{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018315018315018316, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01098901098901099, 'mean_word_length': 5.354651162790698, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
[Value of the interactional anger model: studies in management and competitive sports].

This study focuses on testing the interactional approach underlying the anger models of Novaco (1978) and Spielberger (1988). An additional goal was to demonstrate different types of situations that give rise to anger and different dimensions of anger response in two samples of 97 managers and 74 athletes. Results showed that an anger response could be differentiated into a physiological, a cognitive, and two behavioral components. For the latter, it was confirmed that the expression of anger could be categorized into two independent components, anger in and anger out. Classifying anger situations revealed only a limited situation specificity of the tendency toward anger. The results on the validity of the interactional approach depended on the methods of analysis chosen. If the percentage of variance components were interpreted in the direction of an interactional approach, the external validity coefficients in at least one sample could not be interpreted unequivocally in this direction.