Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Personality Psychology
- Cambridge Handbooks in Psychology
- The Cambridge Handbook of Personality Psychology
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- General Introduction
- Part I Foundational Issues: History and Approaches to Personality
- Part II Description and Measurement: How Personality Is Studied
- Part III Development, Health and Change: Life Span and Health Outcomes
- Part IV Biological Perspectives: Evolution, Genetics and Neuroscience of Personality
- Part V Cognitive and Motivational Perspectives: Dynamic Processes of Personality
- Part VI Social and Cultural Processes: Personality at the Intersection of Society
- Part VII Applications of Personality Psychology: Personality Traits and Processes in Action
- Addendum: Statistical Analyses and Computer Programming in Personality
- Index
- References
Part I - Foundational Issues: History and Approaches to Personality
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 September 2020
Book contents
- The Cambridge Handbook of Personality Psychology
- Cambridge Handbooks in Psychology
- The Cambridge Handbook of Personality Psychology
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Preface
- General Introduction
- Part I Foundational Issues: History and Approaches to Personality
- Part II Description and Measurement: How Personality Is Studied
- Part III Development, Health and Change: Life Span and Health Outcomes
- Part IV Biological Perspectives: Evolution, Genetics and Neuroscience of Personality
- Part V Cognitive and Motivational Perspectives: Dynamic Processes of Personality
- Part VI Social and Cultural Processes: Personality at the Intersection of Society
- Part VII Applications of Personality Psychology: Personality Traits and Processes in Action
- Addendum: Statistical Analyses and Computer Programming in Personality
- Index
- References
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The Cambridge Handbook of Personality Psychology , pp. 11 - 100Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2020
References
References
Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford, R. N. (1950). The authoritarian personality. Oxford, UK: Harpers.Google Scholar
Ainsworth, M. D. S., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wall, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Allport, G. W. (1958). What units shall we employ? In Lindzey, G. (Ed.), Assessment of human motives (pp. 239–260). New York: Rinehart.Google Scholar
Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2005a). A defence of the lexical approach to the study of personality structure. European Journal of Personality, 19, 5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2005b). The lexical approach to the study of personality structure: Toward the identification of cross-culturally replicable dimensions of personality variation. Journal of Personality Disorders, 19, 303–308.Google Scholar
Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., de Vries, R. E., Perugini, M., Gnisci, A., & Sergi, I. (2006). The HEXACO model of personality structure and indigenous lexical personality dimensions in Italian, Dutch, and English. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 851–875.Google Scholar
Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., Marcus, B., & De Vries, R. E. (2007). German lexical personality factors: Relations with the HEXACO model. European Journal of Personality, 21, 23–43.Google Scholar
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Barenbaum, N. B., & Winter, D. G. (2003). Personality. In Freedheim, D. K. (Ed.), Handbook of psychology: History of psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 177–203). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergh, R., Akrami, N., & Ekehammar, B. (2012). The personality underpinnings of explicit and implicit generalized prejudice. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3, 614–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bidney, D. (1949). Towards a psychocultural definition of the concept of personality. In Sargent, S. S. & Smith, M. W. (Eds.), Culture and personality (pp. 31–55). New York: Viking Fund.Google Scholar
Block, J., & Block, J. H. (2006). Venturing a 30-year longitudinal study. American Psychologist, 61, 315–327.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bohart, A. C. (2006). The client as active self-healer. In Stricker, G. & Gold, J. (Eds.), A casebook of psychotherapy integration (pp. 214–251). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Boring, E. G. (1953). A history of introspection. Psychological Bulletin, 50, 169–189.Google Scholar
Bornstein, R. F., & Becker-Matero, N. (2011). Reconnecting psychoanalysis to mainstream psychology: Metaphor as glue. Psychoanalytic Inquiry, 31, 172–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bornstein, R. F., Denckla, C. A., & Chung, W. J. (2013). Psychodynamic models of personality. In Tennen, H., Suls, J., & Weiner, I. B. (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Personality and social psychology (Vol. 5, 2nd ed., pp. 43–64). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Botterill, G., & Carruthers, P. (1999). The philosophy of psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1999). Human nature and individual differences: The evolution of personality. In Pervin, L. A. & John, O. P. (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 31–56). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Caprara, G., & Vecchione, M. (2009). Personality and politics. In Corr, P. J. & Matthews, G. (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of personality psychology (1st ed., pp. 589–607). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carlo, G., Knight, G. P., Roesch, S. C., Opal, D., & Davis, A. (2014). Personality across cultures: A critical analysis of Big Five research and current directions. In Leong, F. T. L., Comas-Díaz, L., Nagayama Hall, G. C., McLoyd, V. C. & Trimble, J. E. (Eds.), APA handbook of multicultural psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 285–298). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Carlson, R. (1971). Where is the person in personality research? Psychological Bulletin, 75, 203–219.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. (1956). The methodological character of theoretical concepts. In Feigel, H. & Sciven, M. (Eds.), Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science (Vol. 1). The foundations of science and the concepts of psychology and psychoanalysis (pp. 38–76). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Caspi, A., Roberts, B. W., & Shiner, R. L. (2005). Personality development: Stability and change. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 453–484.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1979). Personality and learning theory. The structure of personality in its environment (Vol. 1). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Churchill, S. D., & Mruk, C. J. (2014). Practicing what we preach in humanistic and positive psychology. American Psychologist, 69, 90–92.Google Scholar
