The State Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI)
The STAXI was developed with two goals in mind.. The first
was to develop a measure of the components of anger in the context of both
normal and abnormal personality. The second goal seems rather more specific to
a particular research orientation - in this case examining the contribution of
anger to the development or exacerbation of medical conditions such as
hypertension, coronary heart disease, and cancer.
As the name implies there are two
fundamental aspects of anger which are addressed - the experience of anger, and
the expression of anger. The experience of anger can be understood in the
context of state - subjective feelings that vary from irritability to intense
rage, and trait anger which refers to a disposition to perceive situations as
annoying and to respond to these situations by more frequent expressions of
state anger. Thus state and trait anger are unlikely to actually be independent
characteristics or components of anger.
When expressing anger, it may be
focused outward on other people or objects (Anger-Out), or directed inward
(Anger-In). A third component is the degree to which people attempt to control
their expression of anger (Anger Control).
The STAXI is designed to be
administered to people aged 13 through adulthood with a minimum fifth grade
reading level. The task of administering the test is straightforward,
essentially self-administered, but interpretation of test scores requires
formal training in assessment. There are no time limits imposed on completing
the STAXI, but it is a brief test and most people complete it within 15
minutes.
STAXI
Scales:
The STAXI consists of 44 items which
are distributed across the five main scales. Consistent with the
conceptualisation of anger above there are three main aspects to the STAXI
scales: State, Trait, and Anger Expression. Trait contains two subscales that
examine different dispositions in trait anger - temperament and reaction. Anger
Expression is actually an experimental composite of the three expression
constructs -In, Out, and Control.
|
STATE |
TRAIT |
ANGER
EXPRESSION |
|
(S-Anger) |
(T-Anger) |
(AX/EX) |
|
|
Angry
Temperament |
Anger-In
(AX/In) |
|
|
(T-Anger/T) |
Anger-Out
(AX/Out) |
|
|
Angry
Reaction |
Anger
Control (AX/Con) |
|
|
(T-Anger/R) |
|
S-Anger
- This is a 10-item stand-alone scale which measures the respondent's current
feelings of anger.
T-Anger
- This scale also contains 10 items which asks the respondent to answer
questions about his or her disposition towards anger.
T-Anger/T - is a subscale of T-Anger
consisting of 4 items that generally address the disposition to express anger
without provocation.
T-Anger/R - is a subscale of T-Anger
also consisting of 4 items that ask about the respondent's disposition to
express anger when provoked.
AX/In
- this 8 item scale measures the frequency with which the respondent holds in
or suppresses his or her anger.
AX/Out
- this 8 item scale measures the frequency with which the respondent expresses
her anger to other people or objects.
AX/Con
- another 8 item scale that attempts to measure the degree to which the
respondent attempts to control his or her expression of anger.
AX/EX
- this is an experimental composite score that is designed to represent the
combination of AX/In, AX/Out, and AX/Con and essentially examines the overall
frequency of anger expression. AX/EX is computed with the following formula:
AX/EX = AX/Out + AX/In - AX/Con +16.
The
addition of 16 at the end may seem unusual but it is designed to ensure that a
negative score cannot be achieved. Since the four possible responses to each
item are assigned a number between 1 and 4 and each of the AX scales has 8
questions, the minimum total for each scale is 8, and the maximum score is 32.
The lowest possible score would be minimum In and Out and maximum Con which
would be 8+8-32 = -16. Adding 16 to this total would give 0. Similarly if Out
and In were at maximum and Con was at minimum the total would be 32+32-8+16 =
72. For this reason the raw score range for AX/EX is 0 to 72.
All
items are rated on a four-point scale and are assigned a score of between 1 and
4.
Raw
score totals are converted to percentile ranks and T-scores using normative
tables. There are separate normative tables for males and female adolescents,
adults, and college students. There are also special population normative
tables for .
Standardisation:
The
normative sample for the STAXI is an impressive 9,000 subjects broken down in
the following way:
3,769
Adults. Mean age of the combined sample was 40 years. This group was comprised
of heterogenous samples that included managerial, technical, clerical, sales,
and factory workers (360 males, 328 females); people participating in a stress
management program (202 males, 93 females); health care managers (16 males, 131
females); military personnel (1890 males, 104 females) and a small sample of
postal workers (33 males, 23 females).
Don't bother adding it up - they're 589 short!
2,762
Undergraduate college students the vast majority of whom (2,122 - 777 males,
1,345 females) were enrolled in Introductory Psychology units. The remaining
640 (600 males, 40 females) were cadets at West Point (U.S. Military Academy).
Notice that while the combined gender totals are very similar (1377 males, 1385
females) they are the product of two extremely gender biased samples. Median
age was 19 years.
2,469
adolescents in junior and senior high schools. Median age was 14 years.
Influence
of Demographic Variables:
Age:
Age appears to have a profound
effect on STAXI scores. Adolescents score highest and adults score lowest on
all measures - this is used to justify the use of these three separate
normative groups. However, within the adult group there is also a significant
effect of age - responses by 18-30 year olds were higher than those of the
31-40, and 41+ age groups. Interestingly, no separate norms are made available
for 18-30 year-olds and 31+ adults.
