The Interpersonal Circumplex As a Model of Interpersonal Capabilities

Hofsess, Christy D.; Tracey, Terence J. G.

doi:10.1207/s15327752jpa8402_03

Cited by 16 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, despite the intuitive and widespread appeal of the general idea of interpersonal rigidity/flexibility as put forth by many personality theories (e.g., Bem, 1974;Cantor & Kihlstrom, 1987;Leary, 1957), our results support recent arguments that these measures simply do not measure flexibility (Hofsess & Tracey, 2005) or rigidity (Gurtman & Pincus, 2003). The implications are that this particular personality construct may not be amenable to standard self-report measurement formats, necessitating development of alternative strategies, such as having participants respond to a range of scenarios in if-then format as in Study 1 (e.g., "when others dominate, I submit"), thus permitting calculation of variability across situations.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 53%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Predicting unpredictability: Do measures of interpersonal rigidity/flexibility and distress predict intraindividual variability in social perceptions and behavior?

Erickson¹,

Newman²,

Pincus³

2009

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Maladjusted individuals have been theorized to exhibit problematic intraindividual variability of social behavior across situations. This variability is either excessively high (i.e., unpredictable) or low (i.e., rigid), or the behavior is inappropriately matched to the interpersonal context (noncomplementary). However, research has not tested systematically whether interpersonal distress and purported measures of rigidity actually predict these different types of variability across a broad range of social situations. Participants completed measures of interpersonal functioning and then responded to a range of hypothetical interpersonal scenarios, rating perceptions of others and their own expected behavioral responses (Study 1). A subset of participants also rated others' and their own social behaviors across a week of naturalistic social interactions (Study 2). Results most consistently suggested that interpersonal distress predicts high intraindividual variability, with little support for the measurement or theory of rigidity. Moreover, variability of social perceptions partially mediated the link between distress and behavioral variability. Results largely persisted even after accounting for gender and variables' mean levels, and cannot be fully explained by interpersonal complementarity. The implications of these dynamic processes for understanding personality and interpersonal adjustment are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 53%

“…Initial evidence suggested a unique factor structure and links to adjustment (Paulhus & Martin, 1988). However, the BIC may simply possess dominance and affiliation dimensions plus a general factor, with the latter inconsistently related to adjustment (Hofsess & Tracey, 2005).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Predicting unpredictability: Do measures of interpersonal rigidity/flexibility and distress predict intraindividual variability in social perceptions and behavior?

Erickson¹,

Newman²,

Pincus³

2009

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…These adjectives were drawn from a similar pool of interpersonal adjectives as the IAS (Wiggins, 1995). Scores from the BIC are similar in structure to the IAS and conform to the interpersonal circle (Hofsess & Tracey, 2005). One adjective from each of the octant scales was selected: Dominant (PA), Boastful (BC), Cold (DE), Introverted (FG), Submissive (HI), Trusting ( JK), Warm (LM) and Extraverted (NO).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Variations in the Understanding of Interpersonal Behavior: Adherence to the Interpersonal Circle as a Moderator of the Rigidity-Psychological Well-Being Relation

Tracey

Rohlfing

2010

Journal of Personality

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The idiothetic structure of interpersonal trait perceptions was examined as it moderated the interpersonal rigidity-psychological well-being relation. The focus was on the extent to which individuals' perceptions of the similarity of interpersonal behavior fits (i.e., adhered to) the normative interpersonal circle. In two samples of college students, individual differences in adherence to the interpersonal circle moderated the relation of interpersonal rigidity with various indices of psychological well-being. We found that those individuals whose perceptions of interpersonal traits were better represented by the interpersonal circle had negative relations between interpersonal rigidity and satisfaction with life, self-confidence, self-liking, and complementarity and positive relations with interpersonal problems. The results suggest that adherence to the interpersonal circle may be a new means of viewing traitedness and that cognitive interpretation of traits may have an important moderating function.

show abstract

“…Although such noteworthy research helps identify individuals who may be sexual promiscuous and lends some insight into the interpersonal nature of sexual promiscuity, no studies to date have linked sexual promiscuity to what is arguably the most popular model of interpersonal behavior (Hofsess & Tracey, 2005): the Interpersonal Cirucmplex (IPC). The IPC was originally created by researchers at the Kaiser Foundation (Freedman, Leary, Ossorio, & Coffey, 1951;LaForge & Suczek, 1955;Leary, 1957) by systematically observing the interpersonal styles of adults during social interactions.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The interpersonal meaning of sexual promiscuity

Markey

2007

Journal of Research in Personality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order to investigate the interpersonal meaning of sexual promiscuity, the relations between various sexual activities and the Interpersonal Circumplex (IPC) were examined. Two hundred and ten participants (105 women and 105 men; mean age = 24.88 years) indicated the number of people they had engaged in various sexual activates with (e.g., oral manipulation of genitals, sexual intercourse, etc.). These participants' interpersonal styles were also assessed using the primary dimensions of the IPC: dominance and warmth. As predicted, a positive linear relation was found, for men and women, between interpersonal dominance and the number of partners a person had for each type of sexual activity. Additionally, for both men and women, a curvilinear relation was found between interpersonal warmth and the number of partners a person had for each type of sexual activity. Specifically, participants who were either extremely warm or extremely cold tended to have more sexual partners than individuals who were moderately warm. These findings extend past research linking the Five Factor Model traits of extraversion and agreeableness to sexual promiscuity and also help illustrate the dual interpersonal meaning of sexual experience.

show abstract

The Interpersonal Circumplex As a Model of Interpersonal Capabilities

Cited by 16 publications

References 37 publications

Predicting unpredictability: Do measures of interpersonal rigidity/flexibility and distress predict intraindividual variability in social perceptions and behavior?

Predicting unpredictability: Do measures of interpersonal rigidity/flexibility and distress predict intraindividual variability in social perceptions and behavior?

Variations in the Understanding of Interpersonal Behavior: Adherence to the Interpersonal Circle as a Moderator of the Rigidity-Psychological Well-Being Relation

The interpersonal meaning of sexual promiscuity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About