Perceptions of spouse dominance predict blood pressure reactivity during marital interactions
- 114 Downloads
Cardiovascular reactivity (CVR) has been identified as a potential mechanism linking a variety of psychosocial processes to the development of cardiovascular disease. Although the effects of hostile and supportive social stimuli on CVR have been studied extensively, less in known about the effects of a second major dimension of social relations—dominance versus submissiveness. In the present study, 45 married couples participated in an interaction task involving the assertion of differing opinions. Subjects also provided ratings of their typical level of dominance versus submissiveness in relation to their spouse. Consistent with predictions derived from related conceptual models of psychological determinants of CVR, blood pressure reactivity was positively associated with perceptions of the spouse as dominant. At the highest level of perceived spouse dominance, CVR was attenuated, again consistent with prediction. Results are discussed in terms of the usefulness of conceptual models of interpersonal relations and motivation as guides in studying the social determinants of CVR, as well as the value of marital interactions as a context for understanding CVR.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- (2).Turner JR:Cardiovascular Reactivity and Stress: Patterns of Physiological Response. New York: Plenum Press, 1995.Google Scholar
- (6).Larkin KT, Zayfert C, Veltum LG, Abel JL: Effects of feedback and contingent reinforcement in reducing heart rate response to stress.Journal of Psychophysiology. 1992,6: 119–130.Google Scholar
- (16).Frazer NL, Larkin KT, Robyn S, et al: Relation between family environment and cognitive and physiological response to stress. InProceedings of the Fourth International Congress of Behavioral Medicine Rockville, MD: Society of Behavioral Medicine, 1996, S148.Google Scholar
- (17).Suchday S, Larkin KT, Schauss S, et al: Cardiovascular and cognitive response to anger expression and anger suppression in anger-in and anger-out males.Annals of Behavioral Medicine. 1995,17(Suppl.):S120.Google Scholar
- (21).Spielberger CD:State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory: Professional Manual Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources, 1988.Google Scholar
- (22).Spielberger CD, Gorsuch RL, Lushene R:State-Trait Anxiety Inventory. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press, 1970.Google Scholar
- (23).Hops H, Mills TA, Patterson GR, Weiss RL:Marital Interaction Coding System. Eugene, OR: Oregon Research Institute, 1972.Google Scholar
- (26).Turner JR, Hewitt JK: Twin studies of cardiovascular reactivity to psychological challenge: A review and suggested future directions.Annals of Behavioral Medicine. 1992,14:12–20.Google Scholar
- (31).Olson DH, Portner J, Bell R:EACES II: Family Adaptability and Cohesion Scales. St. Paul, MN: University of Minnesota, 1982.Google Scholar
- (33).Suchday S, Desiderato O: Factor analysis of an anger cognitions inventory. The 13th Annual Meeting of the Society for Behavioral Medicine. New York: 1991.Google Scholar