2022
DOI: 10.1111/jopy.12717
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Personality coherence as a personality dynamics‐related concept

Abstract: Extant theoretical models of personality coherence/incoherence do not sufficiently address the challenge of explaining personality coherence dynamics and the role of psychological mechanisms, including temperament and attention.To overcome these limitations, the Complex-System Approach to Personality (C-SAP) postulates that personality coherence is a within-person structure that arises from the functional consistency/inconsistency between personality traits/ types, underlain by specific attentional and tempera… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

1
26
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 103 publications
1
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The approach we have taken differs meaningfully from how others have approached the study of personality coherence. Fajkowska (2013, 2015), for instance, conceptualizes personality as a complex hierarchical system with a three-level nesting structure (i.e., behaviors and actions; trait-, type-, and pattern-based structures; and biological-psychological mechanisms/processes), and with organizational (i.e., top-down) and emergent (i.e., bottom-up) processes that serve respectively to regulate and integrate the system. Within this framework, personality coherence (vs. incoherence) is conceptualized in structural and functional terms as a higher-order property of the personality system, reflecting cross-level correspondences (vs. conflicts) between a set of internal mechanisms at one level of the hierarchy and a set of overt responses and behaviors at another.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The approach we have taken differs meaningfully from how others have approached the study of personality coherence. Fajkowska (2013, 2015), for instance, conceptualizes personality as a complex hierarchical system with a three-level nesting structure (i.e., behaviors and actions; trait-, type-, and pattern-based structures; and biological-psychological mechanisms/processes), and with organizational (i.e., top-down) and emergent (i.e., bottom-up) processes that serve respectively to regulate and integrate the system. Within this framework, personality coherence (vs. incoherence) is conceptualized in structural and functional terms as a higher-order property of the personality system, reflecting cross-level correspondences (vs. conflicts) between a set of internal mechanisms at one level of the hierarchy and a set of overt responses and behaviors at another.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Our approach has therefore been to first estimate the coherence of personality at each layer and then ask if the coherence indicators correlate across layers, rather than to estimate the coherence of personality intra-individually from functional cross-level consistencies (cf. Fajkowska, 2013, 2015). We consider cross-layer coherence to be an important direction for future research, as we discuss in greater detail later.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Research on personality coherence has a long history, with early roots in Allport’s (1937) work and a heyday in the 1990s (e.g., Cervone, 1999), lasting until today (Fajkowska, 2013; 2015; Fournier et al, 2015). Allport understood personality coherence or “personality integration” as the lawful organization of psychological attributes within the individual (Allport, 1937)—a conceptualization that different personality perspectives, communities, and theories subsequently adopted, marginally at least (Fournier et al, 2015).…”
Section: Personality Coherencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The studies were conducted within a broader conceptual framework that construes personality as an intra-individual system that develops and function in interaction with the social world (Cervone, 2004; Cervone, 2005). Systems thinking in personality (Cervone, 1997; Cloninger et al., 1997; Kuhl, 1996; Mischel & Shoda, 1995) and in psychology more generally (Eidelson, 1997; Novak, Vallacher, & Lewenstein, 1994) gained prominence decades ago and is firmly established today (Fajkowska, 2013; Mayer, 2015; Rose et al., 2013; Sosnowska et al., 2019). Yet, the methodological challenges posed by systems thinking often are not fully met.…”
Section: Allportian “Functional Equivalence” Classes and The Psycholo...mentioning
confidence: 99%