TPC-Journal-V4-Issue5

The Professional Counselor \Volume 4, Issue 5 536 allowed examination of exactly where differences lay between genders on AC and AX. Thus, a significant difference existed between gender on AC ( p = .04), and on AX (.03; Table 1). At the beginning of the pilot study, males had less AC, but females had more AX. However, females had the larger increase in AC post- intervention, as well as the greatest reduction in AX between genders. Hence, females had the greater overall gains and improvement pre- and post-intervention as opposed to males. Table 1 Outcome results for Anger Control and Anger Expression Pretest Posttest Males Females Males Females M ( SD ) M ( SD ) df P F ES M ( SD ) M ( SD ) df P Repeated Measures ANOVA a Anger Control 44.22 (12.76) 51.56 (4.33) 8 .003 6.36 .44 50.00 (14.00) 63.33 (7.85) 8 Anger Expression 18.78 (5.58) 24.67 (3.87) 8 .018 4.06 .34 17.44 (5.50) 20.67 (2.74) 8 Pair-Wise Comparisons b .04 .03 Note. a N = 9 b N = 18 Discussion Females had more AX than males, a finding which corresponds with Cross and Campbell (2011). Males appeared to have less AC and were somewhat less angry than females. A number of studies support the preceding findings, most notably Winstok (2011) and Carney et al. (2007). Further, this pilot’s findings corroborate the idea that both genders have equal problems with excessive anger (Carney et al., 2007). The results from this study also suggest that both genders can improve with interventions designed to address anger. According to Winstok (2011), a common misconception is that males have greater need for excessive anger interventions than females. However, in this pilot study, females responded better to the treatment than males did. This responsiveness to treatment is interesting in that few studies have directly compared sensitivity to interventions by gender. While sensitivity to treatment was not a focal point of this pilot, it is interesting to note and direct attention to this unexpected outcome. The author believes that the primary underlying reason females responded better to the treatment is that they are an underserved population (West-Olatunji et al., 2010). This is not to say that other explanations are not contributing factors, but because the females in this study possibly represent an underserved population, the aforementioned factor likely has more influence. According to West-Olatunji (2010), an underserved population is one that needs services, but does not have access to help. In addition, a number of the females in this pilot qualify as an underserved population as defined by Burt and Butler (2011). For instance, background information provided by the school indicated that approximately 85% of males in this pilot study received prior services (e.g., counseling) before participating. Conversely, 40% of females in this pilot study received prior services. Although the purpose of this study was not to detail what causes an underserved population to develop, research indicates that it can be due to institutional, social or cultural constraints (West-Olatunji et al., 2010).