Trait personality and state variability: Predicting individual differences in within- and cross-context fluctuations in affect, self-evaluations, and behavior in everyday life

Geukes, Katharina; Nestler, Steffen; Hutteman, Roos; Küfner, Albrecht C. P.; Back, Mitja D.

doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2016.06.003

Cited by 194 publications

(203 citation statements)

References 100 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

175

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Table 7. Direct actor and partner effects for socialization effects between relationship satisfaction, variability of relationship components (perceived responsiveness, positive expectations, and self-disclosure), and change in interpersonal vulnerabilities (neuroticism, low selfesteem, anxious attachment, and avoidant attachment) Geukes, Nestler, Hutteman, Küfner, & Back, 2017;Lee & Gillath, 2016;Neff & Karney, 2009;Wei et al, 2005). Our findings, however, align with previous research indicating that variability itself may have little unique power to predict outcomes beyond the impact of average levels (Gerstorf et al, 2009).…”

Section: Mediationsupporting

confidence: 79%

“…Regarding variability, people high in neuroticism tend to show more variability of mood and affect (Eid & Diener, 1999;Geukes, Nestler, Hutteman, Küfner, & Back, 2017;Hepburn & Eysenck, 1989;Kuppens et al, 2007;G. Murray, Allen, & Trinder, 2002;Williams, 1981) and to experience variability of interpersonal behaviour, including sociability, self-disclosure, and friendliness .…”

Section: Neuroticismmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Daily Responsiveness, Expectations, and Self-Disclosure: How the Average Levels and Within-Person Variability of Three Relationship Components Mediate Personality–Relationship Transactions in Romantic Couples

Buehler¹,

Weidmann²,

Wünsche³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The associations between couple members' personality and their relationship satisfaction can be conceptualized as reciprocal transactions. To better understand these transactions, we focused on both partners ' interpersonal vulnerabilities (i.e. neuroticism, low self-esteem, and insecure attachment); daily emotional, cognitive, and behavioural relationship components (i.e. perceived responsiveness, positive expectations, and self-disclosure); and relationship satisfaction. Specifically, we examined whether the average levels and within-person variability of the relationship components mediated the transactions between interpersonal vulnerabilities and relationship satisfaction. Data came from 689 female-male couples aged 18 to 81 years who participated in three measurement occasions across 12 months, including a 14-day diary phase. We used mediated dyadic bivariate latent change score models to test the level-change and change-change transactions and mediations. The findings partly supported our hypotheses: Couple members with interpersonal vulnerabilities had lower average levels (but not higher within-person variability) of the relationship components, and less satisfied couple members had lower average levels and higher within-person variability of these components. The lower average levels but not the variability mediated between a lower level of relationship satisfaction and an increase in avoidant attachment. No other mediations were observed. We discuss the importance of studying daily relationship components for better understanding reciprocal transactions in couples. © 2020 European Association of Personality Psychology

show abstract

Section: Mediationsupporting

confidence: 79%

Section: Neuroticismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Daily Responsiveness, Expectations, and Self-Disclosure: How the Average Levels and Within-Person Variability of Three Relationship Components Mediate Personality–Relationship Transactions in Romantic Couples

Buehler¹,

Weidmann²,

Wünsche³

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(2) Personality traits are associated with average levels of experienced situation characteristics (path a2). Research on person-situation transactions indicates that personality predisposes people to select or create certain situations or to perceive these situations differently (e.g., Geukes, Nestler, Hutteman, Küfner, & Back, 2017;Rauthmann et al, 2015;Rauthmann, 2017;Sherman, Nave, & Funder, 2013;Wrzus, Wagner, & Riediger, 2016). However, it is important to mention here that our model does not differentiate between different types of these person-situation transactions but simply refers to the situation as it is experienced by the subject.…”

Section: The Extended Dynamic Mediation Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Inside the happy personality: Personality states, situation experience, and state affect mediate the relation between personality and affect

Kritzler

Krasko

Luhmann

2020

Journal of Research in Personality

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Personality traits are strongly related to affect, but the mechanisms accounting for this association remain mostly unclear. We test a new theoretical model that proposes that personality states, situation characteristics, and affective states mediate the relation between personality traits and trait affect. Data from an experience sampling study (N=206; 4,381 observations) indicate that personality traits are associated with personality states and experienced situation characteristics, personality states and experienced situation characteristics are associated with state affect, state affect is associated with trait affect, and that these variables indeed mediate the relation between personality traits and trait affect. These results emphasize the importance of daily experiences for trait-level variables and call for further research on the interplay between personality, behavior, situations, and affect.