Churchill, S. D., & Wertz, F. J. (2015). An introduction to phenomenological research in psychology: Historical, conceptual, and methodological foundations. In Schneider, K. J., Pierson, J. F. & Bugental, J. F. T. (Eds.), The handbook of humanistic psychology: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed., pp. 275–295). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Churchland, P. M. (2010). Toward a cognitive neurobiology of the moral virtues. In Giordano, J. J. & Gordijn, B. (Eds.), Scientific and philosophical perspectives in neuroethics (pp. 146–171). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Churchland, P. M. (2011). Braintrust: What neuroscience tells us about morality. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Churchland, P. M. (2014). The neurobiological platform for moral values. Behaviour, 151, 283–296.Google Scholar
Conway, J. B. (1992). A world of differences among psychologists. Canadian Psychology, 33, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coon, D. J. (2000). Salvaging the self in a world without soul: William James’s The principles of psychology. History of Psycholog,y 3, 83–103.Google Scholar
Corr, P. J. (2010). Automatic and controlled processes in behavioural control: Implications for personality psychology. European Journal of Personality, 24, 376–403.Google Scholar
Corr, P. J., & Cooper, A. J. (2016). The Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory of Personality Questionnaire (RST-PQ): Development and validation. Psychological Assessment, 28, 1427–1440.Google Scholar
Corr, P. J., & Perkins, A. M. (2006). The role of theory in the psychophysiology of personality: From Ivan Pavlov to Jeffrey Gray. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 62, 367–376.Google Scholar
Costall, A. (2006). “‘Introspectionism” and the mythical origins of scientific psychology. Consciousness and Cognition: An International Journal, 15, 634–654.Google Scholar
Cronbach, L. J. (1957). The two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 12, 671–684.Google Scholar
Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52, 281–302.Google Scholar
Davidson, R. J. (2001). Toward a biology of positive affect and compassion. In Davidson, R. J. & Harrington, A. (Eds.), Visions of compassion: Western scientists and Tibetan Buddhists examine human nature (pp. 107–130). Cary, NC: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Davis, K. L., & Panksepp, J. (2018). The emotional foundations of personality: A neurobiological and evolutionary approach. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
de Waal, F. B. M., Churchland, P. S., Pievani, T., & Parmigiani, S. (2014). Evolved morality: The biology and philosophy of human conscience. Leiden, Netherlands: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
Dollard, J. (1949). Criteria for the life history: With analyses of six notable documents. New York: Peter Smith.Google Scholar
Donnellan, M. B., Lucas, R. E., & Fleeson, W. (2009). Introduction to personality and assessment at age 40: Reflections on the legacy of the person-situation debate and the future of person-situation integration. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 117–119.Google Scholar
Driver-Linn, E. (2003). Where is psychology going? Structural fault lines revealed by psychologists’ use of Kuhn. American Psychologist, 58, 269–278.Google Scholar
Dumont, F. (2010). A history of personality psychology: Theory, science, and research from Hellenism to the twenty-first century. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, S. (1980). The self-concept: A review and the proposal of an integrated theory of personality. In Staub, E. (Ed.), Personality: Basic issues and current research (pp. 82–131). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Epstein, S. (2007). Problems with McAdams and Pals’s (2006) proposal of a framework for an integrative theory of personality. American Psychologist, 62, 59–60.Google Scholar
Erikson, E. H. (1959). Identity and the life cycle. Selected papers. Psychological Issues, 1 (Monograph 1). New York: International Universities Press.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1994). Normality–abnormality and the three-factor model of personality. In Strack, S. & Lorr, M. (Eds.), Differentiating normal and abnormal personality (pp. 3–25). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1997). Personality and experimental psychology: The unification of psychology and the possibility of a paradigm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1224–1237.Google Scholar
Feist, G. J. (2006). How development and personality influence scientific thought, interest, and achievement. Review of General Psychology, 10, 163–182.Google Scholar
Fleeson, W. (2004). Moving personality beyond the person-situation debate: The challenge and the opportunity of within-person variability. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13, 83–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Freeman, H. D., & Gosling, S. D. (2010). Personality in nonhuman primates: A review and evaluation of past research. American Journal of Primatology, 72, 653–671.Google Scholar
Freud, S. (1953). The interpretation of dreams. In Strachey, J. (Ed. & Trans.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vols. 4, 5). London: Hogarth Press. (Original work published 1900.)Google Scholar
