Anger Management Profile (AMP)

Transcription

1 Anger Management Profile (AMP) 2012 Summary Report This report summarizes data received from 989 participants who completed the Anger Management Profile (AMP) from May 1, 2010 thru August 11, This report is designed to provide evaluators and clinicians with an overview of the AMP psychometric properties, as well as a profile of individuals who are screened using the tool. To that end, this report provides demographic characteristics, court history summaries, and AMP test statistics. Data are presented using four figures and six tables. A summary at the end of the document reviews the findings.

2 Anger Management Profile (AMP) Anger can range from mild annoyance to full blown rage. Anger is a normal human emotion, but chronic uncontrolled anger problems have a significant detrimental effect on interpersonal relationships, work and on general quality of life. Individuals who have trouble controlling anger are susceptible to road rage and other impulsive outbursts, and some may find themselves in legal trouble stemming from an anger related incident. Understanding anger requires a comprehensive and multidimensional assessment. The AMP identifies anger and measures its severity but also assesses contributing factors to anger including alcohol, drugs, and stress management. Substance use disorders and poor stress management abilities can put anger prone individuals at greater risk for uncontrolled, impulsive or reckless angry episodes. The Alcohol Scale, Drugs Scale and Stress Management Scale are included in the AMP to measure these exacerbating factors that can aggravate anger problems. The Anger Management Profile (AMP) was developed to help meet anger screening needs. The AMP is designed for high school age to adult anger assessment. The AMP is particularly useful in outpatient anger treatment programs, court related assessments, diversion programs and probation departments. In these reports quantitative information is obtained by empirically based measures (scales) which independently generate risk (percentile) scores. The AMP is a self report test that includes 5 scales consisting of 123 items. AMP Scales include: Truthfulness Scale Alcohol Scale Drug Scale Anger Scale Stress Management Scale The AMP can be completed in approximately 20 minutes. Moreover, the AMP can be administered individually or in group (paper pencil) test settings. For more Anger Management Profile (AMP) information, visit management tests.com. This report summarizes data received from 989 participants who completed the Anger Management Profile (AMP) from May 1, 2010 thru August 11, This report is designed to provide evaluators and clinicians with an overview of the AMP psychometric properties, as well as a profile of individuals who are screened using the tool. To that end, this report provides demographic characteristics, court history summaries and AMP test statistics. Data are presented using four figures and six tables. A summary at the end of the document reviews the findings. 1

3 Demographic Characteristics This section provides a description of respondent characteristics, including gender, ethnicity/race, marital status and education. Data was received for 989 respondents. This section uses four figures to present the findings. Figure 1 displays respondent gender: 75% (741) were male 25% (248) were female Race/ethnicity are presented in Figure 2: 67% (653) were Caucasian 17% (163) were African American 11% (105) were Hispanic <1% (7) were Asian 3% (26) were Native American 3% (28) responded Other; no additional information was provided by these respondents. Data was missing for seven respondents. Marital status of respondents is provided in Figure 3: 52% (515) were single 28% (272) were married 11% (110) were divorced 7% (66) were separated <1% (5) were widowed Data were missing for 20 respondents. 2

4 Figure 4 summarizes respondent educational attainment: 4% (36) completed 8 th grade or less 21% (200) completed some high school 41% (396) graduated high school 20% (196) completed some college 12% (114) graduated college 3% (26) completed a professional/graduate degree Data were missing for 21 respondents. Court History Summary This section summarizes court history items for the AMP. Respondents were asked to provide the number of drug related (not DUI), alcohol related (not DUI), assault and domestic violence arrests they have had in a lifetime. Table 1 summarizes frequency and percentages for these arrests. Respondents were also asked to provide the number of anger management programs they have attended. Correlation analyses were undertaken to examine relationships between court history items. Results are summarized below. Individuals were categorized into first time offenders and multiple offenders based on the number of assaults or domestic violence arrests they reported. First time offenders were defined as respondents with one arrest; multiple offenders were defined as individuals with two or more arrests. Approximately 45% (449) of respondents had no assault or domestic violence arrests and their data was excluded. 78% (423) were first time offenders 22% (117) were multiple offenders Respondents reported that: 77% had not attended an anger management program 18% had attended one anger management program 5% had attended two or more anger management programs As noted in Table 1, 15% of respondents had one or more drug related arrests, 18% had one or more alcohol related arrests, 32% had one more arrests for assault and 32% had one or more domestic violence arrests. 3

