ConclusionThe study shows that MBSR for GPs is feasible and might result in fewer burnout symptoms and increased work engagement and wellbeing. However, an adequately powered randomised controlled trial is needed to confirm the study's findings.

Individuals with aggression regulation disorders tend to attribute hostility to others in socially ambiguous situations. Previous research suggests that this "hostile attribution bias" is a powerful cause of aggression. Facial expressions form important cues in the appreciation of others' intentions. Furthermore, accurate processing of facial expressions is fundamental to normal socialization. However, research on interpretation biases in facial affect is limited. It is asserted that a hostile interpretation bias (HIB) is likely to be displayed by individuals with an antisocial (ASPD) and borderline personality disorder (BPD) and probably also with an intermittent explosive disorder (IED). However, there is little knowledge to what extent this bias is displayed by each of these patient groups. The present study investigated whether a HIB regarding emotional facial expressions was displayed by forensic psychiatric outpatients (FPOs) and whether it was associated with ASPD and BPD in general or, more specifically, with a disposition to react with pathological aggression. Participants of five different groups were recruited: FPOs with ASPD, BPD, or IED, non-forensic patients with BPD (nFPOs-BPD), and healthy, non-aggressive controls (HCs). Results suggest that solely FPOs with ASPD, BPD, or IED exhibit a HIB regarding emotional facial expressions. Moreover, this bias was associated with type and severity of aggression, trait aggression, and cognitive distortions. The results suggest that a HIB regarding facial expressions is an important characteristic of pathological aggressive behavior. Interventions that modify the HIB might help to reduce the recurrence of aggression. Aggr. Behav. 43:386-397, 2017. © 2017 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

The Reactive Proactive Questionnaire (RPQ) was originally developed to assess reactive and proactive aggressive behavior in children. Nevertheless, some studies have used the RPQ in adults. This study examines the reliability of the RPQ within an adult sample by investigating whether reactive and proactive aggression can be distinguished at a variable-and person-based level. Male adults from forensic samples (N ¼ 237) and from the general population (N ¼ 278) completed the RPQ questionnaire. Variable-based approaches, including factor analyses, were conducted to verify the two-factor model of the RPQ and to examine alternative factor solutions of the 23 items. Subsequently, a person-based approach, i.e., Latent Class Analysis (LCA), was executed to identify homogeneous classes of subjects with similar profiles of aggression in the observed data. The RPQ proved to have sufficient internal consistency. Multiple-factor models were examined, but the original two-factor model was statistically and theoretically considered as most solid and in line with previous research. The multi-level LCA identified three different classes of aggression severity (class 1 showed low aggressive behavior; class 2 subjects displayed modest aggression levels; and class 3 exhibited the highest level of aggressive behavior). In addition, class 1 and 2 showed more reactive than proactive aggression, whereas class 3 displayed comparable levels of reactive/proactive aggression. The RPQ appears to have clinical relevance for adult populations in the way that it can distinguish severity levels of aggression. Before the RPQ is implemented in adult populations, norm scores need to be developed. Aggr. Behav. 43:155-162, 2017.

Abstract. Aggressive individuals are thought to process social information in such a manner that the likelihood of engaging in aggressive acts increases drastically. Additionally, emotion and emotion regulation skills are implicated in aggressive and violent behavior as well. However, little attention has been paid to the reciprocal relations between emotion and emotion regulation and Social Information Processing (SIP) in explaining aggression. Therefore, the present study systematically examined extant research on the role of emotion and SIP in aggressive behavior. The results supported substantial overlap between emotion and emotion regulation processes and SIP in explaining aggression. Due to the paucity and nature of available studies, no firm conclusion can be drawn about the nature of their reciprocal relationships. However, the integration of cognition and emotion seems a promising avenue of research for explaining the development and manifestation of aggressive behavior, as well as to inform its prevention and treatment. Future research is needed to elucidate the likely intertwined roles of emotion and the entire SIP process in offender or at-risk populations.