Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T14:46:36.977Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

21 - Cognitive Processes and Models

from Part V - Cognitive and Motivational Perspectives: Dynamic Processes of Personality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2020

By
Gerald Matthews
Edited by
Philip J. Corr  and
Gerald Matthews
Philip J. Corr
Affiliation:
City, University London
Gerald Matthews
Affiliation:
University of Central Florida
Get access

Summary

This chapter provides an introductory review of cognitive-psychological research on personality traits and performance. Traits correlate with objective performance measures in both laboratory and real-world settings, but observed correlations are typically open to multiple explanations. The cognitive psychological perspective is that models of performance can identify information-processing routines that determine performance, such as attention, memory and response selection. In personality research, we can then investigate relationships between traits and individual differences in such component processes that underpin the observed trait-performance correlation. One of the goals of this chapter is to illustrate some of the relationships between traits and information-processing that have been identified from empirical performance studies, and their explanation from cognitive science theory.

Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Personality Psychology , pp. 295 - 315
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ackerman, P. L. (2003). Aptitude complexes and trait complexes. Educational Psychologist, 38, 85–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, J. R. (2009). How can the human mind occur in the physical universe? New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Arce, E., & Santisteban, C. (2006). Impulsivity: A review. Psicothema, 18, 213–220.Google Scholar
Areh, I., & Umek, P. (2007). Predicting quality of memory recall by personality traits. Studia Psychologica, 49, 19–26.Google Scholar
Aue, T., & Okon-Singer, H. (2015). Expectancy biases in fear and anxiety and their link to biases in attention. Clinical Psychology Review, 42, 83–95.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bakker, A. B. (2014). Daily fluctuations in work engagement. European Psychologist, 19, 227–236.Google Scholar
Bar-Haim, Y., Lamy, D., Pergamin, L., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2007). Threat-related attentional bias in anxious and nonanxious individuals: A meta-analytic study. Psychological Bulletin, 133, 1–24.Google Scholar
Barron, L. G., Carretta, T. R., & Bonto-Kane, M. V. A. (2016). Relations of personality traits to military aviator performance: It depends on the criterion. Aviation Psychology and Applied Human Factors, 6, 57–67.Google Scholar
Beauducel, A., Brocke, B., & Leue, A. (2006). Energetical bases of extraversion: Effort, arousal, EEG, and performance. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 62, 212–223.Google Scholar
Beck, A. T. (1967). Depression: Causes and treatment. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Beck, A. T., & Haigh, E. A. (2014). Advances in cognitive theory and therapy: The generic cognitive model. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 10, 1–24.Google Scholar
Berggren, N., Blonievsky, T., & Derakshan, N. (2015). Enhanced visual detection in trait anxiety. Emotion, 15, 477–483.Google Scholar
Berggren, N., & Derakshan, N. (2013). Attentional control deficits in trait anxiety: Why you see them and why you don’t. Biological Psychology, 92, 440–446.Google Scholar
Berggren, N., & Derakshan, N. (2014). Inhibitory deficits in trait anxiety: Increased stimulus-based or response-based interference? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 1339–1345.Google Scholar
Berggren, N., Koster, E. H., & Derakshan, N. (2012). The effect of cognitive load in emotional attention and trait anxiety: An eye movement study. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 24, 79–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beukeboom, C. J., Tanis, M., & Vermeulen, I. E. (2013). The language of extraversion: Extraverted people talk more abstractly, introverts are more concrete. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 32, 191–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, J. P., & Wiernik, B. M. (2015). The modeling and assessment of work performance. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2, 47–74.Google Scholar
Carrigan, N., & Barkus, E. (2016). A systematic review of cognitive failures in daily life: Healthy populations. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 63, 29–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cartwright-Hatton, S., & Wells, A. (1997). Beliefs about worry and intrusions: The Meta-Cognitions Questionnaire and its correlates. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 11, 279–296.Google Scholar
Carver, C. S., & Connor-Smith, J. (2010). Personality and coping. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 679–704.Google Scholar
Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F. (2005). Engagement, disengagement, coping, and catastrophe. In Elliot, A. J. & Dweck, C. S. (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 527–547). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Chapman, A., Devue, C., & Grimshaw, G. M. (2017). Fleeting reliability in the dot-probe task. Psychological Research, 1 -13.Google Scholar
Chen, J., Milne, K., Dayman, J., & Kemps, E. (2019). Interpretation bias and social anxiety: Does interpretation bias mediate the relationship between trait social anxiety and state anxiety responses? Cognition and Emotion, 33, 630–645.Google Scholar
Civai, C., Hawes, D. R., DeYoung, C. G., & Rustichini, A. (2016). Intelligence and extraversion in the neural evaluation of delayed rewards. Journal of Research in Personality, 61, 99–108.Google Scholar
Cisler, J. M., & Koster, E. H. (2010). Mechanisms of attentional biases towards threat in anxiety disorders: An integrative review. Clinical Psychology Review, 30, 203–216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Corcoran, D. J. W. (1972). Studies of individual differences at the Applied Psychology Unit. In Nebylitsin, V. D. & Gray, J. A. (Eds.), Biological bases of individual behavior (pp. 269–290). New York: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corr, P. J., & McNaughton, N. (2008). Reinforcement sensitivity theory and personality. In Corr, P. J. (Ed.), The reinforcement sensitivity theory of personality (pp. 155–187). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coy, B., O’Brien, W. H., Tabaczynski, T., Northern, J., & Carels, R. (2011). Associations between evaluation anxiety, cognitive interference and performance on working memory tasks. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25, 823–832.Google Scholar
Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281–302.Google Scholar
Dale, R., Dietrich, E., & Chemero, A. (2009). Explanatory pluralism in cognitive science. Cognitive Science, 33, 739–742.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Cuyper, K., De Houwer, J., Vansteelandt, K., Perugini, M., Pieters, G., Claes, L., & Hermans, D. (2017). Using indirect measurement tasks to assess the self‐concept of personality: A systematic review and meta‐analyses. European Journal of Personality, 31, 8–41.Google Scholar
De Pascalis, V. (2004). On the psychophysiology of extraversion. In Stelmack, R. (Ed.), On the psychobiology of personality: Essays in honor of Marvin Zuckerman (pp. 295–327). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
Dewaele, J. M. (2013). The link between foreign language classroom anxiety and psychoticism, extraversion, and neuroticism among adult bi‐and multilinguals. Modern Language Journal, 97, 670–684.Google Scholar
Dewaele, J., & Furnham, A. (1999). Extraversion: The unloved variable in applied linguistic research. Language Learning, 49, 509–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dewberry, C., Juanchich, M., & Narendran, S. (2013). Decision-making competence in everyday life: The roles of general cognitive styles, decision-making styles and personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 55, 783–788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dietrich, M., & Abbott, K. V. (2012). Vocal function in introverts and extraverts during a psychological stress reactivity protocol. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 55, 973–987.Google Scholar
Dobbs, S., Furnham, A., & McClelland, A. (2011). The effect of background music and noise on the cognitive test performance of introverts and extraverts. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 25, 307–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doucet, C., & Stelmack, R.M. (2000). An event-related potential analysis of extraversion and individual differences in cognitive processing speed and response execution. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 956–964.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Doughty, N., Paterson, H. M., MacCann, C., & Monds, L. A. (2017). Personality and memory conformity. Journal of Individual Differences, 38, 12–20.Google Scholar
Ettinger, U., Corr, P. J., Mofidi, A., Williams, S. C., & Kumari, V. (2013). Dopaminergic basis of the psychosis-prone personality investigated with functional magnetic resonance imaging of procedural learning. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7 (Article 30), 1–11.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1957). The dynamics of anxiety and hysteria. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1967). The biological basis of personality. Springfield, IL.: Thomas.Google Scholar
Eysenck, M. W. (1981). Learning, memory and personality. In Eysenck, H. J. (Ed.), A model for personality (pp. 169–203). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eysenck, M. W., & Derakshan, N. (2011). New perspectives in attentional control theory. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 955–960.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fan, J., McCandliss, B. D., Sommer, T., Raz, A., & Posner, M. I. (2002). Testing the efficiency and independence of attentional networks. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14, 340–347.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Finomore, V. S., Matthews, G., & Warm, J. S. (2009). Predicting vigilance: A fresh look at an old problem. Ergonomics, 52, 791–808.Google Scholar
Fournier, K. A., Couret, J., Ramsay, J. B., & Caulkins, J. L. (2017). Using collaborative two‐stage examinations to address test anxiety in a large enrollment gateway course. Anatomical Sciences Education, 10, 409–422.Google Scholar
Fuentes-Claramonte, P., Ávila, C., Rodríguez-Pujadas, A., Costumero, V., Ventura-Campos, N., Bustamante, J. C., … Barrós-Loscertales, A. (2016). Inferior frontal cortex activity is modulated by reward sensitivity and performance variability. Biological Psychology, 114, 127–137.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Furnham, A., Boo, H. C., & McClelland, A. (2012). Individual differences and the susceptibility to the influence of anchoring cues. Journal of Individual Differences, 33, 89–93.Google Scholar
Furnham, A., & Strbac, L. (2002). Music is as distracting as noise: The differential distraction of background music and noise on the cognitive test performance of introverts and extraverts. Ergonomics, 45, 203–217.Google Scholar
Gore, W. L., & Widiger, T. A. (2013). The DSM-5 dimensional trait model and five-factor models of general personality. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 122, 816–821.Google Scholar
Grafton, B., & MacLeod, C. (2014). Enhanced probing of attentional bias: The independence of anxiety-linked selectivity in attentional engagement with and disengagement from negative information. Cognition and Emotion, 28, 1287–1302.Google Scholar
Graham, E. K., Rutsohn, J. P., Turiano, N. A., Bendayan, R., Batterham, P. J., Gerstorf, D., … Bastarache, E. D. (2017). Personality predicts mortality risk: An integrative data analysis of 15 international longitudinal studies. Journal of Research in Personality, 70, 174–186.Google Scholar
Gray, J. R., Burgess, G. C., Schaefer, A., Yarkoni, T., Larsen, R. J., & Braver, T. S. (2005). Affective personality differences in neural processing efficiency confirmed using fMRI. Cognitive, Affective and Behavioral Neuroscience, 5, 182–190.Google Scholar
Gurtman, M. B. (2009). Exploring personality with the interpersonal circumplex. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 3, 601–619.Google Scholar
Gustavson, D. E., & Miyake, A. (2016). Trait worry is associated with difficulties in working memory updating. Cognition and Emotion, 30, 1289–1303.Google Scholar
Haran, U., Ritov, I., & Mellers, B. A. (2013). The role of actively open-minded thinking in information acquisition, accuracy, and calibration. Judgment and Decision Making, 8, 188–201.Google Scholar
Hennessy, D. A. (2011). Social, personality, and affective constructs in driving. In Porter, B. E. (Ed.), Handbook of traffic psychology (pp. 149 – 163). London: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Hockey, G. R. J. (1984). Varieties of attentional state: The effects of environment. In Parasuraman, R. & Davies, D. R. (Eds.), Varieties of attention (pp. 449–483). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hooper, C. J., Luciana, M., Wahlstrom, D., Conklin, H. M., & Yarger, R. S. (2008). Personality correlates of Iowa Gambling Task performance in healthy adolescents. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 598–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Humphreys, M. S., & Revelle, W. (1984). Personality, motivation and performance: A theory of the relationship between individual differences and information processing. Psychological Review, 91, 153–184.Google Scholar
Ilkowska, M., & Engle, R. W. (2010). Trait and state differences in working memory capacity. In Gruszka, A., Matthews, G. & Szymura, B. (Eds.), Handbook of individual differences in cognition: Attention, memory, and executive control (pp. 295–320). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Joseph, D. L., Jin, J., Newman, D. A., & O’Boyle, E. H. (2015). Why does self-reported emotional intelligence predict job performance? A meta-analytic investigation of mixed EI. Journal of Applied Psychology, 100, 298–342.Google Scholar
