Holmes D S, Will M J
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1985 Mar;48(3):723-7. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.48.3.723.
Thirty-seven subjects with the Type A or the Type B behavior pattern were first either angered or not angered in a problem-solving task by a confederate who posed as another subject. In a subsequent bogus learning experiment, the Type A and Type B subjects had the opportunity to punish or reward the confederate. The effectiveness of the anger manipulation was attested to by the fact that angered subjects had reliably higher pulse rates, systolic blood pressure, and diastolic blood pressure. In the learning experiment, Type A subjects who had not been angered gave the confederate reliably higher levels of punishment than did Type B subjects, but there was not a difference in the levels of punishment given by Type A and Type B subjects who had been angered. There was not a difference between Type A and Type B subjects in the levels of reward they gave the confederate. The results provided behavioral evidence for aggression in persons with the Type A behavior pattern. The fact that the difference in aggression was limited to nonangered subjects was interpreted in terms of differences in attributions of responsibility.
37名具有A型或B型行为模式的受试者首先在一项解决问题的任务中，被一名伪装成另一名受试者的同谋激怒或未被激怒。在随后的一个虚假学习实验中，A型和B型受试者有机会惩罚或奖励该同谋。愤怒操纵的有效性通过以下事实得到证明：被激怒的受试者的脉搏率、收缩压和舒张压确实更高。在学习实验中，未被激怒的A型受试者给予同谋的惩罚水平确实比B型受试者更高，但被激怒的A型和B型受试者给予的惩罚水平没有差异。A型和B型受试者给予同谋的奖励水平没有差异。这些结果为A型行为模式的人具有攻击性提供了行为证据。攻击性差异仅限于未被激怒的受试者这一事实，根据责任归因的差异进行了解释。
