Gender differences in patients' attributions for myocardial infarction: implications for adaptive health behaviors.

Attributions for myocardial infarction were studied in a patient sample (N = 157). Men and women were comparable at intake on age, health status, and lifestyle factors. Attributions to diet, chi2 (1, N = 157) = 8.83, p = .003, and exercise, chi2 (1, N = 157) = 6.60, p = .01, were less common among women than men. After 3 months (n = 136), women were less likely than men to report improving their diets or increasing exercise. Initial attributions predicted subsequent reports of behavior change in relevant domains. These findings suggest that gender differences in causal attributions for myocardial infarction may contribute to subsequent differences between men and women in health-related behavior change.

A comparison of physical activity in men and women with cardiac disease: do gender roles complicate recovery?

Fifty-four male and twenty-six female married cardiac patients were studied for five months post-hospital discharge. Participants completed activity diaries for three days at 5, 10, 15, and 20 weeks. Reported activities were converted to METs. Patients increased activity across the five-month study period. Patients also tended to engage in higher levels of activity in the morning hours. Men and women did not differ in average total METs expended. Comparisons for specific activities indicated that women consistently expended more energy on domestic responsibilities, such as cleaning and laundry. Men engaged more in repairs, yardwork and carrying, but these activities were performed sporadically and involved low METs requirements. The concentrated domestic activity assumed by women early in recovery may pose a risk of complications.

How do female and male cardiac patients and their spouses share responsibilities after discharge from the hospital?

This study explored sex differences in household and employment responsibilities among cardiac patients (N = 63; 46 men) and spouses during the 5 months following discharge from the hospital. Results showed that both patients and partners maintained traditional sex-typed activities. As patients or spouses, women tended to assume greater responsibility for domestic tasks such as laundry, cleaning, and cooking than their husbands. Men as patients or spouses tended to assume greater responsibility for household repair and maintenance tasks. Husbands also worked more for pay outside the home than did wives, except in couples where the male patient was high risk. Correlations for male patients indicated that reports of more cardiac symptoms were associated with assuming fewer responsibilities. In contrast, among women, the correlations between symptoms and activities were more complex and suggested that female patients might not be heeding signs of overexertion.

From heart attacks to melanoma: do common sense models of somatization influence symptom interpretation for female victims?

Common sense models regarding gender and stress influenced how laypeople responded to information about symptoms in 3 experiments. In Study 1, medical intervention was perceived to be less important for female targets reporting chest pain and stressful events than for male targets experiencing identical symptoms and stressors. In addition, chest pain was less likely to be attributed to cardiac causes for female targets. This gender-based stress-discounting effect was replicated for symptoms of gallstones and melanoma in Study 2, where participants again were less likely to recommend medical care for female than for male targets. Recognition memory for information about a somatizing target was tested in Study 3; results suggested that laypeople hold stereotypes associating somatization with female gender. The authors' findings provide insight into the naive theories that shape symptom interpretation and self-referral behavior.

Self-esteem, construal, and comparisons with the self, friends, and peers.

Extending the better than average effect, 3 studies examined self-, friend, and peer comparisons of personal attributes. Participants rated themselves as better off than friends, who they rated as superior to generalized peers. The exception was in direct comparisons, where the self and friends were not strongly differentiated on unambiguous negative attributes. Self-esteem and construal played moderating roles, with persons with high self-esteem (HSEs) exploiting both ambiguous positive and ambiguous negative traits to favor themselves. Persons lower in self-esteem exploited ambiguous positive traits in their favor but did not exploit ambiguous negative traits. Across self-esteem level, ratings of friends versus peers were exaggerated when attributes were ambiguous. HSEs seemed to take advantage of ambiguity more consistently to present favorable self-views; people with low self-esteem used ambiguity to favor their friends but were reluctant to minimize their own faults.