Contemporary Study: Howells et al (2005)

Question 1

What were the aims of this study?

Answer 1

• To see whether anger management is more effective in producing change than no treatment
• To see if pre-treatment offender characteristics can predict any improvement in treatment

Question 2

Who were used in the sample?

Answer 2

• 418 Australian male offenders
• Sentences ranging from 1 month to 26 years
• Mean age of 28.8 years

Question 3

What kind of crime did the majority of the participants commit?

Answer 3

42% committed violence without bodily harm.

Question 4

What kind of crime did the lowest percentile of volunteers commit?

Answer 4

6% committed injuries causing death.

Question 5

What percentage of the participants hadn’t completed an anger management programme before?

Answer 5

73%

Question 6

List 3 examples of the questionnaires and what they measured.

Answer 6

1) STAXI
- How the offender’s anger is expressed
2) WAKS
- Understanding of how to deal with their anger
3) STRS
- Treatment readiness

Question 7

What was the IV and DV?

Answer 7

IV = Anger management vs. no anger management
DV = The effectiveness and progress of the programme

Question 8

Briefly describe the procedure of this contemporary study.

Answer 8

• 418 male Australian offenders were put on an anger management programme 73% of which had never been on one before
• The AM programme lasted 10, two hour sessions that were focused on the cognitive approach
• It was based on Norace (1997) with structured exercises looking at skills of identifying provoking situations, relaxation, assertion, prevention of relapse and restructuring
• During this time some ppts completed a checklist of the content covered
• Ppts in experimental and control answered 6 different questionnaires through self-report (such as WAKS to measure understanding of how to deal with anger and STRS to measure treatment readiness)
• Those in the control group were put on the waiting list received treatment after the study

Question 9

Why was it important for a facilitator and participant to complete a checklist of each of the sessions conducted?

Answer 9

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

Question 10

Describe the results of Howells’ study.

Answer 10

• There was no statistically significant differences between pre-treatment and post-treatment however those who were motivated to change improved the most
• There was a slight improvement for those in treatment condition where gains could still be seen 2 months after
• Treatment group improved by 1.5 in controlling their anger compared to 0.5 increase for control
• Treatment group improved by 1.8 in their understanding of anger compared to 0.95 increase for control

Question 11

Describe the conclusions.

Answer 11

• The overall impact of the anger management programme was small
• Offenders who were motivated to change showed greatest improvements and those who were poorly motivated showed less or no change

Question 12

Evaluate the generalisablity using a high and low point.

Answer 12

P - High
E - 418 ppts is a large sample 
E - Generalisable to wider population 
P - Low
E - Only used men
E - Sample is androcentric and so not representative of females.

Question 13

Evaluate the reliability using a high and low point.

Answer 13

P - High
E - Standardised programme that involves 10 two hour sessions with focus on identifying triggers
E - Can be replicated easily to test for consistency as all programmes were delivered the same way
P - Low
E - Control group showed similar improvements as treatment group
E - Questions reliability of whether treatment works and so may be ineffective

Question 14

Are there any applications?

Answer 14

P - Yes
E - Showed that there were no significant differences pre and post treatment however those who were motivated to change showed greatest improvement
E - Therefore this could be useful to inform those designing the programmes about the importance of treatment readiness

Question 15

Evaluate validity using a high and low point.

Answer 15

P - High
E - Range of scales like WAKS and STRS to measure things such as aggressive traits, the intensity, and motivation to change
E - This means that data is rich in qualitative and quantitative forms
P - Low
E - Uses self-report data such as ppts stating their understanding of how to deal with aggression effectively in the WAKS scale
E - This data will be open to social desirability as many want to look better than they are because some may have been forced onto the programme

Question 16

Evaluate an ethical consideration.

Answer 16

P - Good
E - The control group were still offered the anger management programme 2 weeks afterwards
E - This ensures that all ppts benefit from taking part