Judge, T. A., & Zapata, C. P. (2015). The person–situation debate revisited: Effect of situation strength and trait activation on the validity of the Big Five personality traits in predicting job performance. Academy of Management Journal, 58, 1149–1179.Google Scholar
Kennis, M., Rademaker, A. R., & Geuze, E. (2013). Neural correlates of personality: An integrative review. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 37, 73–95.Google Scholar
Koch, J., & Exner, C. (2015). Selective attention deficits in obsessive–compulsive disorder: The role of metacognitive processes. Psychiatry Research, 225, 550–555.Google Scholar
Koelega, H. S. (1992). Extraversion and vigilance performance: 30 years of inconsistencies. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 239–258.Google Scholar
Lauriola, M., & Levin, I. P. (2001). Personality traits and risky decision-making in a controlled experimental task: An exploratory study. Personality and Individual Differences, 31, 215–226.Google Scholar
Leleu, V., Douilliez, C., & Rusinek, S. (2014). Difficulty in disengaging attention from threatening facial expressions in anxiety: A new approach in terms of benefits. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 45, 203–207.Google Scholar
Lieberman, M. D. (2000). Introversion and working memory: Central executive differences. Personality and Individual Differences, 28, 479–486.Google Scholar
Lubow, R. E., & Kaplan, O. (2010). Psychopathology and individual differences in latent inhibition: Schizophrenia and schizotypality. In Gruszka, A., Matthews, G. & Szymura, B. (Eds.), Handbook of individual differences in cognition: Attention, memory and executive control (pp. 181–193). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
MacLeod, C., & Clarke, P. J. (2015). The attentional bias modification approach to anxiety intervention. Clinical Psychological Science, 3, 58–78.Google Scholar
Mathews, A., & Mackintosh, B. (1998). A cognitive model of selective processing in anxiety. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 22, 539–560.Google Scholar
Matthews, G. (1992). Extraversion. In Smith, A. P. & Jones, D. M. (Eds.), Handbook of human performance: State and trait (Vol. 3, pp. 95–126). London: Academic.Google Scholar
Matthews, G. (1997). Extraversion, emotion and performance: A cognitive-adaptive model. In Matthews, G. (Ed.), Cognitive science perspectives on personality and emotion (pp. 339–442). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Matthews, G. (1999). Personality and skill: A cognitive-adaptive framework. In Ackerman, P. L., Kyllonen, P. C. & Roberts, R. D. (Eds.), The future of learning and individual differences research: Processes, traits, and content (pp. 251–270). Washington, DC: APA.Google Scholar
Matthews, G. (2000). A cognitive science critique of biological theories of personality traits. History and Philosophy of Psychology, 2, 1–17.Google Scholar
Matthews, G. (2002). Towards a transactional ergonomics for driver stress and fatigue. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 3, 195–211.Google Scholar
Matthews, G. (2004). Neuroticism from the top down: Psychophysiology and negative emotionality. In Stelmack, R. (Ed.), On the psychobiology of personality: Essays in honor of Marvin Zuckerman (pp. 249–266). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science.Google Scholar
Matthews, G. (2008a). Personality and information processing: A cognitive-adaptive theory. In Boyle, G. J., Matthews, G. & Saklofske, D. H. (Eds.), Handbook of personality theory and testing: Personality theories and models (Vol. 1, pp. 56–79). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Matthews, G. (2008b). Reinforcement sensitivity theory: A critique from cognitive science. In Corr, P. J. (Ed.), The reinforcement sensitivity theory of personality (pp. 482–507). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Matthews, G. (2016). Traits, cognitive processes and adaptation: An elegy for Hans Eysenck’s personality theory. Personality and Individual Differences, 103, 61–67.Google Scholar
Matthews, G. (2018). Cognitive‐adaptive trait theory: A shift in perspective on personality. Journal of Personality, 86, 69–82.Google Scholar
Matthews, G., & Amelang, M. (1993). Extraversion, arousal theory and performance: A study of individual differences in the EEG. Personality and Individual Differences, 14, 347–364.Google Scholar
