This meta-analysis used 9 literature search strategies to examine 137 distinct personality constructs as correlates of subjective well-being (SWB). Personality was found to be equally predictive of life satisfaction, happiness, and positive affect, but significantly less predictive of negative affect. The traits most closely associated with SWB were repressive-defensiveness, trust, emotional stability, locus of control-chance, desire for control, hardiness, positive affectivity, private collective self-esteem, and tension. When personality traits were grouped according to the Big Five factors, Neuroticism was the strongest predictor of life satisfaction, happiness, and negative affect. Positive affect was predicted equally well by Extraversion and Agreeableness. The relative importance of personality for predicting SWB, how personality might influence SWB, and limitations of the present review are discussed.

A general model of affective aggression was used to generate predictions concerning hot temperatures. Experiment 1 examined hot temperature effects on hostile affect, hostile cognition, perceived arousal, and physiological arousal in the context of a study of video games. Experiment 2 examined hot temperature effects on hostile affect, perceived and physiological arousal, and general positive and negative affect in the context of brief aerobic exercise. Consistent results were obtained. Hot temperatures produced increases in hostile affect, hostile cognition, and physiological arousal. Hot temperatures also produced decreases in perceived arousal and general positive affect. These results suggest that hot temperatures may increase aggressive tendencies via any of three separate routes. Hostile affect, hostile cognitions, and excitation transfer processes may all increase the likelihood of biased appraisals of ambiguous social events, biased in a hostile direction.

No abstract

This article addresses Bell's (1992) comments on Anderson's (1989) review of the temperature-aggression literature. At a global level, all agree that geographic region studies and most time period studies do not cleanly address the question of the functional shape relating temperature to aggression. In addition, all agree that the negative affect escape model warrants additional empirical investigation. At a more specific level, however, numerous inaccuracies and misinterpretations are noted and corrected. The conclusions of the original review are confirmed. Suggestions for new research are offered.A recent review (Anderson, 1989) examined extant studies on the temperature-aggression relation, with the explicit goal of addressing three main issues. The issues concerned whether a nonartifactual relation exists between temperature and aggression, the shape of this relation, and the fit of past work to five potentially relevant theories. Bell's (1992) comment addresses only one small portion of the review: the relation of extant evidence to the negative affect escape (NAE) model. We agree on many points. We also welcome the opportunity to clarify misinterpretations and to specify the characteristics necessary for improved research on NAE.Three features characterize the comment. First, several "criticisms" are merely restatements of points made repeatedly by the review. Second, the comment responds to a review that was not written. Third, specific defenses of NAE are weak and potentially misleading. This reply addresses these three features, presents the characteristics needed in future research on NAE, and notes the value of prepublication scholarly communications. Restatements of Points Made in the ReviewThe review and our current position agree with the following major points of the comment: (a) Because of methodological complexities, the shape issue (and hence the specific-theories issue) has not been resolved, (b) better laboratory and field experiments on the shape and specific-theories issues are needed, and (c) NAE warrants additional work. Methodological Complexities and the Shape IssueQuotes throughout the review indicate our agreement that the shape issue has not been resolved. The review notes several possible shape functions and states that "distinguishing among these functions is quite difficult, particularly in field studies" (Anderson, 1989, p. 75). This includes the NAE prediction of aWe thank Russell Geen and Kathryn Anderson for comments on this article.

Personality characteristics, especially the traits of extraversion and neuroticism, have been proposed as the primary determinant of subjective wellbeing (SWB). Meta-analytic evidence presented here suggests that personality is indeed strongly related with SWB, and that only health is more strongly correlated with SWB. In a study of 137 personality traits that have been correlated with SWB, neuroticism was one of the strongest negative correlates of SWB. However, extraversion was not the primary factor associated with increased SWB. Rather, several personality characteristics that focus on the characteristic experience of emotions, on enhancing relationships, and on one's characteristic style of explaining the causes of life events are most intimately tied to SWB.