Anger assessment with the STAXI-CA: psychometric properties of a new instrument for children and adolescents

Transcription

1 Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) Anger assessment with the STAXI-CA: psychometric properties of a new instrument for children and adolescents Victoria del Barrio a, *, Anton Aluja b, Charles Spielberger c a Department of Personality, Faculty of Psychology, National University of Distance Education, Madrid, Spain b Department of Psychology, Universitat de Lleida, Catalunya, Spain c Department of Psychology, South Florida University, Tampa, USA Received 10 February 2003; received in revised form 1 July 2003; accepted 24 August 2003 Available online 3 December 2003 Abstract A Spanish adaptation of the State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory for children and adolescent population, was derived from the original English adult inventory to assess the experience, expression and control of anger in Spanish children and adolescents (STAXI; Spielberger, 1988). A sample of 2191 subjects, 940 female and 1251 male, between 7 and 17 years old from several urban settings participated in the study. Items were selected and analysed through exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, and a 32-item questionnaire in 4 dimensions and eight 4-item facets was obtained: Anger-State (Verbal and Physical Anger, Anger Feelings), Anger-Trait (Anger Temperament, Anger Reactions), Anger-Expression (Anger-Expression/In, Anger-Expression/Out), and Anger-Control (Anger-Control/In, Anger-Control/Out). The factor structure was fairly robust, both for boys and girls, while internal consistency and test retest reliability was acceptable, except for Anger-Expression facets. Convergent and discriminant validity was studied in the adolescent subgroup in regard to measures of aggressiveness, sociability and sensation-seeking personality, as well as three and five factor personality models previously validated in the same cultural context. Ó 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Keywords: STAXI; Anger; Aggressiveness; PEN model; Five factor model; Socialisation 1. Introduction According to the Anger-Hostility-Aggression model (AHA), anger is a basic emotion identified in a primary stage of hostility and aggression development (Spielberger, Jacobs, Russell, & Crane, * Corresponding author. Fax: address: vbarrio@psi.uned.es (V. del Barrio) /$ - see front matter Ó 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi: /j.paid

2 228 V. del Barrio et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) ). The same emotions have been observed for children, although their emotional states tend to be more frequent, intense and diverse, given their lower cognitive maturation. Since children s behaviour, especially before the age of 7, essentially regulate their emotions (del Barrio, 2002) it is specially important to understand emotions in these age levels. Considering the seriousness of some violent actions performed by children in different cultures, child aggression has become a relevant problem to solve (Tremblay, 2000). Anger is an internal state that regulates a sort of interaction with the environment. It may be a transitory and reactive form related with the present situation, Anger-State, or a disposition that develops into frequent and intense emotion, or Anger-Trait. This distinction has been the subject of many yearsõ research, initially by Cattell (1965), and subsequently being developed by Spielberger (1980). Emotional behaviours in children have been classified as both internalised and externalised, where Anger may have both connotations (Achenbach & Edelbrock, 1978; Peterson, 1961). At a higher intensity, Anger may cause maladjustment or behaviour disorders. Anger may also be tuned both internally or externally (Averill, 1982). Although the verbal manifestation of Anger appears around the age of three, it is only from 7 years old onwards that it can be assessed by self-reports, given that at this age children are able to properly discriminate this emotion if questions are formulated in short and plain sentences (del Barrio, 2002). The evaluation of anger through selfreported questionnaires provides data from a lot of subjects, allowing group comparison and the revalidation of data in regard to peer-ratings or other instruments that tap similar constructs. The evaluation of Anger in adults with self-reported questionnaires began in the 1970s with the Anger Self Report (ASR; Zelin, Adler, & Myerson, 1972). Subsequently, Novaco (1975) constructed the Anger Inventory, and Spielberger elaborated the State-Trait Anger Scale (STAS, 1980). In this instrument, Anger is assessed through two distinct dimensions: Anger-State and Anger-Trait. Also, the Anger Expression Scale (AX; Spielberger et al., 1985), adds the assessment of different forms of Anger control. In the State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory, both Anger- State and Anger-Trait are gathered in one scale (STAXI; Spielberger, 1988), and afterwards, the STAXI-2 was increased by 9 items from the 47-item form of the STAXI (Spielberger, 1999). The Spanish form of the STAXI-2 has recently been published (Miguel-Tobal, Casado, Cano-Vindel, & Spielberger, 2001). This instrument entails 6 dimensions, 5 facets and 1 Anger index. In the STAXI-2, three of the five original STAXI scales remain the same: Trait Anger (T-Ang), Anger Expression-Out (AX-O), and Anger Expression-In (AX-I). The two T-Ang subscales, Angry Temperament (T-Ang/T) and Angry Reaction (T-Ang/R) are also unchanged. The evaluation of Anger in children has been much less developed. The first attempt was the Paediatric Anger Expression Scale, with 10 items and 2 factors, externalised and internalised Anger (PAES; Jacobs & Blumer, 1985). Then, Jacobs, Phelps, and Rohrs (1989) added 5 items to PAES, plus the Coping Skills Inventory (CSI; Tobin, Holroyd, & Reynolds, 1984). There are four factors in this instrument: Anger-External, Anger-Control, Reflection on Anger, and Anger Removal. Considering the importance of child emotions and anger as an outstanding element in the prediction and control of childhood socialisation behaviours, the necessity of an Anger assessment instrument adapted for children and adolescents, from 7 to 17 years old, would appear to be fully justified. The aim of this work was to elaborate a Spanish adaptation of the STAXI-2 for children and adolescents. The instrument was developed with the following considerations in mind: (a) to be understandable for both Spanish and Latin-American children over the age of 7; (b) to be easily

