Experimental analysis of individual differences and personality

In psychological studies individual differences that result in variability in data and thus mask the effects under investigation have been reduced or eliminated in two ways: (1) through the use of large numbers of subjects and statistical manipulations, or (2) through extensive and controlled studies of individual subjects. The latter, behavior-analytic, method is scientifically better because it permits identification of the variables that result in individual differences. This paper advocates the direct study of individual differences and personality rather than indirect study through experimental control procedures. Some data are presented showing that individual differences in response patterns have orderly characteristics. Extension of the experimental analysis of behavior to the study of individual differences and personality is likely to be important both scientifically and for the future growth of behavior analysis.     

Personality and the Policy Positions of Politicians

Politicians’ support of or opposition to concrete policies is uniquely consequential for policymaking, public opinion, and a host of other societal outcomes. Explaining their policy positions is therefore a major research agenda in political science. Here, we evaluate the role of politicians’ personality traits, measured with the Big Five typology, in shaping how liberal or conservative their economic and social policy positions are. While existing research establishes this link among nonelites, it is far from obvious that the same holds for politicians, who have systematically different personality profiles, and whose positions are constrained by party lines. Using an in-person study of 893 legislators in five countries who completed personality questionnaires and provided detailed issue positions, we find that Openness to Experience is strongly and positively predictive of politicians’ liberal positions on both economic and social policies, but a null relationship for Conscientiousness. We also find that Extraversion predicts more conservative economic (but not social) policy positions. We discuss implications for the role of elites’ individual characteristics in policymaking.     

Intentional response distortion during the COVID-19 pandemic

COVID-19 has abruptly and unexpectedly transformed nearly every aspect of work, including but not limited to increased unemployment rates and uncertainty regarding future job prospects. Response distortion has always been a concern given that many organizations rely on information that is self-reported by applicants regarding their potential employability (e.g., responses to self-reported personality instruments, resumes, interview responses). Drawing from the Valence-Instrumentality-Expectancy (VIE) theory of motivation, we propose that the uncertainty surrounding jobs may lead to amplified distorted responses on these measures in areas where COVID-19 was most salient. In a sample of 213 working adults [~50% female, age M = 38.48], the present study shows that increases in response distortion on a measure of conscientiousness were more pronounced as a function of (a) local COVID positivity rates and (b) job type, such that frontline workers distorted their responses the most. Findings are discussed in the context of VIE theory, personality measurement, and challenges with maintaining effective selection procedures.     

Are curmudgeon personality scales resistant to response distortion?

Curmudgeon personality, which is assessed by having participants evaluate a heterogeneous set of attitude objects, provides an applied value beyond that of more established personality traits. Recent research, for instance, suggests that curmudgeon personality is distinct from the Five Factor Model personality traits and that it predicts unique variance in important criteria, such as job attitudes and well-being. In the current paper we contribute to this literature by testing an explanation of how curmudgeon personality is distinct from other traits—their potential resistance to response distortion. We estimated response distortion for scales of curmudgeon personality and FFM traits across two quasi-experimental studies. As expected, the score shifts between nonapplicant and applicant conditions were smaller for scales of curmudgeon personality compared to scales of emotional stability and conscientiousness. We argue that curmudgeon personality scales may be more resistant to response distortion than are measures of other traits because curmudgeon personality items are semi-implicit and lack an obvious desirable response. The resistance to response distortion should serve as a call to future researchers to test the criterion validity of curmudgeon personality in regard to performance criteria.     

Understanding dark side personality at work: Distinguishing and reviewing nonlinear,interactive, differential,and reciprocal effects

The topic of dark side personality at work has received considerable research attention over the past decade, and both qualitative and quantitative reviews of this field have already been published. To show the relevance of dark personality in the work context, existing reviews have typically focused on systematically discussing the different criteria that have been linked to dark traits (e.g., job performance, work attitudes, leadership emergence, etc.). In contrast, and complementing this earlier work, the current review paper summarizes the available literature on this topic by structuring it in terms of the nature of the relationships studied rather than in terms of the types of outcome variables. Doing so, the focus shifts from “What are the outcomes of dark traits?” to “How are dark traits related to work outcomes?” Scrutinizing the nature of these relationships, we specifically focus on four types of effects (i.e., nonlinear, interactive, differential, and reciprocal) that highlight the complexity of how dark side traits operate in the work context. Structured this way, this review first provides a conceptual underpinning of each of these complex effects, followed by a summary of the empirical literature published over the past 10 years. To conclude, we present an integration of this field, provide suggestions for future research, and highlight concrete assessment challenges.     