Friedman, H. S., & Kern, M. L. (2014). Personality, well-being, and health. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 719–742.Google Scholar
Funder, D. C. (2009). Persons, behaviors and situations: An agenda for personality psychology in the postwar era. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 120–126.Google Scholar
Gable, S. L., & Haidt, J. (2005). What (and why) is positive psychology? Review of General Psychology, 9, 103–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gergen, K. J. (1985). The social constructionist movement in modern psychology. American Psychologist, 40, 266–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gergen, K. J. (2002). Beyond the empiricist/constructionist divide in social psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6, 188–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gergen, K. J. (2009). The problem of prejudice in plural worlds. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 29, 97–101.Google Scholar
Gifford, R. (2004). Review of the book Inventing personality: Gordon Allport and the science of selfhood. Canadian Psychology, 45, 187–188.Google Scholar
Gilbert, A. R. (1973). Bringing the history of personality theories up to date: German theories of personality stratification. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 9, 102–114.3.0.CO;2-2>CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Giordano, P. J. (2014). Personality as continuous stochastic process: What Western personality theory can learn from classical Confucianism. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 48, 111–128.Google Scholar
Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. New York: Aldine.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American Psychologist, 48, 26–34.Google Scholar
Gooding, D. C. (2000). Experimentation. In Newton-Smith, W. (Ed.), A companion to the philosophy of science (pp. 117–126). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Gray, J. A. (1970). The psychophysiological basis of introversion-extraversion. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 8, 249–266.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J., Koole, S. L., & Pyszczynski, T. A. (2004). Handbook of experimental existential psychology. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. R., & Mitchell, S. A. (1983). Object relations in psychoanalytic theory. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J., Pyszczynski, T., & Solomon, S. (1986). The causes and consequences of a need for self-esteem: A terror management theory. In Baumeister, R. F. (Ed.), Public self and private self (pp. 189–212). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Hampson, S. E. (2012). Personality processes: Mechanisms by which personality traits “get outside the skin.” Annual Review of Psychology, 63, 315–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hampson, S. E., & Goldberg, L. R. (2006). A first large cohort study of personality trait stability over the 40 years between elementary school and midlife. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 763–779.Google Scholar
Hassin, R. R., Uleman, J. S., & Bargh, J. A. (2005). The new unconscious. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Heine, S. J., & Buchtel, E. E. (2009). Personality: The universal and the culturally specific. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 369–394.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hogan, R., & Chamorro-Premuzic, T. (2011). Personality and the laws of history. In Chamorro-Premuzic, T., von Stumm, S. & Furnham, A. (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of individual differences (pp. 491–511). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hough, L. M., Oswald, F. L., & Ock, J. (2015). Beyond the Big Five: New directions for personality research and practice in organizations. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 2, 183–209.Google Scholar
Howard, G. S. (1991). Culture tales: A narrative approach to thinking, cross-cultural psychology, and psychotherapy. American Psychologist, 46, 187–197.Google Scholar
Ivonin, L., Chang, H. M., Díaz, M., Català, A., Chen, W., & Rauterberg, M. (2015). Beyond cognition and affect: Sensing the unconscious. Behaviour and Information Technology, 34, 220–238.Google Scholar
James, W. (1907). Pragmatism: A new name for some old ways of thinking. New York: Longmans, Green, and Company.Google Scholar
John, O. P., Angleitner, A., & Ostendorf, F. (1988). The lexical approach to personality: A historical review of trait taxonomic research. European Journal of Personality, 2, 171–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kagan, J. (1994). Galen’s prophecy: Temperament in human nature. New York: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Kandel, E. R. (2006). In search of memory: The emergence of a new science of mind. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Kelly, G. A. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs (Vols. 1–2). New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Kimble, G. A. (1984). Psychology’s two cultures. American Psychologist, 39, 833–839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Klee, R. (1997). Introduction to the philosophy of science: Cutting nature at its seams. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Koltko-Rivera, M. E. (2004). The psychology of worldviews. Review of General Psychology, 8, 3–58.Google Scholar
Køppe, S. (2012). A moderate eclecticism: Ontological and epistemological issues. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 46, 1–19.Google Scholar
Kubzansky, L. D., Martin, L. T., & Buka, S. L. (2004). Early manifestations of personality and adult emotional functioning. Emotion, 4, 364–377.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lamiell, J. T. (1981). Toward an idiothetic psychology of personality. American Psychologist, 36, 276–289.Google Scholar
Lamiell, J. T. (1997). Individuals and the differences between them. In Hogan, R., Johnson, J. & Briggs, S. (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 117–141). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Langer, W. (1972). The mind of Adolph Hitler: The secret wartime report. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Lavazza, A. (2015). Free will and empathy: Two revealing topics in neuroethics. Rivista Internazionale di Filosofia e Psicologia, 6, 1–3.Google Scholar