3 V. del Barrio et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) completed; and (c) to have sound psychometric properties for both clinical and research applications with children and adolescents in Spanish and Latin-American contexts. 2. Method 2.1. Subjects A sample of 2191 subjects living in urban contexts with a mean age of year old (SD: 2.09), took part in this study. Of these, 1251 were boys (mean age: 12.84, SD: 2.12) and 940 were girls (mean age: 12.95, SD: 2.05). Subjects come from general population and all of them belong to their normal school levels. Also, a subgroup of 580 subjects (310 boys [mean age: 13.52, SD: 1.61]; and 270 girls [mean age: 13.57, SD: 1.71]) completed the SSS-J and EPQ-J; and a subgroup of 311 subjects (162 boys [mean age: 13.75, SD: 0.76]; and 149 girls [mean age: 13.74, SD: 0.77]) completed the BAS-3 and the BFQ. A small subgroup performed a test retest with a two-week interval. All subjects attended school and volunteered anonymously for this study. The SES of the sample has a normal distribution according to HollingsheadÕ index (Hollingshead, 1975) Procedure Permission for the study project was obtained from school authorities and Alumni Parents Associations. Only subjects who agreed to participate in the study were assessed. Questionnaires were completed in the classroom with the assistance of the evaluator and the teacher. The instruments were filled in by the general sample in one session, while the subsample, which filled in more questionnaires, did so on two different and consecutive days Instruments STAXI-CA elaboration The STAXI-CA was constructed adapting the STAXI for adults items to children and adolescents, and 55 items were included: 13 for Anger-State (Part I), 10 for Anger-Trait (Part II) and 32 items for the different sorts of Anger Expression and Control (Part III). Two preliminary studies were performed. The first one was intended to assess item comprehension in different Spanish-speaking environments (del Barrio, Spielberger, & Moscoso, 1998), while in the second one the factor structure of the instrument was examined and items with similar content or with principal loadings too high or too low were rearranged. In addition, convergent and discriminant validity was studied in two samples (del Barrio, Aluja, & Spielberger, 2000). The first study was carried out in the University of South Florida in both English and Spanish (del Barrio et al., 1998), considering the previous version constructed for Latin-American adults (Moscoso & Spielberger, 1999) and the original English questionnaire for adults (Spielberger, 1988). Two items unsuitable for children were deleted and substituted by one item referring to crying. The selected items were translated by a native Spanish speaker, and reviewed by a South American expert. Several educators from Spain, Mexico, Argentina, Chile, Puerto Rico, Venezuela, Guatemala, and Peru, were given the task of critically analysing the terms used regarding

4 230 V. del Barrio et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) Anger not usual in their respective countries. Those items not considered clear enough were then deleted. A pilot study constituted by students from different Spanish-speaking countries completed the questionnaire, and were asked to provide information about those terms or sentences not well understood. All Anger-related words not widely understood by these subjects were deleted. Terms presenting most difficulties and ambiguities were reviewed and substituted. For example, the word bravo was dropped given that it was clearly related to Anger in Chile, Peru and Venezuela, but rather confusing in other countries where this word is understood as valiente, as for example in Spain (del Barrio et al., 1998). In the second study, the previous elaborated questionnaire was employed. The first factor structures were obtained from preliminary analyses, these were useful to re-formulate some of the items (del Barrio et al., 2000). Item 13 (I feel like swearing), loading in Anger-State, was deleted due to its similarity to item 10 (I feel like saying bad words), and item 4 (I feel like insulting). Item 27 (when I am in a bad mood I hit somebody), loading in Anger-Trait, was also deleted due to it being hard to understand and also because its content referred to specific behaviour rather than to trait. In Part III of the questionnaire, Anger Expression and Control, it was observed that some items had a similar content and factor loading on the same factor, while several other items were difficult to understand. Thus, it was decided to delete items 36, 44, 45, 49, 54, 55, 61 and 70. The questionnaire was integrated by 12 items in Part I, 9 items in Part II and 24 items in Part III (del Barrio et al., 2000). The results in the present study were obtained from the 45 resulting items in the previous study Additional instruments In order to test the relationships of the STAXI-CA with other aggressiveness and personality questionnaires, the AFV, BFQ, EPQ-J, and SSS-J questionnaires were administered to the adolescents subgroups. These instruments have previously been adapted in similar cultural contexts, and have shown fair psychometric properties. AFV. Verbal and Physical Aggressiveness (Caprara & Pastorelli, 1993). The Spanish language version has been adapted and validated by del Barrio, Moreno, and Lopez (2001b). This questionnaire is made up of 20 items, 5 of which are control items, thus producing a global score from only 15 items. Items may be answered with three different options, indicating the frequency of a particular behaviour (3, often; 2, sometimes; 1, never). a and test retest reliability coefficients are 0.84 and 0.70, respectively (del Barrio et al., 2001b). BAS-3. Socialisation Battery (Silva & Martorell, 1989). This questionnaire has 75 items in the following five scales with a ÔYes NoÕ response format: Consideration for others (CO) (14 items), which detects social sensitiveness or consideration for other people, specially those with problems or those who are rejected; Self-Control in social relationships (SC) (14 items), measuring adjustment to norms and social rules that facilitate social relationships in its positive pole, and tapping aggressive and undisciplined behaviours in its negative pole; Social withdrawal (SW) (14 items), which detects passive and active withdrawing behaviours from others; Social anxiety (SA) (12 items) which measures anxiety, nervousness and shyness in social relationships; and Leadership (LE), tapping popularity, initiative, self-confidence and orientation to others. It also has a 10-item Sincerity scale, in the same vein as the EPQ L scale although in a reversed sense, which was not used in the present study. a and test retest reliability coefficients are 0.82 and 0.64, respectively (Silva & Martorell, 1989).

