
Frustration follows blocked progress toward a valued outcome, unexpectedly omitted reward, delay, or interference with an intended action. Its intensity depends on meaning, expectations, effort, and perceived control. The NIMH definition of frustrative nonreward covers one especially studied subset.
Is frustration an emotion or a feeling?
It is commonly understood as an unpleasant emotional state or affective response. A subjective feeling is one component of emotional experience. Researchers may distinguish feeling, affect, behavior, and physiology, while ordinary language uses the terms flexibly.
Why does frustration become anger?
Anger can become prominent when a person interprets a barrier as unfair, blameworthy, or deliberately imposed. Negative affect and learned associations may also shape reactions. This pathway is influenced by circumstances rather than inevitable. See Berkowitz (1989).
Does frustration lead to aggression?
Sometimes frustration increases the likelihood of aggressive inclinations under specific conditions. Many frustrated people instead use problem-solving, persistence, negotiation, humor, or disengagement. Aggression has additional antecedents. The review of human aggression covers these factors.
Can frustration motivate success?
It may contribute to renewed effort when an attainable goal is obstructed. Evidence from developmental tasks links some anger responses with persistence, while real-world outcomes depend on task demands, context, and other emotions. Tan and Smith (2018) provide a relevant example.
What is frustration tolerance?
It is a broad description of maintaining effective responses when obstacles are unpleasant. Different measures capture different aspects of the construct; one questionnaire or task cannot fully judge an individual. Meindl et al. (2019) studied one behavioral operationalization.
Is frustration a mental disorder?
No. Frustration is a common emotional state, not a separate DSM or ICD diagnosis. Persistent impairment or intense distress can justify evaluating the wider pattern without diagnosing from frustration alone.
What is frustrative nonreward?
It is a research construct describing reactions when an expected positive reward is withdrawn or prevented following effort. The NIMH RDoC framework places it among negative valence processes.
How is frustration measured?
Researchers combine self-report, reward-blockage tasks, observed behavior, and sometimes physiology or brain imaging. These methods address different dimensions and require appropriate validation. The 2024 neuroscience review summarizes many approaches.
What helps when a goal is repeatedly blocked?
Clarifying the goal and the actual obstacle helps determine whether to persist, change strategy, request support, revise an expectation, or address a structural barrier. People with serious distress, impairing reactions, or safety concerns may benefit from individualized help.
For further scientific context, see Types of Emotions: Basic, Complex, and Social Categories.
Related Articles
See What Are Emotions? Psychological Definition, Components, and Functions and Types of Emotions: Basic, Complex, and Social Categories for the broader scientific context. This article is dedicated to the distinctive experience of blocked goals.
References
Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2002). Human aggression. Annual Review of Psychology, 53, 27–51. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.53.100901.135231
Berkowitz, L. (1989). Frustration-aggression hypothesis: Examination and reformulation. Psychological Bulletin, 106(1), 59–73. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.106.1.59
Bettencourt, B. A., Talley, A., Benjamin, A. J., & Valentine, J. (2006). Personality and aggressive behavior under provoking and neutral conditions: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 132(5), 751–777. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.5.751
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (1990). Origins and functions of positive and negative affect: A control-process view. Psychological Review, 97(1), 19–35. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.97.1.19
Dugré, J. R., & Potvin, S. (2023). Neural bases of frustration-aggression theory: A multi-domain meta-analysis of functional neuroimaging studies. Journal of Affective Disorders, 331, 64–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2023.03.005
Green, T. A., Leibenluft, E., Li, Z., Ogawa, M., Sabariego, M., Mármol Contreras, Y., Bellaert, N., & Papini, M. R. (2026). Frustrative nonreward: A century of progress. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 185, 106651. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2026.106651
Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Progress on a cognitive-motivational-relational theory of emotion. American Psychologist, 46(8), 819–834. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.46.8.819
Meindl, P., Yu, A., Galla, B. M., Quirk, A., Haeck, C., Goyer, J. P., Lejuez, C. W., D'Mello, S. K., & Duckworth, A. L. (2019). A brief behavioral measure of frustration tolerance predicts academic achievement immediately and two years later. Emotion, 19(6), 1081–1092. https://doi.org/10.1037/emo0000492
National Institute of Mental Health. (n.d.). Definitions of the RDoC domains and constructs: Frustrative nonreward. https://www.nimh.nih.gov/research/research-funded-by-nimh/rdoc/definitions-of-the-rdoc-domains-and-constructs
Papini, M. R., Green, T. A., Mármol Contreras, Y., Torres, C., Ogawa, M., & Li, Z. (2024). Frustrative nonreward: Behavior, circuits, neurochemistry, and disorders. Journal of Neuroscience, 44(40), e1021242024. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1021-24.2024
Scherer, K. R. (2019). Studying appraisal-driven emotion processes: Taking stock and moving to the future. Cognition and Emotion, 33(1), 31–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2018.1510380
Tan, L., Shin, E., Page, K., & Smith, C. L. (2023). Changes in children's anger, sadness, and persistence across blocked goals: Implications for self-regulation. Child Development, 94(2), 411–423. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13868
Tan, L., & Smith, C. L. (2018). Function of child anger and sadness in response to a blocked goal. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 170, 190–196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2018.01.005