Department of Psychology, Humboldt-University of Berlin
Abstract
In this article, I am discussing the notion that anger can be considered a positive emotion for those who feel it and for society at large. Anger has the ability to motivate people to act against injustice and norm violations in general and it provides the actor with (physical) strength, but also with an optimistic tendency to take risks. However, as a caveat it should be noted that even though anger does this for both men and women, women who show anger are liked less.
One in five (22%) US Americans reported recently having “experienced anger a lot yesterday” (Gallup World Poll, 2019). That surely is a bad thing? Webster’s Thesaurus’ list of synonyms for anger includes animosity, antagonism, embitterment, enmity, hostility, malevolence, and virulence, all of which refer to strife and destruction (Merriam Webster, 2019).Berkowitz and Harmon-Jones (2004)define anger as: “a syndrome of relatively specific feelings, cognitions, and physiological reactions linked associatively with an urge to injure some target” (p. 108). It is in this sense that Gallup adds anger to its Negative Experience Index, together with such states as worry and stress. Interestingly, the question is related to feeling angry – that is, Gallup considers feeling angry a negative experience. But is it? In Gallup’s view feeling anger is negative because it signals that there are things out there that cause this feeling – negative things in fact. But is reacting with anger to a negative event necessarily a bad thing? And for whom?
When addressing this question, it is important to distinguish anger from hostility and aggression with which it is frequently confused in common parlance. Hostility is a personality trait characterized by negative beliefs about and attitudes toward others, including cynicism and mistrust (cf. Miller, Smith, Turner, Guijarro, & Hallet, 1996). Aggression, in turn, refers to behavior that is intended to cause harm or pain and is often elicited by fear or dominance struggles (e.g., Berkowitz, 1993). Both hostility and aggression contribute to the negative reputation of anger but they are not what I will be talking about.
I am also not talking about the pleasantness of the emotion. Rather, the goal of the present article is to discuss the idea that anger is a positive emotion – at least for those who experience the right form of anger. That is, even though anger is traditional considered a negative emotion – in view of its effect on the addressee who certainly might feel so, it can be positive for the emoter, at least in its “right” form. That there is a right form of anger – one that a person actually should show at appropriate times, was first noted by Aristotle: “… since those who do not get angry at things at which it is right to be angry are considered foolish, and so are those who do not get angry in the right manner, at the right time, and with the right people. It is thought that they do not feel or resent an injury, and that if a man is never angry he will not stand up for himself; and it is considered servile to put up with an insult to oneself or suffer one’s friends to be insulted.”(Aristotle, trans. Rackham 1996: p. 101).
From this perspective, anger is a visible sign that a person will take needed action to thwart insult to themselves or close others. This does not deny that anger can indeed, and frequently does, wreak interpersonal havoc and destruction. In what follows, I will discuss the two aspects mentioned by Aristotle – that anger is a force that leads to needed action and one that signals that a person is able to perform such actions.
Anger as a Sign that Needed Action will be Taken
Aristotle points to anger as a sign that a person will stand up for themselves and for others – and that the person will do so in order to not put up with insults to themselves or close others. Research in the domain of person perception and on moral anger addresses these two notions.
Anger as a sign of standing up for oneself. Do others perceive an angry expresser as someone standing up for themselves? There are a number of psychological constructs that relate to this notion, such as self-esteem, dominance and perceived competence. Overall, individuals who show anger are perceived as more competent (e.g., Tiedens, 2001), more self-confident (e.g., Hareli & Hess, 2010), and dominant (Hess, Blairy, & Kleck, 2000; Knutson, 1996).
However, it should be noted that these effects may not be the same for women. Thus, anger expressions when shown by men tend to be more consistently attributed to the event that caused the expression, whereas the same expression shown by a woman will tend to be more strongly attributed to her (angry) character (Brescoll & Uhlmann, 2008). Even though this tendency to attribute women’s expressions to character is not specific to anger (Barrett & Bliss-Moreau, 2009; Shields, 2002), it creates specific problems for women who show anger. In addition, even when showing anger, women are often accorded less status (Brescoll & Uhlmann, 2008)and dominance (Hess et al., 2000)than men showing the same emotion. Lewis (2000)found that men portrayed as managers were rated as more competent when they reacted with anger to negative news, but women who did so were rated as less competent – in fact, they only were rated competent when they showed neutrality. Further, women are often rated as less likable than are men expressing the same emotion. Fischer (2002)has called this effect the ‘bitch’ factor.
