Type A behavior pattern and self-evaluation of abilities: empirical tests of the self-appraisal model

The self-appraisal model proposes that Type A behavior reflects active attempts to generate diagnostic information about abilities, particularly in situations that evoke high uncertainty. In Study 1, subjects were provided feedback indicating high or low uncertainty about underlying abilities in two domains. When subjects were more uncertain of their ability in one domain than in the other, Jenkins-Activity-Survey-defined Type As (but not Type Bs) subsequently constructed tests that were biased to assess the more uncertain domain. Study 2 examined postfailure performance. The model holds that Type As perform poorly because they suspend information gathering when faced with evidence that requisite abilities are absent. Results indicated that deficits emerged only if Type As believed that a second task assessed the same abilities as the initial task on which they failed. A final study examined social comparison among Type As and Bs. Results indicated that Type As engaged in social comparison to obtain diagnostic information, primarily when they were uncertain of their ability levels.     

Type A Behavior and Daily Activities of Young Married Couples

Sixteen young married couples completed the Jenkins Activity Survey and a questionnaire dealing with the temporal parameters of marital communication, work around the home, social activity, relaxation, and marital sex. In general, it was found that the coronary-prone behavior pattern has negative implications for the interpersonal and leisurely activity of Type As and their spouses. As Type A characteristics increase, males communicate less with their wives, work more around the home, and engage in less marital sex. With females, coronary-proneness is associated with engaging in relatively infrequent and brief periods of relaxation. For both sexes, those high on the Type A dimension are most likely to report that they derive relatively little pleasure from socializing. Several differences are also reported as a function of spouse standing on the Type A-B dimension.     

Type A behavior pattern, parental history of hypertension, and cardiovascular reactivity in college males

Two risk factors for cardiovascular disorders, parental history of hypertension and the Type A behavior pattern, were investigated concurrently with respect to cardiovascular reactivity to challenging situations. Sixty-four college males were given both the Structured Interview (SI) and Jenkins Activity Survey (JAS) for the Type A behavior pattern and a family health questionnaire to determine parental history of hypertension. The students were monitored for blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), and pulse transit time (PTT) response to four tasks: cold pressor, isometric handgrip exercise, a reading comprehension task, and backwards digit span. Type As based on SI classification had significantly higher HR levels across all tasks than did Type Bs, as well as higher diastolic BP levels in the cold pressor task. No main effects for Type A-B using JAS classification were found. Positive parental history students had higher HR and shorter PTT levels across all the tasks. Type A and parental history did interact in a limited way on some tasks, but the interactions were also dependent on the Type A classification used.     

Role salience and support as moderators of demand/conflict relationships in China

This study examined the effects of role demand on both work–family conflict and family–work conflict, and the moderating effects of role salience and support on these relationships. Based on 391 dual-career (managerial and blue-collar employees) couples from a Taiwanese company in China, the results of this survey study showed clear gender differences in the patterns of relationships observed. For men, the most important demands that negatively impacted on work–family conflict were frequency of overtime and frequency of socializing for work purposes (yingchou), and supervisory support buffered the negative impact of frequent overtime. For women however, strong supervisory support and low work role salience were more important for reducing work–family conflict, and there was no significant main effect found for any of the role demand factors. Furthermore, women with high work role salience were more likely to feel the impact of yingchou on work–family conflict. In the family domain, the most influential demand for men was hours spent on household tasks, but for women, it was the frequency of family-related leave. Interestingly, males reported higher family role salience than females and spouse support intensified rather than buffered the positive impact of hours spent on household tasks on family–work conflict for males.     

Type A behavior pattern and the judgment of control

We investigated the control judgments of Type A and B actors and observers after five tasks in which actual response-outcome contingency and success were varied systematically. Results indicated that, overall, actors provided higher control judgments than did observers, and both actual contingency and success influenced judged control. Type A and B actors did not differ in their self-perceptions of control but observers judged the Type A actors to have exerted more control than the Type B actors, primarily on positive contingency tasks. These findings suggest that Type As, because of their more active, dynamic style, may be credited by observers with more control or competence than is warranted. By contrast, the more relaxed style of the Type B may lead to lower than warranted evaluations of control or competence. Lastly, Type As were found to learn the contingencies better than Type Bs with important implications for the actual exercise of control.     

A Self-Attribution-Reactance Model of Recovery from Injury in Type A Individuals1

A self-attribution-reactance model of Type A behavior and medical recovery is introduced. The model proposes that Type As' bias to view themselves as causal for all outcomes makes them sensitive to events (illness, injury, or treatment) that reduce their personal control. Consequently, Type As are more likely than Type Bs to respond to such events with reactant behavior (noncompliance with treatment) in order to restore their perceptions of control and freedom. In a test of the model, 32 patients being treated for running-related injuries were assessed for Type A behavior, preference for control over and involvement with treatment, and attributions for and reactions to their injury at the beginning of treatment. The physician's ratings of progress through treatment made at the conclusion of the study served as the measure of recovery. Results supported the model in that extreme Type As were more likely than moderate Type As and Type Bs to be judged as exhibiting poor recovery. Moreover, Type As judged to have made poor progress made more extreme self-attributions and were more angry about their injuries than were Type A and B patients judged to have made good progress. The implications of the findings for promoting compliance are discussed.     

Self-schematic representation of the type A and B behavior patterns

Past research has established clear behavioral differences between Type A and B individuals. The purpose of our research was to examine how these behavioral differences are represented in the self-definitions of Type As and Bs. We investigated the existence of Type A and B self-schemata by using two tasks designed to measure the influence of these hypothetical structures on speed of processing and memory interference. During an initial task, Type As and Bs made self-relevant decisions (like me, not like me) in response to trait adjectives previously scaled as Type A, Type B, or neutral in content. Reaction times for the decisions were measured, and results indicated that both Type As and Bs made faster decisions for schema-compatible responses than for schema-incompatible responses. On a second task, Type As and Bs were tested for recognition memory after they attempted to memorize half of the aforementioned trait list. Memory errors were examined and indicated that Type As and Bs made more errors that were compatible with their respective self-schemata. Taken together, these results indicate that a Type A and B distinction forms a reliable organizing framework for the self-definitions of Type As and Bs. The existence of stable cognitive structures that parallel the behavioral differences between Type As and Bs has important implications for both theory and application.     

Actual and Perceived Group Performance as a Function of Group Composition: The Moderating Role of the Type A and B Behavior Patterns1

This study examined the moderating influence of the Type A and B behavior patterns on group performance and group functioning. Type As and Bs were assigned to different roles in groups given the task of deciding what items to transfer from a sinking ship to a life raft. Results indicated that groups with Type A leaders in conflict with a Type A group member arrived at relatively poor decisions. Type A leaders, however, also were perceived by their groups to be more competent than were Type B leaders. These results suggested that the Type A behavior pattern can have the paradoxical effects of hindering group problem-solving and of leading others to view Type As as more competent than Type Bs because of their active dynamic style.     

Challenge seeking and the type A coronary-prone behavior pattern

The present investigation sought to further delineate the Type A coronary-prone behavior pattern and to elucidate the psychophysiological process through which this behavioral disposition is translated into heart disease. Type A and Type B male subjects engaged in tasks that required varying degrees of activity before an assessment of challenge-seeking tendencies. Type A participants sought greater degrees of challenge than did their Type B counterparts. In addition, the more active the person with Pattern A had been immediately before the challenge-seeking opportunity, the greater the degree of challenge sought. Precedent activity level did not significantly influence challenge seeking in the Type B population. The Type A subjects also had significantly faster heart rates during performance of a challenging task. Pattern A behavior may be translated into heart disease through the cumulative deleterious effects of chronic and excessive challenge-induced cardiovascular excitation.     

The Effect of Experience on the Goal-Setting Behavior of Type A and Type B Individuals

The effect of experience on the goal-setting behavior of Type A and Type B individuals was assessed using anagram tasks. Sixty men and 60 women were administered the Jenkins Activity Survey as well as a questionnaire assessing their previous experience with anagram tasks. Before each of three anagram trials, subjects set a performance goal and indicated how certain they were that they could reach that goal. The analyses indicated that Type A men had the largest differences between performance goals and actual performance, even though men, in general, were more certain that they would reach their goals. Differences across trials, however, decreased for all individuals. Men with the most prior self-reported experience were least satisfied with their performance. Of interest was the finding that Type B women had higher difference scores than did Type A women.     

Type A behavior, attentional style, and symptom reporting among adult men and women

Type A behavior and its components (measured on the JAS) were examined in relation to attentional style and symptom reporting in 294 healthy adult men and women. The results showed that for both men and women the JAS Type A, Job Involvement, and Hard Driving factors were all associated with self-reported attentional effectiveness as measured by the Nideffer Test of Attentional and Interpersonal Style. However, a fourth JAS factor, Speed and Impatience, was associated with Nideffer measures of cognitive overload. For both men and women, the Type A, Speed and Impatience, and Hard Driving factors were all positively associated with the number of medical and psychological symptoms reported on the Cornell Medical Index. In addition, acute psychological distress (Hopkins SCL-90R) was associated with Type A behavior for men and with Speed and Impatience for both sexes. Attention differences did not account for the observed positive relationships between Type A factors and symptom reporting with one exception; attentional overload (internal) appeared to partially explain the relationships between symptom reporting and Speed and Impatience in women. In summary, Type As described themselves as having a broader attentional focus and reported more naturally occurring physical and psychological symptoms than did Type Bs.     

The Time-Urgency Component of the Type A Behavior Pattern: Time Pressure and Performance1

We investigated the effects of time pressure on the performance of Type A and Type B individuals. We predicted that Type As would perform more poorly than Type Bs on an anagram task during a timed condition, but not during an untimed condition. Subjects were 40 female undergraduates and the Jenkins Activity Survey was used to measure Type A behavior. The results confirmed our hypothesis. Type As made significantly more errors than Type Bs when timed, but not when untimed. Implications of these findings and the time-urgency component of the Type A behavior pattern are discussed.     

Preference for control and the coronary-prone behavior pattern: "I'd rather do it myself"

We explored differential preference for control among Type A and Type B individuals. Forty-six subjects were threatened with an aversive event (loud noise) and were allowed to choose whether to turn off the noise themselves or to yield control to another (more competent) individual. The results showed that Type B subjects (regardless of sex) tended to relinquish control to their more competent confederates and thus reduce the aversive stimulus, whereas the choice behavior of Type As was less clear. In addition, although female subjects tended to yield control, male subjects were more inclined to retain it. Because the willingness to yield control in general appears to be stronger in women than in men, the behavior observed in Type As may be partly moderated by the subject's sex. Although there were suggestive trends in the data, the central psychological features of the Type A pattern remain ambiguous and await studies in which researchers explore these effects, using a variety of situations and larger sample sizes.     

Sex role correlates of stress-prone type a behavior in college students

This study considered the direct and interactive relationships between three sex role variables and Type A/Type B behavior in college students of both sexes. As predicted, Type A college women were more masculine than Type B controls; Type A females were not less feminine, however, as had been expected. No relationship was found between masculine or feminine sex role behavior and Type A status in college men, consistent with the results of an earlier study. Both male and female Type As revealed weaker gender schemas than Type B controls. Analysis of the conjoint variation of all three sex role components revealed no relationships for either Type A or Type B men. Type A women presented an unusual asynchrony between these components in light of the expected positive relation between stereotyped sex role identity (femininity) and sensitivity to stereotyped differences between women and men (strong gender-schematic processing). Nontraditional female Type As, who were more masculine than feminine, demonstrated strong gender schemas. Traditional female Type As, more feminine than masculine, displayed weak gender schemas. Type B women did not display these unusual sex role linkages.     

Differences between informants about type a,anger, and social support and the relationship with blood pressure

Abstract

In a study on the influence of different natural environments on self-perception and that of significant others, behavioral manifestations of Type A, Anger, and Social Support were assessed. It was hypothesized that due to different environmental demands, participants will be perceived as displaying differences in Type A behavior, anger, and social support at home and at work. Participants were 45 university employees, constituting a convenience sample. Assessment included Type A Structured Interview scores of participants and questionnaire scores for Type A, anger, and social support of participants who were also evaluated by their spouses and work supervisors. Other risk factors for coronary heart disease (i.e., blood pressure, smoking, previous heart condition, being sedentary, and family history) and their relationships with Type A, anger, and social support were also examined.

Participants and spouses agreed significantly on all measures, whereas participants and work supervisors agreed only on Type A behavior. Spouses' and work supervisors' evaluations of the participants' behavior were not or only marginally associated. Multiple regression analysis showed that the level of disagreement between the different informants with respect to Type A and social support were associated with elevated blood pressure. These results suggest that the perception of Vpe A behavior, anger, and social support may be situationally determined.     

