For years, researchers have predominantly focused on the angry person, their triggers, reactions, and the consequences of these episodes in the workplace. More recently, research has begun to emphasize receivers’ workplace anger experiences within the specific contexts of conflict, conflict and negotiation, bullying, and abusive supervision (Carlson, Ferguson, Hunter, & Whitten, 2012; Geddes & Stickney, 2012; Samnani, 2013). Results reveal numerous individual and organizational outcomes primarily related to job satisfaction, health wellbeing and turnover intention outcomes. In this thesis, I argue that gaining a better understanding of the receivers’ internal (i.e., cognitive and affective) processes when faced with workplace anger is essential. More specifically, I propose that understanding the receivers’ attributions made and emotion regulation (ER) strategies chosen when others express anger will shed light on how they interpret intense sender anger and respond to these incidents. To date, research has not developed a broad model outlining receivers’ interpersonal and intrapersonal processes during workplace anger interactions. To better explore this phenomenon and to make a theoretical contribution to the field, I have developed the ‘relational anger model’ (RAM). This model is based on two foundational theories: attribution theory (Heider, 1958) and the process model of emotion regulation (Gross, 1998). Attribution theory (Heider, 1958) encompasses an individual’s interpretation of events and causation. It is used in this research to understand the attributions receivers make to explain workplace anger. The process model of emotion regulation (Gross, 1998) explicates the effects of sender anger on the receivers’ affective experience and expression in the workplace. This research program aims to provide a better understanding of the receivers’ (direct target or observer) attributions and emotion regulation strategies used in the face of workplace anger expressions. To address this aim, the relational anger model was used to develop the following research questions: RQ1: What attributions do receivers (direct targets or observers) of anger make of perceived sender anger intensity? RQ2: What emotion regulation (ER) strategies do receivers of anger use in response to sender anger: a) directed at themselves, or b) directed at others? RQ3: How do ER strategies and particular attributions interact? RQ4: How do different attributions and ER strategies combine to effect receivers’ individual and organizational outcomes? This thesis comprises two studies. Study 1, presented in Chapter 4, is a qualitative study that addresses Research Questions 1 and 2. The study outlines a series of in-depth interviews conducted with 30 participants from the medical, mining, legal, manufacturing, and banking industries to capture rich insights from their experiences of workplace anger using the day reconstruction method (Kahneman, Krueger, Schkade, Schwarz, & Stone, 2004). Participants made attributions around the appropriateness, effectiveness, and the frequency of sender anger intensity. Many senders described the anger they witnessed as inappropriate, as per the dual threshold model of anger (exceeding the impropriety threshold) (Geddes & Callister, 2007). Based on the data, attributed inappropriate expressions of anger in the workplace were viewed as violating the norms or accepted behavior patterns for that organization. Overall, the main ER strategies used by both targets and observers alike in this study were situation selection, cognitive reappraisal, expression, and suppression of emotions. However, clear distinctions arose concerning receivers who were direct targets of anger and those who were observers, and between targets who were managers and those who were employees. Study 2, presented in Chapter 5, is a quantitative study that builds on Study 1 and addresses Research Questions 3 and 4. The sample comprised 122 employees working in a range of industries (for example, education, information technology, mining, medical, and manufacturing industries) who indicated they had been the direct targets of workplace anger in the last two years. The survey was administered using a split administration design and held two weeks apart. Times 1 and 2 of the survey assessed the independent variable of anger intensity, the mediating variable of attributions (sender anger intensity appropriateness, effectiveness, and frequency), the dependent variables of target health and wellbeing (positive and negative health) and target turnover intention, and the moderating variable of ER strategies (target expression, suppression, and reappraisal). In Study 2, the overall results indicated that greater anger intensity attributions were associated with lower target positive health (e.g., lower work functionality). The targets’ attributions were directly associated with their positive health. Attributions of higher sender anger intensity appropriateness were associated with better health for targets, while inversely, attributions of higher sender anger intensity effectiveness were associated with poorer positive health. Concerning negative health, although workplace sender anger intensity did not predict targets’ negative health, the results revealed that the targets’ attributions of sender anger intensity appropriateness were directly associated with their negative health. Targets’ attribution of lower sender anger intensity appropriateness was associated with the targets’ experience of higher negative health. Finally, higher sender anger intensity did not predict turnover intentions. Further results are discussed in Chapter 5, and in relation to the RAM. In terms of theoretical contribution, I argue my research and proposed theoretical model, the RAM, furthers comprehension of receivers’ internal cognitive and affective processes in the face of workplace anger manifestations in organizations. The model also contributes to a better understanding of how internal processes impact receivers of anger and how this affects organizations. The findings have practical implications for organizations that are also discussed, along with opportunities for future research in this area.