Anger and motivated action. Yet, more importantly, does anger motivate action in the service of overcoming obstacles? This notion is inherent in appraisal theories of emotion (e.g., Frijda, 1986; Scherer, 1987).
According to appraisal theories of emotion (e.g., Frijda, 1986; Scherer, 1987), emotions are elicited and differentiated through a series of appraisals of (internal or external) stimulus events based on the perceived nature of the event. A typical anger event can be characterized by a goal obstruction, blamed on someone else, which is perceived as unjust, combined with strong coping potential resulting in a desire to act to remove the goal obstruction (Berkowitz & Harmon-Jones, 2004; Frijda, Kuipers, & ter Shure, 1989). In this manner, anger mobilizes energy and focuses attention on redressing the appraised wrong (Roseman, Wiest, & Swartz, 1994). Similarly, Averill (1982)argues that certain levels of anger can be conceptualized as forms of problem-solving, which are generally more beneficial than harmful.
However, it is important to note that the term “anger” really describes a “family” of emotions, which all share core appraisals with anger, but also differ in details (Frijda et al., 1989). Along with anger, Frijda et al. (1989) studied rage, aversion and annoyance, which also overlap to some degree with disgust and contempt as all three have implications for moral judgment (Rozin, Lowery, Imada, & Haidt, 1999). Also, not all anger episodes can be described as “righteous” anger or invoked by a clear injustice. Yet, even the instances of “unreasonable” anger studied by Parkinson (1999)contain elements of goal obstruction, which seems the most common theme for all anger events.
That anger is related to approach – needed to solve the problem that caused the anger – is supported by research on left versus right hemispheric asymmetries related to emotional states. Early research in this domain led to the conclusion that the left frontal cortical region is involved in the experience of positive affect, whereas the right frontal cortical region is involved in the experience of negative affect (see Harmon-Jones, Gable, & Peterson, 2009). Yet, more recent research supports the notion that left hemispheric activation is related to approach motivation and right hemispheric activation to withdrawal (Harmon-Jones et al., 2009). Carver and Harmon-Jones (2009) reviewed literature showing that anger is also associated with left frontal activation. This is the case both for trait (Harmon-Jones & Allen, 1998)and state anger (Harmon-Jones & Sigelman, 2001). In the latter study only individuals who were insulted showed greater relative left frontal activity and this activity was correlated with both self-reported anger and a behavioral measure of aggression. In sum, this research further supports the notion that anger leads to goal directed action.
Anger as a motivational force for justice. This issue has been studied from the perspective of moral emotions: specifically anger (like contempt and disgust) is considered an other-condemning emotion (Haidt, 2003)shown in response to moral violations by others. The emotions motivate people to change their relationships with moral violators to punish them for the violation. In this context, anger in particular is linked to violations of autonomy, that is, notions of justice, freedom, fairness, individualism, individual choice and liberty (Rozin et al., 1999). In this vein, people report feeling anger in response to an injustice done to someone else (Berkowitz & Harmon-Jones, 2004; Landmann & Hess, 2017). However, anger is not limited to these moral transgressions, but is also reported in response to violations of community or purity (Landmann & Hess, 2018). Thus, anger may not be reserved for injustice but is also a common response to violations of norms. In fact, an angry response is such a clear sign that a norm violation took place that it helps those who witness it to deduce not only that the norm was violated but also the content of the norm (Hareli, Kafetsios, & Hess, 2015; Hareli, Moran-Amir, David, & Hess, 2013).
Anger as a Sign of Strength and Ability
There are two elements to this notion. The first is already implied in the section on anger as a sign of assertiveness and self-esteem discussed above. That is, psychological strength. However, there is also a body of research that focuses on anger and performance, mainly in the domain of sports, but also in other achievement contexts. In fact, Darwin already notes that rage (which he considers a strong form of anger) gives “strength to the muscles, and at the same time energy to the will” (Darwin, 1872/1965, p. 241). Lazarus discussed the possible influence of emotions on performance in competitive sports (Lazarus, 2000)from an appraisal theory perspective. He concludes that constructive anger (maybe resulting in an intention to “show the others”) may enhance sports performance, whereas self-directed anger should not. In fact, angry individuals tend to feel more energized and active (Frijda et al., 1989; Shaver, Schwartz, Kirson, & O’Connor, 1987)and tend to make more optimistic judgments and choices about themselves. The latter effect is mediated by appraisals of control and of certainty regarding the situation (Lerner, Gonzalez, Small, & Fischhoff, 2003; Lerner & Keltner, 2001). Berkowitz and Harmon-Jones (2004) add that in fact, once aroused, anger may contribute to this feeling of strength and provide the energy for the resulting action. These elements of anger should indeed be conducive to sports performance or any act requiring strength.
