Explorations in the Social Construction of Anger

On the basis of the social-constructionist theory of anger, 2 studies were conducted to explore the social rules relating to anger appraisals and anger-related responses. In Study 1, 400 adults were asked about appropriate causes of anger and appropriate anger-related actions. Attribution of blame, impact or severity of harm, and perceived usefulness of becoming angry emerged as the major determinants of appropriate anger. Talking things over with the offender was judged as the most appropriate behavior when angry at someone. In Study 2, 112 adults were presented with vignettes depicting anger-provoking incidents that varied in regard to the nature of the provocation and the nature of the relationship between offender and target. Both factors significantly influenced the perceived appropriateness of anger-intensity and anger-related behavior. Taken together, the results provide evidence for high social consensus regarding the appropriate causes of anger and anger-related actions. However, there were also noteworthy interindividual differences and cross-situational variations in everyday constructions of anger. The implications of the findings for the social-constructionist view of anger are discussed.