The newly developed SECS provides a valid and reliable tool for assessing anger expression and control, which may be useful in studying the psychological etiology of coronary heart disease.
Questions anger-out as a CHD risk marker; leaves open SECS utility for etiological research pending prospective data.
Objectives . The Self‐Expression and Control Scale (SECS) has been constructed to investigate the role of anger expression and anger control in the aetiology and progression of hypertension, coronary heart disease and other chronic diseases. Design and methods . This questionnaire was presented to a Dutch community sample ( N = 946). A first version of the questionnaire with 64 items was reduced to 40 items on the basis of principal component analyses and analyses of internal consistency. This final 40‐item version of the questionnaire consists of four subscales of 10 items each. The subscales are: anger‐in (AI, the internationalization of anger), anger‐out (AO, the externalization of anger), control‐anger‐in (CAI, control over the internalization of anger) and control‐anger‐out (CAO, control over the externalization of anger). Additionally, differences between the community sample of Dutch residents and a sample of coronary heart disease patients ( N = 257) on the four subscales were examined. Results . The psychometric properties of the SECS proved to be highly acceptable, and the convergent and discriminant validity quite promising. Males and older persons scored statistically significantly lower on AO and higher on CAI and CAO than females and younger persons. The community sample of Dutch residents scored significantly higher on AO than a population of coronary heart disease patients. Conclusions . The anger control scales seem to allow a more differentiated assessment of anger, which may be of crucial importance for future research on anger and health.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Elderen et al. (1997) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: