ÄÛBÑо¿Ôº

Hospitalized Psychiatric Patients: (Novaco, 2012, n = 142)

• Excellent internal consistency for NAS total (¦Á = 0.95*) and PI total (¦Á = 0.95*)

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD): (Novaco, 2012; n = 114 Vietnam combat veterans)

• Excellent internal consistency for NAS total (¦Á = 0.97*) and PI total (¦Á = 0.96*)

*Scores higher than 0.9 may indicate redundancy in the scale questions.

Convergent validity:

Male and female psychiatric patients: (Novaco, 1994; n = 141)

Excellent correlations between the NAS Total score and the Buss-Durkee Hostility Inventory Total Score (r = 0.82); the Caprara scales of Irritability (r = 0.78) and Rumination (r = 0.69); the Cook-Medley Hostility (r = 0.68); and the STAXI Trait Anger Scale (r = 0.84)

Male psychiatric patients: (Novaco & Renwick, 1998; n = 112 male patients at a high-security forensic facility)

• Excellent correlations between the NAS Total score and the STAXI anger disposition measures of Trait Anger (r = 0.75); Anger In (internalized anger (r = 0.55); Anger Out (externalized anger (r = 0.68); and Anger Expression Total (r = 0.73)
• Adequate correlation between the NAS Total score and the STAXI anger disposition measure of Anger In (internalized anger) (r = 0.55)
• Excellent correlation between the PI and the STAXI anger disposition measure of Trait Anger (r = 0.64)

• Adequate correlation between the PI and the STAXI anger disposition measure of Anger Expression Total (r = 0.54)

   

Discriminant validity:

Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD): (Novaco & Chemtob, 2002; n = 143 Vietnam combat veterans, mean age = 50.5 (7.7) years, mean years of education = 14.3 (2.5)

• Significant ability of the NAS measures and Provocation Index (PI) to discriminate between those diagnosed with and without PTSD

NAS Measures and Provocation Index (PI) Score by PTSD Diagnosis for Combat Veterans

*All t values p < 0.001

Undergraduate Students: (Culhane & Morera, 2010; n = 257 U.S. Hispanics and n = 246 U.S. Non-Hispanic Whites, SEM calculated)

• SEM for non-Hispanic white (n = 246): 3.43
• SEM for Hispanic (n = 257): 3.88

Undergraduate Students: (Culhane & Morera, 2010; MDC calculated)

• MDC95 for non-Hispanic white (n = 246): 9.52
• MDC95 for Hispanic (n = 257): 10.77

Standardization Sample: (Novaco, 2012; N = 1,546 (n = 652 males, mean age = 29 (19) and n = 893 females, mean age = 32 (19))

Mean NAS-PI T-scores for Males and Females in the Standardization Sample^a

^aN = 1,546, ^bn = 652, ^cn = 893

*p < 0.01

Standardization Sample: (Novaco, 2012; N = 1,546 (n = 131 with African American background, mean age = 26 (18) and n = 102 with Hispanic/Latino background, mean age = 26 (17))

Mean NAS-PI T-scores for Individuals from African American and Hispanic/Latino Backgrounds in the Standardization Sample^a

^aN = 1,546, ^bn = 131, ^cn = 102

*p < 0.01

Standardization Sample: (Novaco, 2012; N = 1,546, age range = 9-84)

Mean NAS-PI raw scores for the Standardization Sample^a

^aN = 1,546

Standardization Sample Population from Manual: (Novaco, 2012; n = 1,546)

• Excellent internal consistency estimates for the full sample for both the NAS Total score (¦Á = 0.94*) and PI Total score (¦Á = 0.95*)

*Scores higher than 0.9 may indicate redundancy in the scale questions.

Male Inmates: (Calculated from Moeller et al., 2016)

• SEM for Provocation Inventory (PI) (n = 167): 3.960

Male Forensic Patients: (Calculated from Moeller et al., 2016)

• SEM for NAS total (n = 64): 4.445
• SEM for NAS-cognitive (n = 64): 2.594
• SEM for NAS-arousal (n = 64): 2.658
• SEM for NAS-behavioral (n = 64): 2.170
• SEM for NAS-regulation (n = 64): 2.110

Male Offenders: (Calculated from Baker et al., 2008)

• SEM for NAS total (n = 638): 4.003
• SEM for NAS-cognitive (n = 638): 1.944
• SEM for NAS-arousal (n = 638): 2.223
• SEM for NAS-behavioral (n = 638): 1.545

Female Offenders: (Calculated from Baker et al., 2008)

• SEM for NAS total (n = 349): 5.380
• SEM for NAS-cognitive (n = 349): 2.066
• SEM for NAS-arousal (n = 349): 2.420
• SEM for NAS-behavioral (n = 349): 2.862

Male Inmates: (Calculated from Moeller et al., 2016)

• MDC95 for PI (n = 167): 10.98

Male Forensic Patients: (Calculated from Moeller et al., 2016)

• MDC95 for NAS total (n = 64): 12.32
• MDC95 for NAS-cognitive (n = 64): 7.19
• MDC95 for NAS-arousal (n = 64): 7.37
• MDC95 for NAS-behavioral (n = 64): 6.02
• MDC95 for NAS-regulation (n = 64): 5.85

Male Offenders: (Calculated from Baker et al., 2008)

• MDC95 for NAS-total (n = 638): 11.10
• MDC95 for NAS-cognitive (n = 638): 5.39
• MDC95 for NAS-arousal (n = 638): 6.16
• MDC95 for NAS-behavioral (n = 638): 4.28

Female Offenders: (Calculated from Baker et al., 2008)

