Friedman, M., & Rosenman, R. H. (). Type A behavior and your heart. New York, NY Knopf. Health Risks Due to Personality Types: Friedman and Rosenman (). Aims: To research the link between personality factors, stress and Coronary Heart. Type A and Type B personality hypothesis describes two contrasting personality types. In this 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 more.

Author: Fausar Kigakasa
Country: Congo
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Technology
Published (Last): 12 December 2013
Pages: 355
PDF File Size: 12.95 Mb
ePub File Size: 5.17 Mb
ISBN: 420-8-16482-907-3
Downloads: 82464
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Malall

Type A and Type B personality hypothesis describes two contrasting personality types. The two cardiologists who developed this theory came to believe that Type A personalities had a greater chance of developing coronary heart disease. Nevertheless, this research had a significant effect rosneman the development of the health psychology field, in which psychologists look at how an individual’s mental state affects physical health. Type A personality behavior was first described as a potential risk factor for heart disease in the s by cardiologists Meyer Friedman and Ray Rosenman.

They discovered that their patients were wearing out the arms and upholstery on the chairs in the waiting room. Participants were asked to fill out a questionnaire, that asked questions like “Do you feel guilty if you use spare time to relax? The hypothesis describes Type A individuals as outgoing, ambitious, rigidly organizedhighly status -conscious, sensitive, impatient, anxious, proactive, and concerned with time management. People with Type A personalities are often high-achieving ” workaholics “.

They push themselves with deadlines, and hate both delays and ambivalence. Depending on the task and the individual’s sense of time urgency and control, it can lead to poor results when there are complex decisions to be made. Its Diagnosis and TreatmentFriedman suggests that dangerous Type A behavior is expressed through three major symptoms: The first of these symptoms is believed to be covert and therefore less observable, while the other two are more overt.

Type A people were said to be hasty, impatient, impulsive, hyperalert, potentially hostile, and angry.

Type A and B personalities | Life and style | The Guardian

Janet Spence’s research has shown that the Type A archetype can be broken down into two factors assessed using a modified Jenkins activity survey.

AS is a desirable factor which is characterized by being hard working, active, and taking work seriously.

II is undesirable and is characterized by impatience, irritability, and anger. There are two main methods to assessing Type A behaviour. The first being the SI and the second being the Jenkins Activity Survey JAS [15] The SI assessment involves an interviewer measuring a persons emotional, nonverbal and verbal responses your expressive style. The JAS involves a self questionnaire with three main categories: Type B is a behavior pattern that is lacking in Type A behaviors.

The hypothesis 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: 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. Type B personality types are more tolerant than individuals in the Type A category. Type B individuals can ” Type A individuals’ proclivity for competition and aggression is illustrated in their interactions with other Type As and with Type Bs.


When playing a modified Prisoner’s Dilemma game, Type A individuals elicited more competitiveness and angry feelings from both Type A and Type B opponents than did the Type B individuals. Rivalry between Type A individuals was shown by more aggressive behavior in their interactions, including initial antisocial responses, refusal to cooperate, verbal threats, and behavioral challenges.

Chinaveh in Department of Psychology performed a study to examine a relationship between Type A and Type B personality students in regards to stress situation and coping responses in the campus.

Type A and B Personality

This study showed that Type A personality students had a higher level of perceived stress as compared to Type B personality students. In addition, Type A personality students had a higher level of coping responses and were able to reduce stress level rosenma utilizing approach responses when encountered with stressful circumstances Chinaveh,p.

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 a confounding variablethe former calls into question whether the findings can be generalized to the remaining male population or to the female population as a whole. Subjects in the control group received group cardiac counseling, and subjects in the treatment group received cardiac counseling plus Type A counseling.

Further discrediting the so-called Type A Behavior Pattern TABPa study from — 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 s, 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. InFriedman 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 rosemman to receive funding largely from the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute. When TABP finally became untenable, Philip Morris supported research on its hostility component, [26] allowing Vice President Jetson Lincoln to explain passive smoking lethality by the stress exerted on a rosenmann spouse through media rosfnman the smoking spouse to be slowly killing themselves.

Also on the whole most TABP studies had no relationship to the tobacco lobby but the majority of those with positive findings did. Some scholars argue that Type A behavior is not a good predictor of coronary heart disease.

The initial study that pointed to the association of Type A personality and heart attacks had a massive number of questions under consideration. When there are a lot of questions there is a high probability of a false positive. Two subsequent studies [ by whom? Those considerations may have changed. 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.

Type 1 personality is cancer prone, Type 2 is CHD prone, Risenman 3 is fredman 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 rosenmaan personality shows psychopathic tendencies and is prone to rosemnan addiction and AIDS. While most studies attempt to show the correlation between personality types and coronary heart disease, friedma 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. 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. 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 rosenmzn 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 frifdman and interacts synergistically with other risk factors, such as smoking and heredity.

Type A and Type B personality theory

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. 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.

A study conducted by the International Journal of Behavioral Medicine re-examined the association between the Type A concept with cardiovascular CVD roseenman non-cardiovascular non-CVD mortality by using a long follow-up on average They were followed up until the end of through linkage with the National Death Registry.

Type A measures were inconsistently associated with cardiovascular mortality, and most associations were non-significant. Some scales suggested slightly decreased, rather than roenman, risk of CVD death during the follow-up. Associations with non-cardiovascular deaths were even weaker.

Maintaining healthy magnesium Mg levels in the body plays a strong role in protecting the cardiovascular health of an aand. An xnd of the literature suggests the possible role of Mg deficiency in the susceptibility to cardiovascular diseasesobserved among subjects displaying a type A behavior pattern. 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. In a study done by Ball et rosenjan.

Their results showed that Type B personalities had more severe issues with substance abuse than Type A personalities. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Hypothesised duality of personality types. Not to be frjedman with Cluster A personality disorder or Cluster B personality disorder. The role of emotional expression”. Journal of Personality and Social Rosneman.

Journal of Social Behavior and Personality. Retrieved 21 March Journal of the American Medical Association. The New England Journal of Medicine. Retrieved rosenmzn December Personality and Individual Differences. Journal of Social Psychology. Its Diagnosis and Treatment. Hand-book of Health Psychology: Differential effects on students’ health and academic achievement”.

Journal of Applied Psychology. Where Do They Intersect? American Journal of Management. Retrieved 27 November