5 V. del Barrio et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) BFQ. Big Five Questionnaire (Caprara, Barbaranelli, Borgogni, & Peruguini, 1993). The BFQ is a 132-item questionnaire comprising of 5 domain scales, 10 facets scales and a Lie scale. The Domain scales are: Energy, Friendliness, Conscientiousness, Emotional Stability and Openness. In this study, the facets and Lie scales were not used. The respondent has a 5-choice answer format that ranges from complete disagreement (1 ¼ very false for me) to complete agreement (5 ¼ very true for me). The internal consistency assessed by CronbachÕs a is 0.87 (del Barrio, Carrasco, & Rodrıguez-Testal, 2001a). EPQ-J. Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1975; Eysenck, Garcıa- Sevilla, Perez, & Ortet, 1994). This version has 86 items (N: 23, E: 24, P: 18 and L: 21), with a particular dichotomous answer format in regard to gender, ÔYes NoÕ. It measures the Psychoticism (P), Extraversion (E) and Neuroticism (N) personality dimensions, incorporating a Lie detection scale (L), which is also useful to detect behavioural aspects related to social conformismnonconformism. SSS-J. A child and adolescent version of the Sensation-Seeking Scale (Zuckerman, Eysenck, & Eysenck, 1978), adapted by Perez, Ortet, Pla, and Simo (1986). It contains 50 items with a ÔTrue FalseÕ answer format, including 5 facets of 10 items: Thrill and Adventure Seeking (TAS); Experience Seeking (ES); Disinhibition (Dis); Boredom Susceptibility (BS); and a Sincerity (S) scale, also related with social conformism-nonconformism, which was not used given its similarity to the EPQ-J L scale. 3. Results 3.1. STAXI-CA factor structure: exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses The STAXI-CA 45 items were analysed through a principal components analysis (PC) with oblique rotation (Promax). We have used the PC procedure in order to follow the same factor extraction method used by Miguel-Tobal et al. (2001) in the Spanish adaptation of the STAXI-2 for adults. Besides, a more appropriate oblique rotation method were selected for the EFA (Fabrigar, Wegener, MacCallum, & Strahan, 1999). Note that an oblique rotation method was also conducted in the more recent American version (Spielberger, 1999). Both the eigenvalue one criterion (Guttman, 1954; Kaiser, 1961), and the Scree test (Cattell, 1966) were used for factor extraction. Additionally, a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was used with few items not highly interrelated in order to obtain factor structures well adjusted to data. CFA was carried out over the variance covariance matrix through the AMOS 4.01 statistical package (Arbuckle, 1999). The estimation method was maximum likelihood. In order to achieve model identification, regression coefficients of the error terms over the endogenous variables were fixed to 1 (MacCallum, Browne, & Sugawara, 1996). Results are presented both for the full sample and by gender. The correlation matrix of the questionnaire items is available upon request Part I (Anger-State) Two factors were extracted from the first part of the questionnaire, explaining 52.96% of the total variance. The Kaiser Meyer Olkin measure of sampling adequacy (KMO) was 0.89, and the

