Personality variable differences between disease clusters

Previous studies of personality and health have focused mainly on the influence of psychological factors on single diseases such as cancer and coronary heart disease (CHD), thereby neglecting the problem of comorbidity (i.e. the combination of different diseases). The main focus of the present study was the discrimination between single‐ and multiple‐disease conditions on the basis of personality traits. An extensive battery of personality scales implicated in health was administered to a sample of n=5133 individuals of both genders between the ages of 40 and 65. Subjects also reported their health or illness status. A factor analysis of the personality scales yielded five dimensions clearly interpretable as “Emotional Lability”, “Type A Behaviour”, “Behavioural Control”, “Locus of Control over Diseases”, and “Psychoticism”. Hierarchical cluster analyses of the subsample of participants who reported suffering from more than one disease led to eight clusters representing individuals with different combinations of diseases. Generally, there were very few significant differences between healthy and single‐disease participants with regard to personality. However, mean factor scores calculated for “Emotional Lability” were higher across the multiple‐disease groups than in the healthy and single‐disease groups. No other personality factor showed this trend. In general the results reported here show the important role negative affectivity (e.g. Emotional Lability, Neuroticism, Depression) plays in differentiating between single and multiple diseases. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Personality and fatal diseases: Revisiting a scientific scandal

During the 1980s and 1990s, Hans J Eysenck conducted a programme of research into the causes, prevention and treatment of fatal diseases in collaboration with one of his protégés, Ronald Grossarth-Maticek. This led to what must be the most astonishing series of findings ever published in the peer-reviewed scientific literature with effect sizes that have never otherwise been encounterered in biomedical research. This article outlines just some of these reported findings and signposts readers to extremely serious scientific and ethical criticisms that were published almost three decades ago. Confidential internal documents that have become available as a result of litigation against tobacco companies provide additional insights into this work. It is suggested that this research programme has led to one of the worst scientific scandals of all time. A call is made for a long overdue formal inquiry.

Personality and Disease: Correlations of Multiple Trait Scores with Various Illnesses

Correlations between personality measures and self-reported data on health status were examined in a sample of 5133 men and women, aged between 40 and 65. A wider range of diseases was studied than is typical. Small but theoretically meaningful correlations with personality were found for some diseases. Personality syndromes of Emotional Lability, Type A Behaviour, Behavioural Control, Locus of Control over Diseases and Psychoticism were distinguished factorially. Emotional Lability appeared to be the most robust predictor of general disease vulnerability. Some small but significant associations between specific illnesses and Type A and Behavioural Control were also found.

Personality, Cardiovascular Disease, and Cancer:

Abstract. Ten years ago a sample of N = 5.133 male and female subjects (age 28-74) responded to questionnaires including scales for personality, life style, work stress as well as questions on prevalent disease. We now report on the follow-up regarding self-reported incidence of cardiovascular disease and cancer. During a mean follow-up of 10 years, 257 participants had died. Of those alive, N = 4.010 (82%) participated in the follow-up. Of these, 120 and 180 persons reported incident cardiovascular disease and cancer, respectively. The incidence of cardiovascular disease could be significantly predicted by the personality factors “Emotional Lability”, “Behavioral Control” and “Type-A-Behavior” as well as by the “Rationality/Antemotionality”-scale according to Grossarth-Maticek. After controlling for age, gender and smoking behavior only the significant effect of “Emotional Lability” remained and the predictors according to Grossarth-Maticek had no incremental validity. Cancer could not be predicted by any personality factors.

Persönlichkeit, Krebs und koronare Herzerkrankungen:

