Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Hostile Mood and Social Strain During Daily Life: A Test of the Transactional Model

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Annals of Behavioral Medicine

Abstract

Background

Hostility is a multidimensional construct related to cardiovascular (CV) disease risk. Daily hostile mood and social interactions may precipitate stress-related CV responses in hostile individuals.

Purpose

Determine whether trait cognitive hostility best predicts daily hostile mood and social interactions relative to other trait hostility factors and explore the temporal links between these daily measures.

Methods

One hundred seventy-one participants completed assessments of four trait hostility scales. Participants completed an electronic diary across 3 days, assessing current hostile mood and social interaction quality.

Results

Multiple regression analyses revealed both affective and cognitive hostility to be significant predictors of daily hostile mood, and cognitive hostility alone to predict daily social strain. Additional analyses revealed previous social strain to predict elevated subsequent hostile mood.

Conclusions

Episodes of social strain may give rise to elevated hostile mood. Trait cognitive hostility may be an important factor in predicting daily social strain.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Chida Y, Steptoe A. The association of anger and hostility with future coronary heart disease: A meta-analytic review of prospective evidence. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2009;53(11):936-946.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Everson-Rose SA, Lewis TT. Psychosocial factors and cardiovascular diseases. Ann Rev Pub Health. 2005;26(1):469-500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Iribarren C, Jacobs DR, Kiefe CI, et al. Causes and demographic, medical, lifestyle and psychosocial predictors of premature mortality: The CARDIA study. Soc Sci Med. 2005;60:471-482.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bunde J, Suls J. A quantitative analysis of the relationship between the Cook–Medley Hostility Scale and traditional coronary artery disease risk factors. Health Psych. 2006;25(4):493-500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Siegler IC, Costa PT, Brummett BH, et al. Patterns of change in hostility from college to midlife in the UNC alumni heart study predict high-risk status. Psychosom Med. 2003;65:738-745.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Smith TW. Hostility and health: Current status of a psychosomatic hypothesis. Health Psych. 1992;11:139-150.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Smith TW. Concepts and methods in the study of anger, hostility, and health. In: Siegman AW, Smith TW, eds. Anger, Hostility, and the Heart. Hillsdale, N.J: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc; 1994:23-43.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Martin R, Watson D, Wan CK. A three-factor model of trait anger: Dimensions of affect, behavior, and cognition. J Pers. 2000;68(5):869-897.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Smith TW, Glazer K, Ruiz JM, Gallo LC. Hostility, anger, aggressiveness, and coronary heart disease: An interpersonal perspective on personality, emotion, and health. J Pers. 2004;72(6):1217-1270.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Smith TW, Christensen AJ. Hostility, health, and social contexts. In: Friedman HS, ed. Hostility, Coping, and Health. Washington D.C: American Psychological Association; 1992:33-48.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  11. Gallo LC, Smith TW. Patterns of hostility and social support: Conceptualizing psychosocial risk factors as a characteristic of the person and environment. J Res Pers. 1999;33:281-310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Stone AA, Shiffman S. Ecological momentary assessment in behavioral medicine. Ann Beh Med. 1994;16:199-202.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Shapiro D, Jamner LD, Goldstein IB. Daily mood states and ambulatory blood pressure. Psychophys. 1997;34:399-405.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Raikkonen K, Matthews KA, Flory JD, Owens JF. Effects of hostility on ambulatory blood pressure and mood during daily living in healthy adults. Health Psych. 1999;18(1):44-53.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Cook WW, Medley DM. Proposed hostility and pharisaic-virtue scales for the MMPI. J App Psych. 1954;238:414-418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Benotsch EG, Christensen AJ, McKelvey L. Hostility, social support, and ambulatory cardiovascular activity. J Beh Med. 1997;20(2):163-175.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Brondolo E, Rieppi R, Erickson SA, et al. Hostility, interpersonal interactions, and ambulatory blood pressure. Psychosom Med. 2003;65:1003-1011.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Vella EJ, Kamarck TW, Shiffman S. Hostility moderates the effects of social support and intimacy on blood pressure in daily social interactions. Health Psych. 2008;27(2):S155-S162.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Smith TW, Ruiz JM, Uchino BN. Mental activation of supportive ties, hostility, and cardiovascular reactivity to laboratory stress in young men and women. Health Psych. 2004;23(5):476-485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Chen YY, Gilligan S, Coups EJ, Contrada RJ. Hostility and perceived social support: Interactive effects on cardiovascular reactivity to laboratory stressors. Ann Beh Med. 2005;29(1):37-43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Holt-Lunstad J, Smith TW, Uchino BN. Can hostility interfere with the health benefits of giving and receiving social support? The impact of cynical hostility on cardiovascular reactivity during social support interactions among friends. Ann Beh Med. 2008;35:319-330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Sahl JC, Cohen LH, Dasch KB. Hostility, interpersonal competence, and daily dependent stress: A daily model of stress generation. Cog Ther Res. 2009;33:199-210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Suls J, Bunde J. Anger, anxiety, and depression as risk factors for cardiovascular disease: The problems and implications of overlapping affective dispositions. Psych Bull. 2005;131:260-300.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Barefoot JC, Beckham JC, Haney TL, Siegler IC. Age differences in hostility among middle-aged and older adults. Psych Aging. 1993;8(1):3-9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Musante L, MacDougall JM, Dembroski TM, Costa PT. Potential for hostility and dimensions of anger. Health Psych. 1989;8(3):343-354.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Costa PT, McCrae RR, Dembroski TM. Agreeableness vs. antagonism: Explication of a potential risk factor for CHD. In: Siegman AW, Dembroski TM, eds. In Search of Coronary-Prone Behavior. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc; 1989:41-64.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Smith TW, Pope MK. Cynical hostility as a health risk: Current status and future directions. J Soc Beh Pers. 1990;5:77-88.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Kamarck TW, Haskett RF, Muldoon M. Citalopram intervention for hostility: Results of a randomized clinical trial. J Consult Clin Psych. 2009;77(1):174-188.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Barefoot JC, Dodge KA, Peterson BL, Dahlstrom WG. The Cook–Medley Hostility Scale: Item content and ability to predict survival. Psychosom Med. 1989;51:46-57.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Buss AH, Durkee A. An inventory for assessing different kinds of hostility. J Consult Psych. 1957;21:343-349.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Kamarck TW, Shiffman S, Smithline L, et al. The diary of ambulatory behavioral states: A new approach to assessment of ambulatory cardiovascular activity. In: Kranz D, Baum A, eds. Perspectives in Behavioral Medicine: Technology and Methodology in Behavioral Medicine. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1998:163-193.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Reis HT, Wheeler L. Studying social interaction with the Rochester Interaction Record. Adv Exp Soc Psych. 1991;24:269-317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Watson D, Clark LA. The PANAS-X: Manual for the positive affect and negative affect schedule. The University of Iowa;1994.