This notion is supported by research on sports performance. Thus, anger increased peak force performance, especially for extraverted individuals, but did not have an effect on a grammar task (Woodman et al., 2009). Similarly, trait anger and an anger-out expressive style were positively associated with performance enhancement on a peak force task whereas an anger-in expressive style significantly inhibited the trait anger–performance relationship (Davis, Woodman, & Callow, 2010). This view is also reflected in athletes’ beliefs about anger as facilitative of performance (Robazza, Bertollo, & Bortoli, 2006). This picture is nuanced by Ruiz and Hanin (2011)who found that anger was associated with both best and worst performances in karate. In both cases, anger provided more energy but in worst performances it was used inefficiently.
Yet, even though angry individuals tend to see events as changeable, as anger is associated with appraisals of high coping potential (Scherer, 1987), anger also leads to increased use of heuristics rather than systematic processing in a variety of contexts (see Lerner & Tiedens, 2006). As such, it is less likely that the performance enhancing effects of anger generalize to complex mental tasks or academic performance. This is also the conclusion by Pekrun, Elliot and Maier (2009)whose model of emotional effects on academic performance predicts a negative association between anger and performance which was supported in their study. However, the energizing force of anger can also increase effort in simpler tasks demanding concentration, thereby leading to better performance (Boge, 2011).
Summary
In sum, there is good evidence that Aristotle was right about anger. Anger both signals that the angry other will act with strength in an adverse situation and provides the motivational force for such actions as well as strength if that is required. However, as was typical for his age, Aristotle thought about men when he formulated this idea and indeed, as regards the signal value of anger, the situation is not quite the same for women as for men. Women are liked less for their anger and may appear stronger when staying neutral and remote than when “losing control” even in anger. Nevertheless, in most situations anger can be a positive emotion for both men and women. However, one thing must be noted: anger is a positive emotion for the person who expresses it, but not necessarily for the person it is expressed toward. For the person on the receiving end of righteous anger, the situation may well appear negative.
References
Averill, J. R. (1982). Anger and aggression. New York, NY: Springer Verlag.
Aristotle Nicomachean Ethics, translated by H. Rackham (1996). Ware, Hertfordshire: Wordsworth Editions Limited.
Barrett, L. F., & Bliss-Moreau, E. (2009). She’s emotional. He’s having a bad day: Attributional explanations for emotion stereotypes. Emotion, 9(5), 649.
Berkowitz, L. (1993). Aggression: Its causes, consequences, and control.New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Berkowitz, L., & Harmon-Jones, E. (2004). Toward an Understanding of the Determinants of Anger. Emotion, 4, 107-130.
Boge, L. (2011).Consequences of Interpersonal Conflicts in the Workplace: A Look at Anger, Cognitive Depletion and Productivity.Humboldt-University, Berlin.
Brescoll, V., & Uhlmann, E. (2008). Can an Angry Woman Get Ahead? Status Conferral, Gender, and Expression of Emotion in the Workplace. Psychological Science, 19, 268-275.
Darwin, C. (1872/1965). The expression of the emotions in man and animals.Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. (Originally published, 1872).
Davis, P. A., Woodman, T., & Callow, N. (2010). Better out than in: The influence of anger regulation on physical performance. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(5), 457-460.
Fischer, A. H. (2002). Anger politics: Why women are (seen as) bitches. Retrieved from Paper presented at the XIIth conference of the International Society for Research on Emotion, July 20-24th, Cuenca, Spain.:
Frijda, N. H. (1986). The Emotions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Frijda, N. H., Kuipers, P., & ter Shure, E. (1989). Relations among emotion appraisal and emotional action readiness. Journal of personality and social psychology, 57, 212-228.
Haidt, J. (2003). The moral emotions. In R. J. Davidson, K. R. Scherer, & H. H. Goldsmith (Eds.), Handbook of affective sciences(pp. 852-870). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
Hareli, S., & Hess, U. (2010). What emotional reactions can tell us about the nature of others: An appraisal perspective on person perception. Cognition and Emotion, 24, 128-140.
Hareli, S., Kafetsios, K., & Hess, U. (2015). A cross-cultural study on emotion expression and the learning of social norms. Frontiers in Psychology, 6.
Hareli, S., Moran-Amir, O., David, S., & Hess, U. (2013). Emotions as signals of normative conduct. Cognition & Emotion, 27(8), 1395-1404.
