Individual Differences In Stress
- Created by: AnaisMarieNTR
- Created on: 27-04-18 11:25
View mindmap
- Individual Differences In Stress
- Personality Type
- Type A
- Competitive
- Driven
- Achievement-Motivated
- Ambituous
- Aware of Status
- Time Urgent
- Fast-talking
- Impatient
- Proactive
- Multi-taskers
- Hostile
- Aggressive
- Intolorant
- Quick to anger
- Competitive
- Type B
- Laid Back
- Relaxed
- Tolorant
- Reflective
- Friedman & Rosenman (1959)
- Observed that patients with CHD shared a common pattern of behaviour called Type A personality
- Type A
- Competitive
- Driven
- Achievement-Motivated
- Ambituous
- Aware of Status
- Time Urgent
- Fast-talking
- Impatient
- Proactive
- Multi-taskers
- Hostile
- Aggressive
- Intolorant
- Quick to anger
- Competitive
- Type A
- Also identified the characteristics of Type B personality
- Type B
- Laid Back
- Relaxed
- Tolorant
- Reflective
- Type B
- Observed that patients with CHD shared a common pattern of behaviour called Type A personality
- WCGS
- Western Collaborative Groups Study
- 3000 males were medically assessed as free of CHD at the start of the study
- Personality types were assessed through a 25 question interview
- Conducted to incite Type A related behaviour (e.g interviewer would be aggressive and interrupt)
- After 8 years 257 men had developed CHD
- 70% were assessed as Type A
- Had higher levels of adrenaline and noradrenaline & higher blood pressure and chloesterol
- 70% were assessed as Type A
- Personality types were assessed through a 25 question interview
- Results suggest that those with a Type A personality are more vulnerable to stressors because impatience and hostility cause psychological stress response
- Had higher levels of adrenaline and noradrenaline & higher blood pressure and chloesterol
- Type C
- Pathological Niceness
- Repress Emotions
- People pleasers; compliant, passive and self-sacrificing
- Try to avoid conflict
- Repress emotions, especially anger
- Temoshok (1987)
- Proposed that it is linked to cancer
- Dattore et al (1980)
- Studied 200 verterans of the Vietnam war
- 75 had cancer
- Proposed that it is linked to cancer
- Cancer patients reported significantly greater emotional repression
- Reported significantly fewer depression symptoms (repressed)
- 75 had cancer
- There is evidence between Type C and cancer proneness
- Studied 200 verterans of the Vietnam war
- Evaluation
- Strengths
- Edigo (2012)
- Studied 150 Spanish men & women under 65 who had had a stroke and compared them with a matched control group
- Found the stroke sufferers were more likely to be type A
- Studied 150 Spanish men & women under 65 who had had a stroke and compared them with a matched control group
- Edigo (2012)
- Limitations
- Ragland & Brand (1988)
- Followed up men from Friedman & Rosenman's original study who survived a heart attack
- Found Type B survivors were more likely to die than Type A
- Followed up men from Friedman & Rosenman's original study who survived a heart attack
- Findings show that the relationship between Type A/B personalities and illness is a complex one not yet fully understood
- Dembroski et al (1989)
- Reanalysed data from Friedman and Rosenman's study
- Found ratings of hostility significantly predicted later incidence of CHD
- Reanalysed data from Friedman and Rosenman's study
- Casts doubts on validity of Type A
- Type C
- Greer & Morris (1975)
- Found a link between emotional suppression typical of Type C and breast cancer but only in women under 50
- Greer & Morris (1975)
- Ragland & Brand (1988)
- Strengths
- Type A
- Hardiness
- Protects against stress; existential courage
- Kobasa (1979)
- Proposed hardiness is a set of personality characteristics that protect us against stress
- Measured life changes of 670 male American male middle and senior managers aged 40-49 years
- Used the Schedule of Recent Experiences
- Identified who experienced high stress over the previous 3 years
- Also analysed absenteeism records and levels of illness
- Used the Schedule of Recent Experiences
- Those who were more resilient could tolerate high levels of stress without becoming ill or taking time off work
- The findings were interpreted as confirming the role of hardiness because resilient managers scored highly on the 3 C's
- Maddi (1986)
- Argues hardiness gives us 'existential courage' - the will or determination to keep going despite setbacks life throws at us and uncertainties about future
- Studied 400 managers and supervisors at the Bell Telephone company in the US over several years
- Underwent one of the biggest reorganisations in American corporate history when the thousands of people lost their jobs - also extremely stressful for those who stayed
- There were significant declines in performance and health in about two-thirds of participants
- The managers who scored on measures of the 3 C's flourished - their health didn't deteriorate.
- Those who scored highly on measures of the 3 C's felt happier and more fulfilled at work and were rejuvenated by the whole stressful experience
- What are the 3 dimensions to hardiness?
- Commitment
- Hardy people are resilient and welcome changes as an opportunity or a challenge rather than a threat. They recognize life as unpredictable, but this is exciting and stimulating
- Challenge
- Hardy people deeply involved in relationships, activities and selves. They throw themselves whole-heartedly into life optimistic they will learn something valuable
- Control
- Hardy people have a strong belief that they are in charge of events. They actively strive to influence environments rather than being powerless and passive observers of life passing by
- Commitment
- Personality Type
Comments
No comments have yet been made