Lavazza, A., & De Caro, M. (2010). Not so fast. On some bold neuroscientific claims concerning human agency. Neuroethics, 3, 23–41.Google Scholar
Leahey, T. H. (2002). The mythical revolutions of American psychology. In Pickren, W. E. & Dewsbury, D. A. (Eds.), Evolving perspectives on the history of psychology (pp. 191–216). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Lee, S. J., & Oyserman, D. (2009). Expecting to work, fearing homelessness: The possible selves of low-income mothers. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 39, 1334–1355.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
LeVine, R. A. (2001). Culture and personality studies, 1918–1960: Myth and history. Journal of Personality, 69, 803–818.Google Scholar
Lieberman, M. D. (2014). Why symbolic processing of affect can disrupt negative affect: Social cognitive and affective neuroscience investigation. In Todorov, A., Fiske, S. T. & Prentice, D. A. (Eds.), Social neuroscience: Toward understanding the underpinnings of the social mind (pp. 188–209). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Loehlin, J. C., & Nichols, R. C. (1976). Heredity, environment, and personality: A study of 850 sets of twins. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Loevinger, J. (1996). In defense of the individuality of personality theories. Psychological Inquiry, 7, 344–346.Google Scholar
Loevinger, J., & Knoll, E. (1983). Personality: Stages, traits, and the self. Annual Review of Psychology, 34, 195–222.Google Scholar
Loftus, G. R. (1996). Psychology will be a much better science when we change the way we analyze data. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 5, 161–171.Google Scholar
Lombardo, G. P., & Foschi, R. (2002). The European origins of “personality psychology.” European Psychologist, 7, 134–145.Google Scholar
Lombardo, G. P., & Foschi, R. (2003). The concept of personality in 19th-century French and 20th-century American psychology. History of Psychology, 6, 123–142.Google Scholar
MacCorquodale, K., & Meehl, P. E. (1948). On a distinction between hypothetical constructs and intervening variables. Psychological Review, 55, 95–107.Google Scholar
Maher, B. A., & Gottesman, I. I. (2005). Deconstructing, reconstructing, preserving Paul E. Meehl’s legacy of construct validity. Psychological Assessment, 17, 415–422.Google Scholar
Markon, K. E., Krueger, R. F., & Watson, D. (2005). Delineating the structure of normal and abnormal personality: An integrative hierarchical approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 139–157.Google Scholar
Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maslow, A. H. (1976). The farther reaches of human nature (2nd ed.). New York: Viking.Google Scholar
Matthews, G., & Deary, I. J. (1998). Personality traits. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McAdams, D. P. (1996). Personality, modernity, and the storied self: A contemporary framework for studying persons. Psychological Inquiry, 7, 295–321.Google Scholar
McAdams, D. P., & Pals, J. L. (2006). A new Big Five: Fundamental principles for an integrative science of personality. American Psychologist, 61, 204–217.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McClelland, D. C., Koestner, R., & Weinberger, J. (1989). How do self-attributed and implicit motives differ? Psychological Review, 96, 690–702.Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R. (1991). The Five-Factor Model and its assessment in clinical settings. Journal of Personality Assessment, 57, 399–414.Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R., Gaines, J. F., & Wellington, M. A. (2013). The Five-Factor Model in fact and fiction. In Tennen, H., Suls, J. & Weiner, I. B. (Eds.), Handbook of psychology: Personality and social psychology (Vol. 5, 2nd ed., pp. 65–91). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
McKay, R., Langdon, R., & Coltheart, M. (2005). “Sleights of mind”: Delusions, defences, and self-deception. Cognitive Neuropsychiatry, 10, 305–326.Google Scholar
Mischel, W. (2009). From personality and assessment (1968) to personality science, 2009. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 282–290.Google Scholar
Mischel, W., & Shoda, Y. (1994). Personality psychology has two goals: Must it be two fields? Psychological Inquiry, 5, 156–158.Google Scholar
Mischel, W., & Shoda, Y. (1995). A cognitive-affective system theory of personality: Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics, and invariance in personality structure. Psychological Review, 102, 246–268.Google Scholar
Molenaar, P. C. M. (2004). A manifesto on psychology as idiographic science: Bringing the person back into scientific psychology, this time forever. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 2, 201–218.Google Scholar
Molenaar, P. C. M., & Campbell, C. G. (2009). The new person-specific paradigm in psychology. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 112–117.Google Scholar
Monte, C. (1977). Beneath the mask: An introduction to theories of personality. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
Murray, H. A. (1938). Explorations in personality: A clinical and experimental study of fifty men of college age. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Norenzayan, A., & Heine, S. J. (2005). Psychological universals: What are they and how can we know? Psychological Bulletin, 131, 763–784.Google Scholar
Northoff, G., Bermpohl, F., Schoeneich, F., & Boeker, H. (2007). How does our brain constitute defense mechanisms? First-person neuroscience and psychoanalysis. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 76, 141–153.Google Scholar
O’Connor, B. P. (2002). The search for dimensional structure differences between normality and abnormality: A statistical review of published data on personality and psychopathology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 962–982.Google Scholar
Oyserman, D. (2017). Culture three ways: Culture and subcultures within countries. Annual Review of Psychology, 68, 435–463.Google Scholar
