Studies // Cited work
A meta-analytic review of anger management activities that increase or decrease arousal: What fuels or douses rage?
Kjærvik, S. L., & Bushman, B. J. (2024). A meta-analytic review of anger management activities that increase or decrease arousal: What fuels or douses rage?.
Level A Meta-analysis doi:10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102414
What this study supports
Supports the claims that arousal-decreasing activities reduced anger and aggression and that arousal-increasing activities were ineffective overall. The arousal-increasing studies were heterogeneous, so conclusions about specific activities such as running are less certain.
- Who was studied
- 154 studies with 184 independent samples and 10,189 participants, including students, non-students and offenders.
- Design
- Meta-analysis
- Level of evidence
- Syntheses of controlled studies: meta-analyses and systematic reviews of experiments and trials.
Claims that rest on it
Each claim states what the site asserts, at what strength, and with what caveat.
A meta-analysis of 154 studies found that arousal-increasing anger-management activities, such as hitting a bag or running, did not reduce anger and aggression overall (g = -0.02, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.09).
- Scope
- Anger and aggression outcomes across 184 samples and 10,189 participants in laboratory and field settings.
- Caveat
- The pooled effect was close to zero but the arousal-increasing studies were heterogeneous, so some activities in some contexts may differ; physical exercise has other benefits.
Last reviewed · Review due · arousal-increasing-activities-ineffective
The same meta-analysis found that arousal-decreasing activities, such as slow breathing, relaxation and mindfulness, reduced anger and aggression (g = -0.63, 95% CI -0.82 to -0.43), with robust effects across populations and delivery formats.
- Scope
- Students, non-students, offenders and people with and without intellectual disabilities, in group, individual, digital, laboratory and field formats.
- Caveat
- A pooled average does not predict the effect for an individual, and frequent or harmful anger warrants professional help.
Last reviewed · Review due · arousal-decreasing-activities-reduce-anger
The anger curves in the venting model follow the direction of the evidence: lowering arousal reduced anger and aggression in a meta-analysis (g = -0.63), raising arousal did not reduce them overall (g = -0.02), and hitting a punching bag while ruminating increased anger compared with doing nothing.
- Scope
- Anger and aggression outcomes after provocation; the time course drawn in the model is not measured.
- Caveat
- Confidence is moderate because the curves add invented timing to pooled effects, and the arousal-increasing studies were heterogeneous.
Last reviewed · Review due · venting-model-follows-direction
Physical activity can lift positive affect while leaving anger unchanged: arousal-increasing anger-management activities, including running, did not reduce anger and aggression on average, and exertion while ruminating on a provocation produced the most anger.
- Scope
- Anger and aggression outcomes shortly after activity, contrasted with positive affect outcomes in daily life.
- Caveat
- The anger and mood literatures measure different outcomes in different studies; arousal-increasing studies were heterogeneous, so some activities in some contexts may differ.
Last reviewed · Review due · exertion-lifts-mood-but-does-not-discharge-anger
When catharsis is operationalised as venting anger or engaging in arousing activity, controlled studies do not support the prediction that expression reduces anger or aggression; arousal-decreasing activities show better support.
- Scope
- Anger and aggression, mostly in laboratory studies with student samples.
- Caveat
- The findings concern anger; they do not show that every form of expression is unhelpful for every emotion, and arousal-increasing studies were heterogeneous.
Last reviewed · Review due · catharsis-hypothesis-not-supported-for-anger