Places and Traces of Personality

Abstract

Personality psychology and socioecological research are kindred spirits in their investigation of person-environment transactions at different levels of analysis. In the present article, we provide an overview of empirical findings that substantiate the links between personality variation and (social) environment structures at both macro and individual levels of analysis. In doing so, we are particularly concerned about the role of geographical mobility; thus, we explore the conditions that bring it into effect as a moderator or mediator of person-environment associations. We complement our theoretical considerations with an empirical example from our research project PEDES-Personality Development of Sojourners to show that, indeed, personality traits determine individuals' proximal social environments through both direct effects and indirect processes of self-selection in geographical mobility experiences. We conclude with reflections on future study objectives that capitalize on the integration of macro-level and individual-level perspectives in person-environment research.

Editorial: Current and Future Directions of Socio-Ecological Psychology

“…Specifically, Zimmermann and Neyer (2014) examine the transaction between personality and geographical mobility, specifically, the influence of living abroad and personality on interpersonal relationships, as well as the influence of personality on choosing to live abroad. Importantly, Zimmermann and Neyer's work showed that the influence of personality on relationship was mediated by selective migration, such that students' openness to experience and extraversion influenced their likelihood of choosing to study abroad, which in turn influenced changes in their social networks (Zimmermann & Neyer, 2014). Mizokawa and Komiya (2014) explore the role of social environments on the emergence of theory of mind.…”

“…For instance, the articles by Oka (2014) and by Gross and Proffitt (2014) both explored the role of geographical terrains. Murray (2014), Oka (2014), and Gross and Proffitt (2014) all explored physical environments, whereas Mizokawa and Komiya (2014) and Zimmermann and Neyer (2014) both explored interpersonal environments. Importantly, from the socio-ecological perspective, there are many possibilities of cross-fertilization of research across traditional demarcations, such as those featured in this issue-namely, clinical, perception, developmental, personality, and evolutionary psychology.…”

“…Applying Murray's work (2014) to that of Zimmermann and Neyer's (2014), students with more neuroticism might be less likely to choose to study abroad if the destination has higher pathogen prevalence. As another example, geographical regions where theory of mind emerges early in childhood (e.g., North America) might be regions with less pathogens, which increases the likelihood of interactions with others compared to regions with more pathogens (e.g., China), which decreases the likelihood of interactions with others.…”

Co-Development of Personality and Friendships Across the Lifespan

“…For example, the Corresponsive Principle of personality development states that certain personality characteristics select or elicit relationship experiences (i.e., the selection effect), which reinforce these specific characteristics (i.e., the socialization effect; Roberts & Wood, 2006; Roberts, Wood, & Caspi, 2008). Zimmermann and Neyer (2013, 2014) showed that more open students were more likely to go abroad for a semester and gain new friendships, which then predicted further increases in openness. To date, dynamic transactions between personality and friendships have mainly been studied in adolescence and young adulthood, but hardly addressed in middle and late adulthood.…”

“…Personality traits change substantially during young adulthood (Lüdtke et al, 2011; Roberts, Walton, & Viechtbauer, 2006), but the reported socialization effects of both friendships and family relationships are often small or nonsignificant (Asendorpf & Wilpers, 1998; Mund & Neyer, 2014; Neyer & Lehnart, 2007, Table 2). Only one study – which used the comparably shorter interval of 1 year – reported moderate socialization effects for friends when young adults entered new contexts during an academic exchange year in college (Zimmermann & Neyer, 2014). The lack of family socialization effects during this time concurs with our hypotheses (Figure 1b), as parents and other relatives lose their influence as adolescents mature and achieve greater autonomy.…”