Oyserman, D., Bybee, D., & Terry, K. (2006). Possible selves and academic outcomes: How and when possible selves impel action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 188–204.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Panksepp, J. (2007). Affective neuroscience and the ancestral sources of human feelings. In Cohen, H. & Stemmer, B. (Eds.), Consciousness and cognition: Fragments of mind and brain (pp. 173–188). San Diego, CA: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Peterson, D. R. (2006). Paul E. Meehl’s contributions to personality assessment. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 115, 201–204.Google Scholar
Pettigrew, T. F., & Cherry, F. (2012). The intertwined histories of personality and social psychology. In Deaux, K. & Snyder, M. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of personality and social psychology (pp. 13–32). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Phelps, B. J. (2015). Behavioral perspectives on personality and self. The Psychological Record, 65, 557–565.Google Scholar
Piekkola, B. (2011). Traits across cultures: A neo-Allportian perspective. Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 31, 2–24.Google Scholar
Ponterotto, J. G. (2005). Qualitative research in counseling psychology: A primer on research paradigms and philosophy of science. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 52, 126–136.Google Scholar
Popper, K. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. New York: Basic Books. (Original work published 1934.)Google Scholar
Poropat, A. E., & Corr, P. J. (2015). Thinking bigger: The Cronbachian paradigm and personality theory integration. Journal of Research in Personality, 56, 59–69.Google Scholar
Proctor, R. W., & Capaldi, E. J. (2001a). Empirical evaluation and justification of methodologies in psychological science. Psychological Bulletin, 127, 759–772.Google Scholar
Proctor, R. W., & Capaldi, E. J. (2001b). Improving the science education of psychology students: Better teaching of methodology. Teaching of Psychology, 28, 173–181.Google Scholar
Pyszczynski, T., Greenberg, J., Solomon, S., Arndt, J., & Schimel, J. (2004). Why do people need self-esteem? A theoretical and empirical review. Psychological Bulletin, 130, 435–468.Google Scholar
Rennie, D. L. (2002). Experiencing psychotherapy: Grounded theory studies. In Cain, D. J. (Ed.), Humanistic psychotherapies: Handbook of research and practice (pp. 117–144). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Rennie, D. L., & Nissim, R. (2015). The grounded theory method and humanistic psychology. In Schneider, K. J., Pierson, J. F. & Bugental, J. F. T. (Eds.), The handbook of humanistic psychology: Theory, research, and practice (2nd ed., pp. 297–307). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Richardson, F. C., & Guignon, C. B. (2008). Positive psychology and philosophy of social science. Theory and Psychology, 18, 605–627.Google Scholar
Rogers, C. R. (1955). Persons or science: A philosophical question. American Psychologist, 10, 267–278.Google Scholar
Rogers, C. R. (1961). On becoming a person: A therapist’s view of psychotherapy. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar
Rorer, L. G. (1991). Some myths of science in psychology. In Cicchetti, D. & Grove, W. M. (Eds.), Thinking clearly about psychology: Essays in honor of Paul E. Meehl (Vol. 1, pp. 61–87). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Rosen, D. H., & Luebbert, M. C. (1999). Evolution of the psyche. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
Rothbaum, F., Weisz, J., Pott, M., Miyake, K., & Morelli, G. (2000). Attachment and culture: Security in the United States and Japan. American Psychologist, 55, 1093–1104.Google Scholar
Rychlak, J. F. (1968). A philosophy of science for personality theory. Boston, MA: Houghton, Mifflin.Google Scholar
Rychlak, J. F. (1986). Logical learning theory: A teleological alternative in the field of personality. Journal of Personality, 54, 734–762.Google Scholar
Rychlak, J. F. (1988). The psychology of rigorous humanism (2nd ed.). New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Rychlak, J. F. (1997). In defense of human consciousness. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Rychlak, J. F. (2000). A psychotherapist’s lessons from the philosophy of science. American Psychologist, 55, 1126–1132.Google Scholar
Sapolsky, R. M. (2017). Behave: The biology of humans at our best and worst. New York: Penguin Press.Google Scholar
Sarason, S. B. (2002). An asocial psychology and a misdirected clinical psychology. In Pickren, W. E. & Dewsbury, D. A. (Eds.), Evolving perspectives on the history of psychology (pp. 453–469). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saucier, G. (2009a). What are the most important dimensions of personality? Evidence from studies of descriptors in diverse languages. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 3, 620–637.Google Scholar
Saucier, G. (2009b). Recurrent personality dimensions in inclusive lexical studies: Indications for a Big Six structure. Journal of Personality, 77, 1577–1614.Google Scholar
Sedikides, C., Gaertner, L., & Toguchi, Y. (2003). Pancultural self-enhancement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 60–79.Google Scholar
Sedikides, C., Gaertner, L., & Vevea, J. L. (2005). Pancultural self-enhancement reloaded: A meta-analytic reply to Heine (2005). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 539–551.Google Scholar
Seligman, M. E. P., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2000). Positive psychology: An introduction. American Psychologist, 55, 5–14.Google Scholar
Seligman, M. E. P., Railton, P., Baumeister, R. F., & Sripada, C. (2013). Navigating into the future or driven by the past. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 119–141.Google Scholar
Seligman, M. E. P., Steen, T. A., Park, N., & Peterson, C. (2005). Positive psychology progress: Empirical validation of interventions. American Psychologist, 60, 410–421.Google Scholar
Shoda, Y., & Smith, R. E. (2004). Conceptualizing personality as a cognitive-affective processing system: A framework for models of maladaptive behavior patterns and change. Behavior Therapy, 35, 147–165.Google Scholar
Silverman, I., Choi, J., & Peters, M. (2007). The hunter-gatherer theory of sex differences in spatial abilities: Data from 40 countries. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 36, 261–268.Google Scholar
