Assessing Anger Expression: Construct Validity of Three Emotion Expression-Related Measures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Self-report measures of emotional expression are common, but their validity to predict objective emotional expression, particularly of anger, is unclear. We tested the validity of the Anger Expression Inventory (AEI; Spielberger et al., 1985 Spielberger, C. D., Johnson, E. H., Russell, S. F., Crane, R. J., Jacobs, G. A., & Wordern, T. J. (1985). The experience and expression of anger: Construction and validation of an anger expression scale. In M. A. Chesney & R. H. Rosenman (Eds.), Anger and hostility in cardiovascular and behavioral disorders (pp. 5–30). New York, NY: Hemisphere. [Google Scholar]), Emotional Approach Coping Scale (EAC; Stanton, Kirk, Cameron, & Danoff-Burg, 2000 Stanton, A. L., Kirk, S. B., Cameron, C. L., & Danoff-Burg, S. (2000). Coping through emotional approach: Scale construction and validation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 1150–1169. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.78.6.1150[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]), and Toronto Alexithymia Scale-20 (TAS-20; Bagby, Taylor, & Parker, 1994 Bagby, R. M., Taylor, G. J., & Parker, J. D. (1994). The twenty-item Toronto Alexithymia Scale-II. Convergent, discriminant, and concurrent validity. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 38, 33–40. doi:10.1016/0022-3999(94)90006-X[Crossref], [PubMed], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar]) to predict objective anger expression in 95 adults with chronic back pain. Participants attempted to solve a difficult computer maze by following the directions of a confederate who treated them rudely and unjustly. Participants then expressed their feelings for 4 min. Blinded raters coded the videos for anger expression, and a software program analyzed expression transcripts for anger-related words. Analyses related each questionnaire to anger expression. The AEI Anger-Out scale predicted greater anger expression, as expected, but AEI Anger-In did not. The EAC Emotional Processing scale predicted less anger expression, but the EAC Emotional Expression scale was unrelated to anger expression. Finally, the TAS-20 predicted greater anger expression. Findings support the validity of the AEI Anger-Out scale but raise questions about the other measures. The assessment of emotional expression by self-report is complex and perhaps confounded by general emotional experience, the specificity or generality of the emotion(s) assessed, and self-awareness limitations. Performance-based or clinician-rated measures of emotion expression are needed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".