The role of situational demands and cognitive competencies in behavior organization and personality coherence.

Shoda, Yuichi; Mischel, Walter; Wright, Jack C.

doi:10.1037/0022-3514.65.5.1023

Cited by 139 publications

(145 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

141

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, the present research attests to the potential utility of the clustering approach (see, e.g., Shoda, Mischel, & Wright, 1993a, 1993bVansteelandt & Mechelen, 1997) in identifying patterns of coping flexibility. This approach allows researchers to identify different groups of coping flexibility on empirical grounds, with each empirical group displaying a unique pattern of cognitive and coping flexibility across situations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing coping flexibility in real-life and laboratory settings: A multimethod approach.

Cheng

2001

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

363

374

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This research sought to formulate a theoretically based conceptualization of coping flexibility and to adopt a multimethod approach in assessing this construct. A self-report daily measure and an experiment were designed geared to theoretical and empirical grounds. The new daily measure was used in Study 1 to examine coping flexibility in a life transition. Findings showed individual differences in patterns of coping flexibility across different real-life stressful events. In Study 2, coping flexibility was examined in both real-life and laboratory settings. Results replicated those of Study 1 and further revealed consistency between the self-report and the experiment data. Study 3 extended previous studies by adopting a longitudinal design over a 3-month time span. Participants' flexibility in coping with laboratory tasks was found to predict how flexible they would be in handling real-life stressful events.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Assessing coping flexibility in real-life and laboratory settings: A multimethod approach.

Cheng

2001

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

363

374

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The model results in a parsimonious representation that allows one to grasp the complex interplay between persons, situations, and behaviors. As such, it may be a useful tool to describe individual differences in situation-behavior profiles as advocated by authors such as Golding (1975), Olweus (1976), Shoda et al (1993Shoda et al ( , 1994, and Wright and Mischel (1987).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Several authors other than Bern have underscored the importance of studying personality in terms of meaningful patterns of stability and change in well-defined groups of behaviors in relation to well-defined groups of situations (Allport, 1937;Claeys, Timmers, & Phalet, 1993;Golding, 1975;Mischel & Shoda, 1995;Olweus, 1976;Pervin, 1976;Shoda, Mischel, & Wright, 1993Wright & Mischel, 1987). In particular, Wright and Mischel, building on earlier work of Alston (1975), proposed a conditional approach to the study of personality, in which the fundamental unit of observation is not the unconditional probability of behavior but rather the conditional probability of a certain type of behavior given types of situations or psychological conditions.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Individual differences in situation–behavior profiles: A triple typology model.

Vansteelandt¹,

Mechelen²

1998

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A model is proposed to represent individual differences in situation-behavior profiles. The model consists of 3 components: (a) q'ypologies of person, situation, and behavior classes; (b) hierarchical relations between the classes of each typology; and (c) a characterization of the person types in terms of different sets of if (situation class) then (behavior class) rules by which the 3 typologies are linked to one another. A data analysis technique (INDCLAS) is available to induce a triple typology model from empirical data. To reveal the psychological mechanisms behind such a model, the classes of the model can be related to situation, behavior, and person features. As a result, person types can be interpreted in terms of systems of cognitive-affective variables that mediate between active situation features and behavioral manifestations. This is illustrated with a study on selfreported hostile behavior in frustrating situations.According to Bem( 1983 ), the fundamental scientific task for personality research is to convert observations of particular persons behaving in particular ways in particular situations into assertions that certain kinds of persons will behave in certain kinds of ways in certain kinds of situations, that is, to construct triple typologies or equivalence classes--of persons, of behaviors, and of situations--and to fashion theories of personality that relate these equivalence classes to one another. (p. 566) Several authors other than Bern have underscored the importance of studying personality in terms of meaningful patterns of stability and change in well-defined groups of behaviors in relation to well-defined groups of situations (Allport, 1937;Claeys, Timmers, & Phalet, 1993;Golding, 1975;Mischel & Shoda, 1995;Olweus, 1976;Pervin, 1976;Shoda, Mischel, & Wright, 1993Wright & Mischel, 1987). In particular, Wright and Mischel, building on earlier work of Alston (1975), proposed a conditional approach to the study of personality, in which the fundamental unit of observation is not the unconditional probability of behavior but rather the conditional probability of a certain type of behavior given types of situations or psychological conditions. Within this context, differences between (classes of) persons may be conceived as differences in if (situation class) then (behavior class) rules. Wright and Mischel further assumed that the situation category as well as the behavior Kristof Vansteelandt and Iven Van Mechelen, Department of Psychology, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.The research reported in this article was supported by North Atlantic Treaty Organization Grant CRG921321. We thank Seymour Rosenberg for his helpful comments on an earlier version of this article.Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Kristof Vansteelandt, Department of Psychology, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Tiensestraat 102, B-3000 Leuven, Belgium. Electronic mail may be sent to kristof.vansteelandt @psy.kuleuven.ac.be. category are prototype-based categories with vague boun...

