CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 241Attachment and Relationship DynamicsBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 29 of the 29 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

High blood pressure and marital discord: Not being nasty matters more than being nice.

Ewart, Craig K., Taylor, C. Barr, Kraemer, Helena C., Agras, W. Stewart·1991·Health Psychology
DOI 10.1037/0278-6133.10.3.155
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Theories linking anger and blood pressure (BP) reactivity to cardiovascular disease must be able to identify naturally occurring stressors that arouse emotion with sufficient frequency to cause chronic physiologic stress. We examine the impact of normal family arguments on 43 patients (24 women, 19 men) with essential hypertension. Patients and their partners discussed a threatening disagreement for 10 min while BP and conversation were recorded. Discussing problems increased BP, but the causal pathways differed by sex. In women, hostile interaction and marital dissatisfaction were associated with increased BP; "supportive" or "neutral" exchanges were unrelated to BP. In men, BP fluctuations were related only to the patient's speech rate. These findings are consistent with other research on sex differences in communication and social problem-solving styles and implicate different mechanisms (frequent anger, active coping) through which marital discord could increase risk. Implications for intervention are considered.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0278-6133.10.3.155

Cites

29 of 29 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 29 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–241 of 241

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Ewart, C. K., Taylor, C. B., Kraemer, H. C., & Agras, W. S.
Affiliations
Johns Hopkins University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Health Psychology
Publisher
American Psychological Association (APA)
Published
1991
Volume
10
Issue
3
Pages
155-163
ISSN
  • 0278-6133 (ISSN-L)
  • 1930-7810
DOI
10.1037/0278-6133.10.3.155
OpenAlex
W2047094339
Cited by
241
References
29
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 11
FWCI
6.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Health Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01hl036298-04)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01-HL 36298)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Keywords
essential hypertension, marital conflict, blood pressure reactivity, hostility, marital dissatisfaction, sex differences, speech rate, anger, cardiovascular risk, marital communication
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Affect, Aged, Arousal, Conflict, Psychological, Female, Humans, Hypertension, Internal-External Control, Male, Marriage, Middle Aged, Problem Solving, Social Environment, Social Support

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review