Assessment of Type A Behavior in Children: A Comparison of Two Instruments

Abstract

The agreement of classifications yielded from two instruments used to assess children's Type A-Type B behavior, the Matthews Youth Test for Health (MYTH) and Hunter-Wolf (HWolf), was evaluated with a sample of rural children from the southern United States. Fifth grade children (N = 276) served as subjects. MYTH and HWolf scores were found to be only weakly correlated and the agreement of Type A-Type B classifications occurred at a rate only slightly above chance. To assess the psychometric properties of the instruments, both were subjected to factor analysis and reliability/internal consistency estimates were obtained and compared with previous results. A factor structure remarkably similar to that of previous reports was found for the MYTH but not the HWolf. The results closely parallel those of another recent report and provide further support for the recommendation that these instruments should not be considered interchangeable measures of Type A behavior and that when multiple measures cannot be employed for research, the investigator should use the MYTH. Caution is indicated in interpreting scores of either measure, however, since neither has yet been shown to relate to later development of coronary heart disease.

Evidence for the Type in Type A behavior: A taxometric analysis.

“…To date, very little is known about the developmental sequence that gives rise to the patterns. Most developmental research has focused on developing reliable and valid measures of Type A behavior in children and adolescents (e.g., Bishop, Hailey, & Anderson, 1987; Jackson & Levine, 1987; Kirmil-Gray et al, 1987; Matthews & Angulo, 1980) or on validation of the major behavioral and psychophysiological characteristics (e.g., Corrigan & Moskowitz, 1983; Jennings & Matthews, 1984; Lundberg, 1983; Matthews, 1979; Matthews & Jennings, 1984). A latent class variable implies, however, that the antecedent conditions that give rise to Type A behavior should be relatively few in number, necessary (although not necessarily “necessary and sufficient”), or a continuous causal factor that is dichotomized by some threshold.…”

Associations between Hunter Type A/B Personality and Cardiovascular Risk Factors from Adolescence through Young Adulthood

“…Therefore, it is still possible that individual variance in personality type A/B through young adulthood may affect the associations noted in our manuscript. Second, the Hunter-Wolf questionnaire is one of several personality assessment tools, many of which have been shown to be non-interchangeable and lead to different interpretations [17, 18]. The need for a standardized and comprehensive psychosocial tool to measure all components of personality is highlighted by studies such as ours, in which generalizability and comparability to similar studies using different tools can be problematic.…”

“…In contrast, more recent studies have failed to confirm a significant relationship between type A personality traits and cardiovascular morbidity and mortality [10, 11]. In these studies, the questionnaires used to assess personality types and traits (including the Matthews Youth Test for Health [12], Cook-Medley [13], Jenkins Activity Survey [14], Bortner [15], and Hunter-Wolf [16] assessments) have varied widely, and this variation has likely contributed to the conflicting results [17, 18]. Despite these recent inconsistencies, when personality type A/B is more narrowly classified into subtraits or components such as aggression or hostility, results have been indicative of greater risk for cardiovascular disease in adults [19–21].…”

Adolescent Type A Characteristics and Socially Problematic Behaviors1

“…Validity studies relating the Hunter-Wolf to laboratory task performance and physiological indicators have been moderately supportive Hunter et al, 1982), and 3-year test-retest correlations during the teenage years have been fairly strong for the overall instrument and the eagerness-energy subscale (Hunter,Johnson,Vizelberg,Webber,& Berenson,199 I). However, correlations between child/adolescent self-reported Hunter-Wolf scores and teacher-assessed MYTH Type A scores (Matthews Youth Test for Health;Matthews & Angulo, 1980) have been found t o be low, between r = .2-.3 (Bishop et al, 1987;Hunter et al, 1985;Jackson & Levine, 1987).…”

“…The instrument aims t o tap multiple facets of Type A behavior, but factor analyses have yielded differing numbers of factors. Wolf, Sklov, Wenzl, Hunter, and Berenson (1982) adopted a four-factor solution; Amos, Hunter, Zinkgraf, Miner, and Berenson (1987) used a five-factor solution, and Bishop, Hailey, and Anderson (1987) used a six-factor solution. Three factors that have emerged more or less consistently involve hostility-aggression, eagerness-energy-hurry, and leadership.…”