The contribution of Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory to personality theory

Revelle, William

doi:10.1017/cbo9780511819384.019

Cited by 30 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 55 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the field of intelligence, the introduction of the bifactor model (Holzinger and Swineford, 1937) clarified the use of hierarchical models and allowed for the estimation of the relative importance of each. When g has large saturations on each test, it is clearly useful to think in terms of g. But when the saturation is low, and when there is good biological evidence for separate, although correlated systems associated with the lower order constructs (e.g., the three brain systems model of reinforcement sensitivity theory (Corr, 2008; Gray and McNaughton, 2000; Revelle, 2008), it will prove more useful to develop theories at the lower order level.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The general factor of personality: A general critique

Revelle¹,

Wilt²

2013

Journal of Research in Personality

Self Cite

252

190

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recently, it has been proposed that all non-cognitive measures of personality share a general factor of personality. A problem with many of these studies is a lack of clarity in defining a general factor. In this paper we address the multiple ways in which a general factor has been identified and argue that many of these approaches find factors that are not in fact general. Through the use of artificial examples, we show that a general factor is not: The first factor or component of a correlation or covariance matrix.The first factor resulting from a bifactor rotation or biquartimin transformationNecessarily the result of a confirmatory factor analysis forcing a bifactor solution We consider how the definition of what constitutes a general factor can lead to confusion, and we will demonstrate alternative ways of estimating the general factor saturation that are more appropriate.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The general factor of personality: A general critique

Revelle¹,

Wilt²

2013

Journal of Research in Personality

Self Cite

252

190

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As personality theorists continue to emphasize the need to assess complex combinations of surface traits associated with biological systems underlying personality (Knyazev & Slobodskaya, 2006;Revelle, 2008), future research might consider possible relationships between configural patterns of surface traits and their neurophysiological bases (such as dopaminergic and serotonergic neurotransmitter systems) along with individual differences in learning, cue receptivity, and motivation implied by these biological systems. By doing so, science might move closer to understanding how configural patterns of indi-vidual differences-and the biological bases that underlie those configurations-influence health outcomes such as injury risk.…”

Section: Theoretical Implicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Configural Approaches to Temperament Assessment: Implications for Predicting Risk of Unintentional Injury in Children

Berry

Schwebel

2009

Journal of Personality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study used two configural approaches to understand how temperament factors (surgency/extraversion, negative affect, and effortful control) might predict child injury risk. In the first approach, clustering procedures were applied to trait dimensions to identify discrete personality prototypes. In the second approach, two- and three-way trait interactions were considered dimensionally in regression models predicting injury outcomes. Injury risk was assessed through four measures: lifetime prevalence of injuries requiring professional medical attention, scores on the Injury Behavior Checklist, and frequency and severity of injuries reported in a 2-week injury diary. In the prototype analysis, three temperament clusters were obtained, which resembled resilient, overcontrolled, and undercontrolled types found in previous research. Undercontrolled children had greater risk of injury than children in the other groups. In the dimensional interaction analyses, an interaction between surgency/extraversion and negative affect tended to predict injury, especially when children lacked capacity for effortful control.

show abstract

“…The most recent theoretical framework with personal explanation also relies on such a psycho-social model. Impact measurement includes the dimensions of positive and negative effects [12,13]. Given these findings regarding the role of personality in health based on the classification of Sasang, the SPQ (Sasang Personality Questionnaire) was used as a new objective tool to measure the relationship between physical fitness and eating attitudes [2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%