6 232 V. del Barrio et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) Bartlett test of Sphericity yielded an approximated v 2 of with 66 degrees of freedom (p < 0:001). The first factor was integrated by 8 items regarding Physical and Verbal Anger (S- Ang/FV), while the second factor was composed of 4 items related to Anger Feelings (S-Anger- F). No secondary loadings were obtained, with the two factors being highly independent with high factor loadings. The factor analysis was repeated using the same procedure for both boys and girls. Results obtained for boys were very similar to those for the full sample, although item 10 loaded highly on both factors and items 5 and 16 loaded on factor II in the girlsõ sample (Table 1). From the items in the two factors obtained with EFA, a CFA was performed to test whether the model fit the data well (Model A). Fit indices show that the model was acceptable, although a second model was generated deleting item 10 which had a secondary loading of 0.31 in the girlsõ sample. Also, items 5 and 16, which loaded on a different factor in the girlsõ sample, were deleted. With the remaining 5 items, the results of the CFA showed that item 7 yielded an exaggerated Modification Index (78.15) in regard to item 8, showing a high correlation among both, thus, item 7 was deleted due to its lower loading on the EFA. With the remaining 4 items, Model B was formed. Fit indices for this model were somewhat better than those obtained for Model A (Browne & Cudeck, 1993) Part II (Anger-Trait) From the factor analysis regarding the items in the second part of the questionnaire, two factors explaining 47.86% of the variance were obtained. The Kaiser Meyer Olkin measure of sampling adequacy (KMO) was 0.81, and the Bartlett test of Sphericity yielded an approximated v 2 of with 36 degrees of freedom (p < 0:001). The first factor had 5 items related to Temperament of Anger (T-Anger/T), while the second factor was formed of 4 items related to Reactive Anger (T-Anger-R). Considering the same criterion for factor extraction employed in the previous analysis, the same procedure was repeated for both boys and girls, the results replicating the twofactor structure with slight differences in factor loadings (Table 2). Taking the items obtained in the EFA, fit indices were obtained through a CFA for the full sample, for boys and for girls (Model A). The values were excellent in the three samples. Nevertheless, one of the items in the T-Anger/T factor (item 19; I am quick tempered), obtained a high MI with item 20 (I have a bad temper), indicating that item content is fairly equivalent in both items. It was thus decided to delete the item with the lowest factor loading (19) and retest the model fit (Model B). Fit indices improved slightly in this model Part III (Anger Expression and Anger Control) The 23 items from Part III of the questionnaire were factor analysed following the same procedure, and 3 factors were extracted. All items loaded higher than 0.30 on the corresponding factor and lower than 0.30 in other factors, except for item 50 which was deleted. The analysis was repeated without this item and also extracting 3 factors, explaining 37.94% of the variance. The Kaiser Meyer Olkin measure of sampling adequacy (KMO) was 0.88, with a Bartlett test of Sphericity yielding an approximated v 2 of with 253 degrees of freedom (p < 0:001). The first factor was integrated by 13 items related to Anger Control (AC), the second factor was composed of 6 items related to Anger Expression-Out (AX-O), and finally, the third factor was formed by 4

7 V. del Barrio et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) Table 1 Principal component analysis with Promax rotation of Anger-State (Part I) No. Items All subjects Boys Girls I II I II I II Weights higher 0.30 are in boldface 8 I feel like hitting 0.84 ) ) )0.07 someone 7 I feel like having 0.80 ) ) )0.13 afit 12 I feel like kicking ) someone 4 I feel like yelling at somebody 15 I want to smash 0.63 ) ) )0.03 something 10 I feel like swearing I feel like breaking things 16 I feel like screaming I feel irritated ) ) ) I am furious ) ) I feel angry I feel annoyed Eigenvalues % Accounted variance Anger-State (S-Ang) Fit indices for Model Aand Model B v 2 d.f. p < RMSR GFI AGFI IFI TLI CFI RMSEA ECVI All subjects Model A Model B Boys Model A Model B Girls Model A Model B Factor I: Anger-State Physical and verbal; Factor II: Anger-State feeling; Model A: All EFAÕs items; Model B: excluding 5, 7, 10 and 16 items ; v 2 : Chi-square. d.f.: Degrees of freedom. RMSR: root mean square residual. GFI: goodness of fit index. AGFI: adjusted goodness of fit index. IFI: incremental fit index. TLI: Tucker Lewis index. CFI: comparative fit index. RMSEA: root mean square error of approximation. ECVI: expected cross-validation index. STAXI-CA items of Anger-State subscales, S-Ang/PV: 4, 8, 12 and 15; S-Ang/F: 1, 2, 3 and 11. items related to Anger Expression-In (AX-I). The separate analysis for each group in regard to gender, yielded a very similar factor structure to that obtained for the full sample (Table 3).

8 234 V. del Barrio et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) Table 2 Principal component analysis with Promax rotation of Anger-Trait (Part II) No. Items All subjects Boys Girls I II I II I II Weights higher 0.30 are in boldface 20 I have a bad temper 0.80 ) ) ) I fly off the handle 0.70 ) I get angry very quickly 19 I am quick tempered ) When I get bad, I say nasty things 23 I feel annoyed when ) ) I am not given recognition for job well done 28 I feel infuriated ) ) ) when I do a good job and get a poor evaluation 22 I get angry when I have to wait because of otherõs mistakes 26 I get angry when IÕm told IÕm wrong in front of the others ) Eigenvalues % Accounted variance Anger-Trait (T-Ang) Fit indices for Model Aand Model B v 2 d.f. p < RMSR GFI AGFI IFI TLI CFI RMSEA ECVI All subjects Model A Model B Boys Model A Model B Girls Model A Model B Factor I: Anger-Trait temperament; Factor II: Anger-Trait reaction; Model A: All EFAÕs items; Model B: excluding item 19; v 2 : Chi-square. d.f.: Degrees of freedom. RMSR: root mean square residual. GFI: goodness of fit index. AGFI: adjusted goodness of fit index. IFI: incremental fit index. TLI: Tucker Lewis index. CFI: comparative fit index. RMSEA: root mean square error of approximation. ECVI: expected cross-validation index. STAXI-CA items of Anger-Trait subscales, T-Ang/T: 20, 21, 24 and 25; T-Ang/R: 22, 23, 26 and 28.

