Psychophysiological responsivity and the type A behavior pattern

Studies were reviewed in which the psychophysiological responses of Type A and B subjects were studied in various contexts. It appears that Type A's manifest greater psychophysiological arousal than Type B's in solitary as well as interpersonal situations in which there is a moderate external incentive to accomplish something. and there is an intermediate probability of failing to accomplish that something. Further, Type A's appear to manifest greater psychophysiological arousal than Type B's in interpersonal situations in which another person annoys or harasses the subject. Why Type A's respond in these situations with greater psychophysiological arousal was discussed in terms of the possibilities that (a) these situations may engage some defining characteristic(s) of Type A's, (b) Type A's may fear and therefore try to avoid failure more vigorously than Type B's, and (c) Type A's may be more motivated to gain and maintain control over important environmental events and therefore are more aroused by threats to such control than Type B's.     

The type A behavior pattern in children: relationships with performance on speed oriented tasks

The Matthews Youth Test for Health (MYTH) was completed by teachers to evaluate 85 fifth- and sixth-grade boys. Type A and B groups of 20 boys each were selected based on MYTH scores. Each boy performed a signalled reaction time task and a perceptual search task. No performance difference was found between the Type A and B boys on the reaction time task. On the perceptual search task, each boy had to scan a set of pictures and report the number of "Snoopy's" seen in each picture. A group difference in response time was found, with the Type A boys having a mean of 5.98 s versus 7.87 for the Type B boys.     

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.     

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.     

Attributional style and the type A coronary-prone behavior pattern

The present two studies examined the attributional styles of Type A and B individuals. Past research suggests that Type A's exhibit greater performance deficits than Type B's following exposure to extended, salient uncontrollable stimuli. The reformulated learned helplessness model suggests that individuals most prone to such performance deficits should exhibit an attributional style characterized by internal, stable, and global attributions for negative outcomes, but external, unstable, and specific attributions for positive outcomes. However, a self-esteem protection explanation of learned helplessness findings predicts an opposite, self-serving attributional style. Results from both studies indicated that Type A's are more self-serving than Type B's in their attributions for positive and negative outcomes.     

Environmental demand and demand engendering behavior: an observational analysis of the type A pattern

In a prospective, observational study, we examined Type A behavior as a predictor of source of work demands, volume of work and nonwork activity, whether work begun was finished, and attention to more than one activity at a time. Police radio dispatchers (N = 72) were observed throughout one work shift, and half of the sample was observed on two additional work shifts. Behavioral categories showed substantial stability between observation occasions. Hierarchical regression revealed that two components of the broader Type A pattern, Hard-Driving Competitiveness and Job Involvement, were better predictors of work demands and behavior than was the global A score. Results support an interactional personality perspective in that Type As, relative to Type Bs, received more externally imposed demands from particular sources such as superiors or peers. However, these same Type As also generated more demand by simultaneously initiating work tasks for themselves and attending to multiple tasks.     

An experimental study about the congruence between type A behavior pattern and type of task

This paper is an experimental study, the basic aim of which is to check whether the congruence between personality characteristics and task characteristics has positive effects for performance and satisfaction on individuals. The results obtained reveal that Type A behavior pattern individuals get better results in cases of congruence than in cases of incongruence, while the performance of Type B behavior pattern individuals is not related to the (in)congruence between personal needs/aims and the task's demands. Besides, we have found that Type A behavior pattern individuals also have greater levels of satisfaction in cases of congruence than in cases of incongruence. However, Type B behavior pattern individuals show the same levels of satisfaction in both cases.     

Sustained attention and the Type A behavior pattern: the effect of daydreaming on performance.

The present study examined the ability of Type A and Type B subjects to sustain attention during a 40-min visual vigilance task. It was predicted that Type A subjects would perform better than Type B subjects and that the performance of both groups would be related to the frequency of daydreams during the vigil. Type A subjects outperformed Type B subjects with regard to perceptual sensitivity (A') and number of signal detections. Although both groups reported an increase in the number of their daydreams as the vigil progressed, Type A subjects reported fewer daydreams during each period of watch than did Type B subjects. In addition, an inverse relationship was found between the number of signal detections and the frequency of daydreams.     

The type a behavior pattern and the need to prove oneself: A correlational study

This study set out to investigate the relationship between the Type A behavior pattern, the need for approval, and the need to prove oneself. One hundred and two subjects completed four questionnaires: two measuring A-type behavior, one social desirability, and one—especially devised for this study—the belief in the need to prove oneself consistently. Results showed that Type A’s have significantly lower needs for approval than Type B’s, yet appear to show considerably greater interest in comparing their achievements with others. It seems that Type A’s do not have any special need to prove their worth to others, but that they must constantly prove themselves to themselves. Limitations of this preliminary study are discussed.     

