Hostname: page-component-6766d58669-nf276 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-16T12:02:02.062Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Aggression Questionnaire: A Validation Study in Student Samples

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 April 2014

Ana García-León ,
Gustavo A. Reyes ,
Jaime Vila ,
Nieves Pérez ,
Humbelina Robles  and
Manuel M. Ramos
Ana García-León*
Affiliation:
University of Jaén
Gustavo A. Reyes
Affiliation:
University of Jaén
Jaime Vila
Affiliation:
University of Granada
Nieves Pérez
Affiliation:
University of Granada
Humbelina Robles
Affiliation:
University of Granada
Manuel M. Ramos
Affiliation:
University of Jaén
*
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Ana García León, Dpto. de Psicología. Facultad de Humanidades y Ciencias de la Educación.Universidad de Jaén. Paraje de las Lagunillas, s/n. 23071 Jaén (Spain). E-mail: angarcia@ujaen.es
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The goal of this study was to examine the psychometric properties of the Aggression Questionnaire (AQ) in Spain. The AQ is a 29-item instrument designed to measure the different dimensions of the hostility/anger/aggression construct. It consists of 4 subscales that assess: (a) anger, (b) hostility, (c) verbal aggression, and (d) physical aggression. In Study 1, reliability, construct validity, and convergent validity were evaluated in a group of 384 male and female university students. Test-retest reliability was evaluated using a group of 154 male and female university students. The results of the factor analysis were similar to the scale structure claimed for this instrument. The subscales also showed internal consistency and stability over time. The AQ and its subscales were also compared with the scales and subscales of the Spielberger State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI), the Cook-Medley Hostility Scale (Ho), the Buss-Durkee Hostility Inventory (BDHI), and the Jenkins Activity Survey-Form H (JASE-H). The results show that the AQ evaluates some aspects of anger, such as Anger-Trait and Anger-Out, rather than other elements, such as Anger-In or Anger-State. In Study 2, two new male groups were used to evaluate the criterion validity of the AQ: 57 prison inmates and 93 university students, finding that this instrument discriminated between the scores obtained by common offenders and university students.

El objetivo de este estudio fue examinar las propiedades psicométricas del Cuestionario de Agresión (AQ) en España. El AQ es un instrumento de 29 ítems que mide las distintas dimensiones del constructo hostilidad/ira/agresión. Consta de 4 subescalas que evalúan: (a) ira, (b) hostilidad, (c) agresión verbal y (d) agresión física. En el Estudio 1 se evaluó la fiabilidad, la validez de constructo y la validez convergente en un grupo de 384 estudiantes universitarios de ambos sexos. También se midió la fiabilidad test-retest, usando un grupo de 154 estudiantes universitarios de ambos sexos. Los resultados del análisis factorial revelaron una estructura similar a la encontrada con muestras de habla inglesa. Las subescalas mostraron una adecuada consistencia interna y fiabilidad test-retest. Igualmente, se calcularon las correlaciones existentes entre el AQ y otros instrumentos de medida del constructo, tales como el Inventario de Expresión y Estado-Rasgo de Ira de Spielberger (STAXI), la Escala de Hostilidad de Cook y Medley (Ho), el Inventario de Hostilidad de Buss-Durkee (BDHI) y la forma H de la Escala de Actividad de Jenkins (JASE-H). Los resultados sugieren que el AQ evalúa algunos aspectos de la ira tales como Ira-Rasgo e Ira-Externa más que otros elementos como Ira-Interna o Ira-Estado. En el Estudio 2 se evaluó la validez de criterio del AQ a partir de dos grupos de varones: 57 reclusos que habían cometido diversos tipos de delitos y 93 estudiantes universitarios. En este caso, se encontró que las puntuaciones obtenidas en el instrumento permitían discriminar entre ambos grupos de sujetos.

Keywords

angerhostilityaggressionquestionnairefactor analysisirahostilidadagresióncuestionarioanálisis factorial