Simpson, J. A., & Winterheld, H. A. (2012). Person-by-situation perspectives on close relationships. In Deaux, K. & Snyder, M. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of personality and social psychology (pp. 493–516). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Skinner, B. F. (1950). Are theories of learning necessary? Psychological Review, 57, 193–216.Google Scholar
Slife, B. D., & Reber, J. S. (2009). Is there a pervasive implicit bias against theism in psychology? Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, 29, 63–79.Google Scholar
Smith, L. D. (2002). On prediction and control: B. F. Skinner and the technological ideal of science. In Pickren, W. E. & Dewsbury, D. A. (Eds.), Evolving perspectives on the history of psychology (pp. 255–272). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Spinath, F. M., & Johnson, W. (2011). Behavior genetics. In Chamorro-Premuzic, T., von Stumm, S. & Furnham, A. (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of individual differences (pp. 271–304). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Staats, A. W. (1996). Behavior and personality: Psychological behaviorism. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Sternberg, R. J. (2005). Unity in psychology: Possibility or pipedream. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Strobel, A., & Brocke, B. (2011). Molecular genetic aspects of personality. In Chamorro-Premuzic, T., von Stumm, S. & Furnham, A. (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of individual differences (pp. 305–329). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Swann, W. B. J., & Seyle, C. (2005). Personality psychology’s comeback and its emerging symbiosis with social psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 155–165.Google Scholar
Taylor, E. (2009). The mystery of personality: A history of psychodynamic theories. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Turkheimer, E., Pettersson, E., & Horn, E. E. (2014). A phenotypic null hypothesis for the genetics of personality. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 515–540.Google Scholar
Uher, J. (2013). Personality psychology: Lexical approaches, assessment methods, and trait concepts reveal only half of the story – Why it is time for a paradigm shift. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 47, 1–55.Google Scholar
Uher, J. (2015). Conceiving “personality”: Psychologist’s challenges and basic fundamentals of the Transdisciplinary Philosophy-of-Science Paradigm for Research on Individuals. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 49, 398–458.Google Scholar
Watkins, J. (2000). Popper. In Newton-Smith, W. (Ed.), A companion to the philosophy of science (pp. 343–348). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Westen, D., Gabbard, G. O., & Ortigo, K. M. (2008). Psychoanalytic approaches to personality. In John, O. P., Robins, R. W. & Pervin, L. A. (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (3rd ed., pp. 61–113). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Winter, D. G., John, O. P., Stewart, A. J., Klohnen, E. C., & Duncan, L. E. (1998). Traits and motives: Toward an integration of two traditions in personality research. Psychological Review, 105, 230–250.Google Scholar
Wolman, B. B. (1971). Does psychology need its own philosophy of science? American Psychologist, 26, 877–886.Google Scholar
References
Allport, G. W. (1927). Concepts of trait and personality. Psychological Bulletin, 24, 284–293.Google Scholar
Allport, G. W. (1931). What is a trait of personality? The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 25, 368–372.Google Scholar
Allport, G. W. (1937). Personality: A psychological interpretation. New York: Henry Holt and Company.Google Scholar
Allport, G. W., & Odbert, H. S. (1936). Trait-names, a psycho-lexical study. Psychological Monographs, 47, i–171.Google Scholar
Aluja, A., Garcia, O., & Garcia, L. F. (2002). A comparative study of Zuckerman’s three structural models for personality through the NEO-PI-R, ZKPQ-III-R, EPQ-RS and Goldberg’s 50-bipolar adjectives. Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 713–725.Google Scholar
Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2001). A theoretical basis for the major dimensions of personality. European Journal of Personality, 15, 327–353.Google Scholar
Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2005). Honesty-humility, the Big Five, and the Five-Factor Model. Journal of Personality, 73, 1321–1353.Google Scholar
Bäckström, M., Björklund, F., & Larsson, M. R. (2009). Five-factor inventories have a major general factor related to social desirability which can be reduced by framing items neutrally. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 335–344.Google Scholar
Bell, A. M., Hankison, S. J., & Laskowski, K. L. (2009). The repeatability of behaviour: A meta-analysis. Animal Behaviour, 77, 771–783.Google Scholar
Benet-Martínez, V., & John, O. P. (1998). Los Cinco Grandes across cultures and ethnic groups: Multitrait-multimethod analysis of the Big Five in Spanish and English. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 729–750.Google Scholar
Bernreuter, R. G. (1933). The theory and construction of the personality inventory. Journal of Social Psychology, 4, 387–405.Google Scholar
Biesanz, J. C., & West, S. G. (2004). Towards understanding assessments of the Big Five: Multitrait-multimethod analyses of convergent and discriminant validity across measurement occasion and type of observer. Journal of Personality, 72, 845–876.Google Scholar
Borkenau, P., Mauer, N., Riemann, R., Spinath, F. M., & Angleitner, A. (2004). Thin slices of behaviour as cues of personality and intelligence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 599–614.Google Scholar
Bouchard, T. J. Jr., & Loehlin, J. C. (2001). Genes, evolution, and personality. Behavior Genetics, 31, 243–273.Google Scholar
Brocklebank, S., Pauls, S., Rockmore, D., & Bates, T. C. (2015). A spectral clustering approach to the structure of personality: Contrasting the FFM and HEXACO models. Journal of Research in Personality, 57, 100–109.Google Scholar
Carr, H. A., & Kingsbury, F. A. (1938). The concept of traits. Psychological Review, 45, 497–524.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1945). The principal trait clusters for describing personality. Psychological Bulletin, 42, 129–161.Google Scholar
