Wiki Loves Africa: share African cultural fashion and adornment pictures with the world!

 
Wiki Loves Africa: share African cultural fashion and adornment pictures with the world!

Type A and Type B personality theory
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Not to be confused with Cluster A personality disorder or Cluster B personality disorder.
Type A and Type B personality theory describes two contrasting personality types. In this theory, personalities that are more competitive, outgoing, ambitious, impatient and/or aggressive are labeled Type A, while more relaxed personalities are labeled Type B.

The two cardiologists who developed this theory came to believe that Type A personalities had a greater chance of developing coronary heart disease. Following the results of further studies and considerable controversy about the role of the tobacco industry funding of early research in this area, some reject, either partially or completely, the link between Type A personality and coronary disease. Nevertheless, this research had a significant effect on the development of the health psychology field, in which psychologistslook at how an individual’s mental state affects their physical health.[1]

Contents
[hide]
1 History
2 The types2.1 Type A
2.2 Type B
3 Criticism3.1 Funding by tobacco companies
3.2 Other issues
4 Other studies4.1 Role of magnesium in cardiovascular health
5 See also
6 References
History[edit]
Type A personality behavior was first described as a potential risk factor for heart disease in the 1950s by cardiologists Meyer Friedman and Ray Rosenman. After an eight-and-a-half-year-long study of healthy men between the ages of 35 and 59, Friedman and Rosenman estimated that Type A behavior doubles the risk of coronary heart disease in otherwise healthy individuals.[2] The individuals enrolled in this study were followed well beyond the original time frame of the study. Subsequent analysis indicated that although Type A personality is associated with the incidence of coronary heart disease, it does not seem to be a risk factor for mortality.[3]

The types[edit]
Type A[edit]
The theory describes Type A individuals as ambitious, rigidly organized, highly status-conscious, sensitive, impatient, take on more than they can handle, want other people to get to the point, anxious, proactive, and concerned with time management. People with Type A personalities are often high-achieving “workaholics“, push themselves with deadlines, and hate both delays and ambivalence.[4]

In his 1996 book dealing with extreme Type A behavior, Type A Behavior: Its Diagnosis and Treatment, Friedman suggests that dangerous Type A behavior is expressed through three major symptoms: (1) free-floating hostility, which can be triggered by even minor incidents; (2) time urgency and impatience, which causes irritation and exasperationusually described as being “short-fused”; and (3) a competitive drive, which causes stress and an achievement-driven mentality. The first of these symptoms is believed to be covert and therefore less observable, while the other two are more overt. [5]

Type B[edit]
The theory describes Type B individuals as a contrast to those of Type A. Type B personality, by definition, are noted to live at lower stress levels. They typically work steadily, and may enjoy achievement, although they have a greater tendency to disregard physical or mental stress when they do not achieve. When faced with competition, they may focus less on winning or losing than their Type A counterparts, and more on enjoying the game regardless of winning or losing. Unlike the Type A personality’s rhythm of multi-tasked careers, Type B individuals are sometimes attracted to careers of creativity: writer, counselor, therapist, actor or actress. However, network and computer systems managers, professors, and judges are more likely to be Type B individuals as well. Their personal character may enjoy exploring ideas and concepts. They are often reflective, and think of the “outer and inner world”.

Criticism[edit]
Limitations of the original study comprise the inclusion of only middle-aged men and the lack of information regarding the diets of those subjects. While the latter could serve as aconfounding variable, the former calls into question whether the findings can be generalized to the remaining male population or to the female population as a whole.

Friedman et al. (1986)[6] conducted a randomized controlled trial on 862 male and female post myocardial infarction patients, ruling out (by probabilistic equivalence) diet and other confounds. Subjects in the control group received group cardiac counseling, and subjects in the treatment group received cardiac counseling plus Type A counseling. The recurrence rate was 28% in the control group and 13% in the treatment group, a strong and statistically significant finding.