Matthews, G., Davies, D. R., & Lees, J. L. (1990). Arousal, extraversion, and individual differences in resource availability. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 150–168.Google Scholar
Matthews, G., Davies, D. R., Westerman, S. J., & Stammers, R. B. (2000). Human performance: Cognition, stress and individual differences. London: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Matthews, G., Deary, I. J., & Whiteman, M. C. (2009). Personality traits (3rd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Matthews, G., & Gilliland, K. (1999). The personality theories of H. J. Eysenck and J. A. Gray: A comparative review. Personality and Individual Differences, 26, 583–626.Google Scholar
Matthews, G., & Harley, T. A. (1993). Effects of extraversion and self-report arousal on semantic priming: A connectionist approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 735–756.Google Scholar
Matthews, G., & Harley, T. A. (1996). Connectionist models of emotional distress and attentional bias. Cognition and Emotion, 10, 561–600.Google Scholar
Matthews, G., Lin, J., Zeidner, M., & Roberts, R. D. (2017). Emotional intelligence and giftedness. In Pfeiffer, S. (Ed.), APA handbook of giftedness and talent. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Matthews, G., Panganiban, A. R., & Hudlicka, E. (2011). Anxiety and selective attention to threat in tactical decision-making. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 949–954.Google Scholar
Matthews, G., Panganiban, A. R., Wells, A., Wohleber, R. W., & Reinerman-Jones, L. E. (2019). Metacognition, hardiness and grit as resilience factors in Unmanned Aerial Systems (UAS) operations: A simulation study. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 640.Google Scholar
Matthews, G., Pérez-González, J.-C., Fellner, A. N., Funke, G. J., Emo, A. K., Zeidner, M., & Roberts, R. D. (2015). Individual differences in facial emotion processing: Trait emotional intelligence, cognitive ability or transient stress? Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, 33, 68–82.Google Scholar
Matthews, G., & Reinerman-Jones, L. (2017). Workload assessment: How to diagnose workload issues and enhance performance. Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.Google Scholar
Matthews, G., Reinerman-Jones, L. E., Burke, C. S., Teo, G. W., & Scribner, D. R. (2018). Nationalism, personality, and decision-making: Evidence from an SJT for military multi-national teaming scenarios. Personality and Individual Differences, 127, 89–100.Google Scholar
Matthews, G., Warm, J. S., Shaw, T. H., & Finomore, V. S. (2014). Predicting battlefield vigilance: A multivariate approach to assessment of attentional resources. Ergonomics, 57, 856–875.Google Scholar
Matthews, G., Wohleber, R., & Lin, J. (2020). Stress, skilled performance, and expertise: Overload and beyond. In Ward, P., Schraagen, J. M., Gore, J. & Roth, E. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of expertise. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Matthews, G., & Zeidner, M. (2004). Traits, states and the trilogy of mind: An adaptive perspective on intellectual functioning. In Dai, D. & Sternberg, R. J. (Eds.), Motivation, emotion, and cognition: Integrative perspectives on intellectual functioning and development (pp. 143–174). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Matthews, G., & Zeidner, M. (2012). Individual differences in attentional networks: Trait and state correlates of the ANT. Personality and Individual Differences, 53, 574–579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, G., Zeidner, M., & Roberts, R. (2002). Emotional intelligence: Science and myth. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Matthews, G., Zeidner, M., & Roberts, R. D. (2006). Models of personality and affect for education: A review and synthesis. In Winne, P. & Alexander, P. (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (2nd ed., pp. 163–186). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
McIntyre, M. M., & Graziano, W. G. (2016). Seeing people, seeing things: Individual differences in selective attention. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42, 1258–1271.Google Scholar
McKenna, F. P., & Sharma, D. (2004). Reversing the emotional Stroop effect reveals that it is not what it seems: the role of fast and slow components. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 382–392.Google Scholar
McNally, R. J. (2019). Attentional bias for threat: Crisis or opportunity? Clinical Psychology Review, 69, 4–13.Google Scholar
Mehl, M. R., Gosling, S. D., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2006). Personality in its natural habitat: Manifestations and implicit folk theories of personality in daily life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 862–877.Google Scholar