Cattell, R. B. (1947). Confirmation and clarification of primary personality factors. Psychometrika, 12, 197–220.Google Scholar
Chapman, B. P., & Goldberg, L. R. (2017). Act-frequency signatures of the Big Five. Personality and Individual Differences, 116, 201–205.Google Scholar
Cloninger, C. R., Svrakic, D. M., & Przybeck, T. R. (1993). A psychobiological model of temperament and character. Archives of General Psychiatry, 50, 975-990.Google Scholar
Costa, P. T. Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1985). The NEO Personality Inventory manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Costa, P. T. Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Costa, P. T. Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1994). Set like plaster? Evidence for the stability of adult personality. In Heatherton, T. F. & Weinberger, J. L. (Eds.), Can personality change? (pp. 21–40). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Costa, P. T. Jr., Terracciano, A., & McCrae, R. R. (2001). Gender differences in personality traits across cultures: Robust and surprising findings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 81, 322–331.Google Scholar
De Raad, B. (2000). The Big Five personality factors: The psycholexical approach to personality. Seattle, WA: Hogrefe and Huber.Google Scholar
Deary, I. J., & Bedford, A. (2011). Some origins and evolution of the EPQ-R (short form) neuroticism and extraversion items. Personality and Individual Differences, 50, 1213–1217.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G. (2006). Higher-order factors of the Big Five in a multi-informant sample. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 1138-1151.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2002). Higher-order factors of the Big Five predict conformity: Are there neuroses of health? Personality and Individual Differences, 33, 533–552.Google Scholar
Digman, J. M. (1996). The curious history of the Five-Factor Model. In Wiggins, J. S. (Ed.), The Five-Factor Model of personality: Theoretical perspectives (pp. 1–20). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Digman, J. M. (1997). Higher-order factors of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1246–1256.Google Scholar
Digman, J. M., & Takemoto-Chock, N. K. (1981). Factors in the natural language of personality: Re-analysis, comparison, and interpretation of six major studies. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 16, 149–170.Google Scholar
Epstein, S. (1979). Explorations in personality today and tomorrow: A tribute to Henry Murray. American Psychologist, 34, 649–653.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1957). The dynamics of anxiety and hysteria. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J. (1967). The biological basis of personality. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publisher.Google Scholar
Eysenck, H. J., & Eysenck, S. B. G. (1982). Recent advances in the cross-cultural study of personality. In Spielberger, C. D. & Butcher, J. N. (Eds.), Advances in personality assessment (Vol. 2, pp. 41–69). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Ferguson, E., Chamorro-Premuzic, T., Pickering, A., & Weiss, A. (2011). Five into one doesn’t go: A critique of the General Factor of Personality. In Chamorro-Premuzic, T., von Stumm, S. & Furnham, A. (Eds.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of individual differences (pp. 162–186). West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Freeman, H. D., & Gosling, S. D. (2010). Personality in nonhuman primates: A review and evaluation of past research. American Journal of Primatology, 72, 653–671.Google Scholar
Freyd, M. (1924). The personalities of the socially and mechanically inclined. Psychological Monographs, 33, i–101.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R. (1981). Language and individual differences: the search for universals in personality lexicons. In Wheeler, L. (Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 141–165). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R. (1983). The magical number five, plus or minus two: Some considerations on the dimensionality of personality descriptors. Paper presented at the research seminar, Gerontology Research Center, NIA/NIH, Baltimore, MD.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American Psychologist, 48, 26–34.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., & Gough, H. G. (2006). The international personality item pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 84–96.Google Scholar
Gosling, S. D. (2001). From mice to men: What can we learn about personality from animal research? Psychological Bulletin, 127, 45–86.Google Scholar
Gosling, S. D., & John, O. P. (1999). Personality dimensions in nonhuman animals: A cross-species review. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8, 69–75.Google Scholar
Gray, J. A. (1982). The neuropsychology of anxiety: An inquiry into the function of the septo-hippocampal system. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Guilford, J. P., & Guilford, R. B. (1934). An analysis of the factors in a typical test of introversion-extroversion. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 28, 377–399.Google Scholar
Guilford, J. P., & Guilford, R. B. (1936). Personality factors S, E, and M, and their measurement. Journal of Psychology, 2, 109–127.Google Scholar
Gurven, M., von Rueden, C., Massenkoff, M., Kaplan, H., & Lero Vie, M. (2013). How universal is the Big Five? Testing the Five-Factor Model of personality variation among forager-farmers in the Bolivian Amazon. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104, 354–370.Google Scholar
Heymans, G., & Wiersma, E. (1909). Beitrage zur apeziellen Psychologie auf Grund einer Massenuntersuchung. [Contributions to differential psychology based on a large scale investigation.] Zeitschrift fur Psychologic, 51, 1–72.Google Scholar
Ion, A., Iliescu, D., Aldhafri, S., Rana, N., Ratanadilok, K., Widyanti, A., & Nedelcea, C. (2017). A cross-cultural analysis of personality structure through the lens of the HEXACO model. Journal of Personality Assessment, 99, 25–34.Google Scholar
