行为的跨情境一致性及人格与行为的关系——对人格内涵及其中西方差异的理论与实证分析

旨在对行为的跨情境一致性和人格的内涵等问题进行跨文化的理论和实证分析。人格内容被划分为4个层次，包括个体的外显行为、内心体验、动机和神经生理基础等，文化对人格的不同内容都会产生一定的影响。同时，不同情境下的行为由于受到来自个体内部不同动机（自我统一性动机与适应环境要求的动机）的影响而出现跨情境的一致或不一致。文中从理论和实证角度对上述问题进行了分析，并提出了进一步研究的方向

Relations with Personality and Cross-Situational Consistency of Behavior

Abstract The current article was aimed at analyzing cross-situational consistency of behavior and contents of personality structure with possible Western-Chinese differences theoretically and empirically, through three folded arguments. First, it was proposed that personality was composed of four facets as behavior, inner emotions and experiences, motivation, and neuro-physiological responses. Different theories on personality pay different attention on different facets of personality, and may get different conclusion on personality and relations between personality and behavior. And all the four facets were influenced by culture. Secondly, as an integral part of personality, behavior can be classified as personal or situational. Personal behavior was defined as those never or seldom influenced by situational press and/or social desirabilities, such as reading hobbies, preferred music, and private room design, etc. This kind of behavior would be seldom, if any, influenced by situational factors and would show cross-situational consistencies. Situational behavior, on the other hand, was defined as those mainly influenced by situational factors and/or social desirabilities, such as dress style and talk manner in social situations. This kind of behavior would be mainly influenced by situational factors and would show less, if any, cross-situational consistencies. Meanwhile, behavior maybe influenced by different kind of motivations, either self-consolidation and/or adjust to the situation. The former was defined as inherited desire for self-identity, and the latter was defined as learned desire for acceptance from others. Cross-situation consistency or inconsistency can be seen as the result of interactions between kinds of behaviors and motivations. Finally, both contents of personality and relation between personality and behavior were proposed as influenced by cultures. Chinese culture was defined as collectivism, behavior as mainly situational, and motivations as mainly adjust to the situation. Accordingly, the four different facets of Chinese personality, especially the relations between behavior, inner experiences and motivation may display with significant tendency of situational adjustment. That is, as a part of personality, behavior of Chinese maybe mainly influenced by situational factors aimed at adjusting the requirement of situations, with more cross-situational inconsistencies, and the individual may experienced more conflicts between behavior and the inner experiences and motivation. In contrast, Western culture was defined as individualism, behavior as mainly personal, and motivations as mainly achievement of personal goals and expectations. Accordingly, the four different facets of Western personality, especially the relations between behavior, inner experiences and motivation may display with significant tendency of personal adjustment. That is, as a part of personality, behavior of Western maybe mainly influenced by personal factors aimed at achieving the personal goals, with more cross-situational consistencies, and the individual may experienced less conflicts between behavior and the inner experiences and motivation. Statements mentioned above were discussed theoretically and empirically, and it was concluded as: 1) As was defined as an integral pattern of behavior, inner experiences, motivation and neuro-physiological responses, personality should be seen as an individual’s integral characteristics, with different levels of observability from both perspectives of self and others. If only one facet of personality (e.g., explicit behavior, or motivation) was observed, the whole characteristics of personality would not be reflected correctly, and mutual contradictive findings could be emerged. 2) The stability of personality was presented as not only cross-situational consistency of behavior, but also, and sometimes more importantly, the consistency between behavior and situational requirements, or adjustment responses to the environment. And different conclusion on patterns of personality characteristics could be made when individual’s motivation and behavior were seen as integral parts of personality. Further research directions were also discussed in this paper