5 Table 1. Court History Summary (N = 989) 0 arrests 1 arrest 2 arrests 3 arrests 4 or more Court history items N % N % N % N % N % Drug related Alcohol related Assaults Domestic Violence A series of correlation analyses were conducted to examine relationships between court history items. Correlations are used to measure the relationship between items (variables) and correlation scores range from 0 to 1. A score that is closer to 1 indicates a strong relationship between the items. Correlations can be positive or negative. In a positive correlation both items move together, meaning as one item increases (or decreases) so does the other item (Gavetter & Wallanu, 2009). In a negative correlation, the items tend to move in opposite directions. For example, as one item increases the other item decreases (Gavetter & Wallanu, 2009). Results of the court history analyses reveal several statistical significant: Drug related arrests were positively correlated with: Number of alcohol related arrests at (p <.01) Number of assault arrests at (p <.01) Number of domestic violence arrests (p <.05) Program attendance (p <.01) Alcohol related arrests were positively correlated with: Number of drug related arrests at (p <.01) Number of assault arrests at (p <.01) Number of domestic violence arrests (p <.05) Program attendance (p <.01) Assault arrests were positively correlated with: Number of alcohol related arrests at (p <.01) Number of drug related arrests at (p <.01) Number of domestic violence arrests (p <.05) Program attendance (p <.01) 4

6 Domestic violence arrests were positively correlated with: Number of alcohol related arrests at (p <.01) Number of drug related arrests at (p <.05) Number of assault arrests (p <.05) Program attendance (p <.01) These findings indicate that as one type of arrest increases, so do other types of arrests. For example, increased numbers of alcohol arrests are associated with increased numbers of domestic violence arrests, at a statistically significant level. These findings are not related to chance or randomness, but represent meaningful relationships between the court history items. Secondary Analyses Additional analyses were undertaken to examine respondent characteristics and explore possible relationships between variables and responses. Nonparametric statistics were used to examine relationships between demographic characteristics and offender status. Frequency and percentages were used to summarize self reported problems and motivations for treatment. Moreover, additional nonparametric statistics were conducted to examine relationships between self reported problems and treatment motivation for the 989 respondents. Demographics and Offender Status A chi square analysis was conducted to determine whether there was a relationship between race/ethnicity and offender status. A chi square analysis is a statistical technique that uses the frequency of items to determine if there is a relationship between variables (Gravetter & Wallnau, 2009). The result, x 2 (537, 5) p <.002 indicates a statistically significant relationship between race/ethnicity and offender status. A chi square analysis was conducted to explore whether there was a relationship between marital status and offender status. The result, x 2 (537, 4), was not statistically significant. There is no relationship between marital status and offender status. A chi square analysis was conducted to examine whether there was a relationship between level of educational attainment and offender status. The result, x 2 (529, 5), p <.001, indicates a statistically significant relationship between offender status and educational attainment. A chi square analysis was not conducted on gender because research has found that males perpetrate more criminal acts than females, despite an increase in overall female offending (Schwartz, Steffensmeier, & Feldmeyer, 2009), and a disproportionate number of males in the sample would be expected. 5

7 Self Reported Problems and Motivation for Treatment The AMP posed a series of questions that asked respondents to describe their temper, anger, drinking, and drug use. Nine respondents had missing data for each of the questions. Table 2 presents the results. Table 2. Summary of Self Reported Problem Behavior (N = 989) Questions Not a problem Problem N % N % Describe your temper Describe your anger Describe your drinking Describe your drug use The AMP asked respondents about their level of motivation for treatment to address the above mentioned problem behaviors. Nine respondents had missing data for each of the questions. Table 3 summarizes the findings. Table 3. Motivation for Treatment (N = 989) Treatment I want help I need help I am not sure No need N % N % N % N % Anger management program Alcohol treatment Drug treatment Counseling for anger Closer examination revealed that 65% of respondents who identified a problem with anger indicated that they wanted or needed to continue in an anger management program and had a desire to continue participation in therapy for their anger. Sixty two percent of respondents who identified a problem with alcohol indicated they wanted or needed to continue with or to begin participating in alcohol treatment. Results for drug treatment motivation were similar; 6

