Donker FJ, Breteler MH, van der Staak CP. Assessment of hostility in patients with coronary heart disease.
J Pers Assess 2000;
75:158-77. [PMID:
10941707 DOI:
10.1207/s15327752jpa7501_11]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/31/2022]
Abstract
One of the problems in efforts to more clearly conceptualize hostility is the amount of method variance, which ranges from self-report techniques to interview-based methods and mirrors the multidimensional nature of hostility and related constructs. In addition, rather few studies concerned with the assessment of hostility have specifically used samples of coronary heart disease (CHD) patients. The purpose of this study was, therefore, to examine the multidimensionality of the construct of hostility in a sample of male coronary patients with some frequently used instruments. Factor analysis was used to detect the relevant underlying constructs, which were assessed using a variety of hostility measures in a sample of cardiac patients undergoing baseline assessment in an ongoing health-education intervention study. Measurement included both questionnaires and interviews. Participants (N = 235) were divided into 3 diagnostic groups: patients who had recently undergone (a) a myocardial infarction, (b) coronary artery bypass grafting, or (c) percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty. A 4-factor solution appeared to provide the best fit, and the following factors were isolated: Anger-Out, Negative Affect, Coping, and Anger-In. All intercorrelations were less than .50. Medical diagnosis did not differ with regard to the 4 factors found. The total hostility construct as measured by the structured interview (SI) did not fit into the 4-factor model. This study was the first to show that dimensions of anger and hostility constitute valid and relevant aspects of the general construct of hostility for a representative group of CHD patients. The 4 aspects of hostility isolated using some well-known hostility questionnaires and the SI explained most of the observed variance. Although the SI appeared to tap more general state anger, the 4 aspects of hostility may be differentially related to health in those who are coronary prone. Future studies on the role of hostile or negative emotions in CHD patients should, therefore, pay greater attention to the multidimensional nature of hostility and may clearly benefit from the use of the 4-factor model described in this article.
Collapse