| Literature DB >> 33212977 |
Karolina Chilicka1, Aleksandra M Rogowska2, Renata Szyguła1, Ewa Adamczyk1.
Abstract
People with acne vulgaris report a lower level of satisfaction with life and are more frequently classified as having Type D personalities than those without acne. This research examined, for the first time, the moderating and mediating role of personality type in the relationship between acne severity and satisfaction with life. Among 300 female nursing and cosmetology students ranging in age from 19 to 24 years (M = 21.28, SD = 1.39), 150 individuals (50%) presented with symptoms of acne vulgaris (AV group), while the other 150 (50%) were categorized as controls without acne vulgaris (WAV sample). A cross-sectional study was conducted using three self-report questionnaires: The Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS), the Framingham Type A Scale (FTAS), and the Type D Scale (DS14). Acne vulgaris was clinically diagnosed using the Hellgren-Vincent Scale (HVS). The AV group scored significantly higher on the FTAS and DS14 and lower on the SWLS than the WAV sample. Life satisfaction correlated negatively with both the negative affectivity (NA) and social inhibition (SI) subscales of the DS14. The moderating role of the Type A behavioral pattern (TABP) and the mediating role of both NA and SI subscales of the DS14 were observed in the relationship between acne severity and satisfaction with life. The type of personality may explain the mechanism of the relationship between acne disease and subjective well-being. Therefore, psychological interventions and strategies focused on managing stress and mood may effectively improve satisfaction with life in people with acne.Entities:
Keywords: DS14; Framingham Type A Scale; SWLS; Type A Behavior Pattern; Type D personality; acne vulgaris; satisfaction with life; women
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33212977 PMCID: PMC7698541 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17228524
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Descriptive statistics.
| Variable | Range | M | SD | Median | Skewness | Kurtosis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Satisfaction with life | 5–35 | 19.36 | 6.86 | 18.00 | 0.15 | −0.53 |
| Type A behavior pattern | 0–1 | 0.67 | 0.23 | 0.73 | −0.86 | 0.32 |
| TypeD personality | ||||||
| Negative Affectivity | 0–28 | 14.77 | 6.23 | 16.00 | −0.55 | −0.32 |
| Social inhibition | 0–28 | 11.15 | 5.84 | 11.00 | −0.02 | −0.38 |
Differences between the without acne vulgaris (WAV) and acne vulgaris (AV) samples in terms of life satisfaction, Type A behavior pattern (TABP), and Type D personality.
| Variable | WAV | AV |
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M | SD | M | SD | ||||
| Satisfaction with life | 21.57 | 7.24 | 17.14 | 5.66 | 5.91 | 0.000 | 0.68 |
| Type A personality | 0.57 | 0.26 | 0.77 | 0.14 | −8.27 | 0.000 | 0.96 |
| Type D personality | |||||||
| Negative Affectivity | 11.88 | 6.46 | 17.66 | 4.39 | −9.07 | 0.000 | 1.05 |
| Social inhibition | 8.51 | 5.64 | 13.79 | 4.75 | −8.77 | 0.000 | 1.01 |
The prevalence of satisfaction with life, TABP, and Type D personality in samples of young women with (AV) and without (WAV) acne vulgaris.
| Variable | WAV | AV | χ2(1) |
| ϕ | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n | % | n | % | ||||
| Life satisfaction | 43.88 | 0.000 | −0.38 | ||||
| No (SWLS < 20) | 55 | 18.33 | 112 | 37.33 | |||
| Yes (SWLS ≥ 20) | 95 | 31.67 | 38 | 12.67 | |||
| Type A behavior pattern | 19.89 | 0.000 | 0.26 | ||||
| No (FTAS < 0.79) | 115 | 38.33 | 78 | 26.00 | |||
| Yes (FTAS ≥ 80) | 35 | 11.67 | 72 | 24.00 | |||
| Type D personality | 76.22 | 0.000 | 0.50 | ||||
| No (NA ≤ 10; SI ≤ 10) | 103 | 34.33 | 28 | 9.33 | |||
| Yes (NA ≥ 10; SI ≥ 10) | 47 | 15.67 | 122 | 40.67 | |||
Abbreviations: SWLS, Satisfaction with Life Scale; FTAS, Framingham Type A Scale; NA, negative affectivity; SI, social inhibition; WAV, without acne vulgaris; AV, acne vulgaris.
Correlation of life satisfaction with personality types A and D.
| Variable | Samples | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Total | WAV | AV | |
| Type A behavior pattern | −0.06 | 0.14 | −0.01 |
| Type D personality | |||
| Negative affectivity | −0.37 *** | −0.23 ** | −0.31 *** |
| Social inhibition | −0.38 *** | −0.19 * | −0.41 *** |
Abbreviations: WAV, sample without acne vulgaris; AV sample with acne vulgaris.* p< 0.05; ** p< 0.01; *** p< 0.001.
