Multidimensional School Anger Inventory: A Cross-National Comparison

Purpose
Despite increased awareness among educators that the mismanagement of anger among
adolescents can lead to significant challenges for both students and their schools, the
measurement of this fundamental emotion has been limited. Recently, several instruments have
been developed for use specifically with youth: Adolescent Anger Scale, the Aggression
Questionnaire, and the Children’s Inventory of Anger. These instruments focus on anger-related
experiences, but not specifically on how this emotion manifests itself in school settings. The
Multidimensional School Anger Inventory (MSAI) was developed to fill this need.
To date, several studies have examined the MSAI’s psychometric properties (e.g.,
Boman, et al., 2001; Furlong et al., 2002) and its continued enhancement. These studies have
been conducted with diverse samples in the United States and Australia; however, interest about
the expression of anger and aggression in school settings cuts across international borders. To
further explore the utility of the MSAI, this poster will report on an investigation of the use of
the MSAI in the United States, Australia, Peru, and Guatemala.
Method
Measurement. The MSAI is based on a three-component model of the global anger
process that involves an emotional-affective component, a cognitive hostility-cynicism
component, and a behavioral-expressive component. Alpha coefficients are .86 for Anger
Experience, .80 for Hostility, .82 for Destructive Expression, and .68 for Positive Coping. Test-
retest reliabilities over a six-month period ranged from .56 to .62 for the four subscales. Some
recent studies support the construct and predictive validity of the MSAI. For example, Boman et
al. (2003) found that Australian secondary students who manifested helpless attributional styles
and a general sense of pessimism were more likely on the MSAI to report higher levels of anger,
express greater hostility toward school, and to more readily engage in acts of destructive
expression.
Participants
Data have been collected on samples from the United States, Australia, Peru, and Guatemala (the
latter data are being processed at this time). The overall sample consists of 873 USA general
education students (409 males, 464 females, mean age = 16.2); 244 USA EBD students (174
males, 70 females, mean age = 15.0), 494 Australian general education students (285 males, 210
females, mean age = 15.0), and 224 Peruvian general education students (152 males, 71 females,
mean age 14.5).
Procedure
The MSAI English version was used in Australia with minor modifications to reflect
local word usage. The MSAI was first translated for use in Peru and was independently
translated for use in Guatemala. The differences in the Spanish translations were slight,
reflecting local word preferences. The Spanish translations were independently back-translated
into English by an investigator who is a native-Spanish speaker. Students anonymously
completed a paper-and-pencil version of the MSAI that was administered by trained proctors in a
classroom setting.
Results
Table 1 shows a preliminary comparison of the students’ responses for selected Anger
Experience subscale items. These results provide preliminary evidence of significant differences
in the intensity of Anger Experience for youths across countries.
 We will present the results of the following analyses:
(a) Are the constructs measured by the MSAI (anger experience, hostility, anger
coping, and destructive expression) invariant across all samples? The MSAI constructs have
been examined in a series of exploratory factor analyses with both male and female samples. In
this investigation, we will use RASCH item analysis and confirmatory factor analysis to examine
the invariance of the four-factor MSAI structure for each national sample. This structure will be
compared to a one-factor model.
(b) Do youth across national samples obtain similar scores on the MSAI? Analyses
will examine differences in the intensity of responses across all four subscales. This will be
carried out as a 2(male-female) by 5 (USA Non-EBD, USA EBD, Australia, Peru, Guatemala) x
4 (Anger Experience, Hostility, Destructive Expression, Positive Coping) MANOVA.
Discussion
Considerable conceptual confusion surrounds the use of the terms anger and hostility in
the literature. At its most basic level, anger refers to an emotional reaction to a perceived internal
or external provocation (Miller et al., 1996; Novaco, 1985). Anger varies in intensity from mild
irritation to extreme rage. It can be viewed as a transitory state or a stable and general disposition
to experience this emotion more frequently and intensely (Spielberger, Jacobs, Russell, & Crane,
1985). Research has, in fact, distinguished between state anger, or the degree of angry affect
experienced at a particular moment in response to a particular situation, and trait anger, or one’s
disposition to experience angry affect across a range of situations. Just as anger varies from one
student to another, it is of interest to school psychologists and other educators to develop
assessment resources that help them to better understand students’ emotional experiences. It is
also important to build comparative, empirically derived information about how the emotion of
anger manifests itself across cultures. As such, this poster session will offer information to guide
the appropriate use of the MSAI and contribute to comparative school psychology research.

Table 1

Group Means and comparisons for the Multidimensional School Anger Inventory Five Selected Items

MANOVA Group Differences (F = 36.96; p <.001)

USA-High Australia2 USA-EBD3 Peru4 p value
MSAI items

You tell the teacher you do not feel well but she 2.5523 3.16134 2.32124 2.6423 .00
does not believe you

Someone in your classroom acts up and 2.4423 3.01134 2.05124 2.3423 .00
everyone has to stay after school

You find out someone has stolen your school 2.5824 3.2713 2.4324 3.4213 .00
supplies

Someone in your class tells the teacher on you 2.46234 2.8313 2.14124 2.7813 .00

You get sent to the principal’s office when 2.78234 3.45134 2.42124 3.06123 .00
other students are acting worse than you

The teacher’s pet gets to do all of the special 1.3424 1.20134 1.4024 2.41123 .00
errands

significant difference between:

1
= USA High and other schools
2
= Australia and other schools
3
= USA EBD and other schools
4
= Peru and other schools