Effects of parental styles on anxiety and type A behavior pattern

The present study examined the effect of reported parental styles on 35 undergraduates' anxiety and the Type A behavior pattern. The modified version of Kelly and Goodwin's Parental Control-style Questionnaire, the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, and the student version of the Jenkins Activity Survey were administered. Analysis showed that the subjects who had autocratic parents exhibited more Type A behavior pattern as well as having higher scores on the anxiety scales than those who had either permissive or democratic parents.     

Gender differences in the relationship between hostility and the type A behavior pattern

A group of 97 male and 111 female undergraduates completed the Jenkins Activity Survey, the Framingham Type A Scale, the Adjective Checklist Type A Scale, the Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory, and the Buss-Durkee Hostility Inventory. A factor analysis revealed three dimensions: Anger-Emotionality, Anger-Aggression, and Residual Pattern A. All Type A measures loaded highly on the Type A factor, with the Jenkins Activity Survey loading the highest. The Framingham Type A Scale was related to Anger-Emotionality, the Adjective Checklist Type A Scale was related to Anger-Aggression, and the Jenkins Activity Survey was related to neither of the anger dimensions. Women scored higher than men on Anger-Emotionality and the Guilt, Resentment, and Irritability subscales and lower than men on the Assaultiveness subscale. Women showed higher correlations between Type A and the Guilt subscale, and men between Type A and the Suspiciousness subscale. We conclude that Type A is a multidimensional construct that manifests itself differently in men and women.     

The type A behavior pattern, physical fitness, and psychophysiological reactivity

Joint effects of the Type A behavior pattern and aerobic fitness were examined with regard to heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (BP) changes elicited by laboratory challenges. Sixty-one college students were classified as Type A or B using the Structured Interview (SI), and as physically fit or sedentary using self-reports of activity level and estimated VO2max values obtained on a step test. Subjects were challenged with the SI, presentation of a snake, mental arithmetic, a cold pressor task, and two competitive card games. Significant A-B differences were found only on the SI and the card games. During the SI: As displayed significantly greater BP increases than Bs; sedentary subjects showed greater BP increases than fit subjects; and sedentary As revealed greater BP increases than either fit As, fit Bs, or sedentary Bs. In contrast, during the competitive games, physically fit As showed reliably greater BP increases than either sedentary As, sedentary Bs, or fit Bs. Since the physically fit subjects were almost exclusively varsity athletes and the sedentary subjects were college students who reported following a sedentary lifestyle, the differences between sedentary and fit groups may have been due to differences in aerobic fitness or to the improved ability of competitive athletes or those engaged in fitness training to match arousal level to task requirements.     

A test of theory of planned behavior in type II diabetes adherence: The leading role of perceived behavioral control

Current Psychology - Diabetes mellitus is a health complication that millions of people suffer from all over the world. Type II (non-insulin dependent) diabetes requires many changes in the daily...     

Personality, type A behavior, and coronary heart disease: the role of emotional expression

The nature of the relation between personality factors and coronary heart disease (CHD, the nation's greatest killer) is one of the most important if controversial issues in the field of psychology and health. Although there is still a great deal of conceptual confusion, progress is being made in refining the key components of a predisposition to heart disease. In this article we examine the construct of a coronary-prone personality in the context of the relations among personality, emotional expression, and disease. Special consideration is given to mode of measurement of the Type A behavior pattern--Structural Interview (SI) versus Jenkins Activity Survey (JAS)--and to components and non-Type A correlates of the general coronary-prone construct. Fifty middle-aged men who had had a myocardial infarction were compared with 50 healthy controls in terms of relevant aspects of their psychological functioning. Results indicate that the SI is better than the JAS as a predictor of coronary heart disease (CHD) because of its attention to emotional expressive style. Traditional emphases on hurry sickness in coronary proneness are deemed wholly inadequate. Furthermore, the results indicate that depression, anxiety, or both may relate to CHD independently of and in addition to Type A behavior. Other aspects of personality and social support are also discussed in the context of improving the construct of coronary proneness.     

Component analysis of the type A coronary-prone behavior pattern in male and female college students

Two studies investigated the psychological dimensions encompassed by the Rosenman Structured Interview (SI) method of assessing the Type A behavior pattern. In Study 1, female students completed the SI and Jenkins Activity Survey (JAS). Factor analysis of the verbal stylistic and answer content components of the SI yielded a 5-factor solution, with one factor--Clinical Rating--accounting for most nonerror variance in Type A ratings. The remaining factors were derived from answer content and correlated more substantially with JAS Type A ratings than with SI Type A ratings. In Study 2, male and female college students completed the SI and JAS and a battery of questionnaires that tap trait dimensions implied by the conceptual definition of Type A. For both males and females, SI ratings of Type A could almost be completely predicted by scores on the Clinical Rating factor. For both sexes, content dimensions of the SI related to other measures of Type A and to Type A-consistent traits, whereas the Clinical Rating factor was only modestly associated with such traits. Moreover, sex differences were observed in the trait constellations composing SI and JAS definitions of Type A. These results suggest that a discrepancy exists between conceptual and operational definitions of the Type A pattern.