contemporary study: brief anger management programmes with offenders: outcomes and predictors of change (Howells et al., 2005)

Question 1

what were the two main aims of the study investigating anger management interventions for offenders in Australia?

Answer 1

1. To determine whether anger management is more effective than no treatment in producing change
2. To investigate whether improvement in treatment can be predicted from pre-treatment offender characteristics, eg their readiness to engage in treatment

Question 1

background

Answer 1

• prisons and community offended populations in Australia
• study focused on real treatment for offenders and provided insight into an offending population
• conducted during an increase in the use of anger management interventions
• aimed to evaluate whether these interventions lead to behavioural changes in offenders
• reflected shift from traditional punishment to rehabilitative approach to managing offenders

Question 2

what was the participant profile in the study investigating anger management for offenders in Australia?

Answer 2

• 418 male offenders participated, with mean age of 28.8 years
• all were referred to prison or community probation anger management programs in Australia
• 86% were from prison-based programs, others from community correction-based programs
• offenders came from various ethnic backgrounds
• sentences ranged from 1 month to 26 years and 4 months
• regarding violence:
  
  • 14% had committed non-violent offences
  • 42% had committed violence without bodily harm
  • 30% had committed violence with bodily harm
  • 8% had committed grievous bodily harm
  • 6% had committed offences causing death

Question 4

what were the details regarding the completion rates and control sample in the anger management study for offenders in Australia?

Answer 4

• 73% of ppts had not previously completed an anger management program
• 285 out of 418 ppts completed post-intervention assessment
• 78 ppts completed 2-month follow-up
• 21 ppts completed 6-month follow-up
• small follow-up numbers were attributed to smaller follow-up sessions, not dropout rates
• control sample was selected from ppts on the waiting list for the program

Question 5

what methods were used to measure outcomes in the anger management study for offenders in Australia?

Answer 5

• ppts completed questionnaires about their experiences with anger and triggers before and after attending program
• Follow-up assessments were conducted at 2 and 6 months after finishing the program
• Support was provided for those with literacy issues, with questionnaires being verbally administered
• Staff (either prison or community-based) completed an observational rating for each ppt

Question 5

what were the details of the anger management program content and structure in the study for offenders in Australia?

Answer 5

• ppts attended programs lasting approx 20 hours (10 sessions)
• content of programs was very similar across different geographical areas
• Programs were based on cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT)
• treatment manual based on material developed in New Zealand and derived from Novaco’s framework (1997) was used
• Content included structured exercises focusing on:
  
  • Identifying provocations
  • Relaxation techniques
  • Cognitive restructuring
  • Assertion training
  • Relapse prevention

Question 6

what were the results of the anger management programme for offenders in Australia?

Answer 6

• Offenders who completed anger management programme showed a significantly greater improvement in anger knowledge compared to the control group (mean change of 1.80 vs. 0.95)
• There was some improvement in control group who did not complete the treatment, but it was less significant
• While there was a relative improvement in the ability to manage anger using appropriate skills among the treatment group, this was not significant when compared to the control group

Question 7

What were the results at the follow-up stages for the anger management programme?

Answer 7

• At 2-month follow-up, initial improvement was observed again and was significantly different, indicating that the treatment was helping to manage anger and ppts were continuing to make progress
• At 6-month follow-up, this effect was not observed, suggesting that improvements may not have been sustained in long term

Question 8

How did pre-treatment characteristics predict progress in the anger management programme?

Answer 8

• Negative anger symptoms before attending the programme were good predictor of how much change someone would make in treatment (higher predictive validity)
• Treatment readiness had positive correlation with progress made after completing the course, meaning ppts more ready for treatment tended to show greater improvement

Question 9

what were the conclusions about the impact of the anger management programme?

Answer 9

• overall impact was small, and completing an anger management questionnaire may have a small benefit even without treatment
• improvement from programme was not always maintained after several months
• success of programme was mainly due to its educational content, teaching about anger and its effects
• readiness for treatment can affect how successful programme is and can predict its success