Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
×
Home

The Metacognitive Anger Processing (MAP) Scale: Preliminary Testing

  • Stine Bjerrum Moeller (a1)

Abstract

Background: Few studies have explored the metacognitive components of anger, and at present there is no metacognitive framework on anger incorporating both positive and negative beliefs about anger and distinct maladaptive processing routines, such as rumination. Aims: The aim of the present preliminary studies was to apply a metacognitive framework to anger and put forward a new anger self-report scale, the Metacognitive Anger Processing (MAP) scale, intended as a supplement to existing measures of anger disposition and to enhance anger treatment targets. Method: The new measure was tested in a nonclinical and a clinical sample together with measures of anger and metacognition to establish factor structure, reliability, concurrent, and convergent validity. Results: The MAP showed a reliable factor structure with three factors - Positive Beliefs about anger, Negative Beliefs about anger, and Rumination; good internal reliability, and test-retest reliability. The subscales showed positive correlations with anger and the pattern of correlation with the general metacognitive measure supported the idea that the MAP represents dimensions of metacognition as it relates to anger. Conclusions: The present data indicate that positive as well as negative beliefs are involved in the tendency to ruminate about angry emotions. Clinical interventions may benefit from an exploration of the patient´s experience of anger, as structured by the MAP's factors and their interrelationships. The psychometric properties of the MAP should be further investigated in clinical samples using larger test batteries and objective measures of aggression.

Copyright

Corresponding author

Reprint requests to Stine Bjerrum Moeller, Mental Health Centre North Zealand, University of Copenhagen, Dyrehavevej 48, DK 3400 Hilleroed, Denmark. E-mail: stine.bjerrum.moeller@regionh.dk.

References

Hide All
Moeller, S. B., Novaco, R. W., Heinola-Nielsen, V. and Hougaard, H. (2015). Validation of the Novaco Anger Scale - Provocation Inventory (Danish) with non-clinical, clinical, and offender samples. Assessment, May, 113.
Novaco, R. W. (2003). The Novaco Anger Scale and Provocation Inventory. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
Novaco, R. W. (2010). Anger and psychopathology. In Potegal, M., Stemmler, G. and Spielberger, C. (Eds.), International Handbook of Anger (pp.465497). New York: Springer.
Simpson, C. and Papageorgiou, C. (2003). Metacognitive beliefs about rumination in anger. Cognitive and Behavioral Practice, 10, 9194.
Wells, A. (2000). Emotional Disorders and Metacognition: innovative cognitive therapy. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Wells, A. and Cartwright-Hatton, S. (2004). A short form of the metacognitions questionnaire: properties of the MCQ-30. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 42, 385396.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy
  • ISSN: 1352-4658
  • EISSN: 1469-1833
  • URL: /core/journals/behavioural-and-cognitive-psychotherapy
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords

Type Description Title
WORD
Supplementary materials

Moeller supplementary material
Moeller supplementary material 1

 Word (89 KB)
89 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed

The Metacognitive Anger Processing (MAP) Scale: Preliminary Testing

  • Stine Bjerrum Moeller (a1)
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.

×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *