{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025096525096525095, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.136094674556213, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Escalation in response to persistent annoyance: groups versus individuals and gender effects.

Reactions to persistent annoyance were studied with a new laboratory method. A standard escalation sequence was found, which involved the following order of tactics: requests for termination of the annoyance, impatient demands, complaints, angry statements, threats, harassment, and abuse. The further along a tactic was in this sequence, the fewer the people who used it. This pattern of results provided a good fit to a cascading Guttman scale, suggesting the existence of a standard "try-try-again" escalation script. Problem solving and appeals to a third party were intermediate in the escalation sequence but did not appear to be part of the standard script. Groups used more escalated tactics than individuals, apparently because of their greater activity level. Women used more escalated tactics than men, at least in part because of greater anger at being treated unfairly. Men were the targets of more escalated tactics than women.