Funding by tobacco companies[edit]
Further discrediting the so-called Type A Behavior Pattern (TABP), a study from 2012 – based on searching the Legacy Tobacco Documents Library – suggests the phenomenon of initially promising results followed by negative findings to be partly explained by the tobacco industry’s involvement in TABP research to undermine the scientific evidence on smoking and health. The industry’s interest in TABP lasted at least four decades until the late 1990s, involving substantial funding to key researchers encouraged to prove smoking to simply correlate with a personality type prone to coronary heart disease (CHD) and cancer.[7] Hence, until the early 1980s, the industry’s strategy consisted of suggesting the risks of smoking to be caused by psychological characteristics of individual smokers rather than tobacco products by deeming the causes of cancer to be multifactorial with stress as a key contributing factor.[8][9][10] Philip Morris (today Altria) and RJ Reynolds helped generate substantial evidence to support these claims by funding workshops and research aiming to educate about and alter TABP to reduce risks of CHD and cancer. Moreover, Philip Morris primarily funded the Meyer Friedman Institute, e.g. conducting the “crown-jewel” trial on the effectiveness of reducing TABP whose expected findings could discredit studies associating smoking with CHD and cancer but failing to control for Type A behaviour.[7]

In 1994, Friedman wrote to the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration criticising restrictions on indoor smoking to reduce CHD, claiming the evidence remained unreliable since it did not account for the significant confounder of Type A behaviour, notwithstanding the fact that by then, TABP had proven to be significant in only three of twelve studies. Though apparently unpaid for, this letter was approved by and blind-copied to Philip Morris, and Friedman (falsely) claimed to receive funding largely from the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute.[11] When TABP finally became untenable, Philip Morris supported research on its hostility component,[12] allowing Vice President Jetson Lincoln to explain passive smoking lethality by the stress exerted on a non-smoking spouse through media claiming the smoking spouse to be slowly killing themselves.[13] When examining the most recent review on TABP and CHD in this light, the close relationship to the tobacco industry becomes evident: of thirteen etiologic studies in the review, only four reported positive findings,[14] three of which had a direct or indirect link to the industry. Also on the whole most TABP studies had no relationship to the tobacco lobby but the majority of those with positive findings did.[7] Furthermore, TABP was used as a litigation defence, similar to psychosocial stress.[15] Hence, Petticrew et al. proved the tobacco industry to have substantially helped generate the scientific controversy on TABP, contributing to the (in lay circles) enduring popularity and prejudice for Type A personality even though it has been scientifically disproven.[7]

Other issues[edit]
Some scholars argue that Type A behavior is not a good predictor of coronary heart disease.[16] According to research by Redford Williams of Duke University, the hostility component of Type A personality is the only significant risk factor.[17] Thus, it is a high level of expressed anger and hostility, not the other elements of Type A behavior, that constitutes the problem.

Other studies[edit]
A study was performed that tested the effect of psychosocial variables, in particular personality and stress, as risk factors for cancer and coronary heart disease (CHD).[18] In this study, four personality types were recorded. Type 1 personality is cancer prone, Type 2 is CHD prone, Type 3 is alternating between behaviors characteristic of Types 1 and 2, and Type 4 is a healthy, autonomous type hypothesized to survive best. The data suggests that the Type 1 probands die mainly from cancer, type 2 from CHD, whereas Type 3 and especially Type 4 probands show a much lower death rate. Two additional types of personalities were measured, Type 5 and Type 6. Type 5 is a rational anti-emotional type, which shows characteristics common to Type 1 and Type 2. Type 6 personality shows psychopathic tendencies and is prone to drug addiction and AIDS.[19]

While most studies attempt to show the correlation between personality types and coronary heart disease, studies have suggested that mental attitudes constitute an important prognostic factor for cancer. As a method of treatment for cancer-prone patients, behavior therapy is used [20] The patient is taught to express his/her emotions more freely, in a socially acceptable manner, to become autonomous and be able to stand up for his/her rights. Behavior therapy would also teach them how to cope with stress-producing situations more successfully. The effectiveness of therapy in preventing death in cancer and CHD is evident.[21] The statistical data associated with higher death rates is impressive. Other measures of therapy have been attempted, such as group therapy. The effects were not as dramatic as behavior therapy, but still showed improvement in preventing death among cancer and CHD patients.