Moore, A. M., McAuley, A. J., Allred, G. A., & Ashcraft, M. H. (2015). In Chinn, S. (Ed.), Mathematics anxiety, working memory, and mathematical performance. The Routledge international handbook of dyscalculia and mathematical learning difficulties (pp. 326–336). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Moran, T. P. (2016). Anxiety and working memory capacity: A meta-analysis and narrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 142, 831–864.Google Scholar
Munoz, E., Sliwinski, M. J., Smyth, J. M., Almeida, D. M., & King, H. A. (2013). Intrusive thoughts mediate the association between neuroticism and cognitive function. Personality and Individual Differences, 55, 898–903.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Naveh‐Benjamin, M., Lavi, H., McKeachie, W. J., & Lin, Y. G. (1997). Individual differences in students’ retention of knowledge and conceptual structures learned in university and high school courses: The case of test anxiety. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 11, 507–526.Google Scholar
Newell, A. (1982). The knowledge level. Artificial Intelligence, 18, 87–127.Google Scholar
Onie, S., & Most, S. B. (2017). Two roads diverged: Distinct mechanisms of attentional bias differentially predict negative affect and persistent negative thought. Emotion, 17, 884–894.Google Scholar
Ormel, J., Jeronimus, B. F., Kotov, R., Riese, H., Bos, E. H., Hankin, B., … Oldehinkel, A. J. (2013). Neuroticism and common mental disorders: Meaning and utility of a complex relationship. Clinical Psychology Review, 33, 686–697.Google Scholar
Phaf, R. H., & Kan, K. (2007). The automaticity of emotional Stroop: A meta-analysis. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 38, 184–199.Google Scholar
Pollet, T. V., Roberts, S. G., & Dunbar, R. I. (2011). Extraverts have larger social network layers: But do not feel emotionally closer to individuals at any layer. Journal of Individual Differences, 32, 161–169.Google Scholar
Poropat, A. E. (2009). A meta-analysis of the Five-Factor Model of personality and academic performance. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 322–338.Google Scholar
Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1999). What’s in your mind? In Lepore, E. & Pylyshyn, Z. W. (Eds.), What is cognitive science? (pp. 1–25). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Rammsayer, T. H., Indermühle, R., & Troche, S. J. (2014). Psychological refractory period in introverts and extraverts. Personality and Individual Differences, 63, 10–15.Google Scholar
Rasmussen, A. S., & Berntsen, D. (2010). Personality traits and autobiographical memory: Openness is positively related to the experience and usage of recollections. Memory, 18, 774–786.Google Scholar
Roberts, R. D., Martin, J., & Olaru, G. (2015). A Rosetta Stone for noncognitive skills: Understanding, assessing, and enhancing noncognitive skills in primary and secondary education. New York: Asia Society and ProExam.Google Scholar
Sackett, P. R., Lievens, F., Van Iddekinge, C. H., & Kuncel, N. R. (2017). Individual differences and their measurement: A review of 100 years of research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 102, 254–273.Google Scholar
Salgado, J. F., & Tauriz, G. (2014). The Five-Factor Model, forced-choice personality inventories and performance: A comprehensive meta-analysis of academic and occupational validity studies. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 23, 3–30.Google Scholar
Sanford, L. C., & Fisk, J. E. (2009). How does the extraversion personality trait influence false recall with the Deese–Roediger–McDermott (DRM) paradigm? Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 972–977.Google Scholar
Sarason, I. G. (1972). Experimental approaches to test anxiety: Attention and the uses of information. In Spielberger, C. D. (Ed.), Anxiety: Current trends in theory and research (Vol. 2, pp. 383–403). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Sarason, I. G., Sarason, B. R., & Pierce, G. R. (1995) Cognitive interference: At the intelligence-personality crossroads. In Saklofske, D. H. & Zeidner, M. (Eds.), International handbook of personality and intelligence (pp. 285–296). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
Schmukle, S. C., & Egloff, B. (2005). A latent state-trait analysis of implicit and explicit personality measures. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 21, 100–107.Google Scholar
Servaas, M. N., van der Velde, J., Costafreda, S. G., Horton, P., Ormel, J., Riese, H., & Aleman, A. (2013). Neuroticism and the brain: A quantitative meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies investigating emotion processing. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 37, 1518–1529.Google Scholar