9 V. del Barrio et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) Table 3 Principal component analysis with Promax rotation of Anger Control and Expression t (Part III) No. Items All subjects Boys Girls I II III I II III I II III Weights higher 0.30 are in boldface 63 I try to get calm 0.74 )0.03 ) ) ) I try to relax ) ) I try to simmer 0.72 ) ) ) down 58 I try to calm 0.67 ) ) ) myself 65 I reduce my anger 0.67 )0.01 ) ) )0.01 as soon as possible 69 I do something ) )0.03 that relaxes me 66 I do something to ) )0.04 calm down 52 I hold my anger in 0.55 )0.08 ) )0.13 ) )0.11 ) I take a deep breath and relax 46 I get calm faster ) ) than others 43 I can stop myself ) ) ) from loosing 57 I control my anger 0.46 ) )0.15 )0.11 feelings 48 I try to be tolerant 0.38 ) ) ) I attack whatever ) ) )0.23 makes me angry 42 I attack whatever it ) )0.06 ) )0.04 ) )0.02 is that annoys me 30 I express my anger ) ) ) I argue with ) ) ) others 51 If someone ) ) )0.25 annoys me, I let them know 37 I do things like slamming doors ) ) ) I withdraw from other people 32 I feel like crying ) )0.07 ) I hide my anger 0.05 ) ) )0.04 ) I am angry, but I donõt show it 0.16 ) ) ) Eigenvalues % Accounted variance % (continued on next page)

10 236 V. del Barrio et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) Table 3 (continued) No. Items All subjects Boys Girls I II III I II III I II III Anger-Expression (AX) Fit indices for Model Aand Model B v 2 d.f. p < RMSR GFI AGFI IFI TLI CFI RMSEA ECVI All subjects Model A Model B Boys Model A Model B Girls Model A Model B Model A: All EFAÕs items; Model B: excluding 42 and 51 items ; v 2 : Chi-square. d.f.: Degrees of freedom. RMSR: root mean square residual. GFI: goodness of fit index. AGFI: adjusted goodness of fit index. IFI: incremental fit index. TLI: Tucker Lewis index. CFI: comparative fit index. RMSEA: root mean square error of approximation. ECVI: expected cross-validation index. STAXI-CA items of Anger-Expression subscales, AX-I: 31, 32, 34 and 41; AX-O: 30, 37, 40 and 56. Fit indices were obtained for the two factors of Anger Expression from the items obtained in the EFA (Model A). Although the RMSEA value was inside the correct range (<0.08), values for IFI, TLI and CFI were lower than 0.90 for the full sample of boys and girls and for the girlsõ sample, although slightly improved in the boysõ sample. The analysis of the MIs showed coefficients of for items 51 56, and for items 42 45, thus items 42 and 51 were deleted due to their lower factor loadings. A new model (Model B) was tested without these items, and the results showed a slight improvement for the full sample and for the boysõ sample, although it remained practically the same for the girlsõ sample Part III (Anger Control) A principal components analysis was performed with the 13 items related to Anger Control with a Promax rotation, in order to ascertain the empirical evidence of specific items for both internal and external control, given that the previous analysis with the items of Anger Expression did not show these dimensions. The Kaiser Meyer Olkin measure of sampling adequacy (KMO) was 0.90, and a Bartlett test of Sphericity yielded an approximated v 2 of with 78 degrees of freedom (p < 0:001). Two factors were extracted that explained 46.15% of the total variance. The first factor was composed of 9 items, although only the 4 items with the highest factor coefficients loaded in the subsequent analyses for both boys and girls: 43, 46, 52 and 57. Items 59, 66, 68 and 69 loaded on the second factor with factor loadings higher than 0.50 for the full sample and for the boysõ and girlsõ samples, and further, no secondary loadings were obtained. The first factor was considered an Anger Control-Out (AC-O), while the second was termed as an Anger Control-In (AC-I) (Table 4).

11 V. del Barrio et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) Table 4 Principal component analysis with Promax rotation of Anger Control (Part III) No. Items All subjects Boys Girls I II I II I II Weights higher 0.30 are in boldface 52 I hold my anger in 0.78 ) ) ) I can stop myself 0.75 ) ) )0.23 from loosing 57 I control my anger 0.61 ) ) )0.02 feelings 46 I get calm faster 0.61 ) ) than others 58 I try to calm myself 63 I try to get calm I try to simmer down 65 I reduce my anger as soon as possible 48 I try to be tolerant I do something that ) ) ) relaxes me 66 I do something to ) ) ) calm down 68 I try to relax I take a deep breath and relax ) ) Eigenvalues % Accounted variance Anger-Control (AC) Fit indices for Model Aand Model B v 2 d.f. p < RMSR GFI AGFI IFI TLI CFI RMSEA ECVI All subjects Model A Model B Boys Model A Model B Girls Model A Model B Model A: All EFAÕs items; Model B: excluding 48, 62, 63, 65 and 58 items ; v 2 : Chi-square. d.f.: Degrees of freedom. RMSR: root mean square residual. GFI: goodness of fit index. AGFI: adjusted goodness of fit index. IFI: incremental fit index. TLI: Tucker Lewis index. CFI: comparative fit index. RMSEA: root mean square error of approximation. ECVI: expected cross-validation index. STAXI-CA Anger-Control subscales Items, AC-I: 59, 66, 68 and 69; AC-O: 43, 46, 52 and 57.

