Hostility patterns and health implications: Correlates of Cook-Medley Hostility Scale scores in a national survey.

Abstract

Correlated Cook-Medley Hostility Scale (Ho) scores with sociodemographic variables in a national survey of 2,536 adults. Multiple regression models revealed that Ho scores were associated with race (p less than .0001), years of education (p less than .001), sex (p less than .001), occupation (p = .0002), and income (p = .0025). Higher scores were found in non-Whites, men, and those of lower socioeconomic status. There was a Race x Income interaction (p less than .005), such that the greatest Ho score differences between the races occurred among those with the lowest incomes. Age was related to Ho scores in a curvilinear fashion: higher scores in the youngest and oldest age groups than in the middle-aged groups (p = .025). Marital status was unrelated to Ho scores. These patterns of hostility are similar to the patterns of health indicators in the population. Because hostility has been found to be associated with adverse health outcomes, hostility may account for some of the demographic variations in health status. However, it is argued that research must first establish the generality of the hostility-health relationship across subgroups of the population.

Impact of Psychological Factors on the Pathogenesis of Cardiovascular Disease and Implications for Therapy

“…Low socioeconomic status is associated with increased levels of high-risk behaviors 130 and psychosocial risk factors. 131 Interestingly, some evidence also suggests that low socioeconomic status may be an independent risk factor in its own right, 118,132,133 but this possibility requires prospective validation and, if true, delineation of the operative pathophysiological mechanism(s). In any case, when low socioeconomic status is clustered together with other psychosocial risk factors, the risk of cardiac events is often magnified.…”

Neural Correlates of Aggression among Individuals from Low and High Socioeconomic Status: An ERP Study

“…The extant literature has documented some relationships between SES and behavioral indicators of hostility / aggression (Gallo & Matthews, 2003;Àslund, Starrin, Leppert, & Nilsson, 2009;Ranchor, Bouma, & Sanderman, 1996;Barefoot et al, 1991;Scherwitz, Perkins, Chesney, & Hughes, 1991). In one study, for example, McFarlin, Fals-Stewart, Major, & Justice, (2001) found a significant negative correlation between income and verbal or physical aggression and Dodge, Pettit, & Bates (1994) found that low SES is associated with aggressive behavioral problems.…”

“…In one study, for example, McFarlin, Fals-Stewart, Major, & Justice, (2001) found a significant negative correlation between income and verbal or physical aggression and Dodge, Pettit, & Bates (1994) found that low SES is associated with aggressive behavioral problems. Other studies examining the association between SES (including education, income and occupation) and hostility suggest a linear, inverse relationship (Barefoot et al, 1991;Lynch, Kaplan, & Salonen, 1997). Thus, different studies suggest that low SES-whether studied in adults or children-is associated with expressing attitudes of aggression and hostility toward others.…”

“…Despite their usefulness, these studies have limitations as they depend on overt responses such as response times or explicit judgments, all of which can collapse over many stages of processing (Barefoot et al, 1991;Scherwitz et al, 1991;McFarlin et al, 2001;Dodge et al, 1994;Lynch et al, 1997;Aneshensel & Sucoff, 1996). As is widely understood, ERPs provide good temporal resolution and thus allow for a more precise examination of time course and distinctions to be made among different stages of processing .…”

Tramiento cognitivo-conductual para enfermos cardiovasculares

“…Aunque desde un principio los autores consideraron que esta escala estaba constituida por un único factor que media hostilidad cínica, puesto que se había extraído la subescala directamente del MMPI; análisis posteriores (Barefoot et al, 1983;Barefoot et al, 1991) dividen en cinco grupos, de acuerdo con la literatura y las teorías existentes sobre la hostilidad y agresión, los ítems en las siguientes categorías; cinismo, atribución hostil, sentimiento hostil, respuestas agresivas y evitación social. De acuerdo con esta clasificación, siete ítems no fueron incluidos en ninguna de las categorías anteriores, estos conformarían la sexta categoría de otros.…”