Introduction
The research on trait anger yields many different definitions. One of the most common definitions found referred to trait anger as the predisposition to observe several situations as frustrating and experience frequent states of anger. Anger in terms of the emotion itself was defined as “a basic emotion experienced by almost all human beings in response to the unwanted and unexpected behavior of others” (Tafrate, Kassinove, Dundin, 2002, p. 1573). There is a clear consensus that the emotion anger is experienced frequently my most. The difference in trait anger is that it is imbedded in one’s personality and tends to affect the way one views and reacts to the world. It especially affects those high in trait anger. Individuals with high trait anger may feel enraged often and can be sensitive to being treated unfairly. Trait anger can consist of interrelated elements of cynical beliefs and attributions, angry emotional states and aggressive or antagonistic behaviors.
An example to apply this would be: every day during fourth period Jane Doe always sits in the first seat on the third row. However, today when Jane walks in class Johnny was sitting in her seat. Jane scored high on trait anger so she immediately becomes upset and lashes out at Johnny. He tries to explain to Jane that he was sorry and did not know a seat meant that much to her but Jane is too frustrated to have a rational conversation with Johnny. Had Jane not been high in trait anger she may have been able to have a rational conversation with Johnny and explain to him that she sits there because she wears glasses and cannot see from the back of the class.
It is also important to note that within the research trait anger is sometimes used interchangeab...
... middle of paper ...
...ppens, P., & Tuerlinckx, F. (2007). Personality traits predicting anger in self-, ambiguous, and other caused unpleasant situations. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 1105-1115.
Lopez, F. G., & Thurman , C. W. (1993). High-trait and low-trait angry college students: a comparison of family environments. Journal of Counseling & Development, 71, 524-527.
Martin, R., Watson, D., & Wan, C. K. (2000). A Three-Factor Model of Trait Anger: Dimensions of Affect, Behavior, and Cognition. Journal of Personality, 68(5), 870-892.
Pietruska, K., & Armony, J. L. (2012). Differential effects of trait anger on optimism and risk behaviour. Cognition & Emotion, 27(2), 318-325. doi:10.1080/02699931.2012.703130
Tafrate , R. C., Kassinove , H., & Dundin , L. (2002). Anger Episodes in High- and Low-Trait-Abger Community Adults. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 58(12), 1573-1590.
This paper will examine Robert C. Solomon's Emotions and Choices article, to best identify what anger is, and to what extent a rational human being is responsible for their anger. Firstly, Solomon's argument must be described. A quick summation of Solomon's argument can be found in the following four points: Emotions are judgements, emotions are chosen, emotions serve a purpose, and emotions are rational.1 To quote Solomon, he explains that “Emotions are not occurrences, and do not happen to us. They ... may be chosen like an action.”2
Lefkowitz, Monroe M. 1977. Growing Up to be Violent: A Longitudinal Study of the Development of Aggression. New York: Pergamon.
If anger were a disease, there would be an epidemic in this country. Road Rage, spousal and child abuse, and a lack of civility are just a few examples. Emotionally mature people know how to control their thoughts and behaviors how to resolve conflict. Conflict is an inevitable art of school and work, but it can be resolved in a positive way.
...Bender, D. (2007). Social information processing, experiences of aggression in social contexts, and aggressive behaviour in adolescents. Criminal Justice and Behaviour, 34, 330-347.
Neuroticism boldly contrasts with the other personality traits in the Five Factor Model for personality (Openness, Agreeableness, Extraversion, Contentiousness, and Neuroticism). An individual being high in any of the other four traits could hardly be considered pathological. For example, high levels of agreeableness, within reason, would probably be considered to be a positive and healthy characteristic. However, the discussion regarding neuroticism certainly takes a darker turn. Gunthert, Cohen, and Armeli (1999) in their study, operationally define neuroticism as a predisposition to experience negative affect (negative emotional systems). Lahey (2009) defines it slightly differently, as the tendency to “respond with negative emotions to threat, frustration, or loss.” More generally, the personality trait is characterized by anxiety, angry hostility, depression, self-consciousness, impulsiveness, and vulnerability (Cervone & Pervin, 2010). Neuroticism has critical implications outside of personality psychology. Some researchers suggest that neuroticism is significantly correlated with both physical and mental health issues more so than any other personality trait variable. This increased risk is not just for a particular group of pathologies; neuroticism has been linked to Axis I and II disorders in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) across the board (Lahey, 2009). In some occupational performance studies, negative affect was negatively related to job performance (Kaplan, Bradley, Luchman, & Haynes, 2009). This may be extrapolated to individuals high in neuroticism, as it the trait is the predisposition for the experience of negative affect. Research on daily stress and coping showed th...
emphasized a lack of restraint. Popular psychology identified “the positive aspects of anger” and encouraged couples to communicate their desires to one another.
and pleasure, the body changes into a relaxed state. When an individual is angry different
Matthews, G., Deary, I. J., & Whiteman, M. C. (2009). Personality traits. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Anger can be partly physiological, cognitive, and psychological, and it is also pointedly ideological. Factors such as race, class, gender, sexuality, ethnicity, nation, and religion arouse anger (Kim1). Goldhor-lerner stated that:
aggression. For example, Brunner et al conducted a case study of a Dutch family where the
The of the most commonly referred to theories on this topic is the frustration aggression hypothesis, which was proposed, by Dollard, Doob, Miller, Mower and Sears in 1939. According to them frustration is often what leads to aggression. Research shows that frustration is more likely to lead to aggression if the aggressive behavior helps to relieve the frustration. They specifically state that frustration does not always result in aggression. There are specific identifiable circumstances where frustration turns into aggression. (Weinberg,
persons and how parents raise children to respond to facing frustration. Therefore, as a conclusion,
Raymond B. Cattell (1906-1998) studied the personality traits of large groups of people, calling the visible features of their personalities “surface traits.” During his studies, Cattell observed that certain “surface traits” would appear simultaneously in individuals. When Cattell noticed this trend occurring frequently he renamed the group of “surface traits” “source traits”. At the conclusion of his research Cattell identified sixteen “source traits.”
Friedman, H. S., & Schustack, M. W. (2012). Personality: Classic theories and modern research (5th ed). Boston , MA, USA: Pearson
Anger changes the behavior pattern of the person as a result of changes in his emotional status. it is accompanied by physiological and biological changes. Actions resulting from anger often lead to undesirable physiological and health consequences, because the neuro-transmitters/hormones (eg. adrenaline) released during anger intensify impulsive action and obscure rational