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Spanish Journal of Psychology , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , May 2002 , pp. 45 - 53
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ando, A., Soga, S., Yamasaki, K., Shimai, S., Shimada, H., Utsuki, N., Oashi, O., & Sakai, A. (1999). Development of the Japanese version of the Buss-Perry Aggression Questionnaire (BAQ). Shinrigaku Kenkyu, 70, 384–392.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barefoot, J.C. (1992). Developments in the measurement of hostility. In Friedman, H.S. (Ed.), Hostility, coping and health (pp. 13–31). Washington, DC.: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barefoot, J.C., & Lipkus, I.M. (1994). The assessment of anger and hostility. In Siegman, A.W. & Smith, T.W. (Eds.), Anger, hostility and the heart (pp. 43–66). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bendig, A.W. (1962). Factor analytic scales of covert and overt hostility. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 26, 200.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bermúdez, J., Pérez García, A.M., & Sánchez-Elvira, A. (1991). Inventario de medida del patrón de conducta tipo-A: JASE-H. Unpublished manuscript, Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia, Madrid.Google Scholar
Bermúdez, J., Sánchez-Elvira, A., & Fernández, E. (1994, September). Contenido del Inventario de Hostilidad de Cook y Medley (ICM): implicaciones pronocoronarias. Paper presented at the IV Congreso de Evaluación Psicológica, Santiago de Compostela, España.Google Scholar
Bernstein, I.H., & Gesn, P. R. (1997). On the dimensionality of the Buss/Perry Aggression Questionnaire. Behavior Research and Therapy, 35, 563–568.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Biaggio, M.K. (1994). Studies of the experience, expression and control of anger in Brazil. Paper presented at the 23rd International Congress of Applied Psychology, Madrid, Spain.Google Scholar
Biaggio, M.K., & Maiuro, R.D. (1983). Recent advances in anger assessment. In Butcher, J.N. & Spielberger, C.D. (Eds.), Advances in personality assessment (pp. 71–111). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Biaggio, M.K., Supplee, K., & Curtis, N. (1981). Reliability and validity of four anger scales. Journal of Personality Assessment, 45, 639–648.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bishop, G.D., & Quah, S. (1998). Reliability and validity of measures of anger/hostility in Singapore: Cook & Medley Ho Scale, STAXI, and Buss-Durkee Hostility Inventory. Personality and Individual Differences, 24, 867–878.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brody, L.R. (1985). Gender differences in emotional development: A review of theories and research. Journal of Personality, 53, 102–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buss, A.H., & Durkee, A. (1957). An inventory for assessing different kinds of hostility. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 21, 343–349.Spanish version: García-León, A., Pérez-Marfil, M.N., Valencia-Naranjo, N.J., Muñoz-López, J., & Reyes del Paso, G.A. The Buss-Durkee Hostility Inventory: Its adaptation to the Spanish population. Paper presented at the 23rd International Congress of Applied Psychology, Madrid, Spain. 1994b, May.’CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buss, A.H., & Perry, M. (1992). The Aggression Questionnaire. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 452–459.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Capprara, G.V., Cinanni, V., D'Imperio, G., Passerini, S., Renzi, P., & Travaglia, G. (1985). Indicators of impulsive aggression: Present status research of Irritability and Emotional Susceptibility Scales. Personality and Individual Differences, 6, 665–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cook, W., & Medley, D. (1954). Proposed hostility for pharisaic-virtue skills of the MMPI. Journal of Applied Psychology, 38, 414–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(Spanish version: García-León, A., Pérez, M.N., Robles, H., & Valencia, N. J.Estudio psicométrico del Cook-Medley Hostility Scale (Ho). Paper presented at the IV Congreso de Evaluación Psicológica, Santiago de Compostela, Spain. 1994a, September.)Google Scholar
Costa, P.T., Zonderman, A.B., McCrae, R.R., & Williams, R.B. (1986). Cynicism and paranoid alienation in the Cook and Medley Hostility Scale. Psychosomatic Medicine, 48, 283–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernández-Abascal, E.G., & Martín, M.D. (1995). El síndrome AHA y su relación con los trastornos cardiovasculares. Ansiedad y Estrés, 0, 25–36.Google Scholar
Forgays, D.G., Forgays, D.K., & Spielberger, C.D. (1997). Factor structure of the State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory. Journal of Personality Assessment, 69, 497–507.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fuqua, D.R., Leonard, E., Masters, M.A., Smith, R.J., Campbell, J.L., & Fischer, P.C. (1991). A structural analysis of the State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 51, 439–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
García-León, A. (1999). Efectos de la hostilidad/ira sobre la reactividad cardiovascular en paradigmas tónicos y fásicos (la Respuesta Cardíaca de Defensa). Jaén, Spain: Servicio de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Jaén.Google Scholar
Hardy, J., & Smith, T. (1988). Cynical hostility and vulnerability to disease: Social support, life stress, and physiological response to conflict. Health Psychology, 7, 447–459.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harris, J.A. (1995). Confirmatory factor analysis of the Aggression Questionnaire. Behavior Research and Therapy, 8, 991–993.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, J.A. (1997). A further evaluation of the Aggression Questionnaire: Issues of validity and reliability. Behavior, Research and Therapy, 35, 1047–1053.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kjell, H. (1994, May). Factor structure of the Norwegian adaptation of Spielberger's State-Trait Anger Expression Scale (STAXI). Paper presented at the 23rd International Congress of Applied Psychology, Madrid, Spain.Google Scholar
Krantz, D.S., Glass, D.C., & Snyder, M.L. (1974). Helplessness, stress level, and the coronary-prone behavior pattern. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 10, 284–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(Spanish translation: Bermúdez, J., Pérez García, A.M., & Sánchez-Elvira, A. (1991). Inventario de medida del patrón de conducta tipo-A: JASE-H. Unpublished manuscript, Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia, Madrid.)Google Scholar
Miguel-Tobal, J.J., Casado, M.I., Cano-Vindel, A., & Spielberger, C. D. (1997). El estudio de la ira en los trastornos cardiovasculares mediante el empleo del Inventario de Expresión de Ira-Estado-Rasgo (STAXI). Ansiedad y Estrés, 3, 5–20.Google Scholar
Smith, T.W., & Frohm, K.D. (1985). What's so unhealthy about hostility? Construct validity and psychological correlates of the Cook and Medley Ho scale. Health Psychology, 4, 503–520.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Spielberger, C.D. (1988). State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
(Spanish Version: Fernández-Abascal, E.G., & Martín, M.D., (1995). El síndrome AHA y su relación con los trastornos cardiovasculares. Ansiedad y Estrés, 0, 25–36.)Google Scholar
Taugney, J.P., Wagner, P., Fletcher, C., & Gramzow, R. (1992). Shamed into anger? The relation of shame and guilt to anger and self-reported aggression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 669–675.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, T.Y., Boyd, J.C., Cascardi, M.A., & Poythress, N. (1996). Factor structure and convergent validity of the Aggression Questionnaire in an offender population. Psychological Assessment, 8, 398–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar