Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Nick Hagiliassis , Hrepsime Gulbenkoglu , Mark Di Marco , Suzanne Young & Alan Hudson
a
To cite this article: Nick Hagiliassis, Hrepsime Gulbenkoglu, Mark Di Marco, Suzanne Young & Alan Hudson (2005) The Anger
Management Project: A group intervention for anger in people with physical and multiple disabilities, Journal of Intellectual
and Developmental Disability, 30:2, 86-96
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13668250500124950
Abstract
Background This paper describes the evaluation of a group program designed specifically to meet the anger management
needs of a group of individuals with various levels of intellectual disability and/or complex communication needs.
Method Twenty-nine individuals were randomly assigned to an intervention group or a waiting-list comparison group. The
intervention comprised a 12-week anger management program, based on Novacos (1975) cognitive-behavioural
conceptualisation of anger, which incorporates adapted content and pictographic materials developed for clients with a
range of disabilities.
Results On completion of the program, clients from the intervention group had made significant improvements in their selfreported anger levels, compared with clients from the comparison group, and relative to their own pre-intervention scores.
Treatment effects were maintained at 4-month follow-up. In contrast, there was an absence of measured improvements in
quality of life.
Conclusions The results provide evidence for the programs effectiveness as an intervention for anger problems for
individuals with a range of disabilities.
Introduction
Anger is defined as a state of emotion that involves
varying intensities of feelings from aggravation and
annoyance to rage and fury (Spielberger, 1991).
Although anger is a normal emotion, it can become
problematic if it is expressed inappropriately, or if it
is experienced in excessive, intensive, or prolonged
forms, and if it results in impairment in personal
functioning. Poor anger control has been shown to
be an important determinant of aggressive and other
forms of challenging behaviour for people with an
intellectual disability (Black, Cullen, & Novaco,
1997; Kiernan, 1991). Anger expressed through
aggression can result in obvious negative outcomes
for the individual with a disability (e.g., restricted
opportunities, impaired social relationships, diminished self-esteem). The behavioural consequences of
anger can also present as a burden to families and
staff working in day and residential services, as well
as to the wider community. Even anger that is not
expressed through aggression, but rather through
passive means (e.g., insults, complaints, sarcasm,
intimidation), can have detrimental consequences
for the individual and others.
Correspondence: Dr Nick Hagiliassis, Psychology Advisor, Scope, 177 Glenroy Road, Glenroy, Victoria 3046, Australia. E-mail: nhagiliassis@scopevic.org.au
ISSN 1366-8250 print/ISSN 1469-9532 online # 2005 Australasian Society for the Study of Intellectual Disability Inc.
DOI: 10.1080/13668250500124950
87
88
N. Hagiliassis et al.
89
Participants
Following ethics approval, all individuals involved
in the project were recruited from Scope.1 A flier
was distributed seeking expressions of interest, from
which 34 referrals were received. An initial interview with a psychologist involved with the project
was conducted to confirm that an individual was
presenting with a clinically significant anger problem and that they would engage in and benefit
from involvement in a group program. Four
referrals were deemed unsuitable. In two cases,
this was because the presenting issue was not
assessed as being a core problem in anger control,
while in the other two cases, the individuals
ultimately had reservations about participation in
a group and expressed a preference for individualised treatment. A referral to individualised anger
management counselling was arranged in these
circumstances.
Clients were based either in the North West (NW)
or South East (SE) Melbourne Metropolitan
Region. It was therefore decided to establish two
intervention groups, one in each of these regions, to
be delivered simultaneously. The 30 clients were
allocated randomly to an immediate intervention
group or a waiting-list comparison group, using
regional locality as a stratification variable. Within
each region, clients were assigned by simple random
allocation to an intervention group or a comparison
group, with males and females allocated alternately
to ensure an even spread of gender. An individual
who was not involved in the study and who was
blinded to the identity of the clients performed the
randomisation. For the NW region, the intervention
and comparison groups were assigned 7 participants
each, while for the SE region, each group was
assigned 8 participants. It eventuated that one client
in the SE intervention group withdrew from the
study (citing difficulties with transportation, as well
as reduced motivation for participation in the group,
as a reason), resulting in 7 members in that
intervention group as well. Hence, the data of 29
individuals were retained. Note that although
individuals in the comparison group did not receive
the intervention, they continued to have access to
their existing level of support (ranging from no
formal support to individual counselling).
Client characteristics are presented in Table 1. Of
note, a number of clients who used a means other
than speech as their primary form of communication were included in the study. These clients
employed a range of nonverbal communication
methods, including electronic communication
Intervention
(n 5 14)
Characteristic
Male
Female
No intellectual
disabilitya
Borderline intellectual
disabilityb
Mild intellectual
disabilityc
Moderate intellectual
disabilityd
Severe intellectual
disabilitye
Cerebral palsy
Visual disability
Psychiatric disability
Verbal
communication
Nonverbal
communication
Uses wheelchair
Ambulant
Comparison
(n 5 15)
50%
50%
0%
9
6
1
60%
40%
7%
36%
13%
7%
7%
29%
27%
29%
47%
14
1
0
10
100%
7%
0%
71%
14
2
1
11
93%
14%
7%
73%
29%
27%
10
4
71%
29%
9
6
60%
40%
a
PPVT-III Standard Score .80, bPPVT-III Standard Score
7180, cPPVT-III Standard Score 6170, dPPVT-III Standard
Score 5160, ePPVT-III Standard Score ,51.
90
N. Hagiliassis et al.
91
Topic
Learning to relax
Learning to relax
10
11
N
N
N
12
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
92
N. Hagiliassis et al.
Table 3. Age, PPVT-III and CPM data for intervention and comparison groups
Intervention (n 5 14)
Age (years)
PPVT-III (standard score)
CPM (age-equivalent score)
Mean
SD
Min.
Max.
Mean
SD
Min.
Max.
44.93
60.00
6.89
13.04
14.25
1.80
28
40
5
74
79
11
43.57
56.77
7.31
12.76
18.11
2.48
26
40
5
73
97
12
Comparison (n 5 15)
93
94
N. Hagiliassis et al.
Model summary
CPM score
PPVT-III score
Age
Gender
Primary communication
mode
R2 R2 change
.309
.309
Beta
Significance
2.556
2.556
2.094
2.471
2.432
.391
.039
.039
.718
.109
.081
.120
effects maintained at 4-month follow-up. In contrast, anger levels of individuals from the comparison
groups remained relatively stable over the same
period. From this, it may be concluded that the
therapeutic approach examined in the present study
was successful in reducing levels of anger in
individuals with a range of levels of intellectual
disability and complex communication needs. As
already indicated, CPM and PPVT-III scores confirm that individuals representative of a range of
cognitive abilities, including those with moderate to
severe intellectual disabilities, were sampled in the
study. Additionally, there was a spread of communication abilities sampled, ranging from clients who
used speech as their primary form of communication, to clients who employed a range of nonverbal
communication methods, such as electronic communication devices and communication boards.
Given the paucity of specialised anger management
programs for individuals with disabilities with a
range of cognitive and/or communication abilities,
the finding is a welcome outcome. Effectively,
the finding extends the range of evidence-based
resources available to practitioners for delivering
interventions for individuals with anger control
issues and disabilities.
In contrast to observed improvement in anger
levels, there was an absence of measured changes in
quality of life for the intervention group compared
with the comparison group. Although there was no a
priori reason for expecting a relationship to emerge
between participation in an anger intervention group
and improvements in quality of life, the potential
finding of such a relationship would have
nevertheless been a positive outcome. However, this
was not the case. One possibility is that the benefits
of the intervention are restricted to improvements in
anger control, rather than improvements in other
psychological domains, such as quality of life.
Another possibility is that the measure itself was
not robust for this client group. Despite its selection
as a tool with promising utility for the assessment of
treatment outcomes for individuals with disabilities,
95
96
N. Hagiliassis et al.
communication needs. Beyond reinforcing the usefulness of specialised anger management programs as
interventions for individuals with disabilities, the
present study serves to highlight the importance of
continued research in the area, using a robust
research methodology. Through expanding the evidence base, practitioners will have greater confidence
in delivering interventions in the area, ultimately
making a substantial difference in the lives of clients
with disabilities with anger support needs.
Author note
This research was considered and approved by the
Human Research Ethics Committee at RMIT
University.
Note
1 Scope is an organisation providing services to over 3,500
children and adults with physical and multiple disabilities in
Victoria, Australia.
References
Benson, B. A. (1992). Teaching anger management to persons with
mental retardation. Worthington, OH: IDS Publishing.
Benson, B. A., Johnson Rice, C., & Miranti, S. V. (1986). Effects
of anger management training with mentally retarded adults in
group treatment. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,
54, 728729.
Black, L., Cullen, C., & Novaco, R. W. (1997). Anger assessment
for people with mild learning disabilities in secure settings. In
B. Stenfert Kroese, D. Dagnan & K. Loumidis (Eds.),
Cognitive-behaviour therapy for people with learning disability.
London: Routledge.
Dunn, L. M., & Dunn, L. M. (1997). Peabody Picture Vocabulary
Test (3rd ed.). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.
Gilmour, K. (1998). An anger management programme for adults
with learning disabilities. International Journal of Language and
Communication Disorders, 33, 403408.
Gulbenkoglu, H., & Hagiliassis, N. (2002). The Anger
Management Training Package: For people with disabilities.
Melbourne: Scope.
Hill, B. K., & Bruininks, R. H. (1984). Maladaptive behavior of
mentally retarded individuals in residential facilities. American
Journal of Mental Deficiency, 88, 380387.
Holbrook Freeman, L., & Freeman Adams, P. (1999).
Comparative effectiveness of two training programmes on
assertive behaviour. Nursing Standard, 13, 3235.
Howells, P. M., Rogers, C., & Wilcock, S. (2000). Evaluating a
cognitive/behavioural approach to teaching anger management
skills to adults with learning disabilities. British Journal of
Learning Disabilities, 28, 137142.
Kiernan, C. (1991). Service for people with mental handicap and
challenging behaviour in the North West. In J. Harris (Ed.),
Service responses to people with learning difficulties and challenging