Ambivalence About Interpersonal Problems and Traits Predicts Cross‐Situational Variability of Social Behavior

Abstract

Multiple theoretical perspectives suggest that maladjusted personality is characterized by not only distress, but also opposing or "ambivalent" self-perceptions and behavioral lability across social interactions. However, the degree to which ambivalence about oneself predicts cross-situational variability in social behavior has not been examined empirically. Using the interpersonal circumplex (IPC) as a nomological framework, the present study investigated the extent to which endorsing opposing or "ambivalent" tendencies on IPC measures predicted variability in social behavior across a range of hypothetical interpersonal scenarios (Part 1; N = 288) and naturalistic social interactions (Part 2; N = 192). Ambivalent responding for interpersonal problems and traits was associated with measures of distress, maladaptive interpersonal tendencies, and greater variability of social behavior across both hypothetical and daily social interactions, though more consistently for interpersonal problems. More conservative tests suggested that ambivalence predicted some indexes of behavioral variability even when accounting for mean levels and squared means of social behaviors, vector length, gender, and depressive symptoms. Results suggest that processes theorized as typifying personality disorder may apply more broadly to personality maladjustment occurring outside of clinical samples.

Toward a Shared Understanding of Important Consequences of Personality

“…In the remainder of this section we will limit our discussion to those studies that did use longitudinal designs. In total, of the 43 "consequences" that were measured longitudinally, 53.5% were classifiable as external consequences (C e ), 32.6% as internal consequences (C i ), and the rest (13.9%) as internal or external responses (e.g., cross-situational variability of social behavior, Erickson, Newman, Peterson, & Scarsella, 2015;obedience, Begue et al, 2015). However, responses are the central mechanism that brings consequences about; thus, they need to be clearly distinguished from the latter.…”

Value development during adolescence: Dimensions of change and stability

“…Individuals with clearly articulated self‐concepts have previously been hypothesized to show stronger relations between values, attitudes, and behaviors (Rokeach, ). By the same token, personality ambivalence––the endorsement of opposing traits (e.g., dominant and submissive)––has been associated with behavior that varies substantially across situations (Erickson, Newman, Peterson, & Scarsella, ). Finally, conflicts in self‐content have been related to negative emotions during adolescence (Cohen, Spiegler, Young, Hankin, & Abela, ).…”

Interpersonal Dynamics in Personality and Personality Disorders

“…In the language of the Big Five, dominance is similar to extraversion shaded in the direction of warmth, whereas agreeableness is similar to warmth shaded in the direction of low dominance (DeYoung, Weisberg, Quilty, & Peterson, ; Fournier et al, ; McCrae Jr, ). Interpersonal behaviour dysregulation involves a chronic pattern of rigid, unstable, or non‐complementary interpersonal interactions that is associated with distress and/or dysfunction (Erickson & Newman, ; Erickson, Newman, Peterson, & Scarsella, ; Erickson, Newman, & Pincus, ; Roche, Pincus, Conroy, et al, ; Smith & Ruiz, ; Wright, Hopwood, & Simms, ). Behaviour dysregulation might include extreme and rigid behaviours, as exemplified by the psychopathic person who chronically takes advantage of others even when it provides her with little personal benefit, or extreme instability such as the vacillation between warmth and coldness characteristic of borderline personality.…”