Modeling the mind: Assessment of if … then … profiles as a window to shared psychological processes and individual differences

Zayas, Vivian; Lee, Randy T.; Shoda, Yuichi

doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-819200-9.00006-5

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 95 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on the CAPS model, if : : : then contingencies would emerge from individual differences in the organization of the cognitive-affective processing system and its activation in response to environmental variables (Mischel & Shoda, 1995;Shoda et al, 1994). As such, SCSCs would be informative of the underlying personality system, although different cognitive-affective systems could produce similar contingencies (e.g., Zayas et al, 2021). From a more classical trait perspective, some authors define basic personality traits such as the Big Five as decontextualized, average tendencies (e.g., McAdams & Pals, 2006).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Beyond individual differences in the average activation of cognitiveaffective units, individual differences are proposed in associations among units and with features of the situation, which results in consistent and observable if (situation) : : : then (behavior) contingencies (Mischel & Shoda, 1995). Previous work has mainly focused on intraindividual if : : : then profiles (e.g., Fournier et al, 2008;Furr, 2009;Shoda et al, 1994), though recent work building on the CAPS model has also proposed the examination of individual differences in specific contingencies (Zayas et al, 2021). Denissen and Penke (2008) suggest a reconceptualization of personality traits as reactivities.…”

Section: Background Theoretical Relevance Of Contingenciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Individual differences in contingencies between situation characteristics and personality states.

Kuper¹,

Breil²,

Horstmann³

et al. 2022

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contingencies between situational variables and psychological states have been proposed as key individual difference variables by many theoretical approaches to personality. Despite their relevance, the basic properties, nomological correlates, and factor structure of individual differences in contingencies have not been examined so far. We address these fundamental questions in five studies with overall N = 952 participants and N = 32,052 unique assessments. Individual differences in situation characteristic-state contingencies (SCSCs) between DIAMONDS situation characteristics and Big Five personality states were examined in everyday life. SCSCs showed substantial variation across participants, and individual differences in them were moderately reliable (average meta-analytic reliability = .47) and short-term stable (average meta-analytic latent stability = .43). They were weakly and inconsistently related to average personality states, self-reported personality traits, subjective happiness, and sociodemographic variables across studies. However, there were meaningful intercorrelations among SCSCs that could be described by four factors: contingencies involving (1) positive states and situational problems, (2) positive states and situational rewards, (3) thinking/work and requirements of thinking/work, and (4) neurotic states. Overall, our findings support the notion of SCSCs as potentially important individual difference variables, and we sketch future lines of research on contingencies.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Background Theoretical Relevance Of Contingenciesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Individual differences in contingencies between situation characteristics and personality states.

Kuper¹,

Breil²,

Horstmann³

et al. 2022

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…. profiles (Mischel et al, 2002;Zayas et al, 2021) offers first insights on this relation but more research is needed to derive definite guidelines for the description of situations. In addition, more research on cue taxonomies is needed.…”

Section: Limitationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Standardized State Assessment

Freudenstein,

Schulze,

Schäpers

et al. 2023

European Journal of Psychological Assessment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contemporary theories of personality require psychological assessments that take person-situation processes into account. This is most commonly achieved via ambulatory assessments that sample individuals within their real-life environments. An alternative approach aims at measuring person-situation processes by incorporating hypothetical situation descriptions. However, thus far, no detailed guidelines exist on how to develop such measures so that they validly assess person-situation processes. In this article, we propose Standardized State Assessment as a methodological framework for the assessment of situation-specific states in hypothetical situations. We build on theoretical advances in personality research and previous assessment approaches to derive guidelines for a theory-driven development of hypothetical situation descriptions. We further describe how states should be measured in these situations. Finally, we propose that appropriate latent measurement models and validation strategies may help to develop assessments that are similar to real-life person-situation processes. In the first empirical example ( N = 238), we demonstrate the suitability of the framework. Standardized State Assessment may offer economically advantageous alternatives for research or applied settings in which ambulatory assessments are unfeasible. Moreover, we discuss how this framework may help to answer theoretical questions on person-situation processes.

show abstract

An Integrative Framework for Capturing Emotion and Emotion Regulation in Daily Life

Lee,

Ni,

Fang

et al. 2024

Affec Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Modeling the mind: Assessment of if … then … profiles as a window to shared psychological processes and individual differences

Cited by 4 publications

References 95 publications

Individual differences in contingencies between situation characteristics and personality states.

Individual differences in contingencies between situation characteristics and personality states.

Standardized State Assessment

An Integrative Framework for Capturing Emotion and Emotion Regulation in Daily Life

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About