Context-dependent shifts in self-regulatory personality processes during COVID-19: Changes in control predict dynamic shifts in goal reengagement capacity

The ability to reengage with new attainable goals after major setbacks is a core self-regulatory trait linked to health and well-being. Yet little is known about the extent to which such goal reengagement capacities may shift over time in response to changing contextual circumstances. Using a nationally-representative sample of U.S. adults aged 18–80 (n = 293), the present 1-year study examined whether changes in opportunity to influence life circumstances (perceived control) were coupled with dynamic shifts in goal reengagement capacity for individuals who differed in their levels of control at pandemic onset. Results from multilevel models showed that within-person increases in perceived control during the pandemic predicted corresponding within-person increases in goal reengagement capacity. Moderation models showed that the positive within-person association between perceived control and goal reengagement was pronounced for individuals with lower levels of control at pandemic onset who may be particularly sensitive to periods of opportunity to pursue new attainable goals. Findings inform theories of personality and self-regulation in pointing to contextual circumstances under which goal reengagement capacity exhibits dynamic shifts in populations who differ in their perceived opportunities for control.     

Prosocial orientation and COVID-19 vaccine willingness in the U.S.

Despite evidence of the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines and their wide availability, many in the U.S. are not vaccinated. Research demonstrates that prosocial orientations predict COVID-19 health behaviors (e.g., social distancing) and vaccination intentions, however, little work has examined COVID-19 vaccination willingness in the U.S. since vaccines were approved. Findings from two U.S. samples show that, in contrast to other COVID-19 health behaviors, vaccine willingness in unvaccinated people is unrelated to prosocial orientation. Study 2 demonstrates that the lack of association between vaccine willingness and prosocial orientation in unvaccinated participants was specific to those with stronger beliefs that COVID-19 vaccines are ineffective. Thus, in prosocial people, perceptions of vaccines' ineffectiveness may undermine COVID-19 vaccine willingness.     

Prevalence of personality disorders among bulimics,nonbulimic binge eaters,and normal controls

We examined the comorbidity of bulimia and personality pathology among college women. Subjects included women (n=23) meeting DSM-III-R criteria for bulimia nervosa (bulimics), women (n=23) who reported binge eating but did not fulfill the criteria for bulimia nervosa (binge eaters), and women (n=23) who did not binge eat (normals). The subjects completed an assessment battery consisting of the Personality Disorders Examination and the SCID as well as the Beck Depression Inventory, the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Index, and measures of impulsivity and self-defeating tendencies. Fourteen of 23 bulimics (61%) met criterion for a personality disorder using DSM-III-R Axis II criteria. In comparison, 3 of 23 (13%) binge eaters and 1 of 23 (4%) normal subjects received an Axis II diagnosis. Borderline and self-defeating diagnoses were the predominant personality disorders in 96% of the bulimics exhibiting clinically significant personality pathology. Bulimics also exhibited significantly more depression, impulsivity, and self-defeating behavior and lower self-esteem than binge eaters and normals. The findings are discussed within a conceptual framework that posits an interaction between personality pathology and restrained eating.     

The concurrent validity of three self-report measures of borderline personality

The recent accumulation of self-report measures of borderline personality disorder (BPD) affords the opportunity to evaluate both the construct validity of the concept and the quality of these measures. This study examines the relationship among three recently developed self-report instruments for assessing BPD from the Personality Assessment Inventory (PAI; Morey, 1991), the MMPI Personality Disorders Scales (MPD; Morey, Waugh, & Blashfield, 1985), and the Bell Object Relations Inventory (BORI: Bell, Billington, & Becker, 1986). Data on the three measures were provided by 119 undergraduate subjects from a southeastern university. A correlational analysis addresses the convergence of these measures of BPD, their divergence from measures of different but related traits, and their independence from variance due to method. Application of the Campbell-Fiske (1959) criteria indicates adequate convergence for all the BPD measures but a lack of discriminant validity for the BORI scales. The fit of the data to a structural model of construct validity is tested using confirmatory factor analysis, and these results are consistent with the hypothesis of a latent borderline trait factor independent of measurement method factors. In sum, the construct validity of the borderline personality concept using self-report methodologies receives support, and a strong association between borderline personality and paranoid phenomena is also suggested.     

Validity of the DSM-III-R personality disorder Clusters

This study assessed the validity of the DSM-III-R personality disorder clusters (i.e., odd-eccentric, dramatic-emotional-erratic, and anxious-fearful) by examining the relationships between self-report measures that tap the core features shared by disorders from each cluster and Cluster scores established via a semistructured interview in a sample of 57 outpatients. Results indicated a high degree of correlation among the DSM-III-R personality disorder Cluster scores. In addition, a series of regression analyses revealed that self-report scores did not account for a significant amount of variance in their respective Cluster scores over and above that accounted for by other self-report measures and other Cluster scores. These results suggest that the current DSM-III-R cluster classification scheme may not be appropriate, and it is recommended that a more empirically justifiable classification of the personality disorders be adopted in DSM-IV.