8 63% of respondents who identified a problem with drug use expressed a desire to continue in treatment or participate in a drug treatment program. Chi square analyses were conducted to measure whether the differences between selfreported problem behavior (problem, not a problem) and motivation for treatment (I want help, I need help, I am not sure, and no need) were statistically significant. Results indicated that statistically significant relationships existed between these variables. Test Statistics This section will provide an overview of the test statistics of the AMP using data from the 989 respondents. There are three tables in this section. Table 4 provides a summary of reliability coefficients for each scale. Table 5 reviews the accuracy of the AMP. Lastly, Table 6 describes the validity of the assessment tool using offenders status (first time and multiple) and mean scale scores. Reliability Test reliability refers to a scale s consistency of measurement. Cronbach s Alpha, a measure of reliability, measured the internal consistency of the items in each scale of the AMP. Perfect reliability is The professionally accepted reliability standard for this type of instrument is (Murphy & Davidshofer, 2001). Table 4. AMP Reliability (N = 989) Scales Cronbach s Alpha Truthfulness.89 Alcohol.95 Drug.94 Anger.90 Stress Management.92 As noted in Table 3, all scales exceed the professionally accepted standard and support the AMP as a reliable instrument for anger screening. 7

9 Accuracy Test accuracy can be calculated by comparing the differences between predicted and attained risk range percentages; small differences represent high test accuracy. Accuracy results for the AMP are presented in Table 5. For each scale, respondents are classified into four risk ranges: Low Risk (zero to 39 th percentile), Medium Risk (40 th to 69 th percentile), Problem Risk (70 th to 89 th percentile) and Severe Problem (90 th to 100 th percentile). These four risk ranges were established and subsequently reaffirmed in AMP research. Differences between predicted and attained percentages are shown in parentheses and results (in bold) are used to denote the difference between the predicted and attained scores. Table 5. AMP Accuracy Findings (N = 989) Scales Low Risk (39%) Medium Risk (30%) Problem Risk (20%) Severe Risk (11%) Truthfulness 43.0 (4.0) 26.6 ( 3.4) 19.9 (.1) 10.5 (.5) Alcohol 40.6 (1.6) 28.9 ( 1.1) 20.1 (.1) 10.4 (.6) Drug 41.5 (2.5) 27.0 ( 3.0) 21.4 (1.4) 10.1 (.9) Anger 42.9 (2.1) 27.3 ( 2.7) 19.3 (.7) 10.4 (.6) Stress Management 39.9 (.9) 30.6 (.6) 19.5 (.5) 10.0 ( 1.0) The top row of Table 4 shows the percentage of clients who were predicted to score within each risk range category. For example, 39% of clients were predicted to score within the Low Risk range for the Alcohol Scale. The actual percentage of individuals who scored in this range was 40.6%, which is (1.6) percentage points above the predicted low risk range. The largest predicted attained score difference is in the low risk range, on the Truthfulness Scale. All other scale comparisons are even more accurate. These findings confirm the accuracy of the AMP. Validity In testing, the term validity refers to the extent that a test measures what it was designed to measure. A test cannot be accurate without being valid. When individuals known to have more severe problems attain higher (more severe) scale scores than individuals known to have fewer or no problems, this supports test validity. In the following validity analysis, first time offenders AMP mean scale scores were compared to multiple offenders mean scale scores. It is anticipated that multiple offenders will have higher mean scale scores than first time offenders, with the exception of the Stress Management Scale. Stress Management Scale scores are 8

