Psychosocial vulnerability, hostility, and family history of coronary heart disease among male and female college students

  • John N. O’Neil
  • Charles F. Emery

Abstract

This study evaluated the utility of the psychosocial vulnerability model for understanding the hostility—coronary heart disease (CHD) relationship among college students at risk for CHD. Interrelationships of cognitive, affective, and behavioral hostility with structural and functional social support were examined. College undergraduates with a parental history of CHD (n = 121) and a control group of 125 students with no CHD family history completed measures of hostility and social support. Among women, a significant negative correlation was found between affective—experiential hostility and functional support. Among men, a significant negative correlation was observed between cognitive—experiential hostility and structural support. Path analyses revealed a significant positive effect of expressive hostility on functional s⊷port for CHD-negative men and CHD-positive women. CHD family history was not associated with hostility or family environment. CHD-positive participants reported less support satisfaction than did CHD-negative participants. Thus, results indicated qualified support for the psychosocial vulnerability model of the hostility—CHD relationship.

Key words

hostility social support psychosocial vulnerability coronary heart disease family history sex differences 

References

  1. Arbuckle, J. L. (1997).Amos user’s guide version 3.6. Chicago: SmallWaters Corporation.Google Scholar
  2. Barefoot, J.C., Dahlstrom, W.G., & Williams, R. B.(1983). Hostility, CHD incidence and total mortality: A 25-year follow-up study of 255 physicians.Psychosomatic Medicine, 245, 59–63.Google Scholar
  3. Barrett-Connor, E., & Khaw, K. (1984). Family history of heart attack as an independent predictor of death due to cardiovascular disease.Circulation, 69, 1065–1069.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Berg, K. (1983). Geneticsof coronary heart disease. In A. G. Steinberg, A. G. Bearn, A. G. Motulsky, & B. Childs (Eds.),Progress in medical genetics (Vol. 5, pp. 35–90). Philadelphia: Saunders.Google Scholar
  5. Carmelli, D., Swan,G. E.,& Rosenman, R. H. (1990). The heritabilityofthe Cook and Medley Hostility Scale revisited.Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 5, 107–116.Google Scholar
  6. Cates, D. S., Houston, B. K., Vavak, C. R., Crawford, M. H., & Uttley, M. (1992) Heritability of hostility-related emotions, attitudes, and behaviors.Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 16, 237–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Coccaro, E. F., Bergeman,C. S., Kavoussi, R. J., & Seroczynski, A. D. (1997). Heritabilityofaggression and irritability: A twin study of the Buss-Durkee Aggression Scales in adult male subjects.Biological Psychiatry, 41, 273–284.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cohen, S., & Hoberman, H. M. (1983). Positive events and social supports as buffers of life change stress.Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 13, 99–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cohen, S., & Wills, T. A. (1985). Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis.Psychological Bulletin, 98, 310–357.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cook, W., & Medley, D. (1954). Proposed hostility and pharisaic-virtue scales for the MMPI.Journal of Applied Psychology, 238, 414–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Engebretson, T. O., & Stoney, C. M. (1995). Anger expression and lipid concentrations.International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 2, 281–298.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hastrup, J. L., Hotchkiss, A. P., & Johnson, C. A. (1985). Accuracy of knowledge of family history of cardiovascular disorders.Health Psychology, 4, 291–306.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Houston, B. K., & Vavak, C. R. (1991). Cynical hostility: Developmental factors, psychosocial correlates, and health behaviors.Health Psychology, 10, 9–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kee F., Tiret, L., Robo, J. Y., Nicaud, V., McCrum, E., Evans, A., & Cambien, F. (1993). Reliability of reported family history of myocardial infarction.British Medical Journal, 307, 1528–1530.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kline, R. B. (1998).Principles and practice of structural equation modeling New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  16. Matthews, K. A., Rosenman, R. H., Dembroski, T. M., Harris, E. L., & MacDougall, J. M. (1984). Familial resemblance in components of the Type A behavior pattern: A reanalysis of the California Type A twin study.Psychosomatic Medicine, 46, 512–522.