Automatic and Controlled Processes in Behavioural Control: Implications for Personality Psychology

Abstract

This paper highlights a number of unresolved theoretical issues that, it is argued, continue to impede the construction of a viable model of behavioural control in personality psychology. It is contended that, in order to integrate motivation, emotion, cognition and conscious experience within a coherent framework, two major issues need to be recognised: (a) the relationship between automatic (reflexive) and controlled (reflective) processing and (b) the lateness of controlled processing (including the generation of conscious awareness)-phenomenally, such processing seems to 'control' behaviour, but experimentally it can be shown to postdate the behaviour it represents. The implications of these two major issues are outlined, centred on the need to integrate theoretical perspectives within personality psychology, as well as the greater unification of personality psychology with general psychology. A model of behavioural control is sketched, formulated around the concept of the behavioural inhibition system (BIS), which accounts for: (a) why certain stimuli are extracted for controlled processing (i.e. those that are not 'going to plan', as detected by an error mechanism) and (b) the function of controlled processing (including conscious awareness) in terms of adjusting the cybernetic weights of automatic processes (which are always in control of immediate behaviour) which, then, influence future automatically controlled behaviour. The relevance of this model is illustrated in relation to a number of topics in personality psychology, as well related issues of free-will and difficult-to-control behaviours.Johnson, and Joormann (2008) note, studies from cognitive, social, personality and development psychology converge on the conclusion that there exist (at least) two modes of information processing and action regulation, which operate simultaneously and often in competition with each other. The interplay of these mechanisms may be especially important in accounting for individual variation in both normal and abnormal behaviour.This paper contends that psychology in general, and personality psychology in particular, has failed to grasp firmly enough the implications of multiple levels of behavioural control and, in consequence, theoretical advance and integration are being impeded. The aim of this paper is to highlight some of the problems that need to be recognised and addressed, and to invite commentary on a proposal for their resolution.Consideration of the importance of multiple levels of behavioural control requires the recognition of a number of key theoretical issues; namely (a) the relationship between automatic (reflexive-non-conscious) and controlled (reflective, often with conscious representation) processes and (b) the lateness of controlled processes (including the generation of conscious awareness)-phenomenally, such processes seem to 'control' behaviour, but experimentally they can be shown to postdate the behaviour they represent. This paper is primarily concerned with behavioural control; however, i...

A Feedback-Response Pause Normalises Response Perseveration Deficits in Pathological Gamblers

“…This period of reflection may lead to an earlier termination of gambling behaviour in the presence of unfavourable odds. In theoretical terms, this reflection would entail the activation of controlled-attentional processes as opposed to habitual prepotent automatic reactions (Corr, 2010); by this means, automatic responses could be relearned to be more responsive to the changing ratios of wins and losses.…”

Implicit and Explicit Associations with Erotic Stimuli in Women with and Without Sexual Problems

“…Psychological models of sexual dysfunction in physically healthy individuals suggest an important causal role for cognitive processes (Barlow, 1986;Janssen, Everaerd, Spiering, & Janssen, 2000;van Lankveld et al, 2015) that operate at different levels of awareness and regulatory control (Corr, 2010;Schneider & Shiffrin, 1977), including implicit and automatic processes. Conscious access for the individual to automatic cognitive processes is limited (Fitousi & Wenger, 2011;Kahneman, 1973).…”

Personality Traits: Hierarchically Organized Systems

“…(Derryberry & Reed, 2002) • Resolving conflicts, correcting errors, and planning new actions (e.g., Eisenberg, Smith, Sadovsky, & Spinrad, 2004;Fajkowska & Derryberry, 2010) Need for achievement (Eliasz, 1981) • Self-providing dose of stimulation, what influences changes in the physiological mechanisms of temperament reactivity (Eliasz, 1981) BIS (Gray & McNaughton, 2000;Corr, 2008) • Comparator, conflict detection and resolution (Wytykowska, Corr, & Fajkowska, 2015) * associated with high or moderate dominance of environmental determinacy. structurally complex trait (Corr, 2008;Gray & McNaughton, 2000)-one might identify reactive (e.g., through its associations with immediate dissimilarity orientation) and (self-)regulative (e.g., through its positive relation to conflict monitoring and resolution; Corr, 2010;Wytykowska, Corr, & Fajkowska, 2015) aspects, although the regulative aspect seems to be the dominant one. For example, in high-BIS individuals, the activity of neurobiological structures associated with mismatch detection is higher than in low-BIS ones (cf.…”