Relinquishment of control and the Type A behavior pattern.

Past research suggests that Type A (coronary prone) Ss have a higher need for control than Type B (noncoronary prone) Ss, and empirical evidence documents their greater reactivity to control loss. The present study investigated the case of control decisions and examined the hypothesis that Type A's would be less willing than Type B's to relinquish control to another person. On an initial 20-trial RT task, 160 male undergraduates (typed on the basis of the Jenkins Activity Survey, Form T) received feedback about their own performance and about that of a partner. The feedback indicated equal or superior performance by the partner. On a subsequent replication of the task in which only 1 S could work on any 1 trial, Type A's relinquished fewer trials to their partners than did Type B's, particularly when the partner had exhibited a superior initial performance. Attribution data indicated that Type A's were less convinced of their partners' ability, thus justifying lower relinquishment. Implications for job stress and management decision making are discussed. (60 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Self-schematic representation of the Type A and B behavior patterns.

Two studies with 68 undergraduates who were identified as Type A (coronary prone) or Type B (noncoronary prone), based on their scores on the Jenkins Activity Survey—Form T, investigated the existence of Type A and Type B self-schemata, using 2 tasks designed to measure the influence of these hypothetical structures on speed of processing and memory interference. During an initial task, Type A's and B's 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. Reactions times (RTs) for the decisions were measured. Results indicate that both Type A's and B's made faster decisions for schema-compatible responses than for schema-incompatible responses. On a 2nd task, Type A's and B's were tested for recognition memory after they attempted to memorize half of the aforementioned trait list. Memory errors were examined and showed that Type A's and B's made more errors that were compatible with their respective self-schemata. Overall findings indicate that a Type A and Type B distinction forms a reliable organizing framework for the self-definitions of Type A's and B's. The existence of stable cognitive structures that parallel the behavioral differences between Type A's and B's has implications for both theory and application, such as the importance of examining how Type A and Type B self-schemata influence judgments of others in the achievement and performance domains. (57 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2011 APA, all rights reserved)     

Postperformance attributions and task persistence among Type A and B individuals: A clarification.

Tested the hypothesis that Type A (coronary-prone) Ss would be more self-serving than Type B (noncoronary-prone) Ss in their attributions for success and failure. It was also hypothesized that task persistence would differ among Type A's and B's and would be dependent on task difficulty and perceived task diagnosticity. 78 undergraduates classified on the basis of scores on the Jenkins Activity Survey as Type A's and B's attempted multiple sets of anagrams that were either easy or difficult. Persistence was measured by the number of anagram sets attempted, and, after task performance, attributions for success and failure were assessed. Results support both hypotheses. Type A's took more credit for success than for failure, whereas Type B's did not provide reliably different attributions for success and failure. Furthermore, Type A's persisted longer at the task when it was difficult and when it was viewed as relatively low in information value. Type B's persisted longer at the task when it was difficult but viewed as relatively high in information value. Results are discussed in the context of current debates regarding the responses of Type A's and B's to performance settings. (47 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Interpersonal aggression and the Type A coronary-prone behavior pattern: A theoretical distinction and practical implications.

In Study 1, 85 male undergraduates were classified as Type A (coronary prone) or Type B (noncoronary prone) on the basis of scores on the Jenkins Activity Survey. Ss participated in a version of A. H. Buss's (1961) teacher–learner procedure that allowed the isolation of hostile from instrumental acts. Results indicate that a prior task frustration produced greater aggression by Type A's than Type B's, but only under conditions where the aggressive act could not affect a confederate's immediate performance (i.e., hostile aggression). Study 2 examined the representation of Type A's and Type B's among 20 women in treatment for child abuse, 20 women who were victims of spouse abuse, and 20 control women. Findings show that Type A's were more likely than Type B's to exhibit the extreme hostility found in child abuse. Both studies suggest that a lack of control may underlie the greater aggression displayed by Type A's and Type B's. (39 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

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

Examined joint effects of the Type A (coronary prone) behavior pattern and aerobic fitness with regard to heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (BP) changes elicited by laboratory challenges. 61 male college students were classified as Type A or Type B (noncoronary prone) using R. H. Rosenman's (1978) structured interview (SI), and as physically fit or sedentary using self-reports of activity level and estimated VO?max values obtained on a step test. Ss were challenged with the SI, presentation of a snake, mental arithmetic, a cold pressor task, and 2 competitive card games. Significant A-B differences were found only on the SI and the card games: During the SI, (a) Type A's displayed significantly greater BP increases than B's; (b) sedentary Ss showed greater BP increases than fit Ss; and (c) sedentary A's revealed greater BP increases than either fit A's, fit B's, or sedentary B's. In contrast, during the competitive games, physically fit A's showed reliably greater BP increases than either sedentary A's, sedentary B's, or fit B's. Since the physically fit Ss were almost exclusively varsity athletes and the sedentary Ss 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. (47 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Cognitive characteristics of the Type A coronary-prone behavior pattern.

Reasoned that across a series of acquisition stimuli, Type A's, compared to Type B's, would be more responsive to the development of central tendencies in the frequency of appearance of the attributes that comprise the stimuli. This difference in attention should lead to a difference in encoding. On a subsequent recognition-memory task, then, Type A's should report with greater certainty than Type B's that they had seen stimuli composed of frequently observed attributes and should report with greater certainty that they had not seen stimuli composed of rarely observed attributes. In a test of this reasoning, 160 undergraduates classified as A's and B's by the Jenkins Activity Survey completed concept-formation and recognition-memory tasks under 1 of 4 levels of situational challenge. The predicted patterns occurred among Ss in whom moderate and high levels of challenge had been induced. Findings thus support the arguments that Type A's and B's process information differently and that this processing difference must be elicited by situational challenge. (40 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Influence of personal and universal failure on the subsequent performance of persons with Type A and Type B behavior patterns.

Compared the task performance of Type A (coronary prone) and Type B (noncoronary prone) persons following failure on a task in which no one succeeded (universal failure) vs failure on a task in which others had succeeded (personal failure). Postfailure performance was measured in terms of speed of completion of anagrams. 26 Type A and 28 Type B undergraduates were selected based on their scores on the Jenkins Activity Survey. Initial analyses indicated that the failure manipulation was effective in influencing the Ss' perceived cause of their failures and that Ss were more anxious and depressed following personal than universal failure. Type A's performed better following personal than universal failure, whereas type of failure had no effect on the performance of Type B's. Results suggest that, contrary to what is usually thought, Type A's do not struggle for success indiscriminately and that there are situational determinants of the level of effort that Type A's will expend. (15 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Type A and Type B attentional responses to aesthetic stimuli: Effects on mood and performance.

Recent investigations of the Type A (coronary prone) behavior pattern have found that Type A's focus their attention on a central task and actively inhibit attention to peripheral distracting stimuli. This attentional difference has resulted in greater performance for Type A's than for Type B's (noncoronary prone behavior). However, research on aesthetic stimuli suggests that the focused attention of Type A's may not always be adaptive for solving frustrating cognitive tasks, particularly when paying attention to a peripheral stimulus could enhance performance by reducing negative emotions. Simple, predictable, aesthetic stimuli can have a soothing effect, which reduces negative emotions and enhances performance. The present study, conducted with 62 undergraduates (mean age 24 yrs) who had completed the Jenkins Activity Survey for Health Prediction, found that Type B's had improved affect and performance from attending to a soothing peripheral stimulus (simplex melodies) while working on a frustrating cognitive task (anagrams). Neither the performance nor the affect of Type A's was influenced by the simplex music, because they apparently suppressed paying attention to these melodies. (32 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Performance of Type A (coronary-prone) men during and after exposure to uncontrollable noise and task failure.

42 medical students, ages 20–35 yrs, were classified in either Type A or Type B groups to test D. C. Glass's (1977) assertions (a) that Type A Ss would initially react to uncontrollable noise with increased coping efforts, as indexed by improved task performance on pretreatment tasks, and (b) that following exposure they would react with decreased coping, as measured by poor performance on a final task. Type B's were predicted to perform consistently throughout. Instead, Type B's showed initial coping attempts during exposure to uncontrollability and showed decreased coping following exposure, whereas A's performed consistently throughout. It is concluded that Type A and B persons do react differently to a threat to their control of a situation, but that this experimental paradigm may lack the precision necessary to elucidate the psychological factors motivating the behavior of the coronary-prone individual. (20 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Type A behavior pattern and the judgment of noncontingency: Mediating roles of mood and perspective.

Tested past research findings that Type A's (coronary-prone) and Type B's (non-coronary-prone) differ in their behavioral responses to lack of control. 73 undergraduates, classified as Type A or B on the Jenkins Activity Survey, were used to examine perceptual judgments of noncontingency. Types A's and B's assumed the role of either an actor or an observer on a standard contingency-judgment task. Consistent with previous research, both Type A's and B's exhibited an illusion of control when in the role of actor. Only Type B's exhibited an illusion of control when observing another person perform the task. Additional analyses indicated that the absence of an illusion of control by Type A observers reflected accuracy rather than a motivational distortion. Mood was also found to mediate control judgments, but only for actors. The plausibility of a memory-based interpretation for the mood effects is discussed. (44 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Task-related arousal of Type A and Type B persons: Level of challenge and response specificity.

To determine whether different levels of challenge had differential effects on the arousal levels of Type A (coronary prone) and Type B (noncoronary prone) persons, 30 Type A and 30 Type B male undergraduates worked on an intelligence test task (digits backwards recall) that was easy, moderately difficult, or extremely difficult. Arousal was measured in terms of systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, pulse rate, pulse volume, skin resistance, and subjective arousal. Results indicate that, while working on the extremely difficult task, the Type A's evidenced reliably higher systolic blood pressure than did Type B's and that there were not reliable differences between Ss in systolic blood pressure at other levels of challenge or on other measures of arousal. (15 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Effects of time limits on the interview behavior of Type A and B persons within a brief counseling analog.