From the study above, several conclusions have been made. A relationship between personality and cancer exists, along with a relationship between personality and coronary heart disease. Personality type acts as a risk factor for diseases and interacts synergistically with other risk factors, such as smoking and heredity. It has been statistically proven that behavior therapy can significantly reduce the likelihood of cancer or coronary heart disease mortality. On the contrary, psychoanalysis can increase the likelihood of cancer and coronary heart disease mortality drastically (Citation need. This has no supporting evidence). Studies suggest that both body and mental disease arise from each other. Mental disorders arise from physical causes, and likewise, physical disorders arise from mental causes. While Type A personality did not show a strong direct relationship between its attributes and the cause of coronary heart disease, other types of personalities have shown strong influences on both cancer-prone patients and those prone to coronary heart disease.[21]

A study conducted by the International Journal of Behavioral Medicine: The study re-examined the association between the Type A concept with cardiovascular (CVD) and non-cardiovascular (non-CVD) mortality by using a long follow-up (on average 20.6 years) of a large population-based sample of elderly males (N = 2,682), by applying multiple Type A measures at baseline, and looking separately at early and later follow-up years. The study sample were the participants of the Kuopio Ischemic Heart Disease Risk Factor Study, (KIHD), which includes a randomly selected representative sample of Eastern Finnish men, aged 42–60 years at baseline in the 1980s. They were followed up until the end of 2011 through linkage with the National Death Registry. Four self-administered scales, Bortner Short Rating Scale, Framingham Type A Behavior Pattern Scale, Jenkins Activity Survey, and Finnish Type A Scale, were used for Type A assessment at the start of follow-up. Type A measures were inconsistently associated with cardiovascular mortality, and most associations were non-significant. Some scales suggested slightly decreased, rather than increased, risk of CVD death during the follow-up. Associations with non-cardiovascular deaths were even weaker. The study’s findings further suggest that there is no evidence to support the Type A as a risk factor for CVD and non-CVD mortality.[22]

Role of magnesium in cardiovascular health[edit]
Maintaining healthy magnesium levels in the body plays a strong role in protecting the cardiovascular health of an individual. An analysis of the literature suggests the possible role of Mg deficiency in the susceptibility to cardiovascular diseases, observed among subjects displaying a type A behavior pattern. Experimental data which support this hypothesis are reviewed. Type A subjects are more sensitive to stress and produce more catecholamines than type B subjects. This, in turn, seems to induce an intracellular Mg loss. In the long run, type A individuals would develop a state of Mg deficiency, which may promote a greater sensitivity to stress and, ultimately, lead to the development of cardiovascular problems.[23]