Spielberger, C. D. (1966) The effects of anxiety on complex learning and academic achievement. In Spielberger, C. D. (Ed.), Anxiety and behavior (pp. 3–20). London: Academic Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spielberger, C. D. (1972). Anxiety as an emotional state. In Spielberger, C. D. (Ed.), Anxiety: Current trends in theory and research (Vol. 1, pp. 23–49). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Staugaard, S. R. (2010). Threatening faces and social anxiety: A literature review. Clinical Psychology Review, 30, 669–690.Google Scholar
Stelmack, R. M., & Rammsayer, T. H. (2008). Psychophysiological and biochemical perspectives on personality. In Boyle, G. J., Matthews, G. & Saklofske, D. H. (Eds.), Handbook of personality theory and testing: Personality theories and models (Vol. 1, pp. 33–55). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Stoeber, J., Chesterman, D., & Tarn, T. A. (2010). Perfectionism and task performance: Time on task mediates the perfectionistic strivings–performance relationship. Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 458–462.Google Scholar
Stoeber, J., Haskew, A. E., & Scott, C. (2015). Perfectionism and exam performance: The mediating effect of task-approach goals. Personality and Individual Differences, 74, 171–176.Google Scholar
Szalma, J. L., & Taylor, G. S. (2011). Individual differences in response to automation: The five factor model of personality. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 17, 71–96.Google Scholar
Szymura, B., & Necka, E. (1998). Visual selective attention and personality: An experimental verification of three models of extraversion. Personality and Individual Differences, 24, 713–729.Google Scholar
Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131.Google Scholar
van Rooijen, R., Ploeger, A., & Kret, M. E. (2017). The dot-probe task to measure emotional attention: A suitable measure in comparative studies? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24, 1686–1717.Google Scholar
Vogel, S., & Schwabe, L. (2016). Stress in the zoo: Tracking the impact of stress on memory formation over time. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 71, 64–72.Google Scholar
Wacker, J., Chavanon, M. L., & Stemmler, G. (2006). Investigating the dopaminergic basis of extraversion in humans: A multilevel approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 171–187.Google Scholar
Wacker, J., & Smillie, L. D. (2015). Trait extraversion and dopamine function. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 9, 225–238.Google Scholar
Wang, X., Pan, Y., Zhang, K., Sui, Y., Lv, T., Xu, S., & Gao, L. (2017). Emotional experience and personality traits influence individual and joint risk-based decision making. Social Behavior and Personality, 45, 881–892.Google Scholar
Waris, O., Soveri, A., Lukasik, K. M., Lehtonen, M., & Laine, M. (2018). Working memory and the Big Five. Personality and Individual Differences, 130, 26–35.Google Scholar
Warm, J. S., Parasuraman, R., & Matthews, G. (2008). Vigilance requires hard mental work and is stressful. Human Factors, 50, 433–441.Google Scholar
Watson, D. (2000) Mood and temperament. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Weinman, J. (1987) Non-cognitive determinants of perceptual problem-solving strategies. Personality and Individual Differences, 8, 53–58.Google Scholar
Wells, A. (2013). Advances in metacognitive therapy. International Journal of Cognitive Therapy, 6, 186–201.Google Scholar
Wells, A., & Matthews, G. (2015) Attention and emotion: A clinical perspective. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
White, L. K., Britton, J. C., Sequeira, S., Ronkin, E. G., Chen, G., Bar-Haim, Y., … Pine, D. S. (2016). Behavioral and neural stability of attention bias to threat in healthy adolescents. Neuroimage, 136, 84–93.Google Scholar
Wright, B. A., Peters, E. R., Ettinger, U., Kuipers, E., & Kumari, V. (2016). Moderators of noise-induced cognitive change in healthy adults. Noise & Health, 18, 117–132.Google Scholar
Zeidner, M. (1998). Test anxiety: The state of the art. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
Zeidner, M., & Matthews, G. (2005). Evaluation anxiety. In Elliot, A. J. & Dweck, C. S. (Eds.), Handbook of competence and motivation (pp. 141–163). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Ziemkiewicz, C., Ottley, A., Crouser, R. J., Yauilla, A. R., Su, S. L., Ribarsky, W., & Chang, R. (2013). How visualization layout relates to locus of control and other personality factors. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 19, 1109–1121.Google Scholar
Zuckerman, M. (2005). Psychobiology of personality (2nd ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×