Critique on Thomas F. Denson’s Experiments in Anger Regulation in Undergraduate Students
Seeret Kaur Lonj
13653061
James Cook Univeristy
, Introduction
When did everyone get so angry? People wake up every day and go into a world where
the outrage and tribalism of daily life are compounded by volatility, uncertainty and stress. Now
even more so in the midst of a pandemic. With all these emotions pent up the temptation to
primordially act on feelings of anger increases. Although anger is an entirely normal, healthy
emotion, the problem arises when it turns into aggression. Aggression can lead to problems at
work, interpersonal relationships and even affect health (i.e. cardiovascular system) (Denson,
2017). Fortunately, years of research have culminated in several methods in which individuals
can use to regulate their anger and as a result reduce the instances of it turning into aggression
(i.e. rumination, distraction) (Gross, & John, 2003). However, of all these methods, one such
method known as cognitive reappraisal has risen in popularity for possible use in clinical settings
(Szasz, Szentagotai-Tatar, & Hofmann, 2011).
In the Jocelyn Wale Seminar series, Thomas F. Denson (2017) presented a well-outlined
seminar that highlighted theories behind anger and why it occurs and various experiments done
with regard to anger regulation in undergraduate populations. The running theme throughout the
seminar was the salience of the Cognitive reappraisal method in regulating anger, as well as the
possibility of mindfulness as a future strategy. Though Denson (2017) addressed various
advantages and disadvantages of each regulation strategy, there were certain features I hoped he
would have covered. Namely, Denson (2017) did not cover the theory behind cognitive
reappraisal. He informed audiences of how to carry out cognitive appraisal but did not go into
detail about why it works. Furthermore, Denson (2017) did not take into account cultural
differences or gender socialisation when presenting experiment findings. Thus the following
critique will entail further discussion of these three points.
Seeret Kaur Lonj
13653061
James Cook Univeristy
, Introduction
When did everyone get so angry? People wake up every day and go into a world where
the outrage and tribalism of daily life are compounded by volatility, uncertainty and stress. Now
even more so in the midst of a pandemic. With all these emotions pent up the temptation to
primordially act on feelings of anger increases. Although anger is an entirely normal, healthy
emotion, the problem arises when it turns into aggression. Aggression can lead to problems at
work, interpersonal relationships and even affect health (i.e. cardiovascular system) (Denson,
2017). Fortunately, years of research have culminated in several methods in which individuals
can use to regulate their anger and as a result reduce the instances of it turning into aggression
(i.e. rumination, distraction) (Gross, & John, 2003). However, of all these methods, one such
method known as cognitive reappraisal has risen in popularity for possible use in clinical settings
(Szasz, Szentagotai-Tatar, & Hofmann, 2011).
In the Jocelyn Wale Seminar series, Thomas F. Denson (2017) presented a well-outlined
seminar that highlighted theories behind anger and why it occurs and various experiments done
with regard to anger regulation in undergraduate populations. The running theme throughout the
seminar was the salience of the Cognitive reappraisal method in regulating anger, as well as the
possibility of mindfulness as a future strategy. Though Denson (2017) addressed various
advantages and disadvantages of each regulation strategy, there were certain features I hoped he
would have covered. Namely, Denson (2017) did not cover the theory behind cognitive
reappraisal. He informed audiences of how to carry out cognitive appraisal but did not go into
detail about why it works. Furthermore, Denson (2017) did not take into account cultural
differences or gender socialisation when presenting experiment findings. Thus the following
critique will entail further discussion of these three points.
