Cognitive and motivational processes underlying coping flexibility: a dual-process model

Discriminative facility was proposed as a cognitive process and need for closure was proposed as a motivational process underlying coping flexibility. The dual-process model posits that need for closure influences discriminative facility, which in turn modifies coping flexibility and psychological adjustment. In Study 1, results of structural equation modeling provided support for the dual-process model. This model was further examined using experimental methods (Study 2) and a prospective design (Study 3). Consistent with the dual-process model, results from all 3 studies showed that participants who were more motivated to seek alternative coping strategies tended to encode stressful situations in a more differentiated way. These individuals used a greater variety of strategies to fit different situational demands and were better adjusted.     

A dual-process motivational model of attitudes towards vegetarians and vegans

Vegetarians and vegans comprise a minority of most western populations. However, relatively little research has investigated the psychological foundations of attitudes towards this minority group. The following study employs a dual process model of intergroup attitudes to explore the motivational basis of non-vegetarians' attitudes towards vegetarians and vegans. Participants were 1,326 individuals recruited through advertisements in a national newspaper in New Zealand. Non-vegetarian participants first completed measures of ideological attitudes and social worldviews, and then were randomly assigned to complete a measure of outgroup attitudes towards either vegetarians or vegans. Although non-vegetarians' attitudes towards both vegetarians and vegans were generally positive, attitudes towards vegans were significantly less positive than attitudes towards vegetarians, and male participants expressed significantly less positive attitudes towards both outgroups than female participants. The structural equation model predicting attitudes towards vegetarians and vegans fit the data well and explained a significant amount of the variance in attitudes.     

The psychological bases of ideology and prejudice: testing a dual process model

The issue of personality and prejudice has been largely investigated in terms of authoritarianism and social dominance orientation. However, these seem more appropriately conceptualized as ideological attitudes than as personality dimensions. The authors describe a causal model linking dual dimensions of personality, social world view, ideological attitudes, and intergroup attitudes. Structural equation modeling with data from American and White Afrikaner students supported the model, suggesting that social conformity and belief in a dangerous world influence authoritarian attitudes, whereas toughmindedness and belief in a competitive jungle world influence social dominance attitudes, and these two ideological attitude dimensions influence intergroup attitudes. The model implies that dual motivational and cognitive processes, which may be activated by different kinds of situational and intergroup dynamics, may underlie 2 distinct dimensions of prejudice.     

Personality and prejudice: Extension to the HEXACO personality model

We modelled the associations between the HEXACO dimensions of personality, Social Dominance Orientation (SDO), Right‐Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and prejudice towards dangerous, derogated and dissident groups (N = 454 undergraduates). Consistent with a Big‐Five model, low Openness to Experience predicted RWA and therefore dangerous and dissident group prejudice. As predicted, low Emotionality (and Openness) rather than Agreeableness predicted SDO and therefore derogated and dissident group prejudice. Comparison with meta‐analytic averages of Big‐Five data supported expected similarities and differences in the association of Big‐Five and HEXACO models of personality with ideology. Finally, Honesty‐Humility simultaneously predicted increases in RWA but decreases in SDO, and thus opposing effects on prejudice. These opposing effects have gone unidentified in research employing Big‐Five models of personality structure. Copyright © 2010 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Personality and prejudice: a meta-analysis and theoretical review

Despite a substantial literature examining personality, prejudice, and related constructs such as Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO), there have been no systematic reviews in this area. The authors reviewed and meta-analyzed 71 studies (N = 22,068 participants) investigating relationships between Big Five dimensions of personality, RWA, SDO, and prejudice. RWA was predicted by low Openness to Experience but also Conscientiousness, whereas SDO was predicted by low Agreeableness and also weakly by low Openness to Experience. Consistent with a dual-process motivational model of ideology and prejudice, the effects of Agreeableness on prejudice were fully mediated by SDO, and those of Openness to Experience were largely mediated by RWA. Finally, the effects of Agreeableness and Openness to Experience were robust and consistent across samples, although subtle moderating factors were identified, including differences in personality inventory (NEO Personality Inventory-Revised vs. Big Five Inventory), differences across prejudice domain, and cross-cultural differences in Conscientiousness and Neuroticism. Implications for the study of personality and prejudice are discussed.     

Understanding sexual prejudice: The role of political ideology and strategic essentialism

Despite the increased visibility and acceptance of the LGBTQ community, sexual minorities continue to face prejudice and discrimination in many domains. Past research has shown that this prejudice is more prevalent among those holding conservative political views. In two studies, we merge strategic essentialism and motivated ideology theoretical perspectives to empirically investigate the link between political orientation and sexual prejudice. More specifically, we examine how conservatives strategically use different forms of essentialism to support their views of gay individuals and their reactions to messages aimed at changing essentializing beliefs. In Study 1 (N = 220), we demonstrate that conservatives endorse social essentialism (i.e., the belief that gay and straight people are fundamentally different from each other) more than liberals do. In turn, they blame gay individuals more for their sexual orientation and show more prejudice toward them. At the same time, conservatives endorse trait essentialism (i.e., the belief that sexual orientation is a fixed attribute that cannot be changed) less than liberals do, which in turn predicts greater levels of blame and prejudice for conservatives relative to liberals. In Study 2 (N = 217), we additionally show that conservatives, but not liberals, are resistant to messages aimed at increasing trait essentialism and reducing prejudice toward sexual minorities. We discuss theoretical and practical implications of these findings.     

Testing a dual-process model of avoidant defenses

Research suggests that the defensive strategy used by people who score high on attachment-related avoidance when they encounter interpersonal threats involves two stages: automatic vigilance followed by effortful avoidance. In two studies we varied stimulus exposure times and cognitive load to determine how attention is regulated by avoidant individuals. Results indicate that avoidant individuals were vigilant toward contempt faces when the faces were presented for 100 ms but quickly disengaged from them when the faces were presented for 750 ms. Moreover, avoidant participants could disengage from contempt faces presented for 750 ms while rehearsing a simple 1-digit number, but not when rehearsing a 7-digit number, suggesting that avoidant disengagement is a cognitively effortful process. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.     

Personality and prejudice: from Big Five personality factors to facets

Extending our previous research on personality and prejudice, we tested the predictive power of Big Five facet compared with factor scores in three studies. Study 1 (N=170) examined the predictive power of factors and facets when explaining generalized prejudice, a composite of four prejudice types. Study 2 (N=158) focused on sexism and Study 3 (N=80) examined the impact of personality and experimentally manipulated social norm against expressing sexism. Multiple regression analyses showed the strongest facets (Tender-Mindedness and Values) to outperform the strongest factors (Agreeableness and Openness to Experience) in predicting prejudice in all three studies. We discuss the outcome against the background of previous empirical findings and the two major approaches - the personality and the social psychological - to explaining individual differences in prejudice.     

Personality,motivational, and social cognition predictors of leisure-time physical activity

ObjectiveThe purpose of the present study was to investigate associations between personality traits of extraversion and neuroticism, autonomous motivation, and the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) constructs and leisure-time physical activity. The study examined whether autonomous motivation and the TPB constructs mediate the association between personality traits and physical activity, and whether personality traits moderate the relationship of autonomous motivation and the TPB constructs with physical activity.MethodsMiddle-aged women (N = 441) completed self-report measures of personality traits, autonomous motivation, attitudes, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control (PBC) and intention. Moderate-to-vigorous leisure-time physical activity (MVPA) was measured using accelerometers approximately seven weeks later. Participants’ past accelerometer-based MVPA was available from four years earlier.ResultsOnly autonomous motivation and past MVPA directly predicted MVPA. Neuroticism and past MVPA were indirectly related with MVPA through autonomous motivation. No support for a moderator role of personality traits was found.ConclusionsCurrent data suggest that autonomous motivation and past experience are prominent determinants of accelerometer-based leisure-time MVPA, but not beliefs and intentions.     

More evidence for a dual-process model of conditional reasoning

Many studies have shown that the deductive inferences that people make have global properties that reflect the statistical information implicit in the premises. This suggests that such reasoning can be explained by a single, underlying probabilistic model. In contrast, the dual process model of conditional reasoning (Verschueren, Schaeken, & d'Ydewalle, 2005b) proposes that people can use either a logical, counterexample-based strategy or a probabilistic one. In two studies, we presented reasoners with sequences of affirmation-of-the-consequent inferences that differed with respect to the statistical properties of the premises, either explicitly or implicitly. As predicted by the dual-process model, an analysis of individual response patterns showed the presence of two distinct strategies, with use of the counterexample strategy being associated with higher levels of abstract-reasoning competence. Use of the counterexample strategy was facilitated by the explicit presentation of counterexample information. In a further study, we then examined explicitly probabilistic inferences. This study showed that although most reasoners made statistically appropriate inferences, the ability to make more-accurate inferences was associated with higher levels of abstract reasoning competence. These results show that deductive inferential reasoning cannot be explained by a single, unitary process and that any analysis of reasoning must consider individual differences in strategy use.     

Personality and politics: introduction to the special issue

This special issue of Journal of Personality brings together 10 original articles addressing the intersection of personality and politics. Articles build on classic traditions in political psychology by presenting both idiographic and nomothetic work on the motivational, cognitive, ideological, attitudinal, and identity correlates of many different aspects of political behavior. This work is used to understand political activism and leadership as well as everyday political behavior. We hope this collection of articles will inspire our readers to explore new investigations in personality and political psychology.     

