Cited by 99Blood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesRacial and Ethnic Identity ResearchHealth disparities and outcomes

John Henryism, gender, and arterial blood pressure in an African American community

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine the interaction between gender and John Henryism in relationship to arterial blood pressure in an African American community in the Southern United States. It was hypothesized that, within this specific social and cultural context, John Henryism would be associated with blood pressure differently for men and women. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of 600 persons, aged 25 to 65, was conducted in the African American community of a small Southern city. John Henryism was assessed using the 12-item John Henryism Scale for Active Coping. Blood pressure was assessed by conventional methods. RESULTS: The interaction effect between gender and John Henryism was assessed as a cross-product term in ordinary least squares regression analysis using arterial blood pressure as the dependent variable, and with logistic regression using hypertension as the dependent variable. This interaction effect was significant (p < .05) in relation to systolic blood pressure and hypertension, with the effect evident (p < .07) in relation to diastolic blood pressure. For men, as John Henryism increases, blood pressure and the risk of hypertension increases. For women, as John Henryism increases, blood pressure and the risk of hypertension decreases. CONCLUSIONS: The association of the behavioral disposition of John Henryism with blood pressure is dependent on the gender of the individual. Men and women face differing cultural expectations and social structural constraints in this community. The sociocultural context modifies the meaning of the behavioral disposition, and hence its effects.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/00006842-199809000-00019

Cites

17 of 17 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dressler, W. W., Bindon, J. R., & Neggers, Y. H.
Affiliations
University of Alabama (US)
Venue
Psychosomatic Medicine
Published
1998
Volume
60
Issue
5
Pages
620-624
ISSN
0033-3174 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2333338136
Cited by
99
References
17
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 5 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 6
FWCI
0.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychosomatic Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (5r01hl045663-03)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (HL45663)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Racial and Ethnic Identity Research
  • Social Sciences › Health › Health disparities and outcomes
Keywords
John Henryism, gender differences, arterial blood pressure, hypertension, African Americans, active coping, sociocultural context, Southern United States, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure
MeSH terms
Adaptation, Psychological, Adult, Aged, Black or African American, Female, Humans, Hypertension, Male, Middle Aged, Sex Factors, Body Mass Index, Black People

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