48 undergraduates identified as Type A's or B's on the student version of the Jenkins Activity Survey completed an experimental task that required a discussion of positive and negative aspects of one's social life with a counselor in time-limited or time-unlimited conditions. Measures were taken of verbal productivity and anxiety demonstrated during the interview. Type A's talked more and faster than Type B's under both conditions. The presence of time limits increased productivity in terms of speech rate for both groups, but increased the anxiety level of Type A's only. Implications for time-limited counseling and the treatment of Type A behavior are discussed. (22 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Person perception and the Type A coronary-prone behavior pattern.

Investigated the influence of the Type A behavior pattern on attribution processes using 48 male undergraduates. It was predicted that Type A Ss would be more motivated to succeed in the Prisoner's Dilemma game than would Type B's. Increased motivation to succeed was predicted to lead Type A's to exaggerate the amount of dispositional information they would believe they had inferred from observing the behavior of a future opponent, since such a belief would lead to increased confidence about predicting the target's behavior and thus increase Ss' perceived control over the outcome. Results support the predictions when the hard-driving competitiveness dimension of the Type A pattern was used as the individual difference variable. Moreover, evaluations of future opponents in the Prisoner's Dilemma game also differed as a function of the hard-driving competitive dimension. Results are discussed in terms of a person by situation interactive model of motivational influences on attribution processes and in terms of potential interpersonal effects of the cognitive behavior of Type A individuals. (41 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Type A coronary-prone behavior pattern and social facilitation.

Investigated the task performance of 120 Type A coronary-prone undergraduates relative to 120 Type B's (as determined by the Jenkins Activity Survey, Form T) in 3 types of social situations: alone, with a similarly performing coactor, or with a better performing coactor. Results indicate that Type A's performance on a simple task was facilitated by the presence of either a similar or superior coactor, whereas the presence of coactors impaired performance on a complex task. Type B's showed weak and nonsignificant facilitation effects that occurred only in the presence of similar coactors. Results are discussed in terms of (a) the Type A's concern about evaluation, achievement, and social comparison and (b) G. S. Sanders and R. S. Baron's (see record 1976-06212-001) distraction–conflict theory of social facilitation. (19 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Attributional style and the Type A coronary-prone behavior pattern.

Examined the attributional styles of Types A (coronary-prone) and B (non-coronary-prone) individuals in 2 studies in which 62 undergraduates and 199 18–65 yr old county residents, classified on the Jenkins Activity Survey, completed an attributional style questionnaire. 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 indicate that Type A's were more self-serving than Type B's in their attributions for positive and negative outcomes. (37 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Correction to Lovallo and Pishkin.

Reports an error in the original article by William R. Lovallo and Vladimir Pishkin (Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 1980[Jun], Vol 38[6], pp. 963-971). Lovallo and Pishkin's article carried the APA copyright notice. However, the article was prepared as part of the authors' official duties with the federal government, and therefore the copyright notice should not have appeared. (The following abstract of this article originally appeared in record 1981-12817-001.) 42 medical students, ages 20-35 yrs, were classified in either Type A or Type B groups to test D. C. Glass's (1977) assertions (a) that Type A Ss would initially react to uncontrollable noise with increased coping efforts, as indexed by improved task performance on pretreatment tasks, and (b) that following exposure they would react with decreased coping, as measured by poor performance on a final task. Type B's were predicted to perform consistently throughout. Instead, Type B's showed initial coping attempts during exposure to uncontrollability and showed decreased coping following exposure, whereas A's performed consistently throughout. It is concluded that Type A and B persons do react differently to a threat to their control of a situation, but that this experimental paradigm may lack the precision necessary to elucidate the psychological factors motivating the behavior of the coronary-prone individual. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

EMG biofeedback training of Type A and Type B behavior pattern subjects.

Assessed the relative efficacy of EMG biofeedback training to reduce tension levels in Ss characterized either by the presence of the coronary-prone behavior pattern (Type A) or by its absence (Type B). 55 college students, classified as Type A or B on the basis of Jenkins Activity Survey (Form T) scores, were randomly assigned to either a biofeedback or a control group. Ss met for 6 training sessions, then returned for a 7th session to perform without biofeedback a series of easy (4-digit recall) and difficult (7-digit recall) tasks. Biofeedback Ss attained a greater degree of relaxation during training than did control Ss, regardless of A/B status. Also, biofeedback Ss maintained greater relaxation during task performance than did control Ss. Across groups, Type A's performed significantly better than Type B's on difficult tasks, and although Type A biofeedback Ss had EMG levels as high as Type B controls for the actual duration of performance tasks, they maintained significantly lower EMG levels than either group prior to, between, and after performance tasks. (22 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)     

Type A behavior pattern and the judgment of control.

Investigated the control judgments of Type A (coronary-prone) and Type B (noncoronary-prone) actors and observers after 5 tasks in which actual response–outcome contingency and success were varied systematically. 40 male and 40 female undergraduates, classified as Type A or B on the Jenkins Activity Survey, performed the control task or served as observers in same-sex pairs. 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. Findings suggest that Type A's, because of their more 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. Type A's were found to learn the contingencies better than Type B's, which has important implications for the actual exercise of control. (40 ref) (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)