A factor-analytic-based method to measure the inhibition of three verbally aggressive behaviours was investigated in two studies on self-report data. Inhibition was subdivided into two types: inhibition of the tendency to become verbally aggressive and inhibition of the verbally aggressive behaviour. In Study 1, it was investigated whether both kinds can be separated and measured by using a factor-analytic model. In Study 2, the approach was validated by relating both types of inhibition to broad and specific trait measures, either related to behaviour regulation or not. Inhibition of the tendency to become verbally aggressive was negatively related to Extraversion and Anger Out, and positively to hostility and a general inhibition measure. The inhibition of verbally aggressive behaviour was positively related to Agreeableness, Anger In (keeping anger inside) and anger out control (control of outward expression of anger), and negatively to Verbal Aggression and Anger Out.
Anger and verbal aggression are two closely related processes. Anger is often conceived as the emotion which motivates aggression. However, not all aggressive inclinations a person experiences are expressed (Averill, 1983). One may withhold an aggressive reaction for several reasons, often even without any conscious reflection, for example because the other person has a higher social rank (Allan & Gilbert, 2001), to avoid negative consequences (Averill, 1983 and Beatty and McCroskey, 1997), or to avoid an aggressive counterreaction (Deffenbacher, Oetting, Lynch, & Morris, 1996). We will focus on two different kinds of inhibition related to verbally aggressive (VA) behaviour: the inhibition of the tendency to become verbally aggressive, called Action-tendency Inhibition, and the inhibition of the VA behaviour, called Behaviour Inhibition. Scope is twofold: a method to measure inhibition of VA behaviour is presented and validated, and simultaneously, the empirical differentiation of both types of inhibition is tested.
Measuring inhibition is not straightforward because inhibition is not directly observable. Trying to measure inhibition with a direct, situation-based approach, one can end up with questions like ‘How much do you feel inhibited to curse in this situation?’ or ‘In case you feel a tendency to curse in this situation, to which degree do you inhibit this tendency?’ Such direct items may be too complex, certainly if one wants to distinguish between the just mentioned types of inhibition. Alternatively, Smits, De Boeck, and Vansteelandt (2004) successfully developed an indirect strategy to measure inhibition based on a simple view on verbal aggression. An extensive description of the theoretical framework can be found in Smits et al. (2004); here a short description will be presented. It is assumed that anger feelings feed the tendency to react in a VA way, the VA action-tendency, (Anderson and Bushman, 2002, Frijda, 1986 and Kinney et al., 2001), and the VA action-tendency can be seen as the basis of VA behaviour (Frijda, 1986 and Frijda et al., 1989). Whether inhibition is present or not, can be derived from anger feelings without a VA action-tendency or from a VA action-tendency without a VA behaviour (see Fig. 1 for a graphical representation).