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Miller,T. Q., Markides, K. S., Chiriboga,D. A., & Ray, L. A. (1995). Atestofthe psychosocial vulnerability and health behavior models of hostility: Results from an 11-year follow-up study of Mexican Americans.Psychosomatic Medicine, 57, 572–581.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Miller, T. Q., Smith, T. W., Turner, C. W., Guijarro, M. L., & Hallet, A. J. (1996). A meta-analytic review of research on hostility and physical health.Psychological Bulletin, 119, 322–348.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Moos, R. H., Insel, P. M., & Humphrey, B. (1974).Family environment scale manual. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
  20. Myers, R. H., Kiely, D. K., Cupples, L. A., & Kannel, W. B. (1990). Parental history is an independent risk factor for coronary artery disease: The Framingham Study.American Heart Journal, 120, 963–969.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Nora, J. J., Lortscher, R. H., Spangler,R. D., Nora, A. H., & Kimberling, W. J. (1980). Genetic-epidemiological study of early-onset ischemic heart disease.Circulation, 61, 503–508.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Sarason, I. G., Levine, H. M., Basham, R. B., & Sarason,B. R. (1983). Assessing social support: The social support questionnaire.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 127–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Smith, T. W. (1992). Hostility and health: Current status of a psychosomatic hypothesis.Health Psychology, 11, 139–150.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Smith, T. W., & Frohm, K. D. (1985). What’s so unhealthy about hostility? Construct validity and psychosocial correlates of the Cook and Medley HO scale.Health Psychology, 4, 503–520.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Smith, T. W., McGonigle, M., Turner, C. W., Ford, M. H., & Slattery, M. L. (1991). Cynical hostility in adult male twins.Psychosomatic Medicine, 53, 684–692.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. Smith, T. W., Pope, M. K., Sanders, J. D., Allred, K. D., & O’Keefe, J. L. (1988). Cynical hostility at home and at work: Psychosocial vulnerability across domains.Journal of Research in Personality, 22, 525–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Spicer, J., Jackson, R.,; & Scragg, R. (1993). The effects of anger management and social contact on risk of myocardial infarction in Type As and Bs.Psychology and Health, 8, 243–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Spielberger, C. D., Jacobs, G. A., Russell, S., & Crane, R. S. (1983). Assessment of anger: The State-Trait Anger Scale. In J. N. Butcher, & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.),Advances in personality assessment (pp. 161–189). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
  29. Spielberger,C. D., Johnson,E. H., Russell,S. F., Crane,R. J., Jacobs,G. A., & Worden,T. J. (1985). The experience and expression of anger: Construction and validation of an anger expression scale. In M. A. Chesney & R. H. Rosenman (Eds.),Anger and hostility in cardiovascular and behavioral disorders (pp. 5–30). Washington, DC: Hemisphere.Google Scholar
  30. Stoney, C. M. (1997).Medical history questionnaire. Unpublished measure, The Ohio State University, Columbus.Google Scholar
  31. Stoney, C. M., & Engebretson, T. O. (1994). Anger and hostility: Potential mediators of the gender difference in coronary heart disease. In A. W. Siegman & T. W. Smith (Eds.),Anger, hostility, and the heart (pp. 215–237). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
  32. Suarez, E. C., Kuhn, C. M., Schanberg, S. M., Williams, R. B., & Zimmermann, E. A. (1998). Neuroendocrine, cardiovascular, and emotional responses of hostile men: The role of interpersonal challenge.Psychosomatic Medicine, 60, 78–88.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Suls, J., & Sanders, G. S. (1989). Why do some behavioral styles place people at risk? In M. A.Chesney & R. H. Rosenman (Eds.),In search of coronary-prone behavior: Beyond Type A (pp. 1–20). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.Google Scholar
  34. Suls, J., & Wan, C. K. (1993). The relationship between trait hostility and cardiovascular reactivity: A quantitative review and analysis.Psychophysiology, 30, 615–626.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Society of Behavioral Medicine 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • John N. O’Neil
    • 1
  • Charles F. Emery
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyThe Ohio State UniversityColumbusUSA

Personalised recommendations