Equilibria in Personality States: A Conceptual Primer for Dynamical Analyses

Abstract

We provide a basic, step-by-step introduction to the core concepts and mathematical fundamentals of dynamic systems modeling through applying the Change as Outcome model, a simple dynamical systems model, to personality state data. This model characterizes changes in personality states with respect to equilibrium points, estimating attractors and their strength in time series data. Using data from the Personality and Interpersonal Roles (PAIRS) study, we find that mean state is highly correlated with attractor position but weakly correlated with attractor strength, suggesting strength provides added information not captured by summaries of the distribution. We then discuss how taking a dynamic systems approach to personality states also entails a theoretical shift. Instead of emphasizing partitioning trait and state variance, dynamic systems analyses of personality states emphasize characterizing patterns generated by mutual, ongoing interactions. Change as outcome modeling also allows for the effects of personality development after significant life changes to be conceptualized in more nuanced ways, separating effects on characteristic states after the significant change and how people are drawn towards those states (an aspect of resiliency). Estimating this model demonstrates core dynamics principles and provides quantitative grounding for measures of “repulsive” personality states and “ambivert” personality structures. Supplementary materials: https://osf.io/dps4w.

The dynamics, processes, mechanisms, and functioning of personality: An overview of the field

“…They are typically investigated using change-as-outcome models or differential equations. Danvers, Wundrack, and Mehl (2019) Oravecz, Tuerlinckx, and Vandekerckhove 2011Oravecz, Tuerlinckx, and Vandekerckhove 2016Sosnowska et al (2019) Sosnowska, Hofmans, and De Fruyt (2019a) and Sosnowska et al (2019) examined state neuroticism fluctuations in a work context. They investigated individual differences in (1) baseline neuroticism state levels, (2) variability in state neuroticism, and (3) attractor strength (i.e., how quickly people return to their baseline level of neuroticism after deviations from it).…”

Understanding Personality through Patterns of Daily Socializing: Applying Recurrence Quantification Analysis to Naturalistically Observed Intensive Longitudinal Social Interaction Data

“…Overall, our results suggest that just analysing the average amount of time a person spends talking can miss important relationships between personality and style of socializing. Our work adds to the growing literature on personality dynamics (Hopwood, Zimmermann, Pincus, & Krueger, 2015; Robinson & Gordon, 2011; Read et al, 2010; Sosnowska, Kuppens, De Fruyt, & Hofmans, 2019; Wright, Hopwood, & Simms, 2015) and the dynamics of socializing (Dishion & Snyder, 2004; Hollenstein, 2007; Lavictoire, Snyder, Stoolmiller, & Hollenstein, 2012; Schelling, 1998). We present the first instance (to the best of our knowledge) of relating non–linear socializing dynamics assessed through ambulatory assessment to personality traits (but see Gundogdu et al, 2017 and Wang et al, 2018, for related analysis strategies, and Stachl et al, 2020, for some linear dynamic measures).…”

New Directions in the Conceptualization and Assessment of Personality—A Dynamic Systems Approach

“…It must be pointed out though that the nature of attractor strength for each trait warrants further research, especially considering that there were very little between-person differences in attractor strength for Extraversion, Openness, and Neuroticism. Moreover, it is important to note that the strength of an attractor can be modelled in other ways as well, with one example being models that predict change in personality states as an outcome (see Danvers, Wundrack, & Mehl, 2019).…”

“…Drawing on the very same idea that there are interindividual differences in the extent to which behaviour is driven by the person rather than by the situation, Dalal et al . (2015) has referred to this quality as personality strength. Using the personality strength conceptualization, strong personalities reduce the variability in personality–related behaviours, feelings, and thoughts across situations within persons, while weak personalities are characterized by high levels of intraindividual variability.…”