The key to defusing non-constructive forms of anger is to explore and cease to identify with the ego's attempt to feel superior to and in control over other people, and to learn to explore non-judgmentally into the truth of a given situation rather than trying to be "right" and "victorious" at all costs. Another related way to defuse non-constructive forms of anger is to become more aware of a level of our permanent being that is inherently unconditionally relaxed, secure, and naturally empathically attuned to and nonjudgmentally accepting of self and others. In my two recently published books, I discuss how to gain insight into anger and thereby constructively transform it, through unbiased exploration of one's feelings and experiential states, as well as through the development of constructive modes of interpersonal communication and win-win approaches to changing society for the better. More information about my books is described in the enclosed attachment and on my researchgate profile page.

Thanks Barry for the pointer..

Some questions: Are all anger the same? Is being angry at a co-worker for flopping his work the same as being angry at the government for a policy deemed unjust? Is being angry at persistent, irritating insults thrown at oneself the same as being angry at insults to one's community? Is the anger involved in a street protest the same as the anger that one sees in a club fight or in a online forum war? What about being angry at a foreign government or community for historical injustices? Are the "mechanics" of the anger all the same?

Though my interest is on the anger dynamics itself, not on its remedy, I'll add in one question related to the topic of your book: If anger instances are not all the same, then would the same approach apply for all cases?

Thanks Nordin for your thoughtful questions. I recognize that anger is often related to specific circumstances, such as those you mentioned, but I think that the constructiveness or non-constructiveness of anger is much more related to the intentions of the angry person than to the particular situation that arouses the anger. Whereas non-constructive anger seeks to psychologically and/or physically injure another person, constructive anger seeks to rectify an intolerable situation without being motivated by hateful, abusive, or destructive intentions. Anger is truly constructive when it is not expressed in an impulsive, reckless, manner, but rather expressed responsibly, in a manner that does not unnecessarily harm, endanger, or demean oneself or others with whom one is angry. In my books, I suggest that it is not appropriate to always take the same predetermined approach to dealing with anger (be it one's own anger, or facing someone else's anger) but instead to be open to intuitively feeling what response feels most appropriate and compassionate in a given moment, consistent with one's sense of core integrity or self-consistency with the experiential energy or "still small voice" arising from the core of one's being.

I suggest that you start with 1) appraisal theories (Ekman, Plotchik, Darwin) and 2) mindfulness interventions. Awareness of our own expectations and emotive responses is a first step in EI. I think the "sense of control" idea mentioned by another commentator is a broader description of this, I think, but is less specific, behavioral, and therefore targetable. Also, the episodic nature of emotive responses (Peter Lang and Cropanzano) provide some ideas).

Nordin -

You pose fun questions! Here are brief thoughts (if not answers per se) to each in turn:

After an angry street protest, will the anger of the participants be less or more than that before it?

Last time I looked, the "catharsis hypothesis" (which is implied here) has not received support. While it is true that emotional responses are episodic (Cropanzo & Weiss give an early discussion of this), it's not clear whether our own actions coming after the initial autonomic response reduce the state of arousal, and in fact may perpetuate it.

After an online post (say to a forum) made in a state of anger, will there be a change to the anger of the owner of the post?

I think this is the same answer as question one. But, the idea of "emotional contagion" by observers of emotive responses received some early support from Doug Pugh, among others. The answer may be yes for the observer if they have valent outcomes associated with the appraisal that led to the emotion. If I don't "care" as much as the person I'm observing, I probably won't share the anger. 

When a person counters an insult, will there be a change to his/her anger?

Probably not, but this is just my guess. I think it's a really good question, though!

These are interesting questions. I recommend taking a look at some of the dynamic systems theories and studies on conflict, as these tend to get at ratios, relationships of the situation and aggression, and other variables.

Any of the recent publications by Peter Coleman (e.g. The Five Percent: Finding Solutions to Seemingly Impossible Conflicts, 2011, book - good introduction) are excellent. Recently Vallacher et al. (2010) published an overview of dynamic systems ideas applied to conflict in American Psychologist (title = "Rethinking intractable conflict: The perspective of dynamical systems").

Quantitatively, it appears that people have a significantly stronger reaction to negative information than positive, including conflict. For example, Gottman's extensive research suggests a 5 to 1 ratio; people are 5 times more reactive to negative events than to positive. Other researchers (e.g. Losada) find different ratios. Recently, some have questioned the accuracy and value of such specific ratios with excellent arguments - see especially Fredrickson, 2013 - "Updated thinking on positivity ratios" - American Psychologist). However, it seems to be a basic rule that people react more strongly to negative as opposed to positive information.

One mathematical model that explored how people's attitudes and emotions respond to conflict (to include anger) comes from Liebovitch et al.'s modeling work. Two articles worth examining include Liebovitch et al. (2008) - "Dynamics of two-actor cooperation-competition models" - Physica A, and the related article Liebovitch et al. (2010) - "Dynamics of cooperation-competition interaction models" - Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology.

I (and colleagues) experimentally examined Liebovitch et al.'s ideas with my 2013 article "Interaction Shifts Between Agreement and Disagreement Volatile Psychological Dynamics in Social Interactions" - Social Psychological & Personality Science. From this research, we found that people's attitudes and emotions respond to a conflict situation differently based on the situation's history.

As a final thought, you might check some of Andrzej Nowak's work on cellular automata. Some of his models examined how emotions, such as anger, spread in a social system. His work might be able to answer some of your questions.

I hope this helps!

Anger is the emotional energy you generate for the fight against that perceived threat. This dynamic of jealousy can completely destroy her relationships and happiness. The key to anger prevention is to identify the false beliefs at the root of your emotions. Beliefs are the elemental structure in the mind that cause us to generate certain thoughts and interpretations about things. False beliefs, coupled with other factors like, point of view, combine to create destructive emotional reactions. Changing your point of view and false beliefs requires a little more introspective work than simply counting to ten or taking deep breaths. If you have a sincere desire to eliminate unnecessary and unwanted anger from your life and relationships, then consider investing in yourself. Take the time to become aware of your internal dialog, beliefs, how they affect your emotions, and how to change them. With that awareness you can change what goes on in your mind and get rid of your anger permanently.