  34. Kamarck TW, Shiffman SS, Janicki D, et al. Evaluating an EMA-based assessment of psychosocial risk: Replication and extension. Ann Beh Med. 2002;24:S096.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Shiffman S. Real-time self-report of momentary states in the natural environment: Computerized ecological momentary assessment. In: Stone AA, Turkkan JS, Jobe J, eds. Science of Self-Report: Implications for Research and Practice. Mahwah (NJ): Earlbaum; 1999:277-296.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Hathaway SR, McKinley JC. Booklet for the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory. New York: The Psychological Corporation; 1943.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Barefoot JC, Dahlstrom G, Williams RB. Coronary heart disease incidence and total mortality: A 25 year follow-up study of 255 physicians. Psychosom Med. 1983;45:59-63.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Schekelle RB, Gale M, Ostfeld AA, Paul O. Hostility, risk of coronary heart disease, and mortality. Psychosom Med. 1983;45:109-114.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Smith TW, Frohm K. What’s so unhealthy about hostility? Construct validity and psychosocial correlates to the Cook & Medley hostility scale. Health Psych. 1985;4:503-520.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Biaggio MK, Supplee K, Curtis N. Reliability and validity of four anger scales. J Pers Assess. 1981;45:639-648.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Buss AH, Perry M. The aggression questionnaire. J Pers Soc Psych. 1992;63(3):452-459.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Spielberger CD. Manual for the State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory (STAXI). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources; 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Rosenman RH. The interview method of assessment of the coronary-prone behavior pattern. In: Dembroski TM, Shields JL, Haynes SG, eds. Coronary-Prone Behavior. New York: Springer; 1978:55-69.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  44. Barefoot JC, Lipkus IM. The assessment of anger and hostility. In: Smith TW, ed. Anger, Hostility, and the Heart. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum; 1994:43-66.

    Google Scholar 

  45. SPSS, Inc. SPSS for Windows software (Version 19.0.1). Chicago, IL: SPSS, Inc; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  46. SAS Institute. Data Quality Server 9.2: Reference, second edition. Cary, NC: SAS Institute; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Aguinis H. Statistical power problems with moderated multiple regression in management research. J Manage. 1995;21(6):1141-1158.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Sadler P, Ethier N, Woody E. Interpersonal complementarity. In: Horowitz LM, Strack S, eds. Handbook of interpersonal psychology: Theory, research, assessment, and therapeutic interventions. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc; 2011:123-142.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the National Institute of Health Training Grant HL07560, the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Grant HL040962, and the Pittsburgh Mind–Body Center Grants HL076852 at the University of Pittsburgh and HL076858 at Carnegie Mellon University. We thank the entire staff and crew of the Stress Treatment and Health Response study for their efforts in data collection. Some of these data were presented at the 64th annual meeting for the American Psychosomatic Society held in March, 2006, in Denver, CO.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors have no conflict of interest to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Southern Maine, 96 Falmouth Street, Rm 514 Science Bldg, Portland, ME, 04103, USA

    Elizabeth J. Vella Ph.D.

  2. Department of Psychology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Thomas W. Kamarck Ph.D. & Stephen Manuck Ph.D.

  3. Department of Psychiatry, Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA

    Janine D. Flory Ph.D.

Authors
  1. Elizabeth J. Vella Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Thomas W. Kamarck Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Janine D. Flory Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Stephen Manuck Ph.D.
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elizabeth J. Vella Ph.D..

About this article

Cite this article

Vella, E.J., Kamarck, T.W., Flory, J.D. et al. Hostile Mood and Social Strain During Daily Life: A Test of the Transactional Model. ann. behav. med. 44, 341–352 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-012-9400-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12160-012-9400-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation