A Study of The Reactions to the September 11 Terrorist Attack
Kathryn K
North High School, Sheboygan WI
Abstract: 310 high school students were surveyed in a cross-sectional
study of one Mid-Western high school. They were questioned regarding
the September 11 terrorist attack on America. The survey consisted
of a series of questions in which they had to rate how
much stress the attack put on their lives and what would be the
best way for the United States to respond (Appendix A: questionnaire).
The intent of the experiment was to measure student stress responses
to find if there is a correlation between how stressed the subjects
were by the attack and how violent their response is. Results
show there was no correlation between stress and for a subject
to prefer a violent American response. There is a positive correlation
between stress and how emotionally distraught the subject's were,
how emotionally affected the subject's family was, concentration
in school, and how emotionally affected the subjects believed
they would be in the future. There is also a correlation between
how emotionally distraught the subjects were during the attack
and their concentration in school, how emotionally affected the
subjects' families were and their concentration in school, and
how appropriate a U.S. military attack is and finding those responsible
and killing them.
Introduction
Violent acts have always caused stress among those who are
involved in them. The September 11 terrorist attack on the World
Trade Center offers a glimpse into how a violent attack has affected
adolescent stress. Many studies have been done on recent war and
the psychological affects it has on those involved. One such study,
done by Ingleby, Hern, and Angel, analyzed Bosnian refugee children
(2001). They revealed the pattern between war stress and current
psychological problems. They found that when children experienced
a lot of stress, but were able to talk about it, their experiences
seemed to exacerbate their negative effects. Quota, El-Sarrah,
and Punamaiki did an experiment on Palestinian children that focused
on mental flexibility (2001). They found that the more intelligent
the children were, and the less exposed they were to traumatic
events, the higher mental flexibility. Dyregrov et. Al. Did a
study on Rwandan children and adolescents ages 8-19 that studied
their reactions to their war experiences (2000). The study found
that reactions were associated with loss, violence exposure, and
feeling their life was in danger. Dyrgenov, Stuvland, and Kuterovac
conducted a study in 1994 on the amount of stress exposure and
reactions among Croatian war refugees. They found that the more
exposed the children were particularly girls, the more distressed
they were. They were also more prone to be disturbed by their
memories. Another study, conducted by Dowdall, studied the emotional
reactions of Vietnam veterans and the cueing of traumatic memories
(2000). The results suggested a mechanism through which anger
and aggression may arise. Hutchinson and Calvert did a previous
study that. They investigated if there is a relationship between
levels of combat and how they perceive violence (1990). The results
showed that the levels of combat didn't have anything to do with
violent behavior. We took these results and went a step further.
We wanted to see if the stress put under non-combatants in an
undeclared "war" affected how violent their attitudes
were. Violent behavior is not affected by stress.
Previous studies of stressful disasters shed some light on possible
adolescent reactions. Pfefferbaum and others did a study on the
symptomatology of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder on sixth graders
who live within 100 miles of the Oklahoma City bombing (2000).
The results found that media exposure and indirect interpersonal
exposure were significant predictors of symptomatology. Keitel
and Kopala did a study in 1998 which found that children go through
lengthier and more severe PTSD if the events are caused by other
human beings, rather than by nature. Another previous study done
by Kowalski and Schwarz studied the reluctance of subjects exposed
to man-made disaster to use mental health services (1992). They
found that follow up non-participants reported more PTSD symptoms,
such as avoidance, recall of life threat during the event, feeling
depressed, and an increase in positivity toward victims but not
about their work or mental health professionals. Yet all the recent
terror activity from the Middle East, Northern Ireland, Africa,
and now North America, reactions to terror may not necessarily
be negative (Comninos, 2001). It may be how the individual chooses
to look at the terror and identify their role in response to it.
That is where this study proceeds. Do adolescents who are physically
and may be psychologically removed from the attacks, identify
and feel stress from them?
Experiment
I was interested in knowing how the attack on America had affected
my peers. I developed a survey that consisted of 15 questions
(see Appendix A). The questions identified where the subjects
were and what they were doing during the attack. The survey asked
a series of questions that I used to determine the subject's level
of stress and another series of questions that I used to determine
how violent the subjects' responses were.
The experimental question attempted to answer was: does the stress
that a terrorism act puts on high school student effect how violent
they wish to retaliate? The null hypothesis would be that everyone
would want to retaliate in the exact same way, no matter how much
stress they were put under. The working hypothesis is that the
more stressed out the subjects rated themselves, the harsher they
would want to punish the terrorists. To perfectly operationalize
the hypothesis I would have liked to measure the skin responses
to determine their stress levels. I would also have liked to take
a bigger sample from subjects all around the country and of all
age group. Due to time constraints I was unable to do this. In
this study the independent variable is stress and the dependent
variable is the subject's desire for a violent American response.
Methods/Procedure
The first step in the experiment was to develop a survey and
distribute it to as many students as possible. The World Trade
Center and the Pentagon were attacked on Monday September 11,
and I wrote my survey and began distributing it on Monday September
17. I handed the surveys out to 6 classes during third hour on
September 18, 19, and 20,for a total of 310 students (a cross
section of freshmen through senior classes). After that I began
calculating the mean, median and mode for every question I asked,
and the correlation coefficients between all question question
pairs. I also graphed x-y scatter plots of the questions with
higher correlation's. I continued by making a frequency graph
of the questions that focused on stress and the questions that
focused on violence. The experimental group was a random sample
of 310 North High students, ages 15-18. There was no control group.
There were several confounding variables in this experiment.
The first confounding variable was that the subjects could take
the survey in a different environment and at a different time
of day. To control this variable I would have the subjects surveyed
during their third hour classes. The second confounding variable
was we didn't know when America would respond so we had a very
short amount of time to get our results. To eliminate this variable
I finished surveying the students in three days. The third confounding
variable is that the students felt like they were being rushed
because it was right in the middle of class. To eliminate this
variable I instructed the students to take a comfortable amount
of time and answer the questions honestly and thoroughly.
Results
Totals q.1 q.2 q.3 q.4 q.5 q.6 q.7 q.
8 q.9 q.10 q.11 q.12 q.13
mean 4.7 6.2 6.2 4 4.5 3.6 4.2 5.4 5.3
5.2 3.3 2.1 1.5
median 5 6 6 4 5 4 4 6 6
6 3 1 1
mode 5 7 7 3 5 3 4 7 7
7 1 1 1
q1(a) q2 (b) q3 (c) q4 (d) q5 (e) q6 (f) q7 (g) q8 (h) q9 (i)
q10 (j) q11 (k) q12 (l) q13 (m)
question 1(a) 0.27 0.26 0.64 0.49 0.54 0.43 0.09 0.15 -0.02 0.04
-0.08 -0.06
question 2 (b) 0.34 0.25 0.23 0.14 0.29 0.01 0.04 0.11 0.08 0
0.06
question 3 (c) 0.3 0.26 0.25 0.18 0.04 0.08 0.07 0.03 -0.09
-0.08
question 4 (d) 0.63 0.65 0.54 0.04 0.11 0.02 0.04 -0.04 -0.04
question 5 (e) 0.5 0.45 0.04 0.05 0.03 0.04 0.03 0.05
question 6 (f) 0.48 0.11 0.18 0.01 0.1 0.02 0
question 7 (g) 0.05 0.12 0 0.12 0.09 -0.03
question 8 (h) 0.6 -0.14 0.1 -0.19 -0.28
question 9 (i) -0.21 -0.23 -0.13 -0.28
question 10 (j) 0.43 0.25 0.11
quesion 11 (k) 0.46 0.16
question 12 (l) 0.32
question 13 (m)
The graph below shows that the subjects experienced moderate to high levels of stress,
regardless of being connected to the World Trade Center.
