Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vvkck Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T10:01:49.141Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Hostility and Type A behaviour in coronary artery disease

from Psychology, health and illness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 December 2014

By
Willem J. Kop  and
David S. Krantz
Edited by
Susan Ayers ,
Andrew Baum ,
Chris McManus ,
Stanton Newman ,
Kenneth Wallston ,
John Weinman  and
Robert West
Willem J. Kop
Affiliation:
University of Maryland Medical Center
David S. Krantz
Affiliation:
Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
Susan Ayers
Affiliation:
University of Sussex
Andrew Baum
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh
Chris McManus
Affiliation:
St Mary's Hospital Medical School
Stanton Newman
Affiliation:
University College and Middlesex School of Medicine
Kenneth Wallston
Affiliation:
Vanderbilt University School of Nursing
John Weinman
Affiliation:
United Medical and Dental Schools of Guy's and St Thomas's
Robert West
Affiliation:
St George's Hospital Medical School, University of London
Get access

Summary

Historical perspective and early research

Systematic research on behavioural patterns related to increased risk of coronary artery disease (CAD) and its clinical manifestation as myocardial infarction was initiated by Friedman and Rosenman in the 1950s. The Type A Behaviour Pattern (TABP) was documented to be predictive of future myocardial infarction. TABP is defined as: ‘an action-emotion complex that can be observed in any person who is aggressively involved in a chronic, incessant struggle to achieve more and more in less and less time, and if required to do so, against the opposing efforts of other things or persons …’ (Friedman & Rosenman, 1959). Later research (reviewed below) has documented that hostility may be the ‘toxic’ component of TABP. Type A behaviour is characterized by an excessive competitive drive, impatience, hostility and vigorous speech characteristics. The complement of TABP was called Type B behaviour and was described as the relative absence of Type A characteristics.

The early reports by Friedman, Rosenman and co-workers have resulted in numerous epidemiological and experimental investigations on the relationship between TABP and manifestations of coronary artery disease. In the 1960s and 1970s, most epidemiological studies supported the association between TABP and risk of future coronary artery disease (CAD) in men and women. The magnitude of these associations was comparable to that of traditional risk factors for CAD and also independent of these factors, such as hypertension and elevated lipid levels.

