dealing with offenders - anger management

• anger management

  • anger management is a form of CBT with the aim to reduce an emotional response by reconceptualising the emotion using a range of cognitive behavioural skills
  • anger management has become one of the most important rehabilitation programmes
  • the goal of CBT is not to cure anger, but to teach participants to recognise and control their anger (arousal regulation) as well as their thinking patterns (cognitive restructuring) and may involve teaching and developing behavioural strategies like conflict resolution, withdrawal and self-talk
• Raymond Novaco (2011-2013)

  • identified three aims for an anger management programme
  • cognitive restructuring- greater self-awareness and control over cognitive dimensions of anger
  • regulations of arousal- leaning to control the psychological state
  • behavioural strategies- such as problem-solving skills, strategic withdrawal and assertiveness
• three steps

  • cognitive preparation

  o   a generic learning about anger takes place, particularly focusing on how it can be adaptive or non-adaptive

  o   this prisoner will then spend some time reflecting on their own patterns of anger and identify situation that provoke anger

  • skill acquisition

  o   clients are taught various skills to help manage their anger, such as self-regulation, cognitive flexibility and relaxation

  o   they are also taught communication skills so they can better resolve conflicts assertively, without being angry

  • application training

  o   clients apply their skills to non-threatening and controlled situations such as role plays

  o   afterwards, they receive extensive feedback from therapists about their response. Later on, clients can the apply their learning to real life
• Jane Ireland (2004)

  • wanted to assess the effectiveness of anger management therapy with 87 young offenders
  • baseline measurement taken- self-report questionnaire and an assessment completed by prison officers
  • 50 took part in the programme, while 37 were on the waiting list
  • the treatment was 12 one-hour sessions over three days
  • eight weeks later all participants were assessed using the self-report assessment by prison officers
  • significant difference in those who attended the programme, and no difference in those who did not participate
• TImothy Trimble et al (2015)

  • 105 offenders on probation in Northern Ireland
  • the condition of their probation was to attend the programme
  • this included those whose anger and poor emotional control predisposed them to offend
  • 9 weekly sessions lasting two hours, with a 25-minute break
  • significant reduction in the expression of anger, as well as the amount of anger experienced among offenders compared to pre-treatment scores
• mixed evidence

  • Taylor and Novaco (2006)- reported 75% improvement rates based on 6 meta-analyses
  • Landenberger and Lipsey (2005)- analysed 58 studies using CBT with offenders. Anger control element was significantly related to the amount of improvement
  • but not all research has proven to support the use of anger management programmes
• methodological issues

  • it is difficult to make comparisons and draw similarities between programmes and their effectiveness due to differences in how they are carried out
  • some courses are run by psychologists, some by prison staff
  • some programmes are just over a few days, others longer
  • some programmes target a wide range of issues, others are just one
  • some assess through self-report, other observations
• individual differences

  • CBT doesn’t work for everyone
  • if programmes are voluntary, some may drop out
  • an alternative is a drama-based group which can be more engaging
  • one way to assess whether someone will engage in a programme, would be to measure a “readiness to change” before the start of the programme
• are crimes linked to aggression and anger - Loza and Loza-Fanous (1999)

  • criticised previous studies for the use of lab conditions and students
  • studied 300 males in prison
  • found no differences between violent and non-violent offenders in terms of anger – but this can be explained through masking
  • they also note a danger between linking anger and violent behaviour
  • the problem becomes an issue with anger, rather than taking personal responsibility for the crime