I went deeper and studied the frequency of 1's, 5's, 6's, and
7's. I didn't do 2's, 3's, or 4's because they seemed unimportant.
The graph below shows that the less violent America's response would be, the more
inappropriate the response would be. It shows that if America's response is violent, it is
appropriate.
The graph below shows that the more violent America's response is to the attack, the more somewhat appropriate the response is.
The graph above show that the more violent America's response is to the attack, the more very
appropriate the response is.
The graph above shows that the more violent America's response to the attack is, the more very appropriate the response is. The graph below shows that there is a positive correlation (.64) between question number 1-how emotionally distraught were you during the attack?-and question number 4-how much stress has this put on you?
The graph below shows that there is a weak positive correlation (.65) between questions number 4-how much stress has this attack personally put on you-and question number 6-how has this affected your concentration in school?
The graph below shows that there is a positive correlation (.5) between question 5-how has this
emotionally effected your family and other's that are close to you? - and question number 6-how
has this effected your concentration in school?
The graph below shows that there is a weak positive correlation (.63) between question 4-how much stress has this put on you?- and question number 5- how has this emotionally effected your family and others that are close to you?
The graph below shows a weak positive correlation (.54) between question 1-how emotionally distraught were you during the attack?- and question 6-how has this effected your concentration in school?
The graph below shows that there is a weak positive correlation (.54) between questions 4-how
much stress has this put on you?-and question 7-how likely will this emotionally effect you in
the future?
The graph below shows that there is a weak positive correlation
(.6) between question 8-how
appropriate is a U.S. military attack and question 9-how appropriate
is it to find those responsible to kill them
Discussion
The results show that the subjects were somewhat distraught
during the attack (question number 1 with a mean of 4.7, a median
of 5, and a mode of 5); (question number 2 with a mean of 6.2,
median 6, and mode 7) the attack greatly affected America; and
(question number 3 with a mean 6.2, median 6, mode 7) the attack
was terrible for humanity.
Personally the subjects were only moderately stressed out by the
attack (question number 4 with a mean of 4, median 4,and mode
3); the subjects family and friends were only moderately affected
emotionally (question number 5 with a mean of 4.5, median 5, and
mode 5); and yet the subjects believed their families would be
somewhat emotionally affected in the future (question 7 with a
mean of 4.2, median 4, and mode 4. Question number 6 (with a mean
of 3.6, median 4 and mode 3), shows that the subject's concentration
in school was somewhat affected.
The reason the subjects were not highly stressed out or greatly
emotionally affected is because they don't live close to New York
and the overwhelming majority did not know anyone who was killed
(Pfefferbaum, 2ooo). However they did recognize that many Americans
were affected greatly by the attack due to media exposure, as
shown by the results of question 2 (Dyrgenov, Stuvlnd, Kuterovac,1994).
The subjects believed a U.S. military attack to be very appropriate
(Question number eight mean 5.4, median 6, mode 7); it is very
appropriate to find those responsible and kill them (question
9 mean 5.3, median 6, mode 7); and it is very appropriate to find
those responsible and put them on trial (question 10 mean 5.2,
median 6, mode 7).
Conversely, the subjects found it inappropriate to find those
responsible and put them on trial (question 11 with a mean of
3.3, median 3 and mode 1); to express how upset the U.S. is and
ask them not to do it again (question number 12 with a mean of
2.1, median 1 and mode 1) ; and forgive those responsible and
go on as if nothing had happened (question number 13 with a mean
of 1.5, median 1, and mode 1).