12 238 V. del Barrio et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) Similarly to the three previous Anger dimensions, a confirmatory factor analysis was performed with the first factor 9 items, and the second factor 4 items (Model A). Fit indices values were fair except for that of TLI, which did not reach the cut-off value of 0.90 in both the full sample and the girlsõ sample. Model B was tested with the 4 items with the highest loadings on the first factor and the second factor, which substantially improved the fit to the data Descriptive, t-test differences and reliability The factors obtained in the 4 dimensions and 8 facets out of a total pool of 32 items were computed. Table 5 shows descriptive statistics of the factorial dimensions and facets derived from the STAXI-CA, and mean scores are also compared for boys and girls. Boys scored highly on S- Anger, T-Anger and AX-O, whereas girls scored higher on AX-I and AC-I. Reliability coefficients show a pattern of results ranging from 0.53 to 0.81 for the 4 dimensions, with facets yielding a coefficients higher than 0.60, except for 0.45 in AX-I. Test retest reliability with an interval of 12 days with a subgroup of 67 subjects, was also calculated. Of the 4 dimensions and 8 facets of Anger, most Pearson product moment correlations were significant, except for S-Ang/F, S-Anger, AC-O and AC. Note that state measures change from time to time, so they are expected to get low test retest correlations (especially for S-Ang/F). On the other hand, significant coefficients will be hypothesised for the trait measures. In fact, these measures always obtain significant test retest correlations. These test retest coefficients are in agreement with the original standardisation Spanish study (Miguel-Tobal et al., 2001, p. 42) Intercorrelations between dimensions and facets of the STAXI-CA Table 6 shows a correlation matrix between dimensions and facets of the STAXI-CA, broken down by gender and for all participants. Coefficients are as expected and very similar for boys and girls. S-Anger and T-Anger obtain correlations of 0.39 and 0.33 (p < 0:001), respectively. AX correlates 0.25 and 0.20 with S-Anger, and 0.51 and 0.50 with T-Anger, both for boys and girls. Correlation coefficients between AC with S-Anger, T-Anger and AX are moderately negative in both samples Intercorrelations between STAXI-CA, aggressiveness, socialisation and personality Convergent and discriminant validity of the STAXI-CA was assessed in relation to other wellknown validated questionnaires such as APV, BAS-3, BFQ, EPQ-J and SSS-J. Table 7 shows a correlation matrix of dimensions and facets of the STAXI-CA by gender. S-Ang, T-Ang, AX and its facets, except for AX-I, obtain high correlations with the aggressiveness dimension APV. Further, APV yields negative correlations with AC and its facets, being more significant for girls than for boys. The socialisation scales CO and SC obtain negative correlations with S-Anger, T- Anger and AX, the highest being for SC; also, CO and SC correlate positively with AC and its scales. In both cases, the correlations between both socialisation scales and STAXI-CA are higher for girls than for boys. RE correlates significantly with S-Anger, T-Anger and AX in both genders, while L is positively related with AC for boys although not for girls.

13 V. del Barrio et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) Table 5 Descriptives, a, t-test gender differences and test-retest of STAXI-CA No. Boys Girls All a t-test p < Retest M SD M SD M SD 4 S-Ang/PV S-Ang/F S-Anger T-Ang/T ns T-Ang/R T-Anger AX-O AX-I ) AX ) AC-O ns AC-I ) AC )1.17 ns 0.18 S-Ang/PV: Anger-State, physical and verbal. S-Ang/F: Feeling of Anger-State. S-Anger: Anger-State. T-Ang/T: Anger- Trait temperament. T-Ang/R: Anger-Trait reaction. T-Ang: Anger-Trait. AX-O: Anger-Expression out. AX-I: Anger- Expression in. AX: Anger-Expression. AC-O: Anger-Control out. AC-I: Anger -Control in. AC: Anger-Control. Starting from ±0.24, p < 0:05; from ±0.30, p < 0:01. Table 6 Intercorrelation matrix between domains and subscales of STAXI-CA; boys button left and girls button right S-Ang/PV S-Ang/F S-Anger T-Ang/T T-Ang/R T-Anger AX-O AX-I AX AC-O AC-I AC S-Ang/PV ) )0.19 )0.09 )0.16 S-Ang/F )0.08 )0.08 )0.10 S-Anger )0.15 )0.11 )0.15 T-Ang/T )0.30 )0.15 )0.26 T-Ang/R )0.06 )0.03 )0.05 T-Anger )0.21 )0.11 )0.19 AX-O )0.23 )0.19 )0.25 AX-I AX )0.10 )0.07 )0.10 ACO )0.10 )0.04 )0.08 )0.22 )0.01 )0.14 ) ) AC-I )0.14 )0.09 )0.13 )0.15 )0.01 )0.10 ) ) AC )0.14 )0.08 )0.13 )0.22 )0.01 )0.14 ) ) S-Ang/PV: Anger-State, physical and verbal. S-Ang/F: Feeling of Anger-State. S-Anger: Anger-State. T-Ang/T: Anger- Trait temperament. T-Ang/R: Anger-Trait reaction. T-Ang: Anger-Trait. AX-O: Anger-Expression out. AX-I: Anger- Expression in. AX: Anger-Expression. AC-O: Anger-Control out. AC-I: Anger -Control in. AC: Anger-Control. Starting from ±0.07, p < 0:05; from ±0.11, p < 0:01. The STAXI-CA was correlated with the 5 dimensions of the Big Five, Big Three and Sensation- Seeking personality models. Conscientiousness is negatively correlated with S-Anger and positively with AC in both genders. Emotional Stability obtains negative and significant correlations with T-Anger, AX, although correlations are positive with AC. Friendliness is negatively related with

