Development and Validation of a Brief Scale of Vengeful Tendencies (BSVT-11) in a Mexican Sample

The development and analysis of psychometric properties of a brief scale that assesses vengeful tendencies (BSVT-11) is presented. A three-dimensional model is proposed: (1) resentment, (2) planning of revenge, and (3) justification of revenge. Two studies were conducted for this purpose: one was carried out with a sample of 478 participants, to evaluate the content validity, factorial structure, reliability, and invariance of the instrument; the other was conducted with a sample of 308 participants, to determine the concurrent validity of the BSVT-11. The data indicated adequate reliability (ω = 0.877), optimal fit (CFI = 1.0, TLI = 1.0) according to the dimensions proposed, and invariance between genders (p = 0.893). Concurrent validity data yield significant correlation values (p < 0.001) ranging from 0.522 to 0.804 in the analyses between the BSVT and other scales. The results allow us to present a brief instrument with good psychometric properties with possibilities for use in basic and translational science.

High and Low Trait Anger, Angry Thoughts, and the Recognition of Anger Problems

This research had two goals: (1) it tested hypotheses of the State-Trait Model of anger, and (2) it explored characteristics that may distinguish individuals with high trait anger who recognize problems with their anger from those who do not recognize anger problems. Regarding the first goal, findings supported three hypotheses tested. In particular, compared to those low in trait anger, individuals with high trait anger reported: (a) more intense anger (intensity hypothesis), p < .001, effect size (η(2)) = .109; (b) more thoughts involving pejorative labeling/denigration, p < .001, η(2) = .280, thoughts of revenge, p < .001, η(2) = .170, more outward, negative anger expression (anger-out), p < .001, η(2) = .229, and more physically aggressive expression, p < .001, η(2) = .046-.123, (aggression hypothesis); and (c) more anger suppression (anger-in), p < .001, η(2) = .231, and fewer thoughts of self-control, p < .001, η(2) = .088, and behavioral efforts to control angry feelings (anger control-in), p < .001, η(2) = .116, and behavior (anger control-out), p < .001, η(2) = .260 (reduced positive coping hypothesis). For the second goal we employed two types of individuals, both with high trait anger: those who identified anger as a personal problem and wanted help, and those who did not identify anger as a personal issue. As a result, compared to those who did not report anger problems, those who reported anger problems demonstrated a higher overall propensity to experience anger (i.e., higher trait anger), p < .01, η(2) = .028, greater anger suppression and harboring grudges (anger-in), p < .001, η(2) = .035, fewer thoughts of self-control, p < .05, η(2) = .015, and attempts to control their angry feelings (anger-control-in), p < .05, η(2) = .016, and behavior (anger-control-out), p < .001, η(2) = .054. Gender was not associated with trait anger or anger problem recognition. Findings were discussed in terms of State-Trait Theory and implications for anger interventions.