I stumbled upon many correlations, but found nothing to support
my hypothesis that the more stress a student felt, the more violent
response she/he would prefer (Hutchinson and Calvert,1990). There
were correlation's between: 1) how emotionally distraught the
subject was during the attack and how much stress the subject
was put under; 2) concentration in school and how emotionally
distraught the subject was, 3) stress and how emotionally effected
the subject's family was, 4) stress and the subject's concentration
in school,5) stress and how emotionally affected the subject will
be in the future, 6) concentration in school and how emotionally
effected the subject's family was, and 7) how appropriate a U.S.
military attack is and how appropriate it is to find those responsible
and kill them. The results confirm earlier studies which show
that stress was a major link in my experiment. If the attack placed
a lot of stress on the subject, it effected all aspects of the
subject's life (Dyrgenov, Stvland, Kuterovac,1994).
The frequency graph of the stress questions was statistically
significant because the bell curve showed that the subject's experienced
moderate to high levels of stress regardless if they were connected
to the World Trade Center and the Pentagon(Pfefferbaum, 2000).
The frequency graphs of violence questions was statistically
significant because they showed that the more violent America's
response, the better. Only 72 responses of all the stress questions
were 1's (less violent), while there were 1271 responses were
either a 5, 6, or 7(more violent).
The experiment denied the hypothesis. Stress didn't affect violent
resposnses which corresponds to the results found by Hutchinson
and Calvert,1990. If I were to change the hypothesis I would say
that stress is caused by how affected the subject and the subject's
family were. I would also say that the more stressed the subject
is, the more he/she's performance in school is affected. I think
traumatic events would cause the subject's grades to drop.
Future replication would be difficult because terrorist attacks
on America are infrequent. Yet if something like this did happen
again, it would be extremely important to replicate and study
the psychological affects of terror on Americans. I would further
study to see if media exposure would effect the subject's reaction
to the attack. If I would study this specific attack again, I
would also do a follow up experiment to see if the anthrax situation
had an affect on the subject's answers, and to see if they would
reaffirm their violent beliefs. I would also repeat the survey
6 months later to see if time has affected violent responses.
I believe this experiment has shown how stressful events are
important for continual study and understanding.
Works Cited Page
Angel, Hern, Ingleby (2001) Effects of war and organized
violence on children: A study
of Bosnian refugees in Swenden. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry
(vol 71)(pp. 4-15).
Brandt, Maynard, McDonald, Meierhoefer, Miller, Pffeferbaum,
Rainwater, Seale (2000)
Posttraumatic stress two years after Oklahoma City bombing
in youths
Geographically distant from the explosion. Psychiatry: Interpersonal
and
Biological Processes vol 63 pp.358-370.
Calvert, Hutchinson (1990) Vietnam veteran levels of combat:
related to later violence?
Journal of posttraumatic stress vol 3 pp. 103-113.
Comninos (October 12, 2001) Reactions to terror take positive,
negative forms. Reuters
Health Headlines. http://dailynews.yahoo.com/htx/nm/20011012/hl/terror-1.html
Dowdall (2000) The impact of trauma and memory activation
on fear, anger, and
perceived emotional control among Vietnam veterans with combat-related
posttraumatic stress disorder. Dissertation Abstracts International:
section b: The Sciences and Engineering. vol 60 8-B.
Dyregrov, Kuterovac, Stuvland (1994) Children in war: A
silent majority under stress.
British Journal of Medical Psychology. vol. 67 pp. 363-375.
Dyregrov, Gupta, Gjestad, Mukanoheli (2000) Trauma Exposure
and Psychological
Reactions to Genocide Among Rwandan Children. Journal of
Traumatic Stress.
vol 13 pp. 3-21.
El-Sarraj, Punamaeki, Quota (2001) Mental Flexibilty as
Resiliency Factor Among
Children Exposed to Political Violence. International Journal
of Psychology.
vol. 36 pp. 1-7.
Keitel, Kopala (1998) Groups for Traumatic Stress Disorders.
Handbook of Group
Intervention for Children and Families pp. 236-267.
Kowalski, Schwarz (1992) Malignant Memories: Reluctance
to Utilize Mental Health
Services After a Disaster. Journal of Nervous and Mental
Disease vol 180
pp. 767-772.