The Brief Aggression Questionnaire: Reliability, validity, and structure

• Main Authors: Webster, Gregory D., DeWall, C. Nathan, Pond, Richard S., Deckman, Timothy, Jonason, Peter K., Le, Bonnie M., Nichols, Austin Lee, Schember, Tatiana Orozco, Crysel, Laura C., Crosier, Benjamin S., Smith, C. Veronica, PADDOCK, Elizabeth Layne
• Format: text
• Language: English
• Published: Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University 2015
• Subjects: aggression; personality; anger; measurement; Industrial and Organizational Psychology; Organizational Behavior and Theory
• Online Access: https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/lkcsb_research/6847; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/lkcsb_research/article/7846/viewcontent/Brief_Aggression_Q_Structure_2015_pv.pdf
• Institution: Singapore Management University

In contexts that increasingly demand brief self-report measures (e.g., experience sampling, longitudinal and field studies), researchers seek succinct surveys that maintain reliability and validity. One such measure is the 12-item Brief Aggression Questionnaire (BAQ; Webster et al., 2014), which uses 4 3-item subscales: Physical Aggression, Verbal Aggression, Anger, and Hostility. Although prior work suggests the BAQ's scores are reliable and valid, we addressed some lingering concerns. Across 3 studies (N = 1,279), we found that the BAQ had a 4-factor structure, possessed long-term test–retest reliability across 12 weeks, predicted differences in behavioral aggression over time in a laboratory experiment, generalized to a diverse nonstudent sample, and showed convergent validity with a displaced aggression measure. In addition, the BAQ's 3-item Anger subscale showed convergent validity with a trait anger measure. We discuss the BAQ's potential reliability, validity, limitations, and uses as an efficient measure of aggressive traits.