We used three studies to examine the validity of hostility scores from the Children's Form of the Picture-Frustration (P-F) Study in the context of Dodge's (1986) social information-processing model of aggression. Dodge's theory states that frustration results in retaliatory aggression only if the frustrated individual attributes hostile intent to the frustrator. Further, differences between aggressive and nonaggressive children in retaliatory aggression are more likely when the frustrator's intent is ambiguous than when the frustrator's intent is clear. In Study 1, items on the Children's P-F Study were rated by 237 children according to how mean they believed the frustrator in each item was. Results showed that items varied significantly in the amount of hostility portrayed. On the basis of these ratings, items were divided into those in which the intent was hostile, nonhostile, or ambiguous. In Studies 2 and 3, we tested Dodge's theory that differences between aggressive and nonaggressive children would be revealed on those items in which the frustrator's intention is ambiguous. In both studies, teacher's ratings of children's retaliatory aggression correlated significantly with the scale comprised of the ambiguous items but not with the scales comprised of the hostile or nonhostile items. The results provide further support to Dodge's theory of aggression and to the use of the Children's P-F Study within a social-cognitive perspective.

One purpose of this study was to examine the validity of the Make A Picture Story (MAPS) for assessment of children's fantasies. Children from a university laboratory school who were exhibiting good adjustment comprised our first sample. The second sample was composed of children from special education classes who were experiencing behavioral and/or academic difficulties. Children told stories to seven MAPS backgrounds. Stories created by special education children contained more dysphoric and fanciful fantasies than did nonproblem children's stories. Behavior disordered children had more aggressive fantasies in their stories than did nonproblem and learning disabled children. Another purpose of this study was to provide norms for children's choice of figures, number of figures used, moving and adding figures, story length, and choice of backgrounds. These norms should facilitate clinicians' interpretations of children's responses to the MAPS.