Howells et al 2005 Flashcards
Howells et al 2005 (contemporary study)
aims
To see if anger management is more effective than no treatment in producing change in anger related behaviors
to see if improvement in Treatment can be predicted by pre-treatment offender characteristics for example willingness to be treated
Howells et al 2005 (contemporary study)
Low generalisability andronic
the study has low generalisability
all 418 ppts were males (mean age is 28.8) in the study so its andronic
meaning the results that there is no sig diff in anger related behaviour improovments between the control group and the treatment group cant be generalised to women
Howells et al 2005 (contemporary study)
+ generalisability crime types
The 418 male participants with a mean age of 28.8 have a wide range of sentences between one month and 26 years and 4 months
all of which had different crimes but mainly violent crimes meaning that the results (that there is not a significant difference between the improvement of Anger Management between the experimental group and we control group) it is generalizable to many different types of violent crimes and therefore many different types of criminals
Howells et al 2005 (contemporary study)
high test retest reiability
Test reliability due to having a standardized procedure which consisted of 10 to our sessions of Anger Management program
where the control and experemental groups completed various measures ( such as the STAXI test for type of anger and the MOAS test for 4 categories of types of aggression including verbal, against property, auto and physical )at different times: before treatment and post-treatment (2mth/6mth)
Participants completed self-report outcome measures ( questionnaires about anger/triggers) each and the aggression was rated by two correctional offices or one staff member depending on if they were referred by prisons or community service
there were Databases were used to log instance for six months after the program had finished including the number of instance and the severity
Due to the standardized procedure making it so that other psychologists can easily replicate this study to find similar results, it means that the study is high test retest reliability
Howells et al 2005 (contemporary study)
Internal validity +/-
Randomised allocation of roles +
Self report -
+
There was a randomized trial meaning that there was an equal chance of offenders either being in the treatment group or the control group
decreasing allocation bias and experimenter bias as the sample was random
therefore increasing the internal validity as these factors could not invalidate the results
———
Low internal validity due to most of the measures being self-report
which has social desirability bias as offenders may put down that they are improving when in fact they are not so they can leave
which then means that the data is invalid and cause and effect between the anger management program and a reduction in anger-related behaviors cannot be established
therefore leading to an invalid conclusion
giving the study low internal validity
Howells et al 2005 (contemporary study)
high ecological validity
Due to the anger management programs taking place in real life of real life offenders
it means that the result that there isn’t a significant difference between the improved anger management between the control group and the treatment group can be applied to real life as it has occurred in real life
therefore giving this to the High ecological validity
Howells et al 2005 (contemporary study)
+/- ethics
+
Support with given to those of literacy issues meaning that there is high accessibility which is ethical
––
the control group had treatments delayed for them which possibly cause harm to others
– they might have had an aggressive outburst towards others
– therefore affecting them and the community possibly causing physical harm and psychological harm which isn’t ethical
Howells et al 2005 (contemporary study)
conclusion and aplication
Inconclusion it was found that the treatment groups improved slightly more than the control group in terms of ability to manage anger but this was not statistically significant
There was a improvement in anger managment ability two months after the study had finished ( stat sig compared to pre treatment) but the rate of this improvement was not carried on to the six month post treatment
The treatment group had significantly increased knowledge of aggression compared to the control group
Readiness school had predictive validity as increased readiness meant that there was more likely to be less aggression post treatment
those who had difficulties of Anger Management significantly improved in this post-program
And there was no significant change in the control group
Overall the impact of amps was small and there was no significant difference between the treatment group and the control group in terms of Anger Management level
An application of this study is that those in prison (violent offender) who are willing to learn and those who have difficulties in anger management should be prioritized when selecting prisoners for anger management as these types of people will improve the most
