A variety of instruments have been developed to measure the Type A behavior pattern (TABP), although concern has often been expressed that no single measure captures the complete range of attributes encompassed by the notion of the TABP. This paper presents data using a broad range of these instruments applied to a large sample of men at risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). The data indicate considerable variation in strengths of association between measures of the TABP, and recommend three conclusions. Firstly, the TABP is a complex phenomenon and not a unitary one. Secondly, self-report measures of the TABP assess only parts of the overall behavior pattern, and this varies from one instrument to another. Thirdly, the Structured Interview (SI), insofar as it relates modestly and consistently to other instruments, remains the first measure of choice for the TABP. The need to develop new measures, however, seems strongly indicated.

No abstract

It has been suggested that under normal conditions, there is no relationship between decision and movement time components of response latency. However, for normal Ss, induced elevation of decision time produces conpensatory reductions in movement time. Psychomotor retardation, commonly observed in depressive patients, shows in the main, elevations for decision time. Such patients should also produce compensatory reductions in movement time. This was found not to be so. While 15 controls exhibited no relationship between decision and movement times, 30 depressive Ss exhibited a positive one. The result was discussed in terms of a post hoc postulate of motivational deficit among depressive patients.