Skip to main content
PMC home page
International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research logoLink to International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research
. 2007 Sep 11;16(3):124–136. doi: 10.1002/mpr.221

The generalizability of the Buss–Perry Aggression Questionnaire

József Gerevich 1,2,✉, Erika Bácskai 1, Pál Czobor 3,4
PMCID: PMC6878225  PMID: 17849418

Abstract

Aggressive and hostile behaviours and anger constitute an important problem across cultures. The Buss–Perry Aggression Questionnaire (AQ), a self‐rating scale was published in 1992, and has quickly become the gold‐standard for the measurement of aggression. The AQ scale has been validated extensively, but the validation focused on various narrowly selected populations, typically, on samples of college students. Individuals, however, who are at risk of displaying aggressive and hostile behaviours may come from a more general population. Therefore, it is important to investigate the scale's properties in such a population. The objective of this study was to examine the factorial structure and the psychometric properties of the AQ scale in a nationally representative sample of the Hungarian adult population.

A representative sample of 1200 subjects was selected by a two‐step procedure. The dimensionality and factorial composition of the AQ scale was investigated by exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Since spurious associations and increased factorial complexity can occur when the analysis fails to consider the inherently categorical nature of the item level data, this study, in contrast to most previous studies, estimated the correlation matrices subjected to factor analysis using the polychoric correlations. The resulting factors were validated via sociodemographic characteristics and psychopathological scales obtained from the respondents.

The results showed that based on the distribution of factor loadings and factor correlations, in the entire nationally representative sample of 1200 adult subjects, from the original factor structure three of the four factors (Physical and Verbal Aggression and Hostility) showed a good replication whereas the fourth factor (Anger) replicated moderately well. Replication further improved when the sample was restricted in age, i.e. the analysis focused on a sample representing the younger age group, comparable to that used in the original Buss–Perry study. Similar to the Buss–Perry study, and other investigations of the AQ scale, younger age and male gender were robustly related to physical aggression. In addition, level of verbal aggression was different between the two genders (with higher severity in males) whereas hostility and anger were essentially the same in both genders.

In conclusion, the current study based on a representantive sample of adult population lends support to the use of the AQ scale in the general population. The authors suggest to exclude from the AQ the two inverse items because of the low reliability of these items with regard to their hypothesized constructs. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Keywords: Buss and Perry's Aggression Questionnaire, generalizability, exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, representative sample

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (203.4 KB).

REFERENCES

  1. Ando A, Soga S, Yamasaki K, Shimai S, Shimada H, Utsuki N, Oashi O, Sakai A. Development of the Japanese version of the Buss–Perry Aggression Questionnaire (BAQ). Shinrigaku Kenkyu 1999; 70: 384–392. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Beck AT, Beck RW. Shortened version of BDI. Post Grad Med 1972; 52: 81–85. [Google Scholar]
  3. Bernstein IH, Gesn PR. On the dimensionality of the Buss/Perry Aggression Questionnaire. Behav Res Therapy 1997; 35: 563–568. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Bryant FB, Smith BD. Refining the architecture of aggression: a measurement model for the Buss‐Perry Aggression Questionnaire. J Res Personality 2001; 35: 138–167. [Google Scholar]
  5. Buss AH, Perry M. The Aggression Questionnaire. J Personality Soc Psychol 1992; 63: 452–459. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Cattell R. The Scientific Use of Factor Analysis. New York: Plenum, 1978. [Google Scholar]
  7. Collani D, Werner R. Self‐related and motivational constructs as determinants of aggression. An analysis and validation of a German version of the Buss‐Perry Aggression Questionnaire. Personality and Individual Differences 2005; 38: 1631–1643. [Google Scholar]
  8. Cronbach L. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 1951; 16: 297–334. [Google Scholar]
  9. Felsten G, Hill V. Aggression Questionnaire hostility scale predicts anger in response to mistreatment. Behav Res Therapy 1999; 37: 87–97. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Fossati A, Maffei C, Acquarini E, Di Ceglie A. Multigroup confirmatory component and factor analyses of the Italian version of the aggression questionnaire. Eur J Psychological Assessment 2003; 19: 54–65. [Google Scholar]
  11. Gallardo D, Maydeu‐Olivares A, Pueyo AA, Kramp U. A Spanish adaptation of the Aggression Questionnaire‐refined: preliminary results. Barcelona: Violence Studies. Universitat Barcelona, 2004. [Google Scholar]
  12. García‐León A, Reyes GA, Vila J, Pérez N, Robles H, Ramos MM. The Aggression Questionnaire: a validation study in student samples. The Spanish Journal of Psychology 2002; 5(1): 45–53. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Harris JA. Confirmatory factor analysis of the Aggression Questionnaire. Behav Res Therapy 1995; 33: 991–993. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Harris MB, Knight‐Bohnhoff K. Gender and aggression II: personal aggressiveness. Sex Roles 1996; 35: 27–42. [Google Scholar]
  15. Hollander E, Stein D (eds). Impulsivity and Aggression. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1995. [Google Scholar]
  16. Kaiser HF. The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement 1960; 20: 141–151. [Google Scholar]
  17. Loehlin JC. Latent Variable Models. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1987. [Google Scholar]
  18. Lovaš L, Trenková O. Aggression and perception of an incident. Studia Psychologica 1996; 38: 265–270. [Google Scholar]
  19. Meesters C, Muris P, Bosma H, Schouten E, Beuving S. Psychometric evaluation of the Dutch version of the Aggression Questionnaire. Behav Res Therapy 1996; 34: 839–843. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Morren M, Meesters C. Validation of the Dutch version of the aggression questionnaire in adolescent male 405 offenders. Aggress Behav 2002; 28: 87–96. [Google Scholar]
  21. Nakano K. Psychometric evaluation on the Japanese adaptation of the aggression questionnaire. Behav Res Therapy 2001; 39: 853–858. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Palmer EJ, Thakordas V. Relationship between bullying and scores on the Buss–Perry Aggression Questionnaire among imprisoned male offenders. Aggress Behav 2005; 31: 56–66. [Google Scholar]
  23. Ramirez JM, Andreu JM, Fujihara T. Cultural sex differences in aggression: a comparison between Japanese and Spanish students using two different inventories. Aggress Behav 2001; 27: 313–322. [Google Scholar]
  24. Rosenberg M. Society and the Adolescent Self‐image. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1965. [Google Scholar]
  25. Thurstone LL. Multiple‐factor Analysis. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 1947. [Google Scholar]
  26. Van Praag HM, Plutchik R, Apter A (eds). Violence and Suicidality. Perspectives in Clinical and Psychobiological Research. New York: Brunner/Mazel, 1990. [Google Scholar]
  27. Vigil‐Colet A, Lorenzo‐Seva U, Codorniu‐Raga MJ, Morales F. Factor structure of the Buss–Perry Aggression Questionnaire in different samples and languages. Aggress Behav 2005; 31: 601–608. [Google Scholar]
  28. Volavka J. Neurobiology of Violence, 2nd edition. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Publishing, 2002. [Google Scholar]

Articles from International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research are provided here courtesy of Wiley

RESOURCES