Results of the moderation analysis for satisfaction with life as a dependent variable, acne severity as an independent variable, and dichotomous TABP as a moderator.
| Variable | Bootstrap 95% | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Constant | 21.26 | 0.60 | 35.59 | 0.000 | 21.26 | 0.68 | 19.90 | 22.59 |
| Acne severity (AS) | ||||||||
| First-degree on the HVS (AS 1) | −4.50 | 1.08 | −4.17 | 0.000 | −4.49 | 0.94 | −6.31 | −2.63 |
| Second degree on the HVS (AS 2) | −4.26 | 1.37 | −3.11 | 0.002 | −4.26 | 1.32 | −6.79 | −1.60 |
| Type A behavior pattern (TABP) | 1.34 | 1.24 | 1.08 | 0.280 | 1.34 | 1.43 | −1.58 | 4.04 |
| Interaction term AS × TABP | ||||||||
| Int 1 AS 1 × TABP | 1.30 | 1.80 | 0.72 | 0.472 | 1.29 | 1.82 | −2.18 | 4.95 |
| Int 2 AS 2 × TABP | −4.12 | 2.14 | −1.93 | 0.055 | −4.11 | 2.03 | −8.12 | −0.05 |
Abbreviations: SE, standard error; LL, lower level; UL, upper level; CI, confidence interval. Number of bootstrap samples for the percentile bootstrap confidence intervals was 10,000. R2 = 0.14, F(5, 294) = 9.70, p < 0.001, f2 = 0.16.
Figure 1An interaction effect between acne severity and TABP on satisfaction with life.
Figure 2Parallel multiple mediation model for predicting satisfaction with life (Study Model 4).
Path coefficients of acne severity (X1, X2), negative affectivity (M4a), and social inhibition (M4b) on satisfaction with life (Y) in a parallel multiple mediation model.
| Antecedent | Consequent | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate | M4a (Negative Affectivity) | Estimate | Y (Satisfaction with Life) | |||||
| Coefficient |
|
| Coefficient |
|
| |||
| X1 (first-degree AV) | a1 | 5.41 | 0.72 | 0.000 | c’1 | −1.98 | 0.89 | 0.027 |
| X2 (second-degree AV) | a2 | 6.44 | 0.88 | 0.000 | c’2 | −4.07 | 1.08 | 0.000 |
| M4a (negative affectivity) | - | - | - | b1 | −0.29 | 0.07 | 0.000 | |
| Constant | iM1 | 11.88 | 0.45 | 0.000 | iY | 25.06 | 0.93 | 0.000 |
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| X1 (first-degree AV) | a3 | 4.74 | 0.68 | 0.000 | c’3 | −1.97 | 0.88 | 0.025 |
| X2 (second-degree AV) | a4 | 6.23 | 0.83 | 0.000 | c’4 | −3.86 | 1.08 | 0.000 |
| M4b (social inhibition) | - | - | - | b2 | −0.34 | 0.07 | 0.000 | |
| Constant | iM2 | 8.51 | 0.42 | 0.000 | iY | 24.45 | 0.78 | 0.000 |
Note. The path a represents the impact of the independent variable (X) on the mediator variable (M). Path b represents the impact of M on the dependent variable (Y). Path c’ represents the direct effect of X on Y and is calculated controlling for the indirect, mediated effect.
Figure 3Serial multiple mediation model for predicting satisfaction with life (Study Model 5).
Path coefficients of acne severity (X1, X2), social inhibition (M5a), and negative affectivity (M5b) on satisfaction with life (Y) in a serial multiple mediation model.
| Antecedent | Consequent | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate | M5a (Social Inhibition) | Estimate | Y (Satisfaction with Life) | |||||
| Coefficient |
|
| Coefficient |
|
| |||
| X1 (first-degree AV) | a1 | 4.74 | 0.68 | 0.000 | c’1 | −3.57 | 0.84 | 0.000 |
| X2 (second-degree AV) | a2 | 6.23 | 0.83 | 0.000 | c’2 | −5.96 | 1.03 | 0.000 |
| M5a (social inhibition) | - | - | - | - | b1 | −0.24 | 0.08 | 0.002 |
| Constant | iM1 | 8.51 | 0.42 | 0.000 | iY | 21.57 | 0.53 | 0.000 |
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||
| X1 (first-degree AV) | a3 | 3.11 | 0.69 | 0.000 | c’3 | −1.38 | 0.90 | 0.120 |
| X2 (second-degree AV) | a4 | 3.40 | 0.85 | 0.000 | c’4 | −3.22 | 1.10 | 0.004 |
| M5a (social inhibition) | b3 | 0.49 | 0.06 | 0.000 | - | - | - | - |
| M5b (negative affectivity) | - | - | - | b2 | −0.19 | 0.07 | 0.000 | |
| Constant | iM2 | 7.74 | 0.62 | 0.000 | iY | 25.90 | 0.96 | 0.011 |
Note. The path a represents the impact of the independent variable (X) on the mediator variable (M). Path b represents the impact of M on the dependent variable (Y). Path c’ represents the direct effect of X on Y and is calculated controlling for the indirect, mediated effect.