36
Does Venting Anger Feed or Extinguish the Flame? Well, that's some pretty good evidence in favor of feeding… (kbin.melroy.org)
submitted 1 month ago by Emotional_Series7814@kbin.melroy.org to c/academiagonewild@lemmy.world
4 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Source article: Does Venting Anger Feed or Extinguish the Flame? Catharsis, Rumination, Distraction, Anger, and Aggressive Responding

Finally figured out Mbin images and alt text! Have to make a thread post, and then click the image icon next to language selection. There will be an alt text section. No adding URLs in the URL section, just put it in the body. Unfortunately I replaced the image with a better one and retyped the alt text and it vanished, so thankfully we have

Transcription of image of text in body, as per rule 3:

  1. One man in the rumination group became so angry while hitting the punching bag that he also punched a hole in the laboratory wall.
top 4 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] spankmonkey@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

I think it depends and I think the study more accurately reflects how rumination can escalate anger, not that venting doesn't reduce anger.

If one normally keeps it bottled up, then the occasional venting helps to reduce the pressure of keeping it bottled up and in my experience can break the cycle of not being able to let the thing go. If someone vents in a way that allows then to ruminate less over time then it is a benefit. As this study and previous studies were described, the person who just vented their anger was found to still be angry immediately after they were intentionally ruminating on the thing that made them angry. That is like measuring heart rate immediately after exercising.

I do think the study showes that ruminating on things that make us angry does work us up more than not thinking about them. From personal experience venting about something I have bottled up does reduce rumination starting an hour or so afterwards.

[-] marine_mustang@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 month ago

Just me, but when I tried catharsis I always finished angrier than when I started. Doesn’t work for me. Better to put a lid on it and stuff it down deep.

[-] FartMaster69@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 month ago

Kyle should be treated as an outlier.

[-] frightful_hobgoblin@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 month ago

Life-wisdom says it feeds the flame

this post was submitted on 01 May 2025
36 points (100.0% liked)

Academia Gone Wild

507 readers
1 users here now

A community for funny, quirky, and downright bizarre excerpts from peer-reviewed academic journals and scholarly textbooks. This is not an NSFW community, nor is it a place to make fun of the authors who dedicate immense time and effort to forwarding their respective fields. We're laughing with them, not at them.

Rules

The rules are subject to change, especially upon community feedback.

  1. Content – Posts should be a screenshot of an excerpt from a peer-reviewed academic article or a scholarly book which you find funny, quirky, or bizarre in some way. This excerpt should be no larger than about one paragraph. The text should be easily legible.
    • If the excerpt is a figure, it should include both the figure itself and the caption explaining what the figure represents.
  2. Sourcing – The post body must provide information about the excerpt's source. This can be a URL to a webpage on the publisher's website containing this information (or a repository like JSTOR if the article's publisher has no such page); otherwise, you can provide the information yourself. Any formatting of this pseudo-citation is acceptable as long as it's comprehensible. If not using a URL, this information includes at minimum:
    • For peer-reviewed academic articles: the title, year published, first listed author's name (or both names if there are only two authors), and the name of the journal (volume, issue, page(s), and digital identifier(s) optional).
    • For scholarly books: the title, year published, first listed book author's/editor's name (or both names if there are only two authors/editors), edition (if multiple), publisher, page number, and ISBN. No Amazon links.
  3. Accessibility – For accessibility purposes, any posts which are images of text must include a full transcript of the excerpt in the body of the post. Embedded images should also have alt-text.
    • For figures, this should include a transcript of the caption as well as a brief description of the part(s) of the figure you think is/are noteworthy (pretend you're talking to a blind friend).
    • Non-English-language excerpts are allowed, but the post body must contain both a transcript from the original language and a reasonably accurate translation into English.
  4. Piracy – Links to, requests for, and advice on obtaining illegally hosted copies of the paper or book are subject to removal and a ban. If the source can be accessed online freely and legally (e.g. through ResearchGate, universities and museums, Google Books/the Internet Archive, open-access databases like PubMed Commons, etc.), you are welcome and encouraged to include a link in the post body.
  5. Predatory journals – Please try to avoid predatory publishers like MDPI. This isn't a strict rule so much as something to keep an eye out for, as these sorts of publishers tank academic credibility for profit and can misinform readers with sometimes-questionable science.
  6. All Lemmy.World Terms of Service also apply.

founded 7 months ago
MODERATORS
TheTechnician27@lemmy.world