Bushman B J, Wells G L
Department of Psychology, Iowa State University, Ames 50011-3180, USA.
J Appl Psychol. 1998 Dec;83(6):969-74. doi: 10.1037/0021-9010.83.6.969.
Previous studies examining the validity of measures of trait aggressiveness either have been retrospective studies or have used laboratory aggression as the criterion behavior. Can a measure of trait aggressiveness predict nonlaboratory physical aggression? The Physical Aggression subscale of the Aggression Questionnaire was completed by 91 high school hockey players prior to the start of the season. At the end of the season, these trait aggressiveness scores were regressed on minutes in the penalty box for aggressive penalties (e.g., fighting, slashing, tripping) and minutes in the penalty box for nonaggressive penalties (e.g., delay of game, illegal equipment, too many players). As expected, preseason trait aggressiveness scores predicted aggressive penalty minutes (r = .33) but not nonaggressive penalty minutes (r = .04).
以往研究特质攻击性测量方法的效度时，要么采用回顾性研究，要么以实验室攻击行为作为标准行为。特质攻击性测量能否预测非实验室情境下的身体攻击行为？91名高中曲棍球运动员在赛季开始前完成了攻击性问卷中的身体攻击分量表。赛季结束时，将这些特质攻击性得分与因攻击性处罚（如打架、砍人、绊倒）而在受罚席的分钟数以及因非攻击性处罚（如比赛延误、违规装备、球员过多）而在受罚席的分钟数进行回归分析。正如预期的那样，赛季前特质攻击性得分能够预测攻击性处罚的分钟数（r = 0.33），但不能预测非攻击性处罚的分钟数（r = 0.04）。