Zusammenfassung. Die Befundliteratur zu den ätiologisch bedeutsamen Faktoren bei Krebs- und koronaren Herzerkrankungen (KHK) lässt auf einen nur sehr geringen Stellenwert von Persönlichkeitsfaktoren schließen. Nicht mehr als 1 bis 2% der Gesundheits-Krankheitsvarianz sind auf differentialpsychologische Variablen zurückführbar, von denen vorrangig Verlusterlebnisse, Depressionen und gehemmter Gefühlsausdruck mit Krebs in Verbindung gebracht werden, während Typ A-Verhalten sowie dessen Komponenten Ehrgeiz, Ärger und Feindseligkeit mit KHK korrelieren sollen. Verschiedene Anzeichen sprechen dafür, dass im Zuge der Forschung die Bedeutung psychologischer Merkmale im Vergleich zu den bekannten biomedizinischen Risikofaktoren weiter zurückgegangen ist. Als Ursache dafür kommen verschiedene methodische Gesichtspunkte in Betracht, darunter geänderte Zusammensetzung der Stichproben, andere Diagnoseinstrumente und die Einführung immer stringenterer Kontrollen für konfundierende Faktoren. Denkbar ist aber auch, dass sich als Folge der Publikation von Forschungsergebnissen zu Krebs und KHK die untersuchten Krankheiten selbst - und damit ihr Verursachungsgeflecht - geändert haben, etwa über andere Ernährungs- und Bewegungsgewohnheiten. Angesichts der geringen Bedeutung psychologischer Faktoren erscheinen Spekulationen darüber müßig, wie im Einzelnen die Kausalketten von Persönlichkeit zu Krankheit beschaffen sind.

Interaction of psychosocial and physical risk factors in the causation of mammary cancer, and its prevention through psychological methods of treatment

Some 8059 healthy women (mean age 58 years) were studied in 1973 with the aim of establishing the presence or absence of a variety of physical and psychological risk factors for mammary cancer. Mortality was established in 1988. factor predictors were highly significant. Physical risk factors were more predictive than psychological ones, but both interacted synergistically to predict mortality. Alone, psychological (stress) factors had little effect, while-physical factors did. However, psychological factors seemed to potentiate the effect of physical factors, particularly in the middle range. The causal relevance of psychological factors was established in a special intervention study using autonomy training as a method of prophylactic therapy and comparing outcome with the effects of no therapy (control).

Method of test administration as a factor in test validity: the use of a personality questionnaire in the prediction of cancer and coronary heart disease

This study examines the predictive accuracy of four different methods of administration of a questionnaire designed to predict cancer and coronary heart disease (CHD) in healthy probands. The method of administration uses the establishment of trust and the explanation of questions as variables in all four possible combinations, i.e. trust and explanation, trust only, explanation only, and neither, the prediction being that the combination of trust and explanation would produce the most accurate prediction, the treatment using neither the worst prediction, with methods using either trust alone or explanation alone intermediate. The criterion was the successful prediction of cancer and CHD. A total population of 3563 men and women was used, and followed up over 15 years, death certificates being used to establish cause of death. As predicted, the combination of trust and explanation did best, use of neither worst. Explanation seemed more important than trust, and the combination seemed to have a synergistic effect. It is apparent that method of administration had an important effect on the outcome of the experiment.

Prediction of Cancer and Coronary Heart Disease as a Function of Method of Questionnaire Administration

We have tested the hypothesis in this study that different methods of administering a questionnaire produce differential approximations to truthful admission of undesirable personality traits and behaviours. Four different methods of administration produced different levels of trust and understanding, using the current prediction among healthy subjects of death by cancer or coronary heart disease 13 years later as the criterion. There were significant differences in the accuracy of the predictions, depending crucially on the method of administration of the questionnaires. Best predictions were achieved for subjects when both trust and understanding had been increased by interviewers’ suitable participation; worst results were achieved for subjects when no special effort was made to increase either. Intermediate results were found for procedures which increased either trust or understanding. It is argued that the success or failure of studies investigating the influence of personality and stress on diseases like cancer and coronary heart disease may depend crucially on the adopted method of interrogation.

Prediction of cancer and coronary heart disease mortality by means of a personality inventory: results of a 15-year follow-up study

This paper reports on the 1982-1986 follow-up of two samples of healthy persons first studied in 1972 and followed up in 1982 when mortality and cause of death were established (N = 2,146). Both were related to stress and personality type according to clearly elaborated theories, and results were very much in accordance with theory. The second follow-up was instigated to answer criticisms of the first study and to test whether results would still support the theories involved. The data support the previous results strongly and show that psychosocial data can predict with considerable accuracy mortality and cause of death over 14 years ahead.