Type A behavior, personality hardiness, and cardiovascular responses to stress.

Abstract

Type A behavior and hardiness were examined as predictors of cardiovascular responses to stress in 68 male undergraduates. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP and DBP) and heart rate were monitored while subjects performed a difficult mirror-tracing task. Type A assessments based on the Structured Interview, but not those based on the Jenkins Activity Survey, were associated with significantly enhanced SBP and DBP elevations. Hardiness was associated with significantly reduced DBP responsiveness. In addition, a significant interaction indicated that the Type B-high hardiness group showed the least DBP reactivity. A near-significant interaction (p = .06) suggested that Type B-high hardiness subjects also reported the least anger. Further exploration of the data indicated that the challenge component of hardiness accounted for its relationship to DBP reactivity. These results have implications both for the psychophysiologic study of Type A behavior and for understanding the health-promoting effects of hardiness.Interest in the effects of personality on health and illness has grown considerably in recent years. One factor that has drawn attention to this topic is the extensive literature examining Type A behavior as a contributor to coronary heart disease (CHD; Houston & Snyder, 1988). Type A behavior consists of competitive achievement striving, hostility, impatience, and vigorous speech and motor mannerisms. Type B refers to the relative absence of these characteristics and a more relaxed style of coping. Initially, epidemiological work provided rather consistent evidence that individuals exhibiting Type A behavior show a greater risk of developing CHD than their Type B counterparts (Cooper et al., 1981 ). However, more recent studies have failed to confirm earlier findings (Shekelle, Gale, & Norusis, 1985; Shekelle, Hulley, et al., 1985).Two recent meta-analyses have helped to clarify the status of Type A behavior as a coronary risk factor. The first (BoothKewley & Friedman, 1987) included both cross-sectional and prospective studies and suggested that Type A behavior is reliably associated with CHD. The second meta-analysis (Matthews, 1988) differed in that it focused exclusively on prospective studies, had access to more recent findings, and used different decision rules in aggregating data across studies. Resuits indicated that Type A behavior predicts CHD (a) when Type A is assessed using a Structured Interview (SI; Dembroski, 1978;Rosenman, 1978), but not when measured using the Jenkins Activity Survey (JAS; Jenkins, 1978; a self-administered questionnaire) and (b) in population-based studies that exam-I thank Lee Jussim, Suzanne Ouellette Kobasa, David Krantz, and three anonymous reviewers for their critical comments on an earlier version of this article. I am also grateful to Mark Patane for his assistance in conducting the second session, Jean Landeau for rating Structured Interview tapes, and Susan Hedges for coding verbalization data.Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed t...

Resilience Under Military Operational Stress: Can Leaders Influence Hardiness?

“…Studies with a variety of occupational groups have found that hardiness operates as a significant moderator or buffer of stress (e.g., Bartone, 1989;Contrada, 1989;Kobasa, Maddi, & Kahn, 1982;Roth, Wiebe, Fillingim, & Shay, 1989;Wiebe, 1991). Hardiness has also been identified as a moderator of combat exposure stress in Gulf War soldiers (Bartone, 1993(Bartone, , 1999a(Bartone, , 2000.…”

Growing transformational leaders: exploring the role of personality hardiness

“…Other studies point to hardiness as a significant moderator or buffer of stress (e.g. Contrada, 1989;Kobasa et al, 1982;Roth et al, 1989;Wiebe, 1991). In military groups, hardiness has also been identified as a significant moderator of combat exposure stress in Wartime conditions (Bartone, 1999;Bartone et al, 1989) and during combat training (Florian et al, 1995;Westman, 1990).…”

Social Identity and Health: An Intergroup Communication Approach to Cancer

“…In general, we see positive consequences stemming from an identification with other cancer survivors and a tendency to view the self in terms of survivorship. Identification as a survivor should link to internal locus of control and more general feelings of self-esteem (Deimling, Kahana, & Schumacher, 1997), which are themselves associated with increased survival (Contrada, 1989). Identification with other survivors may also enhance preventive measures, such as a healthy lifestyle (Mears, 1997).…”