Inter-individual differences in intra-individual variability in personality within and across contexts

This study focuses on intra-individual variability in personality at work, and how it relates to job performance. 288 professionals completed contextualised adjective-based personality assessments in work and non-work contexts, and a non-contextualised personality measure. Ratings of their personality were also obtained from colleagues, family members and friends. Supervisors provided performance ratings for 130 participants. Results indicate that personality is context- and source-dependent, and varies systematically within contexts intra-individually regardless of source. Whilst this variability was predictive of some performance criteria when based on other-ratings, overall predictive effects were small in number and size. This study adds to the relatively small body of research on personality variability and performance and contributes to the conceptualisation of personality as a dynamic construct.     

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.     

不确定是坏的么?不确定状态中的错误加工特点及其解释机制

错误是人类决策和行为过程中在所难免的。然而, 错误常常带来不利后果甚至危及生命(如高危作业时的失误)。如何有效监控错误并优化行为对于个体生存和发展至关重要。错误的发生受到内部心理状态影响, 个体常在不确定的情境中做出判断, 不确定状态增强还是削弱错误监控, 是一个重要科学问题, 却存在矛盾结果。在前期积累和理论分析基础上, 本项目拟从人格差异角度探索不确定容忍度的调节作用。不确定容忍度的差异意味着个体对于模糊情境的耐受性和错误的敏感性不同, 因而可能调节不确定状态中的错误加工过程。研究1采用行为实验, 揭示多种不确定情境中(如奖赏/惩罚)错误监控和错误后调整的认知特点, 考察不确定容忍度的调节作用; 研究2通过考察电生理表征、时间加工进程和神经振荡机制等进一步解释这些现象。本项目对于探明不确定状态中的错误加工规律及其人格调节机制具有重要理论价值, 对于促进个体的环境适应、目标达成等具有较好现实意义。     

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.