In two studies, the relations between the experience and expression of anger and the Behavioral Inhibition System/Behavioral Approach System were investigated with self-report data. In a first study, our results replicated previous findings that trait anger relates positively to both BIS and BAS, and generalized these findings to a measure of trait anger based on contextual anger responses. In a second study, the relations between anger coping-styles, anger expression, and BIS/BAS were examined. It was hypothesized that coping with anger involves low activity of either BIS or BAS, resulting in the anger coping styles of anger-out and anger-in, respectively. Measures of anger-out were found to be positively related to a measure of BAS and negatively to a measure of BIS, whereas the opposite pattern of associations was obtained for anger-in. Furthermore, corresponding to an anger-out coping style, both physical and verbal aggression were found to be positively related to BAS, and negatively to BIS.
It has been argued that two systems lie at the base of the regulation of emotion and behavior (Depue and Iacono, 1989, Fowles, 1980, Gray, 1987 and Gray, 1990): (1) The Behavioral Inhibition System (BIS) deals with aversive motivation and avoidance behavior; its primary purpose is preventing or stopping behavior that is expected to lead to punishment or the cessation/loss of reward. As such, BIS activity has been related to the experience of negative emotions, in particular anxiety (Arnett and Newman, 2000, Carver and White, 1994, Gray, 1987 and Gray, 1990). (2) The Behavioral Approach System (BAS) deals with appetitive motivation and approach behavior. It is activated by conditioned stimuli of reward or opportunities to avoid or stop punishment. It energizes behavior directed at acquiring the rewards or eliminating the punishment (Depue & Iacono, 1989). As such, BAS has been related to the experience of positive emotions (Carver and White, 1994, Gable et al., 2000 and Gray, 1990).
Recently, however, several authors have argued that BIS and BAS may not be uniquely related to either negative or positive emotions (Carver, 2004, Corr, 2002, Harmon-Jones, 2003 and Putman et al., 2004). In particular, the emotion of anger can be considered to have a negative affective component (relating it to BIS activity) as well as an approach-motivated component (relating it to BAS activity). As such, anger has been hypothesized to result from activity of both BIS and BAS.
With the present research, we aim to examine the relation between different aspects of anger on the one hand and BIS/BAS on the other hand. In a first study, we aim to replicate and further generalize previous findings on the relation between trait anger and BIS/BAS. In a second study, we aim to more closely examine the relations between anger coping-styles and the expression of anger on the one hand, and BIS/BAS on the other hand.
Traditionally, activity of BIS and BAS were thought to be responsible for respectively, negative and positive emotions. Recently, theorists have argued that both systems may play a role in specific positive and negative emotions. The results from Study 1 corroborated this reformulation of the relation between BIS/BAS activity and emotional experiences: It was found that the tendency to experience anger is positively associated with BIS and BAS. Further, the relationship between TA and BIS was found to be mediated by negative affect or neuroticism, in line with findings of Harmon-Jones (2003). The results regarding anger coping and expression demonstrated that anger-out and aggression are characterized by high BAS and low BIS activity, whereas the opposite pattern was found for anger-in (Study 2). Thus, BIS is related to the inhibition of aggressive impulses. The effects of BAS on outward expression, however, were found to be mediated by anger.
The findings of the studies here are subject to two caveats. First, although the individual differences strategy seems a useful strategy to investigate our hypotheses, one should realize that results based on individual differences do not automatically generalize to intra-individual differences. Second, the methods used were correlational, and as such subject to limitations of correlational designs (e.g. direction of causality, third variables causing correlations). Further research should extend the present research by manipulating BIS and BAS activity and assessing changes in experienced anger, anger coping, and aggression.