Sex:
Minimal differences were found
across the three samples in terms of the gender of respondents. Again this is
interesting as the norms provided are separate for males and females. The
variable that does not impact on scores (sex) is accounted for and the variable
that does impact on scores (age) is not - at least in the adult sample.
Interpreting
Scores:
Raw scores are converted into percentile
ranks for interpretative purposes. Scores that are commonly found in the middle
fifty percent of the distribution - the 25th to 75th
percentiles are considered to fall within the normal range. Individuals with
high anger scores (above the 75th percentile) are endorsing levels
of state, trait, expression, or control that are likely to impair their optimal
functioning. Very high scores would fall at or above the 90th
percentile. The distributions for S-Anger and T-Anger/T are so skewed that low
scores are unlikely to be interpretable. Individuals who score below the 25th
percentile on the remaining six scales, however, generally experience, express,
or control relatively little anger.
Reliability:
|
|
Adults |
College Students |
Adolescents |
|||
|
Scale |
Males |
Females |
Males |
Females |
Males |
Females |
|
S-Anger |
.90 |
.91 |
.93 |
.90 |
.87 |
.90 |
|
T-Anger |
.82 |
.82 |
.82 |
.83 |
.82 |
.84 |
|
T-Anger/T |
.89 |
.88 |
.88 |
.89 |
.85 |
.85 |
|
T-Anger/R |
.69 |
.69 |
.71 |
.70 |
.65 |
.70 |
|
AX/In |
.86 |
.81 |
.73 |
.74 |
.84 |
.81 |
|
AX/Out |
.75 |
.78 |
.75 |
.77 |
.73 |
.75 |
|
AX/Con |
.81 |
|
.85 |
.84 |
|
|
Validity:
Validity for the STAXI scales is based primarily upon convergent and divergent validity. Essentially this is established through showing high correlations among tests that are purported to measure the same or similar constructs and low correlations among tests that measure distinct or different constructs.
When examining these correlation tables remember to square the correlation coefficient in order to get an estimate of the shared variance among the two measures. So, in general T-Anger correlates highly with other measures of hostility (although note the low correlation with MMPI Overt Hostility – only 9% of the variance (.3 x .3) versus 49% of the variance (.69 x .69) for the BDHI). Also compare what constitutes a large relationship in Table 2 presumably supporting the validity of the measure with those reported in Table 3 for other non-anger measures.
Table 2. Mean Correlations of T-Anger with Measures of Hostility
|
Scale |
T-Anger |
|
Buss-Durkee
Hostility Inventory |
.69 |
|
MMPI
Hostility scale |
.50 |
|
MMPI Overt
Hostility scale |
.30 |
Table 3. Mean Correlations of T-Anger and S-Anger Scales with Other Personality Scales
|
Scale |
S-Anger |
T-Anger |
|
Eysenck
Personality Questionnaire Extraversion |
-.06 |
-0.01 |
|
Eysenck
Personality Questionnaire Neuroticism |
0.35 |
0.50 |
|
Eysenck
Personality Questionnaire Psychoticism |
0.27 |
0.21 |
|
Eysenck
Personality Questionnaire Lie |
-0.8 |
-0.23 |
|
|
|
|
|
State-Trait
Personality Inventory State-Anxiety |
0.63 |
0.22 |
|
State-Trait
Personality Inventory Trait-Anxiety |
0.33 |
0.38 |
|
State-Trait
Personality Inventory State -Curiosity |
-0.13 |
-0.12 |
|
State-Trait
Personality Inventory Trait-Curiosity |
-0.16 |
-0.8 |
Similarly, the Anger expression measures seem to be as highly correlated with measures of anxiety as they are to other measures of anger.
Table 4. Mean Anger Expression Scale Correlations
|
Scale |
AX/In |
Ax/Out |
Ax/Ex |
|
Anger-provoking
Situations |
|
|
|
|
Angry Teacher |
-0.34 |
0.31 |
0.48 |
|
Movie Line |
-0.34 |
0.27 |
0.45 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
State
Trait Anger Expression Inventory |
|
|
|
|
State -Anger |
0.24 |
0.10 |
-0.12 |
|
Trait -Anger |
0.27 |
0.56 |
0.17 |
|
Trait -Anger/T |
0.14 |
0.49 |
0.23 |
|
Trait -Anger/R |
0.34 |
0.27 |
-0.09 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
State
Trait Personality Inventory |
|
|
|
|
State-Anxiety |
0.28 |
0.09 |
-0.13 |
|
Trait-Anxiety |
0.27 |
0.26 |
-0.01 |
|
State -Curiosity |
0.05 |
-0.01 |
-0.08 |
|
Trait -Curiosity |
-0.02 |
0.01 |
-0.03 |
Whether or not these relationships reflect good or poor validity depends upon the degree to which you expect the different measures of anger to be independent of other personality characteristics. Spielberger certainly presents this data as being consistent with his theoretical and empirical expectations.
Note: All
tables and other information derived from Spielberger, C. (1988). State-Trait
Anger Expression Inventory, Research Edition. Professional Manual. Psychological
Assessment Resources: Odessa, Florida.
Tuesday,
13 November 2001
© 2001 by Graeme Senior, Ph.D.
Senior Lecturer
Department of Psychology
University of Southern Queensland
Toowoomba, QLD 4350
Australia