昭和十年到十三年，台北帝大心理學教室助手藤澤茽以台灣原住民為對象，進行一個憤怒的社會心理學實驗。其實驗假設認為原住民心理「孩童似的」且「感情中心」，容易出現憤怒的爆發。然而藤澤茽最終未能證明其假設，所有接受實驗的原住民都未出現憤怒的發作。 以藤澤茽就此實驗發表的論文與雜記為對象，本文將其放在殖民脈絡中予以批判性的檢視。據此論證心理學者對於原住民心理的研究與論述，並不只是一種知識興趣，同時也是殖民政治的一環。就藤澤茽的實驗而言，其選擇憤怒為研究對象，反映出殖民者對於原住民武力反抗的戒懼與解釋。強制性的實驗參與、實驗者作為殖民權力象徵的在場、以及實驗本身所設計的挫折情境等，則使整個實驗體現了殖民權力的運作。至於藤澤茽對於實驗結果的詮釋，更反映出一種普遍見於殖民「人的科學」研究中的忽略，使研究者無法正視殖民權力才是形塑被殖民者主體的主要力量，而自己同時作為研究者與殖民者的在場，則決定了被實驗者的行動。 此外，藉由藤澤茽所留下來的原始紀錄，我們還可將被實驗者的行動詮釋為憤怒的轉化，而可看到被殖民者在與殖民者的對峙中所潛藏的族群認同。在宣稱成功的同化政策下，其實隱藏著一個壓抑、偽裝的憤怒自我。

From 1935 to 1938, Fujisawa Shigeru, then an assistant at the Institute of Psychology, Imperial University of Taihoku, Formosa, conducted an experiment on "anger" in various Taiwn aborigine tribes. Fujisawa hoped the experiment, originally designed by T. Dembo, would prove a theory about the emotional and behavioral characteristics of aborigines, namely that aborigines were childish, emotional, and prone to outburst of anger. However, he failed to prove this hypothesis. This article offers a critical review of the experiment. The hypothesis portraying Taiwan aborigines as childish and emotional obviously reflected the prevailing racial prejudices of the day. Of all the variety of emotions, Fujisawa's choice to research anger among aboriginals may also have reflected the fears of colonizers about Taiwan aborigines after the bloody Musha rebellion of 1930. By demonstrating their inclination to outbursts of anger, the aborigines would be condemned as at least partially responsible for the rebellion. However, in the experiement aborigines did not lose their tempers when faced with the frustrating predicament designed to make them angry. Taiwan aborigines seemed even less prone to anger than those highly civilized scholars who became furious in Dembo's original experiment. I suggest that the absence of anger was a consequence of colonial suppression--we need to remember the colonial domination that was indispensable to the proceeding of the experiment, as seen in the presence of the colonial experimenter as both an observer and a symbol of colonial power. As to Fujisawa's interpretation of his findings, which correlated the difference between the actions of various tribes in the experiment with their differential motivation and efforts at civilization and 'Japanization', as was commonly the case, he neglected the effects of colonization upon the subject in the colonial "human sciences." Yet in spite of the absence of tantrums, some indications of anger can be discerned in Fujisawa's original records. Anger thus was not absent but was suppressed, transformed or disguised. This demonstrates the potential ethnic identity of the colonized as opposed to the colonizers, and so we cannot sustain the view that assimilationist policies put in place after the Msuha rebellion were successful.