[French validation of the anger reactions and goals scale (RBC)].

BACKGROUND: The study presents the French validation of a German scale (AERZ) [Diagnostica 49 (2003) 97-109, revised Eur J Pers (2009)] measuring anger regulation. The French validation (RBC scale) comprises two subscales measuring seven anger reactions and seven anger goals. Disentangling dimensions related to anger reactions and anger goals, respectively, is the main advantage of this scale. In addition to seven cognitive-behavioral anger reactions (i.e., venting, rumination, submission, feedback, distraction, humor and downplaying the incident's negative impact), the RBC scale also addresses the cognitive representations underlying anger reactions by exploring anger goals (i.e., enforcing personal standards, enforcing social standards, downregulating affect, avoiding conflicts, protecting one's reputation, weighing costs and gaining revenge).

METHOD: The original scale was translated following the scientific guidelines and recommendations for cultural adaptation of instruments. The adapted French version was tested with a sample of students (n=184, 70.7% were females) from the University of Luxembourg (M=21.31, S.D.=1.93). Students filled in a questionnaire composed of the RBC scale, the SF-36 quality of life scale and the STAXI-II anger instrument. The RBC scale comprises 56 items; reactions are assessed on a 4 point Likert scale from "almost never" (1) to "always" (4), whereas goals are assessed on a 4 point Likert scale from "not at all" (1) to "completely" (4).

RESULTS: Factor analysis revealed a seven-factor solution for the anger reactions subscale (that explained 63.13% of the common variance) and a six-factor solution for the anger goals subscale (that explained 57.45% of the common variance). The original factorial structure was examined in confirmatory factor analysis. For the anger reactions subscale, a good model fit was found, with chi(2)(329)=546.38, p<0.1, CFI=0.87, RMSEA=0.06. For the anger goals subscale, a satisfactory model fit was observed, with chi(2)(335)=658.52, p<0.1, CFI=0.78, RMSEA=0.07 revealing a six-factorial structure that differed from the original version in the combination of two dimensions ("downregulating affect" and "protecting one's reputation"). The RBC scale's internal consistencies were found satisfactory with Cronbach's alphas ranging from 0.60 to 0.83 for the various dimensions. Part-whole correlations ranged from r(it)=0.27 to 0.80. Gender differences showed that female participants used significantly more rumination strategies and emotional regulation, whereas male students demonstrated greater humor in anger situations. Significant correlations between RBC and STAXI-II confirmed the construct validity of the RBC scale. Criteria validity was analyzed using the predictive value of the RBC dimensions on the quality of life subscales of the SF-36.

CONCLUSION: The present results support the validity, the reliability and the sensitivity of the 56 items scale on anger regulation and its use in psychological research. Although our findings need to be replicated and the test-retest validity is subject to future verification, the present validation of the RBC scale offers a multidimensional inventory for measuring anger reactions and anger goals. This inventory may be used, for example, as a diagnostic tool or for testing the effectiveness of anger management interventions.