Harmon-Jones, E., & Allen, J. J. B. (1998). Anger and frontal brain activity: EEG asymmetry consistent with approach motivation despite negative affective valence. Journal of personality and social psychology, 74(5), 1310-1316.
Harmon-Jones, E., Gable, P. A., & Peterson, C. K. (2009). The role of asymmetric frontal cortical activity in emotion-related phenomena: A review and update. Biological Psychology.
Harmon-Jones, E., & Sigelman, J. (2001). State anger and prefrontal brain activity: Evidence that insult-related relative left prefrontal activation is associated with experienced anger and aggression. Journal of personality and social psychology, 80, 797-803.
Hess, U., Blairy, S., & Kleck, R. E. (2000). The influence of expression intensity, gender, and ethnicity on judgments of dominance and affiliation. journal of nonverbal behavior, 24, 265-283.
Knutson, B. (1996). Facial expressions of emotion influence interpersonal trait inferences.journal of nonverbal behavior, 20, 165-182.
Landmann, H., & Hess, U. (2017). What elicits third-party anger? The effects of moral violation and others’ outcome on anger and compassion. Cognition and Emotion, 31(6), 1097-1111.
Landmann, H., & Hess, U. (2018). Testing moral foundation theory: Are specific moral emotions elicited by specific moral transgressions? Journal of Moral Education, 47, 34-47.
Lazarus, R. S. (2000). How emotions influence performance in competitive sports. The sport psychologist, 14(3), 229-252.
Lerner, J. S., Gonzalez, R., M., Small, D. A., & Fischhoff, B. (2003). Effects of fear and anger on perceived risks of terrorism: A national field experiment. Psychological Science,, 14, 144-150.
Lerner, J. S., & Keltner, D. (2001). Fear, anger, and risk. Journal of personality and social psychology, 81, 146-159.
Lerner, J. S., & Tiedens, L. Z. (2006). Portrait of The Angry Decision Maker: How Appraisal Tendencies Shape Anger’s Influence on Cognition Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 19, 115-137.
Lewis, K. M. (2000). When leaders display emotion: how followers respond to negative emotional expression of male and female leaders. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 221-234.
Merriam Webster (2019) Thesaurus. https://www.merriam-webster.com/
Miller, T. Q., Smith, T. W., Turner, C. W., Guijarro, M. L., & Hallet, A. J. (1996). Meta-analytic review of research on hostility and physical health. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 322-348.
Parkinson, B. (1999). Relations and Dissociations between Appraisal and Emotion Ratings of Reasonable and Unreasonable Anger and Guilt. Cognition & Emotion, 13(4), 347-385.
Pekrun, R., Elliot, A. J., & Maier, M. A. (2009). Achievement goals and achievement emotions: Testing a model of their joint relations with academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 101(1), 115-135.
Robazza, B., Bertollo, M., & Bortoli, L. (2006). Frequency and direction of competitive anger in contact sports. Journal of Sports Medicine and Physical Fitness, 46(3), 501-508.
Roseman, I. J., Wiest, C., & Swartz, T. S. (1994). Phenomenology, behaviors, and goals differentiate discrete emotions. Journal of personality and social psychology, 67, 206-221.
Rozin, P., Lowery, L., Imada, S., & Haidt, J. (1999). The CAD triad hypothesis: A mapping between three moral emotions (contempt, anger, disgust) and three moral codes (community, autonomy, divinity). Journal of personality and social psychology, 76, 574-586.
Ruiz, M. C., & Hanin, Y. L. (2011). Perceived impact of anger on performance of skilled karate athletes. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 12(3), 242-249.
Scherer, K. R. (1987). Towards a dynamic theory of emotion: The component process model of affective states. Geneva Studies in Emotion and Communication, 1, 1-98.
Shaver, P. R., Schwartz, J., Kirson, D., & O’Connor, C. (1987). Emotion knowledge: Further exploration of a prototype approach. Journal of personality and social psychology, 52, 1061-1086.
Shields, S. A. (2002). Speaking from the heart. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Tiedens, L. Z. (2001). Anger and advancement versus sadness and subjugation: The effect of negative emotion expressions on social status conferral. Journal of personality and social psychology, 80, 86-94.
Woodman, T., Davis, P. A., Hardy, L., Callow, N., Glasscock, I., & Yuill-Proctor, J. (2009). Emotions and Sport Performance: An Exploration of Happiness, Hope, and Anger. Journal of Sport and Exercise Psychology, 31(2), 169-188.
