PERSOC: A unified framework for understanding the dynamic interplay of personality and social relationships

Abstract

The interplay of personality and social relationships is as fascinating as it is complex and it pertains to a wide array of largely separate research domains. Here, we present an integrative and unified framework for analysing the complex dynamics of personality and social relationships (PERSOC). Basic principles and general processes on the individual and dyadic level are outlined to show how personality and social relationships influence each other and develop over time. PERSOC stresses the importance of social behaviours and interpersonal perceptions as mediating processes organized in social interaction units. The framework can be applied to diverse social relationships such as first encounters, short-term acquaintances, friendships, relationships between working group members, educational or therapeutic settings, romantic relationships and family relationships. It has important consequences for how we conceptualize, understand, and investigate personality and social relationships.

Accurate Judgments of Neuroticism at Zero Acquaintance: A Question of Relevance

“…Examining real‐life social contexts relevant for the trait being studied promises to further enhance our understanding of zero‐acquaintance personality judgments, as well as the social impact of personality in general (cf. Back et al., ).…”

Self‐esteem development in the school context: The roles of intrapersonal and interpersonal social predictors

“…However, perceptions of social relationships are known to have a more complex structure. For example, in classrooms, classmates act and react to one another, which may also influence how a person evaluates himself or herself (Back et al, ). Interpersonal approaches such as the social relations model (SRM; Kenny, Kashy, & Cook, ; Kenny, Mohr, & Levesque, ) explicitly distinguish several inter personal components, such as the general tendency to be liked by one's classmates (classroom inclusion), and consider them an important complement to the self‐reported intrapersonal component.…”

“…McAdams () suggested that the self cannot be considered in isolation from the self‐in‐relationships (see Back et al, , for an overview and framework). Accordingly, the social world has been shown to be important for providing individual feedback, and self‐esteem has been suggested as a potential monitor or sociometer of social inclusion.…”

“…Thus, we hypothesized that over and above the usually considered intra personal perceptions (i.e., self‐perceptions of social inclusion), inter personal perceptions (Back & Kenny, ) in the classroom should gain importance for self‐esteem development. Considering the complexity of social relationship perceptions, these interpersonal perceptions might draw attention to different perspectives on self‐esteem and its development that have been overlooked by the previous tendency to consider only self‐perceptions of social inclusion (Back et al, ). In the following subsections, we therefore differentiate the intra‐ and interpersonal components of social relationship perceptions.…”

Personality Traits as Potential Susceptibility Markers: Differential Susceptibility to Support Among Parents

“…We focus on the Big Five personality traits (Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Emotional Stability, and Openness) as susceptibility markers (Caspi & Shiner, ). Together these five traits comprehensively describe individual differences in how people act, think, and feel toward others, thereby shaping social interactions and eventually relationships (Back et al., ). Based on previous research, we expect Conscientiousness, Emotional Stability, and Openness to mark differences in susceptibility.…”