Integration and expression: The complementary functions of self‐reflection

Abstract

No construct is more central to personality than the person's self-concept. Higherorder domains of self-assessment, including self-perceived skills, traits, and values, are expressed in action and provide frames of reference for deciding whether to accept or reject personally relevant social feedback. To perform these functions in a consistent manner, the domains of self-concept need to achieve coherence, with the components of each domain sufficiently integrated to provide an unequivocal platform for decision making and behavior. This depiction implies two functions of self-reflection-one focused on forging coherence in self-concept and the other focusing on the expression of domains that have achieved coherence. We refer to these two modes of self-reflection, respectively, as integration and expression. Both modes can be understood in terms of a spotlight of attention that focuses on different regions of the self-structure. In the integration mode, the spotlight converges on incoherent regions of self-concept to eliminate inconsistencies among the lower-level components. In the expression mode, the spotlight converges on coherent regions of self-concept that can provide an unequivocal platform for decision making and effective action. Using agent-based modeling, we illustrate the operation of both modes, discuss the conditions that differentially activate them, and develop their implications for personality dynamics.

The Personalities of the Main Characters in the Drama “The Glass Menagerie” by Tennessee Williams

“…Incorporating personality psychology theories helps the readers to understand the motivations and behaviors of Amanda's character. Her projection, self-concept, discrepancy between real and ideal selves, and coping mechanisms are integral components of her personality that contribute to the play's exploration of the human psyche and the impact of personal ideals and self-concept on one's actions and relationships (Nowak et al, 2023).…”

Personality dynamics: Regulatory mechanisms and processes

“…First, most authors of this special issue addressed those regulatory mechanisms and processes of personality dynamics which account for changes (e.g., in “dark traits”: Hudson, 2023; in plasticity: Rogers et al, 2023) without (explicit) explanation “what” has to be stable to allow for those changes. However, a few contributors have taken some steps in this direction, suggesting that, for example, global or regional coherence (Fajkowska, 2023; Nowak et al, 2023; Read & Miller, 2023) might serve as a “stable frame” for particular personality changes. Interestingly, those contributions are based on or refer to systemic approaches.…”

“…Four other special issue articles employed the motivational self-regulatory system to enrich our understanding of personality dynamics. Nowak et al (2023) and Dunlop et al (2023) underscored the importance of self-reflection in the motivational self-regulatory system, whereas Di Sarno et al (2023) and Kersten et al (2023) addressed the regulatory functions of personal determinants (goals and motives) of motivation.…”

“…In two theoretical articles, Nowak et al (2023) and Dunlop et al (2023) provide thoughtful reflections on the self‐regulation and dynamics of personality.…”

“…This special issue of the Journal of Personality was designed to advance the field of personality dynamics in this respect. Eleven articles have been brought together: eight theoretical (Dunlop et al, 2023; Fajkowska, 2023; Nowak et al, 2023; Quirin et al, 2023; Read & Miller, 2023; Rogers et al, 2023; Skimina et al, 2023; Wilt & Revelle, 2023) and three empirical (Di Sarno et al, 2023; Hudson, 2023; Kersten et al, 2023). We here outline four topics and elaborate on how these articles contribute to them: Personality dynamics and levels of regulation Personality dynamics and the motivational dimension of regulation Dynamics and regulatory potentials of structural personality components Personality dynamics and timescales …”