See also[edit]
Type D personality
Alpha (ethology)
References[edit]
Jump up^ Eysenck, H.J. (1990). Type A Behavior and Coronary Heart Disease: The Third Stage. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 5, 25-44.
Jump up^ Friedman, M.; Rosenman, R. (1959). “Association of specific overt behaviour pattern with blood and cardiovascular findings”. Journal of the American Medical Association 169: 1286–1296.doi:10.1001/jama.1959.03000290012005.
Jump up^ Ragland, D.; Brand, R. (1988). “Type A Behavior and Mortality from Coronary Heart Disease”. The New England Journal of Medicine 318: 65–69. doi:10.1056/nejm198801143180201.
Jump up^ McLeod, Saul. “Type A Personality”. Retrieved 29 December 2013.
Jump up^ Friedman, M. (1996). Type A Behavior: Its Diagnosis and Treatment. New York, Plenum Press (Kluwer Academic Press), pp. 31 ff.
Jump up^ Friedman, Meyer; Carl E. Thoresen; James J. Gill; Diane Ulmer; Lynda H. Powell; Virginia A. Price; Byron Brown; Leonti Thompson; David D. Rabin; William S. Breall; Edward Bourg; Richard Levy; Theodore Dixon (1 October 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 (4): 653–665. doi:10.1016/0002-8703(86)90458-8.
^ Jump up to:a b c d Petticrew, M. P.; K. Lee; M. McKee (2012). “Type A behavior pattern and coronary heart disease: Philip Morris’s “crown jewel””. American Journal of Public Health 102 (11): 2018–2025. doi:10.2105/AJPH.2012.300816.
Jump up^ Landman, A.; D.K. Cortese; S. Glantz (2008). “Tobacco industry sociological programs to influence public beliefs about smoking”. Social Science & Medicine 66 (4): 970–981.doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2007.11.007.
Jump up^ Petticrew, M. P.; Lee, K. (2011). “The “father of stress meets “big tobacco”: Hans Selye and the tobacco industry”. American Journal of Public Health 101 (3): 411–418.doi:10.2105/AJPH.2009.177634. PMC 3036703. PMID 20466961.
Jump up^ Smith, E. A. (2007). “”It’s interesting how few people die from smoking”: tobacco industry efforts to minimize risk and discredit health promotion”. European Journal of Public Health 17 (2): 162–170. doi:10.1093/eurpub/ckl097.
Jump up^ Friedman, Meyer. “Letter to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration”. Legacy Tobacco Documents Library. Retrieved 13 November 2013.
Jump up^ Wall, C. R. “Philip Morris research”. Legacy Tobacco Documents Library. Retrieved 13 November 2013.
Jump up^ Lincoln, J. E. “Letters to the editor RE: “Effects of passive smoking in the multiple rist factor intervention tral””. Legacy Tobacco Documents Library. Retrieved 13 November 2013.
Jump up^ Kuper, H.; M. Marmot; H. Hemingway (2002). “Systematic review of prospective cohort studies of psychosocial factors in the etiology and prognosis of coronary heart disease”. Seminars in Vascular Medicine 2 (3): 267–314. doi:10.1055/s-2002-35401.
Jump up^ Philip Morris Inc. “Deposition of Robert D. Verhalen, Dr P. H., September 29, 1998, Northwest Laborers-Employees Health & Security Trust Fund v. Philip Morris Inc.”. Legacy Tobacco Documents Library. Retrieved 13 November 2013.
Jump up^ “Bates, K. L. (2006). Type A personality not linked to heart disease”. Retrieved 2006-11-05.
Jump up^ Williams, R. B. (2001). Hostility: Effects on health and the potential for successful behavioral approaches to prevention and treatment. In A. Baum, T. A. Revenson & J. E. Singer (Eds.)Handbook of Health Psychology. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Jump up^ Grossarth-Maticek, R., & Eysenck, H. J., & Vetter, H., 1988
Jump up^ Grossarth-Maticek, R., & Eysenck, H. J., & Vetter, H. (1988). Personality Type, Smoking Habit and Their Interaction as Predictors of Cancer and Coronary Heart Disease. Personality and Individual Differences, 9, 479-495
Jump up^ Grossarth-Maticek, R., & Eysenck, H. J. (1991). Creative Novation Behaviour Therapy as a Prophylactic Treatment for Cancer and Coronary Heart Disease: I. Description of Treatment. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 29, 1-16.
^ Jump up to:a b Eysenck, H.J. (1986). Smoking and Health. In R. Tollison (Ed.), Smoking and Health (pp. 17-88). Lexington, MA: Lexington
Jump up^ Šmigelskas, K. (2014). Type A Behavior Pattern is not a Predictor of Premature Mortality. International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 285-302. Retrieved fromhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25169700
Jump up^ “Type A behavior and magnesium metabolism. [Magnesium. 1986] – PubMed – NCBI”. Ncbi.nlm.nih.gov. 2013-03-25. Retrieved 2013-11-14.
Personality theories
Biospheric model of personality · Cognitive-affective personality system · Constructivism (psychological school) · Distressed personality type · Ego psychology ·Hypostatic model of personality · Nature versus nurture · Personal construct theory · Personality Assessment System · Personality systematics · Personology · Phenomenal field theory ·Positive Disintegration · Psychological behaviorism · Self monitoring · Situationism (psychology) · Trait theory · Two-factor models of personality

Categories:

Ischemic heart diseases
Personality typologies

Navigation menu
Create account
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Log in
Article
Talk
Read
Edit
View history

Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Eesti
فارسی
Français
Norsk bokmål
Polski
中文
Edit links
This page was last modified on 30 September 2015, at 18:35.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Mobile view

home

social

methods

perspectives

psychologists

developmental

a-z index
Home › Personality Theories › Type A
Type A Personality
by Saul McLeod twitter icon published 2011, updated 2014

This type of personality concerns how people respond to stress.

Friedman & Rosenman (both cardiologists) developed their theory based on an observation of the patients with heart conditions in their waiting room.

Unlike most patients, who wait patiently, some people seemed unable to sit in their seats for long and wore out the chairs. They tended to sit on the edge of the seat and leaped up frequently.
What was unusual was that the chairs were worn down on the front edges of the seats and armrests instead of on the back areas, which would have been more typical. They were as tense as racehorses at the gate.

The two doctors labeled this behavior Type A personality. They subsequently conduced research to show that people with type A personality run a higher risk of heart disease and high blood pressure than type Bs.
Although originally called ‘Type A personality’ by Friedman & Rosenman it has now been conceptualized as a set of behavioral responses collectively known as Type A Behavior Pattern.

Type A Behavior Pattern (TABP)
Typical responses of TABP include:

Competitiveness
Type A individuals tend to be very competitive and self-critical. They strive toward goals without feeling a sense of joy in their efforts or accomplishments.

Interrelated with this is the presence of a significant life imbalance. This is characterized by a high work involvement. Type A individuals are easily ‘wound up’ and tend to overreact. They also tend to have high blood pressure (hypertension).

Time Urgency
Type A personalities experience a constant sense of urgency: Type A people seem to be in a constant struggle against the clock. Often, they quickly become impatient with delays and unproductive time, schedule commitments too tightly, and try to do more than one thing at a time, such as reading while eating or watching television.

Hostility
Type A individuals tend to be easily aroused to anger or hostility, which they may or may not express overtly. Such individuals tend to see the worse in others, displaying anger, envy and a lack of compassion.

When this behavior is expressed overtly (i.e. physical behavior) it generally involves aggression and possible bullying (Forshaw, 2012). Hostility appears to be the main factor linked to heart disease and is a better predictor than the TAPB as a whole.

Type B & C Personalities
People with Type B personality tend to be more tolerant of others, are more relaxed than Type A individuals, more reflective, experience lower levels of anxiety and display higher level of imagination and creativity.

type a personality

The Type C personality has difficulty expressing emotion and tends to suppress emotions, particularly negative ones such as anger. This means such individual also display ‘pathological niceness’, conflict avoidance, high social desirability, over compliance and over patience.

Empirical Research
Friedman & Rosenman (1976) conducted a longitudinal study to test their hypothesis that Type A personality could predict incidents of heart disease.

The Western Collaborative Group Study followed 3154 healthy men, aged between thirty nine and fifty nine for eight and a half years.

Participants were asked to complete a questionnaire.

Examples of questions asked by Friedman & Rosenman:

• Do you feel guilty if you use spare time to relax?

• Do you need to win in order to derive enjoyment from games and sports?

• Do you generally move, walk and eat rapidly?

• Do you often try to do more than one thing at a time?
From their responses, and from their manner, each participant was put into one of two groups:

Type A behavior: competitive, ambitious, impatient, aggressive, fast talking.

Type B behavior: relaxed, non-competitive.

