Cited by 12Psychological Testing and AssessmentCardiac Health and Mental HealthHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Incremental Validity of Self-Report and Performance-Based Methods for Assessing Hostility to Predict Cardiovascular Disease in Physicians

Abstract

We evaluated the utility of an integrative, multimethod approach for assessing hostility-related constructs to predict premature cardiovascular disease (CVD) and premature coronary heart disease (CHD) using participants from the Johns Hopkins Precursors Study, which was designed to identify risk factors for heart disease. Participants were assessed at baseline while in medical school from 1946 to 1962 (M age = 24.6) and have been followed annually since then. Baseline assessment included individually administered Rorschach protocols (N = 416) scored for aggressive imagery (i.e., Aggressive Content, Aggressive Past) and self-reports of 3 possible anger responses to stress. Cox regression analyses predicting morbidity or mortality by age 55 revealed a significant interaction effect; high levels of Aggressive Content with high self-reported hostility predicted an increased rate of premature CVD and CHD, and incrementally predicted the rate of these events after controlling for the significant covariates of smoking (CVD and CHD) and cholesterol (CHD) that were also assessed at baseline. The hostility and anger measures, as well as other baseline covariates, were not predictors of CVD risk factors assessed at midlife during follow-up. Overall, this integrative model of hostility illustrates the potential value of multimethod assessment to areas of health psychology and preventive medicine.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/00223891.2017.1306780

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, 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

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 66

  1. 10.1007/s12160-016-9784-x · DOI
  2. 10.1207/s15327752jpa7201_6 · DOI
  3. Beck, S. J., Beck, A. G., Levitt, E. E., & Molish, H. B. (1961). Rorschach's test: I. Basic processes. New York, NY: Grune & Stratton.
  4. 10.1037/0021-9010.92.3.722 · DOI
  5. 10.1037/0033-2909.101.3.343 · DOI
  6. 10.1017/CBO9780511790874 · DOI
  7. 10.1037/0278-6133.25.4.493 · DOI · Paper page
  8. 10.1001/archinte.162.8.901 · DOI
  9. 10.1016/j.jacc.2008.11.044 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.1037/1040-3590.6.4.284 · DOI · Paper page
  11. 10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.309 · DOI · Paper page
  12. 10.1097/00006842-196211000-00012 · DOI
  13. 10.1016/j.ahj.2009.11.007 · DOI
  14. 10.1037/0033-2909.92.2.410 · DOI
  15. Donohue, B., & Cavenagh, N. (2003). Anger (negative impulse) management. In W. O'Donohue, J. E. Fisher & S. E. Hayes (Eds.), Cognitive behavior therapy: Applying empirically supported techniques in your practice (pp. 10–15). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
  16. 10.1287/mksc.1060.0263 · DOI
  17. 10.1177/0956797614557867 · DOI
  18. 10.1080/10683402.1949.10381465 · DOI
  19. Exner, J. E. (2003). The Rorschach: A Comprehensive System. Vol. 1: Basic foundations and principles of interpretation (4th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
  20. 10.1007/978-981-287-206-7_31 · DOI
  21. 10.1198/tast.2009.0012 · DOI
  22. 10.1037/0021-9010.92.5.1299 · DOI
  23. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.09.026 · DOI
  24. 10.1027/1192-5604.27.1.164 · DOI
  25. Gacono, C. B., & Meloy, J. R. (1994). The Aggression response. In C. B. Gacono & J. R. Meloy (Eds.), The Rorschach assessment of aggressive and psychopathic personalities (pp. 259–278). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
  26. 10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085530 · DOI · Paper page
  27. 10.1007/s11121-007-0070-9 · DOI · Paper page
  28. 10.1097/00006842-198106000-00003 · DOI
  29. Harrower, M. R., & Steiner, M. E. (1951). Large scale Rorschach techniques (2nd ed.). Springfield, IL: Thomas.
  30. 10.4135/9781452231198 · DOI
  31. 10.1080/00223890902936116 · DOI
  32. 10.1207/s15327752jpa8501_03 · DOI
  33. 10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.19 · DOI · Paper page
  34. 10.1037/0033-295X.96.4.690 · DOI
  35. 10.1037/1082-989X.11.4.386 · DOI
  36. 10.1037/0033-2909.111.1.172 · DOI · Paper page
  37. 10.1207/s15327752jpa6802_5 · DOI
  38. 10.1207/s15327752jpa8703_01 · DOI
  39. Meyer, G. J., Viglione, D. J., Mihura, J. L., Erard, R. E., & Erdberg, P. (2011). Rorschach Performance Assessment System: Administration, coding, interpretation, and technical manual. Toledo, OH: Rorschach Performance Assessment System.
  40. 10.1037/a0029406 · DOI
  41. 10.1097/00006842-195411000-00001 · DOI
  42. 10.1037/0033-2909.119.2.322 · DOI
  43. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehu033 · DOI · Paper page
  44. 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000350 · DOI · Paper page
  45. 10.1016/j.jacc.2011.04.044 · DOI
  46. Norman, G. R., & Streiner, D. L. (2008). Biostatistics: The bare essentials (3rd ed.). Hamilton, ON, Canada: B. C. Decker.
  47. 10.1001/archinte.1959.00270070045006 · DOI
  48. 10.1348/014466604X23491 · DOI
  49. Porcelli, P. (2004). Psychosomatic medicine and the Rorschach test. Madrid, Spain: Psimatica.
  50. 10.1176/appi.psy.43.5.360 · DOI
  51. 10.1080/00223890903508146 · DOI
  52. 10.4135/9781412984997 · DOI · Paper page
  53. 10.1097/01.crd.0000246318.59658.25 · DOI
  54. 10.1111/j.2044-8317.2010.02002.x · DOI
  55. 10.1037/0022-3514.51.1.191 · DOI
  56. 10.1136/bmj.e3318 · DOI · Paper page
  57. 10.1097/PSY.0b013e3180600a65 · DOI
  58. 10.1016/j.pcad.2013.03.002 · DOI · Paper page
  59. Thomas, C. B. (1977). Habits of nervous tension: Clues to the human condition. Baltimore, MD: The Precursors Study.
  60. 10.1097/00006842-198503000-00012 · DOI
  61. Thomas, C. B., Ross, D. C., Brown, B. S., & Duszynski, K. R. (1973). A prospective study of the Rorschachs of suicides: The predictive potential of pathological content. Johns Hopkins Medical Journal, 132, 334–360.
  62. 10.1027/1192-5604.21.1.18 · DOI
  63. 10.1002/9780470713860.ch1 · DOI
  64. 10.1002/9780470713860.ch12 · DOI
  65. 10.2105/AJPH.82.6.816 · DOI · Paper page
  66. 10.1037/0033-295X.105.2.230 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Meyer, G. J., Katko, N. J., Mihura, J. L., Klag, M. J., & Meoni, L. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Toledo (US)
  • Brooke Army Medical Center (US)
  • Johns Hopkins University (US)
Corresponding author
Meyer, Gregory J.
Venue
Journal of Personality Assessment
Published
2017-04-18
Volume
100
Issue
1
Pages
68-83
ISSN
  • 0022-3891 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7752
OpenAlex
W2606323033
Cited by
12
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2017: 2
FWCI
1.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Personality Assessment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Psychological Testing and Assessment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Health and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Keywords
hostility, cardiovascular disease, coronary artery disease, Rorschach test, self-report measures, multimethod assessment, incremental validity, physicians, heart disease risk factors, smoking, cholesterol
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Aggression, Anger, Cardiovascular Diseases, Female, Hostility, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Physicians, Risk Factors, Self Report

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