Matthews K A, Krantz D S, Dembroski T M, MacDougall J M
J Pers Soc Psychol. 1982 Feb;42(2):303-13. doi: 10.1037//0022-3514.42.2.303.
The aim of the present study was to identify factors that account for similarities and discrepancies in classification of Type A and B behavior by the Structured Interview (SI) and by the Jenkins Activity Survey (JAS). Two diverse samples were administered the SI and the JAS. SI questions were coded for content of response and psychomotor behavior during the interview. Frequency of specific Type A speech characteristics and clinical judgments were also rated. Analyses revealed that the SI estimate of Type A could be predicted by the subjects' promptness of response, voice emphasis, hurried speech, and judgements of competitiveness, hostility, and energy level. The latter three judgments were also measured somewhat by the JAS. Interviewer ratings of subjects' overt motor behavior and appearance did not relate to SI assessments. The JAS estimate of Type A could be predicted by subjects' reports of pressured drive, which was also measured by SI. This pattern of interrelationships was similar in the two samples in spite of sample differences in age, health status, geographical location, interview and JAS forms, and raters. Overall, the correlations between the SI and JAS assessment were low and suggested a considerable degree of independence between the two measures. In light of these results, they should not be used as interchangeable measures of Type A behavior.
本研究的目的是确定通过结构化访谈(SI)和詹金斯活动调查(JAS)对A型和B型行为进行分类时,导致相似性和差异的因素。对两个不同的样本进行了SI和JAS测试。SI问题根据访谈期间的回答内容和精神运动行为进行编码。还对特定A型言语特征的频率和临床判断进行了评分。分析表明,A型行为的SI评估可以通过受试者的反应速度、语音强调、语速以及竞争、敌意和精力水平的判断来预测。后三项判断在一定程度上也通过JAS进行测量。访谈者对受试者明显的运动行为和外表的评分与SI评估无关。A型行为的JAS评估可以通过受试者对压力驱动的报告来预测,这一点SI也进行了测量。尽管两个样本在年龄、健康状况、地理位置、访谈和JAS形式以及评分者方面存在差异,但这种相互关系模式在两个样本中是相似的。总体而言,SI和JAS评估之间的相关性较低,表明这两种测量方法在很大程度上相互独立。鉴于这些结果,它们不应被用作A型行为的可互换测量方法。