Norms for Five Parameters of Anger: How Do Incarcerated Adults Differ From the Community?

Abstract

The present study generated normative data for anger in a forensic sample in comparison to a non-forensic sample. The former sample comprised 125 incarcerated adults from an adult detention center in a large metropolitan city and the latter consisted of 182 adult patrons of a public library within the same city. Anger was assessed using the Anger Parameters Scale which taps into five parameters: Frequency, Duration, Intensity, Latency, and Threshold. Significant differences were found between both samples on three of the five parameters: incarcerated individuals experienced anger more frequently, more intensely, and for longer periods of time than participants within the non-forensic sample. These findings indicate that certain specific aspects of anger experience require greater clinical attention when treating detainees. The modest but nonsignificant gender differences across these five parameters is consistent with previous research, thus making it appropriate for treatment to target the same parameters of anger in male and female detainees.

Anger parameters in parolees undergoing psychoeducation: Temporal stability, social desirability bias, and comparison with non‐offenders

“…The offender sample consisted of 64 men convicted of violent crimes and recently released on parole in San Antonio, a densely urban area with a population of mixed socio‐economic status. The comparison group comprised 64 age‐matched volunteers previously recruited at several libraries in the same San Antonio community and surveyed as part of a separate study (Fernandez et al, ).…”

“…The Anger Parameters Scale (APS; Fernandez et al, , ) was used to assess five parameters of anger: (1) frequency, which measures how often someone experiences anger (high vs low); (2) duration, which taps into how long anger persists (short vs long); (3) intensity, referring to the magnitude at which anger is experienced (weak vs strong); (4) latency, which is the dimension that measures how quickly anger arises after the anger‐provoking stimulus (slow vs fast); and (5) threshold, which pertains to how sensitive an individual is to anger‐provoking stimuli (insensitive vs sensitive). The five parameters of the APS are each measured by six items/statements, and participants were asked to rate how true each statement is for them on a 0 (absolutely false) to 4 (absolutely true) rating scale; fractional responses are permitted.…”

“…The higher the scores, the more that parameter tends towards maladaptiveness. The APS has been psychometrically evaluated and found to have factorial validity, temporal stability and internal consistency with Cronbach's alpha as follows: 0.85 for frequency, 0.90 for duration, 0.62 for intensity, 0.88 for latency and 0.74 for threshold (Fernandez et al, , ; Henderson, ).…”

“…In a recent attempt to explore multidimensional aspects of anger among incarcerated adults from an adult detention centre in a large metropolitan city in the USA, inmates were assessed not only on the basis of frequency and intensity of anger‐related behaviours (as with the STAXI‐2) but also on five anger parameters: frequency, duration, intensity, latency and threshold (Fernandez et al, ). Compared to an adult community sample, the inmates reported experiencing anger more often, more intensely and for longer periods of time.…”

Anger and Emotion Regulation Associated With Borderline and Antisocial Personality Features Within a Correctional Sample

“…Problematic anger is associated with poorer treatment response, quality of life, and greater symptom severity (Cassiello-Robbins & Barlow, 2016). Inmates report more intense, frequent, and prolonged anger than nonincarcerated samples (Fernandez et al, 2014) and in isolation, anger is associated with a variety of negative outcomes among forensic populations, including recidivism (Ç orapçıoglu & Erdogan, 2004;Walters, 2007). Emotion regulation refers to the ability to influence the quality, intensity, and duration of an emotional response (Gross, 1998) in pursuit of one's goals (Gratz & Roemer, 2004).…”