Mapping the Intellectual Structure of Four Decades of Research on Interventions for Anger, Aggression, and Bullying: A Bibliometric Analysis of Structures, Emerging Trends, Research Gaps, and Key Players

Abstract

Purpose: Aggressive behavior, which includes a wide range of intentional actions—whether physical, verbal, or psychological—represents a significant public health and social issue with extensive individual and societal consequences. Anger, aggression, and bullying not only harm victims but also negatively affect the well-being of aggressors and the broader community. In recent decades, researchers have increasingly focused on designing and evaluating preventive and therapeutic interventions aimed at addressing the root causes and consequences of these behaviors. This study presents a comprehensive bibliometric analysis to map the global scientific landscape of interventions targeting anger, aggression, and bullying, identifying key contributors, publication trends, thematic clusters, and the research impact over time. Methodology: This study is classified as applied research. Documentary research was employed as the methodology, and the data were analyzed using bibliometric techniques. On March 28, 2025, data were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection. The search was limited to peer-reviewed articles and reviews published between January 1, 1984, and March 28, 2025, yielding 15,653 unique records. The extracted data were saved in 31 plain-text files, each containing 500 records, and one additional file containing 153 records. After merging these files, the data were imported into Microsoft Excel, VOSviewer, and HistCite for analysis. Findings: Scholarly output on interventions targeting anger, aggression, and bullying has steadily increased from 1984 through March 2025. A total of 148 countries contributed to this body of literature. The United States emerged as the leading contributor, with 8,323 articles (53.2%), followed by the United Kingdom (1,046; 6.7%) and Canada (861; 5.5%), collectively accounting for over 65% of the total publications. The United States and South Africa had the highest Relative Specialization Index (RSI) values, at 0.55 and 0.59, respectively. Regarding scientific impact, Sweden (1.67), France (1.59), and Belgium (1.57) led in mean normalized citation scores. At the journal level, the Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment was the most productive, publishing 364 articles (3.2% of the total), and also the most cited, with 13,998 citations. Among institutions, the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) was the most prolific; the University of Washington received the most citations; and Columbia University was the most central in terms of co-authorship networks. The most frequently cited source in the field was Cohen’s Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2013), with 350 citations. This was followed by Mittal and Walker’s (2011) letter to the editor, Letter to the Editor: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (323 citations), and Straus et al.'s (1996) article, The Revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2): Development and Preliminary Psychometric Data (295 citations). The country co-authorship network formed seven clusters, with the strongest collaborations observed between the United States and Canada (187 joint publications), the United States and the United Kingdom (138), the United States and South Africa (82), the United Kingdom and Australia (79), and the United States and Australia (77). The co-authorship network revealed eight thematic clusters. Elizabeth Miller emerged as the most prolific author, while Banyard ranked highest in both centrality and citation impact. Co-occurrence analysis identified five key thematic areas: (1) clinical management of substance use and addiction-related aggression; (2) integrated violence prevention and adolescent abuse intervention programs; (3) anger and violence management in healthcare and organizational settings; (4) psychosocial and rehabilitative approaches to domestic violence and intimate partner abuse; and (5) child abuse support systems and family harm interventions. Conclusion: This bibliometric analysis highlights the enduring global interest in evidence-based interventions addressing anger, aggression, and bullying. If current publication trends continue, the total number of articles in this field is expected to double by 2035 compared to 2019. The findings underscore the urgent need for early-stage educational, psychological, and social interventions, particularly within school, family, and community settings, to prevent the escalation of aggressive behavior. In severe cases, targeted therapeutic approaches can alleviate violence and psychological harm. Furthermore, behavioral and integrative treatment models, combined with anger management strategies and environmental stress reduction, show promise in rehabilitating individuals predisposed to hostility. The increasing incidence of both traditional and cyberbullying among adolescents particularly necessitates the development of tailored, age-appropriate interventions. To ensure a sustainable impact, multi-layered support systems—psychological, social, and legal—are recommended for both victims and perpetrators. This study serves as a foundational reference for researchers and policymakers seeking to identify key literature, influential entities, and emerging areas within the interdisciplinary study of aggression and its mitigation.