Implicit theories of anger: Beliefs about anger, conflict behavior, and couple outcomes

This article reports on a pilot study that uses both quantitative and qualitative methodologies to explore the utility of the emotion theories construct in prediction of conflict behavior in intimate relationships and relationship outcomes. A new quantitative measure of beliefs about anger and interviews with committed couples were used to assess anger theories. Preliminary exploratory factor analysis revealed a structure suggesting three constellations of beliefs about anger that may be salient to motivating particular behavior repertoires: beliefs about using anger as a tool (instrumentality); about anger's potential for harm (harmfulness); and, about personal responsibility for anger (responsibility). This article examines the association between these theories and individuals' behavior repertoires, intimacy, and satisfaction within their intimate relationships. Results of the quantitative study suggest that instrumentality and responsibility theories are related to conflict behavior, however no association was observed between anger theories and partner outcomes. Analysis of interviews with participating couples provided preliminary evidence in support of the three proposed anger theories, and offered new information about subjective conceptualizations of anger. Qualitative data also demonstrated the possible mechanisms by which individuals' instrumental and responsibility theories of and relate to their behavior.