Type
Chapter
Information
Cambridge Handbook of Psychology, Health and Medicine , pp. 119 - 124
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barefoot, J. C., Dodge, K. A., Peterson, B. L., Dahlstrom, W. G. & Williams, R. B. (1989). The Cook–Medley hostility scale: item content and ability to predict survival. Psychosomatic Medicine, 51, 46–57.Google Scholar
Bortner, R. W. (1969). A short rating scale as a potential measure of pattern A behaviour. Journal of Chronic Diseases, 22, 87–91.Google Scholar
Brummett, B. H., Maynard, K. E., Haney, T. L., Siegler, I. C. & Barefoot, J. C. (2000). Reliability of interview-assessed hostility ratings across mode of assessment and time. Journal of Personality Assessment, 75, 225–36.Google Scholar
Buss, A. H. & Durkee, A. (1957). An inventory for assessing different kinds of hostility. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 21, 343–9.Google Scholar
Carney, R. M., Rich, M. W., Freedland, K. E.et al. (1988). Major depressive disorder predicts cardiac events in patients with coronary artery disease. Psychosomatic Medicine, 50, 627–33.Google Scholar
Chaput, L. A., Adams, S. H., Simon, J. A.et al. (2002). Hostility predicts recurrent events among postmenopausal women with coronary heart disease. American Journal of Epidemiology, 156, 1092–9.Google Scholar
Cook, W. W. & Medley, D. M. (1954). Proposed hostility and pharisaic virtue scales for the MMPI. Journal of Applied Psychology, 38, 414–18.Google Scholar
Dembroski, T. M., MacDougall, J. M., Costa, P. T. Jr. & Grandits, G. A. (1989). Components of hostility as predictors of sudden death and myocardial infarction in the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial. Psychosomatic Medicine, 51, 514–22.Google Scholar
Eaker, E. D. (1998). Psychosocial risk factors for coronary heart disease in women. Cardiology Clinics, 16, 103–11.Google Scholar
Engebretson, T. O. & Matthews, K. A. (1992). Dimensions of hostility in men, women, and boys: relationships to personality and cardiovascular responses to stress. Psychosomatic Medicine, 54, 311–23.Google Scholar
Friedman, M. & Rosenman, R. (1959). Association of specific overt behavior pattern with blood and cardiovascular findings: blood cholesterol level, blood clotting time, incidence of arcis senilis and clinical coronary artery disease. Journal of American Medical Association, 169, 1286–96.Google Scholar
Friedman, M., Thoresen, C. E., Gill, J. J.et al. (1986). Alteration of Type A behavior and its effect on cardiac recurrences in post myocardial infarction patients: summary results of the recurrent coronary prevention project. American Heart Journal, 112, 653–5.Google Scholar
Glass, D. (1977). Behavior pattern, stress and coronary disease. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Gottdiener, J. S., Kop, W. J., Hausner, E.et al. (2003). Effects of mental stress on flow-mediated brachial arterial dilation and influence of behavioral factors and hypercholesterolemia in subjects without cardiovascular disease. American Journal of Cardiology, 92, 687–91.Google Scholar
Haney, T. L., Maynard, K. E., Houseworth, S. J.et al. (1996). Interpersonal hostility assessment technique: description and validation against the criterion of coronary artery disease. Journal of Personality Assessment, 66, 386–401.Google Scholar
Haynes, S. G., Feinleib, M. & Kannel, W. B. (1980). The relationship of psychosocial factors to coronary heart disease in the Framingham Study. III. Eight-year incidence of coronary heart disease. American Journal of Epidemiology., 111, 37–58.Google Scholar
Helmer, D. C., Ragland, D. R. & Syme, S. L. (1991). Hostility and coronary artery disease. American Journal of Epidemiology, 133, 112–22.Google Scholar
Hemingway, H. & Marmot, M. (1999). Psychosocial factors in the aetiology and prognosis of coronary heart disease: systematic review of prospective cohort studies. British Medical Journal, 318, 1460–7.Google Scholar
Jenkins, C. D., Zyzanski, S. J. & Rosenman, R. H. (1971). Progress toward validation of a computer-scored test for the Type A coronary-prone behavior pattern. Psychosomatic Medicine, 33, 193–202.Google Scholar
Kaplan, J. R., Manuck, S. B., Clarkson, T. B.et al. (1982). Social status, environment, and atherosclerosis in cynomolgus monkeys. Arteriosclerosis, 2, 359–68.Google Scholar
Kawachi, I., Sparrow, D., Kubzansky, L. D.et al. (1998). Prospective study of a self-report type A scale and risk of coronary heart disease: test of the MMPI-2 type A scale. Circulation, 98, 405–12.Google Scholar
