Type A behaviour and trait anger in boys: Behavioural, cognitive, and physiological correlates.

Abstract

Coronary heart disease represents one endpoint of a process that begins early on in life. Recent interest has focused on identifying in children the presence of risk factors known to occur in adults. One such risk factor is the Type A behaviour pattern. Originally defined as consisting of enhanced aggressiveness, easily aroused hostility, a sense of time urgency, and competitive achievement-striving, many investigators recognized this behaviour pattern as a major independent risk factor for coronary heart disease. However, more recent research with adult populations has clearly shown that not all aspects of Type A are equally important risk factors. Hostility and cynicism appear to be the critical components implicated in increased disease risk. Research with children has identified the presence of Type A behaviours; however, studies have yet to address the issue of critical aspects of this behaviour pattern in children. The present study examined whether certain critical components of Type A, parallel to those identified for adults, could be identified in young boys, and whether they predicted psychophysiological functioning better than global Type A. Sixty-three fourth, fifth, and sixth grade boys differing on behaviour type (A/B) and/or trait anger (high/low) status were studied to determine the relative effects of these variables on four variables: attributional style; peer perceptions of social behaviour; anger expression stylistics; and physiological (blood pressure) reactivity. These boys were selected from a larger sample of 163 fourth, fifth, and sixth grade boys based on their scores on a teacher measure of Type A and a self-rating of trait anger. High trait anger boys were found to differ from low trait anger boys on peer perceptions of social behaviours, mode of anger expression, and attributions of intentionality in response to ambiguous peer provocations. Type A/B differences were found only for peer perceptions of aggressive behaviours. Contrary to expectations, no differences in blood pressure reactivity in response to interpersonal conflict were found for either high versus low trait anger or Type A versus Type B groups. Overall, the results of the current study call into question the utility of the global Type A construct as an index of coronary-proneness. The implications of the current findings for both the early identification and tracking of coronary-prone behaviours and for goals and targets of intervention are discussed.