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 aim
from the joke discussed in attributive reaction. It lacks hostility.
Its aim is friendliness, the theme is contrary to the situation giving
rise to anger and serves to distract the attention from the emotion.