14 Table 7 Correlations between STAXI-C and aggressiveness, socialisation and personality variables S-Ang/PV S-Ang/F S-Anger T-Ang/T T-Ang/R T-Anger AX-O AX-I AX AC-O AC-I AC B G B G B G B G B G B G B G B G B G B G B G B G APV )0.15 )0.37 )0.05 )0.18 )0.13 )0.32 CO ) )0.10 )0.14 )0.15 )0.05 )0.17 )0.20 ) )0.12 )0.11 )0.08 ) )0.10 )0.05 ) SC )0.24 )0.36 )0.09 )0.29 )0.19 )0.40 )0.35 )0.57 )0.14 )0.34 )0.30 )0.53 )0.29 )0.50 )0.06 )0.13 )0.24 ) SW )0.02 )0.13 )0.12 )0.16 )0.08 )0.18 SA ) ) )0.05 )0.01 ) LE ) )0.06 ) )0.02 ) )0.04 )0.06 ) ) Ener. )0.05 )0.04 )0.17 )0.07 )0.12 )0.07 ) ) )0.10 ) Cons. )0.24 )0.07 )0.26 )0.18 )0.28 )0.17 )0.26 ) )0.06 )0.13 )0.10 )0.09 ) )0.01 )0.07 ) Emo. )0.14 )0.11 )0.04 )0.23 )0.10 )0.23 )0.32 )0.59 )0.31 )0.39 )0.37 )0.57 )0.27 )0.49 )0.19 )0.01 )0.31 ) Sta. Frien. )0.17 )0.13 )0.14 )0.18 )0.17 )0.20 )0.31 )0.13 )0.25 )0.15 )0.33 )0.16 )0.20 )0.14 ) )0.19 ) Open. )0.07 )0.09 )0.17 )0.19 )0.14 )0.18 )0.19 )0.20 )0.05 )0.13 )0.15 )0.19 )0.06 )0.17 )0.05 )0.11 )0.08 ) N )0.18 )0.25 )0.01 )0.20 )0.12 )0.26 E ) P ) )0.13 )0.26 )0.11 )0.11 )0.15 )0.22 L )0.21 )0.23 )0.17 )0.17 )0.22 )0.21 )0.28 )0.28 )0.22 )0.31 )0.30 )0.37 )0.41 )0.42 )0.04 )0.01 )0.32 ) TAS ) ) ) ) )0.04 ES )0.01 )0.11 )0.11 )0.03 )0.08 )0.09 Dis )0.03 )0.19 )0.10 )0.15 )0.09 )0.20 BS )0.02 )0.01 ) )0.03 )0.08 )0.07 )0.01 )0.05 )0.07 )0.08 SSS-J )0.14 )0.05 )0.09 )0.03 )0.14 B: boys; G: girls. Starting ±0.17. p < 0:01. Correlations higher or equal 0.20 are in boldface. Ang/PV: Anger-State, physical and verbal. S-Ang/F: Feeling of Anger-State. S-Anger: Anger-State. T-Ang/T: Anger-Trait temperament. T-Ang/R: Anger-Trait reaction. T-Ang: Anger-Trait. AX-O: Anger-Expression out. AX-I: Anger-Expression in. AX: Anger-Expression. AC-O: Anger-Control out. AC-I: Anger-Control in. AC: Anger-Control. APV: Physical and Verbal Aggression. CO: Consideration with the others. SC: Self-control in the social relationships. SW: Social Withdrawal. SA: Social Anxiety. LE: Leadership. Ener.: Energy. Cons.: Conscientiousness. Emo. Sta.: Emotional Stability. Frien.: Friendliness. Open.: Openness to Experience. N: Neuroticism. E: Extraversion. P: Psychoticism. L: Lie. TAS: Thrill and Adventure Seeking. ES: Experience Seeking. Dis: Disinhibition. BS: Boredom Susceptibility. SSS-J: Sensation Seeking Scale Junior. 240 V. del Barrio et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004)