Kojima, M., Nagaya, T., Takahashi, H., Kawai, M. & Tokudome, S. (2004). A chronological decrease in Type A behavior patterns among Japanese male workers in 1995–1999. Journal of Occupational Health, 46, 171–4.Google Scholar
Kop, W. J. (2004). Psychological interventions in patients with coronary heart disease. In James, L. C. & Folen, R. (Eds.). The primary care consultant: the next frontier for psychologists in hospitals and clinics (chapter. 4, pp. 61–81). American Psychological Association, Division 38 (Health Psychology) Book Series. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Kop, W. J., Appels, A. P., Mendes de Leon, C. F., Swart, H. B. & Bar, F. W. (1994). Vital exhaustion predicts new cardiac events after successful coronary angioplasty. Psychosomatic Medicine, 56, 281–7.Google Scholar
Krantz, D. S., Contrada, R. J., Hill, D. R. & Friedler, E. (1988). Environmental stress and biobehavioural antecedents of coronary heart disease. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 56, 333–41.Google Scholar
Matthews, K. A., Gump, B. B., Harris, K. F., Haney, T. L. & Barefoot, J. C. (2004). Hostile behaviors predict cardiovascular mortality among men enrolled in the multiple risk factor intervention trial. Circulation, 109, 66–70.Google Scholar
Matthews, K. A. & Haynes, S. G. (1986). Type A behavior pattern and coronary disease risk. Update and critical evaluation. American Journal of Epidemiology, 123, 923–60.Google Scholar
Mendes de Leon, C. F., Kop, W. J., Swart, H. B., Bar, F. W. & Appels, A. P. (1996). Psychosocial characteristics and recurrent events after percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. American Journal of Cardiology, 77, 252–5.Google Scholar
Mendes de Leon, C. F., Powell, L. H. & Kaplan, B. H. (1991). Change in coronary-prone behaviors in the recurrent coronary prevention project. Psychosomatic Medicine, 53, 407–19.Google Scholar
Miller, T. Q., Smith, T. W., Turner, C. W., Guijarro, M. L. & Hallet, A. J. (1996). A meta-analytic review of research on hostility and physical health. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 322–48.Google Scholar
Myrtek, M. (2001). Meta-analyses of prospective studies on coronary heart disease, type A personality, and hostility. International Journal of Cardiology, 79, 245–51.Google Scholar
Ragland, D. R. (1989). Type A behavior and outcome of coronary disease letter; Comment. New England Journal of Cardiology, 319, 1480–1.Google Scholar
Raikkonen, K., Matthews, K. A. & Salomon, K. (2003). Hostility predicts metabolic syndrome risk factors in children and adolescents. Health Psychology, 22, 279–86.Google Scholar
Riska, E. (2000). The rise and fall of Type A man. Social Science and Medicine, 51, 1665–74.Google Scholar
Rosenman, R. H., Brand, R. J., Jenkins, D.et al. (1975). Coronary heart disease in Western Collaborative Group Study. Final follow-up experience of 8 1/2 years. Journal of American Medical Association, 233, 872–7.Google Scholar
Shekelle, R. B., Hulley, S. B., Neaton, J. D.et al. (1985). The MRFIT behavior pattern study. II. Type A behavior and incidence of coronary heart disease. American Journal of Epidemiology, 122, 559–70.Google Scholar
Siegman, A. W., Dembroski, T. M. & Ringel, N. (1987). Components of hostility and the severity of coronary artery disease. Psychosomatic Medicine, 49, 127–35.Google Scholar
Siegman, A. W. & Smith, T. W. (1994). Anger, hostility, and the heart. New York: Lawrence Earlbaum Associates.
Sluyter, F., Keijser, J. N., Boomsma, D. I.et al. (2000). Genetics of testosterone and the aggression–hostility–anger (AHA) syndrome: a study of middle-aged male twins. Twin Research, 3, 266–76.Google Scholar
Smith, D. F. & Sterndorff, B. (1993). Coronary-prone behavior may be declining in Danish men and women. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 34, 379–83.Google Scholar
Smith, T. W. & Gallo, L. C. (1999). Hostility and cardiovascular reactivity during marital interaction. Psychosomatic Medicine, 61, 436–45.Google Scholar
Smith, T. W., Glazer, K., Ruiz, J. M. & Gallo, L. C. (2004). Hostility, anger, aggressiveness, and coronary heart disease: an interpersonal perspective on personality, emotion, and health. Journal of Personality, 72, 1217–70.Google Scholar
The review panel on coronary-prone behavior, and coronary heart disease (NHLBI) (1981). Coronary-prone behavior and coronary heart disease: a critical review. Circulation, 63, 1199–215.
Williams, R. B. , Jr., Suarez, E. C., Kuhn, C. M., Zimmerman, E. A. & Schanberg, S. M. (1991). Biobehavioural basis of coronary-prone behavior in middle-aged men. Part I: evidence for chronic SNS activation in Type As. Psychosomatic Medicine, 53, 517–27.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×