This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Jorgensen, R. S. Articles by Abdul-Karim, K. W. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Jorgensen, R. S. Articles by Abdul-Karim, K. W. Related Collections Personality Coronary Artery Disease

Defensive Hostility and Coronary Heart Disease: A Preliminary Investigation of Male Veterans

From Syracuse University (R.S.J., J.J.F., K.W.A.-K.), Veterans Administration Medical Center, and State University of New York, Health Science Center at Syracuse (L.J.L., K.P., R.P.S.), Syracuse, New York.

Address correspondence to: Randall S. Jorgensen, PhD, Center for Health and Behavior, Department of Psychology, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY 13244-2340. Email: rsjorgen{at}syr.edu

OBJECTIVE: Research and theory link an interpersonal conflict model to cardiovascular disease. Specifically, persons scoring high on cynical hostility and social defensiveness are thought to manifest a defensive need for approval while harboring basic distrust and hostility toward those who could provide such approval. The objective of this study was to assess whether angiographically determined coronary artery disease (CAD) was associated with this combination of high cynical hostility and high social defensiveness.

METHODS: Fifty-nine male patients of a Veterans Administration Medical Center (86% white, mean age = 59.9 years) participated in the study on the day before their angiographic procedure; these men filled out the Cook-Medley Hostility Scale and the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale (social defensiveness). They subsequently were categorized as having defensive hostility (DH), high hostility (HH), high social defensiveness (SD), or low psychosocial risk (LRisk; low on both scales).

RESULTS: The four groups did not differ significantly on risk factor status or health status. As predicted, a preplanned contrast showed that the DH group’s mean number of arteries with at least 50% blockage (mean = 2.5) differed significantly from the combined means of the other groups. The HH and SD groups did not differ from the LRisk group.

CONCLUSIONS: When combined with other reports, the approach-avoidance interpersonal conflict model holds the promise of providing additional information about the psychosocial factors contributing to CAD development among men with high cynical hostility.

Key Words: defensiveness • hostility • angiography • coronary artery disease.

Abbreviations: CAD = coronary heart disease; CHD = coronary heart disease; DBP = diastolic blood pressure; DH = defensive–high hostility; HH = high hostility; Ho = Cook-Medley Hostility Scale; LRisk = low psychosocial risk; MCSDS = Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale; SBP = systolic blood pressure; SD = high social defensiveness.