According to the results of the questionnaire 1589 individuals were classified as Type A personalities, and 1565 Type B.

personality type a

Findings
The researchers found that more than twice as many Type A people as Type B people developed coronary heart disease. When the figures were adjusted for smoking, lifestyle, etc. it still emerged that Type A people were nearly twice as likely to develop heart disease as Type B people.

For example, eight years later 257 of the participants had developed coronary heart disease. By the end of the study, 70% of the men who had developed coronary heart disease (CHD) were type A personalities.

The Type A personality types behavior makes them more prone to stress-related illnesses such as CHD, raised blood pressure etc.

fight or flight response

Such people are more likely to have their ”flight or fight” response set off by things in their environment.

As a result, they are more likely to have the stress hormones present, which over a long period of time leads to a range of stress-related illnesses.

Research Evaluation
Limitations of the study involve problems with external validity. Because the study used an all male sample it is unknown if the results could be generalized to a female population.

Studies carried out on women have not shown such a major difference between Type A and Type B and subsequent health. This may suggest that different coping strategies are just as important as personality.

The study was able to control for other important variables, such as smoking and lifestyle. This is good as it makes it less likely that such extraneous variables could confound the results of the study.

Theoretical Evaluation
However, there are a number of problems with the type A & B approach.

Such approaches have been criticized for attempting to describe complex human experiences within narrowly defined parameters. Many people may not fit easily into a type A or B person.

A longitudinal study carried out by Ragland and Brand (1988) found that as predicted by Friedman Type A men were more likely to suffer from coronary heart disease. Interestingly, though, in a follow up to their study, they found that of the men who survived coronary events Type A men died at a rate much lower than type B men.

The major problem with the Type A and Type B theory is actually determining which factors are influencing coronary heart disease. Some research (e.g. Johnston, 1993) has concentrated on hostility, arguing that the Type A behavior pattern is characterized by underlying hostility which is a major factor leading to coronary heart disease.

Other research has investigated the way that type A people experience and cope with stress, which is the major factor leading to coronary heart disease. It would seem that a much more sophisticated model is needed to predict coronary heart disease than Friedman and Rosenman’s Type A & Type B approach.

References
Johnston, D. W. (1993). The current status of the coronary prone behaviour pattern. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 86(7), 406.

Ragland, D. R., & Brand, R. J. (1988). Coronary heart disease mortality in the Western Collaborative Group Study. Follow-up experience of 22 years. American Journal of Epidemiology, 127(3), 462-475.

Rosenman, R. H., Brand, R. J., Sholtz, R. I., & Friedman, M. (1976). Multivariate prediction of coronary heart disease during 8.5 year follow-up in the Western Collaborative Group Study. The American Journal of Cardiology, 37(6), 903-910.

How to cite this article:
McLeod, S. A. (2014). Type A Personality. Retrieved from www.simplypsychology.org/personality-a.html

Print Friendly and PDF

Further Information
A-level psychology stress revision notes

The body’s response to stress

Stress and the immune system

Type A Personality Test

Journal Article – The Personality Assessment System as A Conceptual Framework for the Type A Coronary-Prone Behavior Pattern piaget pdf

Journal Article – Evaluation of Type A personality piaget pdf

Print Friendly and PDF
popular pages
Questionnaires | Simply Psychology
Theories of Personality | Simply Psychology
Emotion Focused Coping with Stress | Simply Psychology
Stress, Illness and the Immune System | Simply Psychology
Simply Psychology – Articles for Students

more info

Article Content
Introduction
Type A Behavior
Type B & C Behavior
Empirical Evidence
Critical Evaluation
References

Related Articles
Self Concept
Stress Biology
Stress and the Immune System
SRRS
search here:

search
navigation
Social
Methods
Perspectives
Psychologists
Developmental
A-Z Index
Top Menu
keep in touch
Twitter
Facebook
Google+
© 2015 simplypsychology.org. All rights reserved.
AboutPrivacy Policy

Is this the question you were looking for? If so, place your order here to get started!