Personality and motivational antecedents of activism and civic engagement

This article conceptually links theory and research on volunteerism to different forms of political activity, specifically activism and civic engagement. Multiple perspectives and measures of personality as antecedents of volunteerism, activism, and civic engagement are outlined, including individual differences in motivations, interpersonal orientations, and traits. Next, self-report data from 624 people involved in AIDS service organizations (as clients, volunteers, staff, or supporters) are utilized to empirically explore the best personality predictors of AIDS activism and civic engagement. Other-focused rather than self-focused motivation better predicted AIDS activism and civic engagement. The only measure of interpersonal orientation consistently related to these outcomes was communal orientation; as well, only the trait of extraversion was related to both outcomes. In analyses testing the predictive power of constellations of personality measures, other-focused motivation better predicted AIDS activism and civic engagement than the other measures of motivation, interpersonal orientation, and traits. Finally, meditational analyses supported a developmental sequence in which other-focused motivation leads to specific activism, which, in turn, encourages broader civic engagement. The discussion focuses on theoretical implications for understanding the impact of personality on different forms of citizenship behaviors and of the applicability of the Volunteer Process Model for studying political activity and civic engagement.     

How lay theories of prejudice shape prejudice confrontations: Examining beliefs about prejudice prevalence,origins, and controllability

The formative framework in prejudice confrontations research has focused on the utility of confrontations to activate one's self-regulation strategies to interrupt unintentional prejudice, discrimination, and stereotyping. As this framework remains dominant in the literature, little research has examined everyday people's theories about prejudice that diverge from this framework and accounted for these theories in investigating confrontation rates and outcomes. In this paper, we review key lay theories of prejudice and discuss the ways in which they may influence prejudice confrontations. First, we summarize lay theories regarding the prevalence, origins, and controllability of prejudice. Next, we consider how lay theories of prejudice may factor into the circumstances under which people confront prejudice, goals that people may hold when confronting, and outcomes of confronting for confronters and perpetrators. Throughout, we highlight fundamental research questions and hypotheses that integrate lay theories of prejudice and prejudice confrontations. We propose that better understanding lay theories of prejudice and how they influence prejudice confrontations may help to advance translational and theoretical research in social psychology.     

Explicit and implicit emotion regulation: a dual-process framework

It is widely acknowledged that emotions can be regulated in an astonishing variety of ways. Most research to date has focused on explicit (effortful) forms of emotion regulation. However, there is growing research interest in implicit (automatic) forms of emotion regulation. To organise emerging findings, we present a dual-process framework that integrates explicit and implicit forms of emotion regulation, and argue that both forms of regulation are necessary for well-being. In the first section of this review, we provide a broad overview of the construct of emotion regulation, with an emphasis on explicit and implicit processes. In the second section, we focus on explicit emotion regulation, considering both neural mechanisms that are associated with these processes and their experiential and physiological consequences. In the third section, we turn to several forms of implicit emotion regulation, and integrate the burgeoning literature in this area. We conclude by outlining open questions and areas for future research.     

Personality, motivational and situational determinants of regular and occasional use of smokeless tobacco

This study evaluated the effects of personality, motivational, and situational factors on Regular (n=191) and Occasional (n=80) users of smokeless tobacco (SLT) products. The participants completed the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ), Spielberger’s State-Trait Personality Inventory (STPI) and Anger Expression (AX) Scale, and questionnaires designed to evaluate the reasons why SLT-Users begin, continue, and are motivated to use smokeless tobacco. Occasional Users had higher scores than Regular Users on the EPQ Extraversion scale; no other personality differences were found between these groups. Ratings of the importance of the reasons for beginning to use tobacco products were quite similar for the Regular and Occasional Users; novelty and enjoyment were ranked highest by both groups. In contrast, Regular Users rated 7 of the 10 reasons for continuing to use tobacco as significantly more important than Occasional Users; enjoyment, stimulation and management of emotions were ranked as most important by both groups. Findings that smokeless tobacco products enhanced positive affect and intellectual stimulation, and reduced anxiety and boredom were generally consistent with Eysenck’s Diathesis Stress Model.     

Two effects of repetition: Support for a dual-process model of know judgments and exclusion errors

In three experiments, aremember/know recognition test (Experiments 1–2) and an exclusion test (Experiments 2–3) were used to examine effects of repeated study presentations. An effect of study repetition was obtained for remember but not know judgments, similar to results reported by Gardiner, Kaminska, Dixon, and Java (1996). Experiment 2 demonstrated the similarity between know responses and exclusion errors; neither was affected by repeated study presentations. In Experiment 3, a response deadline procedure was used to show that exclusion errors are the product of two opposing processes—recollection and familiarity—both of which are influenced by repetition. The interpretation of exclusion errors and know responses is shown to require a dual-process model that includes an assumption about the relationship between processes.