{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.035278154681139755, 'fraction_numerical': 0.009497964721845319, 'mean_word_length': 5.413043478260869, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
HOSTILITY AS A MODERATOR OF PHYSICAL REACTIVITY AND RECOVERY TO STRESS

This experiment was designed to assess differences in physiological reactivity and recovery to stress among low- and high-hostile men. Specifically, 25 low- and 25 high-hostile undergraduates were identified using the Cook-Medley Hostility Scale (Cook & Medley, 1954). To ensure homogeneity, all subjects were right-handed and had a general right hemibody preference, as indicated by a score of +7 or higher on the Coren, Porac, and Duncan Laterality Test (Corer, Porac, & Duncan, 1979). All subjects underwent a traditional cold-pressor stressor test. Physiological measures heart rate, systolic blood pressure, and diastolic blood pressure were recorded before the stressor (Prestress), after the stressor (Poststress), and then again 9 min later (Recovery). Increased physiological arousal between pre- and poststress measurements was used as an indicator of reactivity. Subsequent decreases in physiological arousal were used as recover measures. Given the current models of negative emotion and hostility, it was expected that high-hostiles, relative to low-hostiles, would evidence increased physio logical arousal and decreased recovery to stress. Interestingly, high-hostiles experienced significantly greater reactivity to stress in heart rate only, and no group differences were found with regard to recovery. Results are discussed in terms of previous research and current models of emotion.