Individual Differences in Stress - Personality Differences (Types A,B,C & hardiness) Flashcards
Personality can be defined as
“the combination of characteristics or qualities that form an individual’s distinctive character”.
Type A Personality
Time pressured/conscious/urgent
Working against the clock
Doing several things at once – multi-taskers
Constantly setting deadlines
Low boredom threshold
Excessive competitiveness
Always plays to win – achievement orientated
Ambitious
Anger
Self-critical
Hostile
Anger directed inwards
Aggressive and intolerant
Easily irritated, provoked and impatient with others
Type B is considered to be a healthier personality type
Characteristics:
Patient
Relaxed
Non-competitiveness
Tolerant
Reflective
Self-confident
Easy-going – take things in their stride
(….opposite of a Type A personality!)
How do Type A individuals respond to stress?
Type A’s respond more negatively to stressful situations than Type B’s; they are more likely to have their ‘flight or fight’ response set off by things in their environment.
As a result, Type A’s are more likely to have the stress hormones (adrenaline, cortisol) present in their bodies, which over a long period of time can increase their risk of suffering from a range of stress-related illnesses (e.g. CHD) due to immunosuppression and wear and tear of the cardiovascular system
Friedman and Rosenman (1974)
Procedure:
3,200 Californian men between the ages of 39-59 years old were interviewed and classified as Type A, B, or X.
Research technique: Behaviour was assessed through a structured interview.
Participants were asked 25 questions about how they responded to everyday pressures relating to impatience, competitiveness, motivation for success, frustration at goals being hindered and their feelings towards being under pressure.
The interview was conducted in a provocative manner in an attempt to elicit Type A behaviours. For example, as the participants answered the questions, the interviewer deliberately interrupted them or spoke slowly and hesitantly, to see how they would react, noting down any behavioural signs of type A behaviour e.g. finger tapping, restlessness.
They were followed for 8.5 years (longitudinal).
Friedman and Rosenman: Findings
Type A individuals were found to be more prone to coronary heart disease (CHD), independent of lifestyle factors (smoking and obesity).
- Twice as many Type A personalities developed cardiovascular disorders as did Type B personalities.
257 out of 3200 men suffered CHD
70% (of 257) were Type A individuals.
Type B individuals are less vulnerable to stress-related illnesses such as CHD: less than 30% of the 257 men who developed CHD were Type B.
Friedman and Rosenman: conclusions
Conclusion: Type A behaviour increases vulnerability to heart disease, suggesting that psychological factors can have physiological effects. Therefore, stressors are not harmful in themselves: it is how people perceive and react to them that is potentially dangerous for health.
Friedman and Rosenman (1960) found that Type A individuals were also more likely to suffer heart attacks than Type B individuals.
Type A: 12.8%
Type B: 6.0%
Friedman and Rosenman: Evaluation
Some of the key lifestyle variables that could have affected the participants’ vulnerability to heart disease that weren’t controlled for included elements of hardiness.
Those who don’t possess elements of hardiness may be less protected against the negative effects of stress.
Gender biased: Friedman and Rosenman only studied men
This makes their research androcentric (male-focused) and difficult to apply to females, because the behaviour and attributes of Type A are very masculine (a reflection of the importance of traditional masculinity at that time).
However, in a follow-up study, Friedman et al. (1986) studied over 800 men and women who had experienced CHD and found that both men and women experience Type A behaviours and benefit from strategies to reduce them.
This was not an experimental study, so cause and effect cannot be assumed
Evaluating Type A Behaviour and Stress
There is a lack of consistent research evidence regarding the relationship between Type A behaviour and CHD. Some research has found weak correlations or negative findings:
Miller et al. (1996) reviewed several studies, confirming Friedman and Rosenman’s original results.
Ragland and Brand (1998) found (22 years after the start of the study) that 15% of Friedman and Rosenman’s original sample had died of CHD, with age, high blood pressure and smoking proving to be significant factors, but there was little evidence of Type A personality being a risk factor.
Evaluating Type A Behaviour and Stress
The Type A personality is too broad a description. The critical personality variable is hostility, as it is thought to increase the risk of CHD.
Matthew and Haynes (1986) found that CHD was most associated with the hostility trait of Type A men, especially those experiencing high levels of hostility.
Forshaw (2002) also found that hostility was the single best predictor of CHD and a better predictor than Type A personality as a whole.
Evaluating Type A Behaviour and Stress
Perceptions of control have been found to moderate stress outcomes:
Chesney and Rosenman (1980) found that control was an important factor that interacted with personality type to determine responses to stressors – Type A managers experienced greatest anxiety when they were not in control, whereas other managers (with different personality types) experienced greater anxiety when they were in control.
Evaluating Type A Behaviour and Stress
Factors that could protect a Type A person against the negative effects of stress:
Elements of hardiness (control, commitment, challenge); Physical exercise; Social support.
Type C Personality
Strongly suppress emotions, particularly negative ones
Introverted
Sensitive
Thoughtful
Inclined towards perfectionism
Taking everything seriously
Working very hard
Conformist
Thorough in everything they do
Exceedingly dependable
Unassertive; avoid confrontation
Try to please others, even when it upsets them
Easily stressed
what are Type C Personality prone to developing
certain cancers, depression and illnesses associated with immunosuppression.
Procedure: Morris et al. (1981)
Over a period of two years, women attending a cancer clinic in London were asked to participate in a study.
In total, 75 women were interviewed and asked about how often they expressed affection, unhappiness by crying or losing control when angry, in order to assess typical patterns of emotional behaviour.
The interviewer was not aware of the initial diagnosis of cancer.
Findings: Morris et al. (1981)
Those women whose breast lumps were found to be cancerous were also found to have reported that they both experienced and expressed far less anger (Type C) than those women whose lumps were found to be non-cancerous.
conclusions: Morris et al. (1981)
This supports the idea of a link between cancer and the suppression of anger.
Evaluation of research into Type C behaviour
The studies into Type C women suffering from cancer might be considered unethical, as they might cause further distress to seriously ill women.
Practical applications: The findings could be used to formulate effective strategies to reduce the chances of Type C women developing cancer.
Challenging research evidence: Subsequent research has not supported Morrris et al’s findings…
Giraldi et al. (1997) conducted a six-year follow-up study in Italy and found no association between psychosocial variables (such as emotional suppression) and cancer progression. However, they did find that more stressful life events had occurred in the months prior to a cancer diagnosis.
The Hardy Personality
Kobasa (1979) suggested that some people are more psychologically hardy than others.
Hardiness enables people to cope better with stress and supposedly encourages resilience, protecting them against the negative effects of stress.
Hardiness is associated with lower physiological arousal in the presence of stressors, leading to a reduction in stress-related disorders.
Kobasa proposed that hardiness could be taught and used as a stress management technique.
Kobasa (1979) identified the following characteristics of a hardy personality:
CONTROL – hardy people see themselves in control of their lives - they feel a sense of personal control over what they are doing. They actively strive to influence environments rather than being controlled by external factors or seeing themselves as powerless and passive observers of life passing by.
COMMITMENT – hardy people are involved in the world around them e.g. relationships, activities and selves. They are committed to what they are doing and have a strong sense of self and purpose. They throw themselves wholeheartedly into life, optimistic they will learn something valuable.
CHALLENGE – hardy people see problems as challenges to be overcome and mastered, rather than as threats or stressors. They see change as expected and an opportunity for development. They recognise life is unpredictable, but this is exciting and stimulating.
Kobasa (1979) procedure
About 800 middle- and upper-level executives (all male) from a large utility company in the US were contacted and asked to identify the life events they had experienced in the previous three years (using a slightly adapted version of the SRRS). They were also asked to list any illness episodes they had experienced in this time.
Kobasa then identified those who were either high-stress/low-illness (86 participants) or high-stress/high-illness (75 participants).
Three months later the final participants were asked to complete several personality tests, which included assessments of control, commitment and challenge (hardy personality
Kobasa (1979) findings
Individuals in the high-stress/low-illness scored high on all three characteristics of the hardy personality.
The high-stress/high-illness group scored lower on those variables.