show abstract

“…Which personal and relational factors influence these differences, and what kinds of intra-and interpersonal consequences do they have?). With regard to the relation between social interaction states within individuals, longitudinal state data, such as those obtained in PILS and CONNECT, can, for example, be applied to investigate in detail interindividual differences in intraindividual behavioral, affective, and perceptual variability versus consistency (see, e.g., [175][176][177]) as well as individual differences in the amount of authenticity (i.e., consistency between self-perceptions and behavioral expressions). With regard to the relation between social interaction states across social partners, both studies exemplify the opportunity of fine-grained investigations of individual differences in self-other agreement in trait-and behavioral perceptions, the meta-accuracy of interpersonal perceptions, as well as the reciprocity of behaviors, affect, and interpersonal perceptions.…”

Section: Opening the Process Black Box: Targeted Research Domains Andmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In We provide open material with detailed descriptions of PILS and CONNECT in the Open Science Framework (PILS: osf.io/q5zwp [85]; CONNECT: osf.io/2pmcr [86]). By providing open code in our publications on PILS and CONNECT data, we have already made (i.e., [78,[158][159][160][161]163,[168][169][170][171][172][173][174][175][176]179,180,182]) and will continue to make public all analytical codes needed to comprehend and reproduce the results presented in our articles (e.g., R codes, Mplus codes; see osf.io/5tw8b/ for this paper). Herewith, we also provide open data for the all descriptive and exemplary analyses (also see osf.io/zj38h/) to actually offer other researchers the opportunity to reproduce the published results with the provided analytical code.…”

Section: Open Research Policy: An Invitation To Collaboratementioning

confidence: 99%

Explaining the Longitudinal Interplay of Personality and Social Relationships in the Laboratory and in the Field: The PILS and the CONNECT Study

Geukes¹,

Breil²,

Hutteman³

et al. 2018

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Here, we provide you with the preprint and with supplemental material (R-Codes) to the manuscript "Explaining the Longitudinal Interplay of Personality and Social Relationships in the Laboratory and in the Field: The PILS and the CONNECT Study" by Geukes, Breil, Küfner, Hutteman, Nestler, & Back (under Review). If you like to get in contact with us, please write an email to katharina.geukes@wwu.deAbstract:Our personalities (who we are) influence our social relationships (how we relate to the people around us), and our social relationships influence our personalities. However, little is known about the specific processes underlying the complex interplay of personality and social relationships. According to the PERSOC framework, the identification of underlying social interaction processes promotes the understanding of how personality and social relationships (a) are expressed, (b) develop, and (c) influence each other over time. The aim of the present paper is twofold: First, we outline four methodological challenges that arise when we empirically realize a process approach to the personality-relationship interplay. Second, we describe two empirical studies, that is, a laboratory-based process approach (Personality Interaction Laboratory Study; PILS) and a field-based process approach (CONNECT), both designed to meet these challenges. We provide detailed information about the samples (two student samples; PILS: N = 311; CONNECT: N = 131), procedures (longitudinal and multimethodological), and measures (personality and social relationships, appearance and behavior, interpersonal perceptions). For all these measures, we present descriptive information, reliabilities, and intercorrelations. In addition, we illustrate how these unique data sets can be applied to provide detailed process insights to answer topical research questions at the levels of the individual, dyad, and social network. We summarize how these studies meet the introduced methodological challenges, discuss the advantages and limitations of laboratory- and field-based process approaches, and call for their combination. We close by outlining an open research policy, aimed at collaborative and accelerated efforts to further open the process black box and ultimately leading to a better understanding of the expression, development, and complex interplay of personality and social relationships.

show abstract

Trait personality and state variability: Predicting individual differences in within- and cross-context fluctuations in affect, self-evaluations, and behavior in everyday life

Cited by 194 publications

References 100 publications

Daily Responsiveness, Expectations, and Self-Disclosure: How the Average Levels and Within-Person Variability of Three Relationship Components Mediate Personality–Relationship Transactions in Romantic Couples

Daily Responsiveness, Expectations, and Self-Disclosure: How the Average Levels and Within-Person Variability of Three Relationship Components Mediate Personality–Relationship Transactions in Romantic Couples

Inside the happy personality: Personality states, situation experience, and state affect mediate the relation between personality and affect

Explaining the Longitudinal Interplay of Personality and Social Relationships in the Laboratory and in the Field: The PILS and the CONNECT Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About