Type D personality and blunted cardiovascular stress reactivity: Role of task engagement

Abstract

Objective. The underlying mechanisms for linking Type D personality to cardiovascular stress reactivity remain unknown. The present study explored the possible mediating role of cognitive appraisals of stress and/or motivational levels involved in stress in the association between Type D personality and cardiovascular stress reactivity.Design. Cross-sectional.Methods. Chinese version of Type D Scale-14 was administered to 154 undergraduate students who underwent psychosocial stress during which the physiological data were continuously monitored, and cognitive appraisals indexed by a ratio of perceived stress demands to perceived personal resources and motivational levels engaged in stress indexed by self-reported stress task engagement were immediately assessed after the stress exposure.Results. Results indicated that Type D personality was related to blunted HR, SBP, and DBP reactivity to stress. Self-reported stress task engagement mediated the relation between Type D personality and blunted cardiovascular stress reactivity. The mediation effect of cognitive appraisals on this link was non-significant.Conclusions. These findings suggest that motivational disengagement in the psychosocial stress task might be an important pathway linking Type D personality to blunted cardiovascular stress reactivity. Statement of contributionWhat is already known on this subject?Type D personality is a high-risk personality trait that leads to cardiovascular diseases. Exaggerated or blunted cardiovascular reactivity to stress is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease.Type D personality is associated with exaggerated/blunted stress cardiovascular reactivity, which is one of the physiological pathways that leads to cardiovascular disease.

Type D personality and cardiovascular reactivity to acute psychological stress: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

“…Extensive study details including significant effects, the operationalization of Type D personality, stress tasks, and statistical approaches are provided in . In brief, four studies linked Type D personality to lower cardiovascular reactivity (Kelly-Hughes et al, 2014; Lü & Yao, 2021; O’Leary et al, 2013; O’Riordan, Howard, & Gallagher, 2022), one study found Type D to be associated with greater reactivity (Williams et al, 2009), and two studies linked Type D personality to both higher and lower cardiovascular reactivity, depending on the parameter of focus (Howard et al, 2011; O’Riordan, Howard, Brown, & Gallagher, 2020). Furthermore, three studies found either sex or the social salience of the experimental stressor (or both) to moderate the association between Type D and cardiovascular reactivity (Bibbey et al, 2015; Gramer et al, 2018; O’Riordan et al, 2019).…”

“…A total of nine studies examined the continuous Type D interaction term (NA × SI; Allen et al, 2019a; Gramer et al, 2018; Howard et al, 2011; Kelly-Hughes et al, 2014; Lü & Yao, 2021; O’Leary et al, 2013; O’Riordan et al, 2019; O’Riordan, Howard, Brown, & Gallagher, 2020; O’Riordan, Howard, & Gallagher, 2022). Four studies confirmed significant categorical Type D effects in follow-up analyses using the continuous Type D interaction term (NA × SI; Gramer et al, 2018; Howard et al, 2011; O’Leary et al, 2013; O’Riordan, Howard, Brown, & Gallagher, 2020).…”

“…Four studies confirmed significant categorical Type D effects in follow-up analyses using the continuous Type D interaction term (NA × SI; Gramer et al, 2018; Howard et al, 2011; O’Leary et al, 2013; O’Riordan, Howard, Brown, & Gallagher, 2020). Additionally, five studies solely reported effects using the continuous Type D interaction term (NA × SI), without any effects observed for the categorical Type D typology (Allen et al, 2019a; Kelly-Hughes et al, 2014; Lü & Yao, 2021; O’Riordan et al, 2019; O’Riordan, Howard, & Gallagher, 2022).…”

“…Interestingly, Type D personality has been associated with both high (O’Riordan, Howard, Brown, & Gallagher, 2020; Williams et al, 2009) and low (Howard et al, 2011; Kelly-Hughes et al, 2014; Lü & Yao, 2021; O’Leary et al, 2013; O’Riordan, Howard, & Gallagher, 2022) cardiovascular responses to acute psychological stress. To date, the literature has accentuated two likely moderating factors that may account for these antithetical effects, including the social salience of the experimental stressor and the sex of the sample.…”

“…Others have posited that these sex differences may pertain to societal norms pertaining to SI, whereby it is less acceptable and more distressing for males to behave in a socially inhibited manner, resulting in greater levels of stress and higher cardiovascular responses (Habra et al, 2003; O’Riordan et al, 2019). While the vast majority of research has provided support for the varying effect of Type D by sex and across tasks of differential social salience, it is also important to note that others have reported lower cardiovascular reactivity to social stress among Type D individuals (Lü & Yao, 2021), as well as null effects of Type D personality on measures of cardiovascular reactivity (Habra et al, 2003).…”