15 V. del Barrio et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) S-Anger and T-Anger, and positively with AC. Openness to Experience tends to correlate negatively with S-Anger, T-Anger and AX, although the sign changes to positive with AC, 0.18 and 0.30 for both genders. Considering the EPQ-J, N shows the same correlational pattern as Emotional Stability, although inverted, P correlates positively with S-Anger, T-Anger and AX-O, and to a lesser extent, negatively with AC. Moreover, L correlates negatively with S-Anger, T-Anger and AX for both genders, and positively with AC for girls although not for boys (0.30; p < 0:001). Finally, the ES scale from the SSS-J is positively correlated with S-Anger, T-Anger and AX-O, although it is not correlated with AX-I. Dis is positively correlated with S-Ang/PV, T-Anger and AX-O, and negatively with AC for girls. BS is positively correlated with T-Ang/R for boys. The total score of the SSS-J is positively correlated with S-Anger, T-Anger and AX-O, with higher coefficients for boys than for girls. It is well known that STAXI-CA scales present high correlations among them. From this standpoint, it is reasonable to think that most of the significant correlations shown at Table 7 could fall below significance when other scales are partialled out. An specific example could give us some light to this point. The correlations between APV and S-Anger and T-Anger in the total sample when the other STAXI-CA scale is controlled are 0.21 and 0.43, respectively. So, they remain significant. Note that the value for the correlation between APV and T-Anger is quite similar to the coefficient obtained before controlling for S-Anger. 4. Conclusions The elaboration of a self-reported questionnaire for the assessment of anger in boys and girls between 7 and 17 years old constituted an important challenge. Although from the age of 7 it is usually considered that children and adolescents have a fair cognitive maturation to recognise their emotions, there are several elements that play a role in self-evaluation: reading comprehension, interests and motivation, exhaustion, introspective skills, response coherence, and the like. For this reason the elaboration procedure of the STAXI-CA has been quite demanding and it has been performed in several stages (del Barrio et al., 1998, 2000). Anyway, it would be necessary to compare the factor structure across age groups since the factors commented above could influence our results. Besides, cross-validation of the CFA models will also be a necessary step to confirm them. These multi-group analyses will be carried out in a future study since this target is clearly beyond the scope of the current study. Taking into account that STAXI-CA is an adaptation for children and adolescents of the STAXI for adults (Spielberger, 1988), it was interesting to test the possibility of reproducing the same structure within every dimension, as Spielberger did (1999, pp ): Anger-State, Anger- Trait, Anger Expression and Anger Control. Results indicate that the version for children and adolescents sustains this structure, although the Verbal and Physical Expression facets of the Anger-State appear unified in a single facet instead of two. The questionnaire was reduced from the initial 55 items to only 32 in accordance with the following criteria: (a) items with high secondary loadings on a different factor; (b) items with different loadings in the groups of boys and girls; (c) items with exaggerated or highly interrelated modification indices. Bearing these criteria in mind, a representation of the four STAXI-CA dimensions that show a two-independent factor structure has been achieved, although these factors were extracted with an oblique rotation

16 242 V. del Barrio et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 37 (2004) method. This enables the facets of each dimension not to be highly correlated and to be more relevant in meaning. The STAXI-CA obtained an excellent structure and construct validity. Construct validity is determined by the fit indices values reached with the CFA (Byrne, 1993). From the model modifications, an optimal fit to data was obtained, maybe with the exception of the Anger Expression facets, where indicators are not as good as in the remaining facets although acceptable (Browne & Cudeck, 1993). The deletion of one of the highly correlated items according to the MIs coefficients improves model fit although it influences the internal consistency of the factor. On some occasions an internal consistency may be attained including highly correlated items, although it is not advisable to follow this strategy (Aluja, Garcıa, & Garcıa, 2003a, 2003b). In the present study and despite deleting excessively correlated items, internal consistency values are higher than 0.60, a fair result considering that these are 4-item scales, with the exception of the Anger Expression facets. It should be stated that intercorrelations between facets and dimensions are very similar to those reported in the adaptation to Spanish of the STAXI-2 (Miguel-Tobal et al., 2001), which also adds to the construct validity of the instrument. Independently of construct validity, a psychological measurement instrument should also show convergent and discriminant validity. The Anger-Trait dimension proved to be highly correlated with the Buss Durkee Hostility Inventory and two scales derived from the MMPI. Furthermore, fair correlations were also obtained between Anger-Trait and Anger-State with the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ) and the State-Trait Personality Inventory (STPI). Results showed that both Anger measures are positively related with Neuroticism and Psychoticism, and Anger-Trait is negatively related with Lie (Social Conformism) in the girlsõ group, a finding which is perfectly consistent with results obtained elsewhere (Donnellan, Ge, & Wenk, 2002). The two anxiety measures of the STPI are also related with the two measures of Anger (Spielberger, 1999, pp ). In our study, convergent validity was demonstrated by the high correlations between Anger-State, Anger-Trait and Anger Expression with Physical and Verbal Aggressiveness (Caprara & Pastorelli, 1993), as well as by the negative relationship of this scale with the dimension of Anger Control, a pattern of results which are in accordance with other studies with children and adolescents (Berkowitz, 1990; del Barrio et al., 2001a). Discriminant validity was also demonstrated with the statistically significant correlations of the STAXI-CA with the socialisation scales of the BAS-3. Furthermore, STAXI-CA is also related with personality measured with the EPQ-J, presenting the same pattern of correlations as in the adult version in regard to Neuroticism, Psychoticism and Social Conformism. This same pattern of correlations has been also found in children and adolescent populations (Carrasco & del Barrio, 2002; del Barrio, Moreno, & Lopez, 1997). Similar results are also observed with a Big-Five personality measure (Caprara et al., 1993). Subjects high in sensation seeking obtain higher scores on Anger-State, Anger-Trait and Anger Expression and lower scores on Anger Control. In the light of the results presented in this study, it can be concluded that the measure of Anger elaborated for use with children and adolescents shows acceptable psychometric properties for use in both children and adolescent applications and epidemiological research of emotional states in both Spain and Latin-America. The significant reduction of items in regard to the adult version may contribute to the easier completion of the instrument by younger children, thus improving response consistency, although future research is clearly needed in this area. The results may also be useful as a base for the adaptation of the STAXI-CA in English, and it is also our opinion that