10 reversed, meaning that higher scores are associated with better stress management skills; multiple offenders were expected to score lower on this scale. Table 6. AMP Validity Findings (N = 989) Scales First Offender Mean Score Multiple Offender Mean Score t value Significance Truthfulness Alcohol <.001 Drug <.001 Anger <.001 Stress Management <.001 A comparison between the mean scores of first time offenders and multiple offenders found higher mean scale scores for multiple offenders on the Alcohol Scale, Drug Scale, and Anger Scale. First time offenders scored higher on the Stress Management Scale as anticipated. On the Truthfulness Scale first time offenders had higher mean scale scores which likely reflected limited experience with the assessment process. These individuals may, naively, engage in more denial and minimizing behaviors whereas, multiple offenders (who have more experience with law enforcement and the courts) may be aware that denial, minimization, and deception will be detected. Table 6 presents offender score comparisons along with results from statistical analyses. T test analyses were conducted to examine whether the differences in mean scores were statistically significant. Results indicated that for all scales, the differences were statistically significant. As a general rule, higher AMP scores were obtained by multiple offenders when compared to firsttime offenders. These results support the validity of the AMP and demonstrate that the AMP effectively differentiates between offenders that are known to have more severe problems (multiple offenders) than first time offenders. Summary Data was received by 989 respondents who completed the Anger Management Profile (AMP). Below is a summary of respondent characteristics, offender status, court history, motivation for treatment, and test statistics. In addition implications for treatment will be offered. 75% were male, 25% were female 9

11 67% were Caucasian, 17% were African American, 11% were Hispanic, <1% were Asian, 3% were Native American, 3% responded Other 52% were single, 28% were married, 11% were divorced, 7% were separated, <1% were widowed 4% completed 8 th grade or less, 21% completed some high school, 41% graduated high school, 20% completed some college, 12% graduated college, 3% completed a professional/graduate degree 78% were first time offenders, 22% were multiple offenders 15% of respondents had one or more drug related arrests, 18% had one or more alcohol related arrests, 32% had one more arrests for assault, and 32% had one or more domestic violence arrests. 77% had not attended an anger management program, 18% had attended one anger management program, 5% had attended two or more anger management programs Court history items were statistically significant and positively correlated with one another, indicating that as one type of arrest increases, so do other types of arrests Relationships between offender status (first time or multiple), race, and educational attainment were statistically significant. 72% indicated that their temper was not a problem; 73% indicated that their anger was not a problem; 90% indicated their drinking was not a problem, and 94% indicated that drug use was not a problem. 23% indicated a desire to continue or to participate in an anger management program; 7% indicated a desire to continue or to participate in alcohol treatment; 6% indicated a desire to continue or participate in a drug treatment program; 23% indicated a desire to participate in counseling or therapy for anger. 65% of respondents who identified a problem with anger indicated that they wanted or needed to continue in an anger management program and had a desire to continue participation in therapy for their anger 62% of respondents who identified a problem with alcohol indicated they wanted or needed to continue or to begin participating in alcohol treatment 63% of respondents who identified a problem with drug use expressed a desire to continue in treatment or participate in a drug treatment program. As noted above, the AMP has demonstrated high reliability, accuracy, and validity. These assessment features are essential when identifying individuals who demonstrate higher severity and consequently may have more complex treatment needs (PEW Center for the States, 2010). Properly identifying individuals who acknowledge problem behaviors and 10

12 express a desire for treatment may have important clinical implications. Test administrator and clinicians may be able to identify individuals who express a desire for help and match them to appropriate levels of treatment. There is evidence that treatment matched to problem severity results in more successful treatment outcomes and lower recidivism rates (Andrews & Bonta, 2010). Lisa Degiorgio, PhD Senior Research Analyst Behavior Data Systems, Ltd. References Andrews. D. A., & Bonta, J. (2010). The Psychology of Criminal Conduct (5th ed.). New Providence, NJ: Lexis Nexus Group. Gravetter, F. J., & Wallnau, L. B. (2009). Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences (8 th ed.). CA: Wadsworth. Murphy, K. R. & Davidshofer, C. O. (2001). (5th ed.). Psychological Testing: Principles and Applications. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Schwartz, J., Steffensmeier, D., & Feldmeyer, B. (2009). Gender and violence: Trends in adult male and female violence, Social Problems, 56, Pew Center for the States (September, 2011). Risk/needs assessment 101: Science reveals new tools to manage offenders. Retrieved from 11