contemporary study: howells et al

Question 1

state the 2 aims of howells (2005)

Answer 1

1. determine whether anger management is more effective than no treatment
2. investigate whether improvement in offenders’ treatment can be predicted from pre treatment characteristics

Question 2

what was the IV?

Answer 2

whether or not the participants took part in an anger management scheme

Question 3

what was the DV?

Answer 3

scores on a variety of anger scales

Question 4

describe the sample

Answer 4

• 418 australian males with a mean age of 28.8
• sentences from 1 month - 26 years 4 months
• 86% prison based referrals, 14% community correction referrals
• variety of ethnic backgrounds
• controls taken from waiting list

Question 5

what percentage of participants committed violence without bodily harm?

Answer 5

42%

Question 6

what percentage of participants committed crimes which caused death?

Answer 6

6%

Question 7

what percentage of participants had not taken part in an anger management scheme before?

Answer 7

73%

Question 8

name 3 questionnaires that were used in the procedure

Answer 8

• STAXI = anger expression
• WAKS = anger knowledge
• NOVACO = arousal

Question 9

describe the procedure

Answer 9

• Novaco’s framework anger management programme; structured exercises looking at relaxation, assertion, identifying provoking situations and preventing relapse
• 10x2 hour sessions
• controls and experimental participants filled out 6 questionnaires

Question 10

why did a facilitator and participant complete checklists of each session?

Answer 10

check what was covered to ensure the sessions were carried out as per the manual to provide the content they should

Question 11

how many participants continued to the 2 month follow up?

Answer 11

78

Question 12

how many participants continued to the 6 month follow up?

Answer 12

21

Question 13

what were the 3 research methods used?

Answer 13

• self report questionnaires
• observations rated by correctional officers and a member of staff
• databases to log incidents for 6 months after the programme

Question 14

describe the results (stats)

Answer 14

• STAXI questionnaire measuring anger expression = -2.9 controls, -4.4 ppts
• STAXI questionnaire measuring anger control= +0.5 controls, + 1.5 ppts

Question 15

describe the results immediately after the programme

Answer 15

not statistically significant

Question 16

describe the results at the two month follow up

Answer 16

statistically significant - ppts were continuing to make progress and manage anger

Question 17

describe the results at the six month follow up

Answer 17

not statistically significant

Question 18

in terms of individual differences, where was the biggest improvement observed?

Answer 18

• prisoners who had most intense anger and least control in the beginning
• those who were motivated to undergo treatment so readiness score has predictive validity

Question 19

describe the conclusions

Answer 19

• impact of anger management was small
• initial improvement not maintained over time
• controls also had positive outcomes so the questionnaire itself had benefits
• anger management increases self awareness so has educational applications

Question 20

evaluate the study (PEE)
- generalisability

Answer 20

the initial sample size had high generalisability. this is because it was a large sample of 418 experimental participants and 418 controls and there was a range of ethnic backgrounds, with different criminal history. for example, 42% were involved in crime resulting in bodily harm and 6% of the crimes caused death. therefore, this makes it representative of a wider population so findings can be generalised. however, only australian males were studied, making it androcentric and ethnocentric. also, only 78 ppts continued to the 2 month follow up and 21 to the 6 month follow up. therefore, the final sample size is considerably low so it is difficult to identify the long term effects, and research doesn’t account for other cultures or females which lowers the generalisability of the results.

Question 21

evaluate the study (PEE)
- reliability

Answer 21

the study has high reliability. this is because of the standardised procedures and use of triangulation in research methods. for example all participants filled out the same 6 questionnaires such as STAXI and WAKS and took part in the same Novaco’s framework anger management programme. three data collection methods were used; self report, observation from correctional officers and databases which are objective measures. therefore, the study is easy for other researchers to replicate and consistency can be checked for in the various measures.

Question 22

evaluate the study (PEE)
- applications

Answer 22

the study has practical applications. for example, it was shown that there was no significant difference pre and post treatment but those who were motivated, made the biggest improvement. therefore, this applies to the design of anger management programmes and could be useful to inform people about the importance of treatment readiness. additionally, it shows that accepting the need for treatment is significant for therapeutic purposes which assists in identifying suitable candidates for treatment.

Question 23

evaluate the study (PEE)
- high validity

Answer 23

the study has high validity. this is because of the use of various anger related questionnaires such as STAXI (measuring anger expression/control) and WAKS (measuring anger knowledge). therefore, the data is rich in both quantitative and qualitative forms so numerical values and averages can easily be compared, and qualitative data can provide a deeper explanation for behaviour e.g using a thematic analysis.

Question 24

evaluate the study (PEE)
- high ecological validity

Answer 24

the study has high ecological validity. this is because the anger management scheme was a naturally occurring treatment programme. therefore, it reflects natural behaviours and has a real life clinical application.

Question 25

evaluate the study (PEE)
- low validity

Answer 25

the study has low internal validity. this is because one of the research methods was self report questionnaires which focused on anger expression/control/knowledge. the use of self report methods reduces the validity because of the risk of social desirability bias. therefore, some participants may have answered in a way that made them appear favourable especially if they had been forced into the programme. so, the findings may lack accuracy and the DV is not a direct manipulation of the IV.

Question 26

what is an ethical issue?

Answer 26

control group treatment delayed