• MDC95 for NAS-total (n = 349): 14.91
• MDC95 for NAS-cognitive (n = 349): 5.73
• MDC95 for NAS-arousal (n = 349): 6.71
• MDC95 for NAS-behavioral (n = 349): 7.93

Incarcerated Adult Offenders: (Baker et al., 2008; n = 1,308, mean age = 32.7 (8.08))

Novaco Anger Scale (NAS) Means and Standard Deviations for Male and Female Offender Groups

^an = 638

^bn = 349

*p < 0.01, **p < 0.001

Male Offenders: (Moeller et al., 2015; n = 231 (n = 64 male forensic patients, 92% of whom were convicted of a violent crime and n = 167 male inmates, 61% of whom were convicted of a violent crime; mean age across both groups = 32.6 (11.4), age range = 18-67)

^aNAS Regulation is not included in the NAS total.

Incarcerated Male Offenders: (Mills et al., 1998; N = 204 (n = 102 General Admissions, mean age = 33 (10.5) years, age range = 19-69 years; n = 102 Violent Admissions, mean age = 28 (7.9) years, age range = 18-55 years; all offenders sentenced to ¡Ý 2 years)

Means and Standard Deviations on NAS by Admission Status

Incarcerated Male Offenders: (Mills et al., 1998; n = 102 for total group and n = 51 for both computer and paper retests)

• Acceptable to Excellent test-retest reliability: (ICC¡¯s ranged from 0.78 for the computer retest of the cognitive domain to 0.91 for the paper retest of Part A, with all other correlations between 0.82 and 0.89

   

Male Forensic patients (Scotland): (Novaco, 2012, n = 119)

• Excellent for NAS Total: Cronbach¡¯s alpha = 0.95*
  • Excellent for Cognitive, Arousal, and Behavior Subscales: All Cronbach¡¯s alphas ¡Ý 0.80

Incarcerated Adult Offenders: (Baker et al., 2008)

• Excellent for NAS Total Score, Part A and domains, and Part B for male offenders (¦Á = 0.83 ¨C 0.93*) and female offenders (¦Á = 0.80 ¨C 0.89) 

Male Offenders: (Moeller et al., 2015; n = 231)

• Excellent for male forensic patients: Cronbach¡¯s alpha for NAS Total = 0.93
• Excellent for male inmates: Cronbach¡¯s alpha for PI Total = 0.92

Incarcerated Male Offenders: (Mills et al., 1998)

• Excellent for General Admissions group: Cronbach¡¯s alpha for NAS Part A = 0.95* and for NAS Part B = 0.96*
• Excellent for Violent Admissions group: Cronbach¡¯s alpha for NAS Part A = 0.94* and for NAS Part B = 0.95*

Male Hospital Patients with Developmental Disabilities: (Novaco, 2004; n = 129 (121 (94%) detained under sections of the mental health act and 8 (6%) ¡°informal¡± or voluntary patients, mean age of whole group = 33.2 (11.6))

• Excellent for NAS Total (n = 110): Cronbach¡¯s alpha = 0.92*
• Excellent for PI Total (n = 114): Cronbach¡¯s alpha = 0.92

Convergent validity:

Violent Adult Male Prison Inmates: (Lindqvist et al., 2005; n = 95; age range = 18-67 years; inmates with violent convictions: physical assault (n = 35), rape (n = 15), murder (n = 41) and kidnapping (n = 4); Swedish translation of NAS into NAS-1998-S)

• Excellent correlations between NAS Total and scales of anger and aggressiveness:
  • Provocation Inventory (PI-S) (r = 0.69)
  • State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory-2 (STAXI-2-S) (r = 0.68-0.79)
  • Aggression Questionnaire (AQ-S) (r = 0.65-0.86)
  • Swedish Universities Scale of Personality (SSP) Aggressiveness factor scales (r = 0.71-0.76)
• Excellent correlations between NAS Behavior scale and measures of expressed anger:
  • Anger Expression Out (AX-Out) subscale of STAXI-2-S (r = 0.77)
  • Physical aggression scales of AQ (r = 0.87) and SSP (r = 0.80)
• Adequate correlations between NAS Cognitive and Arousal scales and measures of cognitive distortion (AQ Hostility: r = 0.50 for both)
• Poor correlations between NAS Cognitive and Arousal scales and internal anger (STAXI-2-S AX-In scale: r = 0.30 and r = 0.27, respectively).
• Excellent correlations between NAS Regulation scale and Control scales of STAXI-2-S (Anger Control-In (r = 0.65) and Anger Control-Out (r = 0.68)
• Poor to Excellent negative correlations between NAS Regulation scale and PI-S, STAXI-2-S, and AQ-S measures of anger expression (r = -0.02-0.67) 

Face validity was not statistically assessed, however independent studies have confirmed the validity of the NAS with multiple populations (Moeller et al., 2015)

Incarcerated Male Offenders: (Mills et al.; N = 204)

• ¡°Scores on the NAS were significantly lower in the 4^th week than in the 1^st week. This could be due in part to a second exposure to the test instrument. However, it may also be due to a reduction in anxiety between the two testings. Kroner and Reddon (1995) and Spielberger et al. (1983) demonstrated a significant positive correlation between anger and anxiety in two different populations. Admission to a maximum security institution is undoubtedly an anxiety provoking experience, and research among this population has shown that anxiety does decline over time (Zamble & Porporino, 1988). These results suggest the need for consistent administration of the test with respect to temporal proximity to any systemic anxiety eliciting situations. Consequently, norms established in the first week after admission to an institution may be less valid if used with test results garnered several weeks later (p. 246).¡±