show abstract

“…This might be termed a trait approach. In contrast, the state approach suggests that behavior is more consistent in the same situation than across different situations (see Mischel, 1990;Shoda, Mischel, & Wright, 1993). Nonhumans as well as humans have been used to explore the mechanisms that might underlie personality (e.g., Mather & Anderson, 1993;Wanchisen, Tatham, & Mooney, 1989).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Lack of consistent individual differences in rats on tasks that require response inhibition

Reed

Pizzimenti

1995

Animal Learning & Behavior

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hungry rats performed four different tasks which all required responding to be withheld for food reinforcement to be obtained. The tasks were the following: an omission schedule, a go/no-go procedure, a differential reinforcement of low rate schedule, and a choice task in which the subject could respond for a small immediate reward or a large delayed reward. Each rat experienced each task twice. For each task, the rank ordering of the subjects' performance on the test and retest was highly consistent, indicating the reliability of the task for measuring a particular "ability." However, there were no consistencies in the performance of individual rats between tasks. This suggests that claims regarding consistent individual differences in brain-lesioned nonhumans across a range of such tasks are not supported in intact subjects.Approaches to analyzing personality may be divided into two broad categories. One approach suggests that individuals may possess one out of a number of personality traits that are stable across different situations (e.g., Eysenck & Eysenck, 1985;Gray, 1987). This might be termed a trait approach. In contrast, the state approach suggests that behavior is more consistent in the same situation than across different situations (see Mischel, 1990;Shoda, Mischel, & Wright, 1993). Nonhumans as well as humans have been used to explore the mechanisms that might underlie personality (e.g., Mather & Anderson, 1993;Wanchisen, Tatham, & Mooney, 1989). In fact, some models of personality in humans draw extensively on work involving nonhuman performance in conditioning tasks (see, e.g., Gray, 1987). However, little work has been done to establish whether data collected from nonhuman subjects may be best characterized as supporting the state or trait view of personality.An example of a model of personality based on data from studies with nonhumans (especially rats) is that of Gray (1987). These data suggested a three-factor model of personality, involving an activation system that deals with behavior elicited by rewards; an inhibition system that deals with responses to punishment and the inhibition of ongoing behavior; and a flight/fight system which mediates the behavioral effects of unconditioned aversive events. Since damage to the septum and to the hippocampus has been found to produce impairments on a variety of tasks (see Gray, Rawlins, & Feldon, 1979, for a review), it Part of this work formed a thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of a Master of Science degree for the second author. Thanks are due Celia Heyes and Lisa Osborne and two anonymous reviewers for comments on an earlier version of this paper. Requests for reprints should be sent to: P. Reed, Department of Psychology, University College London, Gower Street, London WClE 6BT, England (e-mail:ucjtspr@ucl.ac.uk). -Accepted by previous editor, Vincent M. LoLordohas been assumed that performance on those tasks was mediated by this common substrate, and that this may underlie the expression of a personality trait. If this point is accepted, ...

show abstract

The role of situational demands and cognitive competencies in behavior organization and personality coherence.

Cited by 139 publications

References 43 publications

Assessing coping flexibility in real-life and laboratory settings: A multimethod approach.

Assessing coping flexibility in real-life and laboratory settings: A multimethod approach.

Individual differences in situation–behavior profiles: A triple typology model.

Lack of consistent individual differences in rats on tasks that require response inhibition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About