The objectives of the study were: (1) To study the reaction pattern of frustration (all the three reactions) of deprived and non-deprived students. (2) To study the difference in the reaction pattern of frustration (all the three reactions) of deprived and non-deprived students. (3) To study the direction of aggression of frustration (all the three directions) of deprived and non-deprived students. (4) To study the difference in direction of aggression of frustration (all the three directions) of deprived and non-deprived students. (5) To study the self-actualization of deprived and non-deprived students. (6) To study the difference in self-actualization of deprived and non-deprived students. (7) To study the reaction pattern of frustration (all the three reactions) of high self-actualized and low self-actualized deprived and non-deprived students separately. (8) To study the difference in the reaction pattern of frustration (all the three reactions) of high self-actualized and low self-actualized deprived and non-deprived students separately. (9) To study the direction of aggression of frustration (all the three directions) of high self-actualized and low self-actualized deprived and non-deprived students separately. (10) To study the difference in direction of aggression of frustration (all the three directions) of high self-actualized and low self-actualized deprived and non-deprived students separately. (11) To study the achievement of deprived and non-deprived students. (12) To study the difference in the achievement of deprived and non-deprived students separately. (13) To study the reaction pattern of frustration (all the three reactions) of high achieving and low achieving deprived and non-deprived students separately. (14) To study the difference in the reaction pattern of frustration (all the three reactions) of high achieving and low achieving deprived and non-deprived students separately. (15) To study the directions of aggression of frustration (all the three directions) of high achieving and low achieving deprived and non-deprived students separately. (16) To study the difference in the direction of aggression of frustration (all the three directions) of high achieving and low achieving deprived and non-deprived students separately.

The hypotheses of the study were: (1) There will be significant difference in the reaction pattern of frustration (all the three reaction) of deprived and non-deprived students. (2) There will be significant difference in the direction of aggression of frustration (all the three direction) of deprived and non-deprived students. (3) There will be significant difference in the self -actualization of deprived and non-deprived students. (4) There will be significant difference in the reaction pattern of frustration (all the three direction) of high self-actualized and low self-actualized deprived and non-deprived students separately. (5) There will be significant difference in the direction of aggression of frustration (all the three directions) of high self-actualized and low self-actualized deprived and non-deprived students separately. (6) There will be significant difference in achievement of deprived and non-deprived students. (7) There will be significant difference in the reaction pattern of frustration (all the three reactions) of high achieving and low achieving deprived and non-deprived students separately. (8) There will be significant difference in the reaction pattern of frustration (all the three reactions) of high achieving and low achieving deprived and non-deprived students separately. (9) There will be significant difference in the direction of aggression of frustration (all the three directions) of high achieving and low achieving deprived and non-deprived students separately. 

Sample comprised 400 students of class XI and XII of Agra city. The sample was selected with the help of purposive sampling technique. 

Tools used were- Indian adaptation of the Rosinweed Picture Frustration Study (Adult form) by Udai Pareek, Prolonged Deprivation Scale by Girishwar Mishra and L.D. Tripathi, and Self Actualization Inventory (SEAI) by K.N. Sharma. 

For academic achievement, class X marks were taken. Data were analyzed with the help of mean, SD, and critical ratio. 

The findings of the study were: (1) With regard to reaction pattern to frustration, all deprived students irrespective of gender bias were more ego-defensive when placed in situation of frustration as compared to their non-deprived counter parts. They showed lower tendency of obstacle dominance as compared to the non-deprived group. (2) Except for the girls of deprived group, students in general and boys in particular showed a higher tendency towards the need persistence reaction pattern to frustration. (3) Deprived students in general were more extra-punitive, intropunitive and impunitive in comparison to the non-deprived students. (4) The deprived boys as compared to their non-deprived counterparts were higher in the extra-punitive direction of aggression and lower in the intropunitive and impunitive direction of aggression. (5) The girls of the deprived group were found to be more intropunitive and impunitive in their direction of aggression and less extra-punitive. However the difference in all the cases was found to be insignificant. (6) The students of the non-deprived group irrespective of the gender bias were more self-actualized than students of the deprived group. The difference in self-actualization of deprived and non-deprived girls as well as boys was significant separately. (7) The high self-actualized deprived boys were higher on OD and NP but lower on ED reaction pattern in compared to their counter parts. (8) The high self- actualized deprived girls were less obstacle dominant, ego defensive and need persistence in their reaction pattern to frustration as compared to the low self-actualized deprived girls. (9) The high self-actualized non-deprived students irrespective of gender bias were more ego defensive in their reaction to frustration as compared to the low self-actualized non-deprived students. (10) The high self-actualized non-deprived boys and girls separately were more obstacles dominant and ego-defensive than lower self-actualized counter parts. (11) High self-actualized deprived students irrespective of gender bias were more extra-punitive and less impunitive than the low self-actualized deprived students. In case of general and boys in particular were more intra-punitive in direction of aggression than the low self-actualized counterparts. (12) The high self-actualized non-deprived students in general were more extra-punitive and intropunitive than the low self-actualized students in general. (13) The students of non-deprived group irrespective of gender bias were high achievers. The difference in achievement in every group was found to be significant. (14) The high achieving deprived students in general were more obstacle dominant, while the high achieving deprived boys and girls separately were fewer obstacles dominant and ego-defensive in reaction to frustration than their low achieving deprived counter parts. (15) The high achieving deprived students in general were fewer obstacles dominant and ego-defensive in reaction to frustration than their low achieving deprived counter parts. (16) The high achieving non-deprived students perspective of gender bias were less impunitive in direction of aggression than the low achieving counterpart. (17) In case of high achieving non-deprived girls & boys, separately with comparison to their non deprived achieving counterparts was insignificantly differ. (18) High self-actualized deprived students were more OD and NP in reaction to frustration than the high self-actualized non-deprived students. The high self-actualized deprived students in general as well as boys and girls were less ego defensive than their non-deprived counterparts. (19) The low self-actualized deprived boys were more ego-defensive and need persuasive in reaction to frustration than the low self-actualized non-deprived boys but they were less-obstacle dominant in reaction to frustration. The less self-actualized deprived girls were more obstacle dominant and ego defensive but less NP in reaction to frustration than their low self-actualized non-deprived counterparts. (20) The high self-actualized deprived students irrespective of gender bias were more extra-punitive (E) and less impunitive (M) in direction of aggression than the high self-actualized non-deprived students. The high self-actualized deprived boys and girls were more intra-punitive in direction of aggression than the high self-actualized non-deprived counterparts. (21) The low self-actualized deprived students irrespective of gender bias were more impunitive than the low self-actualized non-deprived students in direction of aggression. In case of boys, they were more extra-punitive and less intropunitive while girls were less extra-punitive and more intropunitive in direction of aggression than their non-deprived counter-parts. (22) The low achieving deprived boys were more OD than the low achieving non-deprived boys while the low-achieving deprived girls were fewer obstacles dominant. In case of boys of same group, they were more ego defensive while girls were less ego defensive. (23) The high achieving deprived boys and girls were less extra-punitive and more impunitive in direction of aggression as compared to the high achieving non-deprived boys and girls. The boys of same group were less intropunitive while the girls were intropunitive in direction to frustration than the high achieving non-deprived counterparts.