Stress effects on affiliation preferences among subjects possessing the type A coronary-prone behavior pattern

An experiment tested the hypothesis that when subjects who display the Type A coronary-prone behavior pattern are placed under stress, they prefer to wait for the stressful event with others, but desire to work under stress alone. One half of 25 Type A and 25 Type B (non-coronary-prone) subjects were told that they would receive painful electric shock while working on a mental task, while the other one half were told that they would receive subliminal stimulation. Both groups were then given the choice of waiting for the event with others or alone and the choice of working on the task alone, in the company of others, or in a leader-directed group. The results showed that Type As relative to Type Bs tended to wait in the company of others regardless of threat level, but displayed a marked preference to work alone under high threat. This decision to work alone was not influenced by waiting preference. Subsequent correlational studies showed that coronary patients (n = 40) reported a greater preference for working alone when under pressure than matched controls (n = 40), as did Type A college students (77% vs. 14% for Type Bs) when asked their preference within the context of the structured interview that is used to assess the Type A pattern. The significance of the findings for increasing the understanding of affiliative preferences and coronary-prone behavior are discussed.     

Type A behavior pattern and emotion expression in younger and older adults.

Eighty younger (less than 50 years, M = 28 years) and 80 older (more than 50 years, M = 69 years) Type A and Type B Ss were evaluated for Type A behavior pattern using the Structured Interview (SI) and given personality tests for anxiety, depression, anger, aggression, hostility, and anger-in-anger-out. Ss also underwent an emotion induction procedure. Videotapes of the emotion induction procedure (N = 160) and the SI (N = 80) were coded for facial expression of emotion. Type As did not differ from Bs on anxiety or depression but did on anger and aggression. Type As showed anger inhibition and anger bound to shame, as predicted by emotion socialization theory. The greatest number of differential effects were observed between age groups. Older individuals, in general, were more emotionally expressive than younger Ss across a range of emotions. Women appeared more conflicted about anger expression than men, and Type A women more so than Type A men.     

Perceived coercion, resistance to persuasion, and the Type A behavior pattern

Three studies are reported, which tested the notion that persons possessing the Type A “coronary-prone” behavior pattern would be more susceptible to the experience of psychological reactance than would Type Bs, i.e., persons without that pattern. In Experiment 1, subjects exposed to a persuasive communication that was either low or high in coerciveness rated the degree of coercive intent behind the communication. Type As perceived greater coerciveness overall than Type Bs, a finding that was most reliable in the low coercion condition. In Experiment 2, subjects' postcommunication opinions were assessed, so that resistance to persuasion could be measured. A gender difference within Pattern A emerged from this study. Male Type As resisted the persuasion attempt to an equivalent degree whether it was low or high in coerciveness; female Type As displayed comparable resistance in the low coercion condition, but tended to be even more resistant in the high coercion condition. In contrast, both male and female Type Bs displayed persuasion in the low coercion condition, and resisted (to a degree comparable to Type As) in the high coercion condition. Experiment 3 further investigated resistance to persuasion among females, using a different issue for the persuasion attempt. Type A women again resisted more in the high coercion than the low coercion condition. Type B women displayed no evidence of resistance in either condition. Discussion centers on the observed gender difference and the possible theoretical importance of the notion that Type As perceive threat at lower objective levels than do Type Bs.     

Type A behavior and work situation: associations with burnout and work engagement

The aim of the present study was to investigate Type A behavior as well as perceived work situation, and associations with burnout and work engagement. The associations in focus were investigated through hierarchical regressions in a sample (N= 329) of Swedish Information Communication Technology consultants. The findings indicated that both work situation and Type A behavior was correlated with work engagement and burnout; however, no interactions between Type A behavior and work situation were elicited. The main conclusion was that the achievement striving aspect of Type A behavior appears as "non-toxic" and is related only to work engagement. However, the irritability/impatience aspect appears to be responsible for burnout complaints among Type A individuals, possibly through negative effects of the mood itself than through perceived stress at work.     

Type A behavior, need for control, and reactions to group participation

The present study examines the behavior of Type A coronary-prone subjects in group problem-solving sessions. Subjects discuss possible solutions to two problems in same-sex groups containing both Type As and Bs. As are much more likely than Bs to be seen as leaders and are rarely nominated as the least helpful member. Although A and B leaders are both seen as moderately likeable, A leaders' problem solutions are rated as lower in quality. Manipulations of problem importance and incentive for good solutions have similar effects on As and Bs. The results are discussed as being generally consistent with the proposal that Type As are primarily motivated by a need for control. Some indirect support is obtained for the idea that As are more susceptible than Bs to learned helplessness.