Ivkovic, V., Vitart, V., Rudan, I., Janicijevic, B., Smolej-Narancic, N., Skaric-Juric, T., … Deary, I. J. (2007). The Eysenck personality factors: Psychometric structure, reliability, heritability and phenotypic and genetic correlations with psychological distress in an isolated Croatian population. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 123–133.Google Scholar
Jang, K. L., McCrae, R. R., Angleitner, A., Riemann, R., & Livesley, W. J. (1998). Heritability of facet-level traits in a cross-cultural twin sample: Support for a hierarchical model of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1556–1565.Google Scholar
John, O. P., & Robins, R. W. (1993). Gordon Allport: Father and critic of the Five-Factor Model. In Craik, K. H., Hogan, R. & Wolfe, R. N. (Eds.), Fifty years of personality psychology (pp. 215–236). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
Kandler, C., Bleidorn, W., & Riemann, R. (2012). Left or right? Sources of political orientation: The roles of genetic factors, cultural transmission, assortative mating, and personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 633–645.Google Scholar
Kendler, K. S., Gatz, M., Gardner, C. O., & Pedersen, N. L. (2006). Personality and major depression. A Swedish longitudinal, population-based twin study. Archives of General Psychiatry, 63, 1113–1120.Google Scholar
Kendler, K. S., & Myers, J. (2010). The genetic and environmental relationship between major depression and the Five-Factor Model of personality. Psychological Medicine, 40, 801–806.Google Scholar
Kenrick, D. T., & Funder, D. C. (1988). Profiting from controversy: Lessons from the person-situation debate. American Psychologist, 43, 23–34.Google Scholar
King, J. E., & Figueredo, A. J. (1997). The Five-Factor Model plus dominance in chimpanzee personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 31, 257–271.Google Scholar
Lee, K., Ogunfowora, B., & Ashton, M. C. (2005). Personality traits beyond the Big Five: Are they within the HEXACO space? Journal of Personality, 73, 1437–1463.Google Scholar
Luciano, M., Hagenaars, S. P., Davies, G., Hill, W. D., Clarke, T.-K., Shirali, M., … Deary, I. J. (2018). Association analysis in over 329,000 individuals identifies 116 independent variants influencing neuroticism. Nature Genetics, 50, 6–11.Google Scholar
Markon, K. E., Krueger, R. F., & Watson, D. (2005). Delineating the structure of normal and abnormal personality: An integrative hierarchical approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 139–157.Google Scholar
Matthews, G., Deary, I. J., & Whiteman, M. (2009). Personality traits (3rd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R. (2001). Trait psychology and culture: Exploring intercultural comparisons. Journal of Personality, 69, 819–846.Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R. (2004). Human nature and culture: A trait perspective. Journal of Research in Personality, 38, 3–14.Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. Jr. (1997). Conceptions and correlates of Openness to Experience. In Hogan, R., Johnson, J. & Briggs, S. (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 825–847). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. Jr. (2003). Personality in adulthood: A Five-Factor Theory perspective. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R., Costa, P. T. Jr., Martin, T. A., Oryol, V. E., Rukavishnikov, A. A., Senin, I. G., … Urbánek, T. (2004). Consensual validation of personality traits across cultures. Journal of Research in Personality, 38, 179–201.Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R., Costa, P. T. Jr., Terracciano, A., Parker, W. D., Mills, C. J., De Fruyt, F., & Mervielde, I. (2002). Personality trait development from age 12 to age 18: Longitudinal, cross-sectional and cross-cultural analyses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1456–1468.Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R., Jang, K. L., Livesley, W. J., Riemann, R., & Angleitner, A. (2001). Sources of structure: Genetic, environmental, and artifactual influences on the covariation of personality traits. Journal of Personality, 69, 511–535.Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R., Terracciano, A., & 78 members of the Personality Profiles of Cultures Project. (2005). Universal features of personality traits from the observer’s perspective: Data from 50 cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 547–561.Google Scholar
McDougall, W. (1929). The chemical theory of temperament applied to introversion and extraversion. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 24, 293–309.Google Scholar
Measelle, J. R., John, O. P., Ablow, J. C., Cowan, P. A., & Cowan, C. P. (2005). Can children provide coherent, stable, and valid self-reports on the Big Five dimensions? A longitudinal study from ages 5 to 7. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 90–106.Google Scholar
Meehl, P. E. (1986). Trait language and behaviorese. In Thompson, T. & Zeiler, M. (Eds.), Analysis and integration of behavioral units (pp. 315–334). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Musek, J. (2007). A general factor of personality: Evidence for the Big One in the Five-Factor Model. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 1213–1233.Google Scholar
Norman, W. T. (1963). Toward an adequate taxonomy of personality attributes: Replicated factor structure in peer nomination personality ratings. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 66, 574–583.Google Scholar
Ozer, D. J., & Benet-Martínez, V. (2006). Personality and the prediction of consequential outcomes. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 401–421.Google Scholar
Paunonen, S. V. (2002). Design and construction of the Supernumerary Personality Inventory (Research Bulletin 763). University of Western Ontario: London, Ontario.Google Scholar
Peabody, D., & De Raad, B. (2002). The substantive nature of psycholexical personality factors: A comparison across languages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 983–997.Google Scholar
Réale, D., Reader, S. M., Sol, D., McDougall, P. T., & Dingemanse, N. J. (2007). Integrating animal temperament within ecology and evolution. Biological Reviews, 82, 291–318.Google Scholar
Revelle, W., & Wilt, J. (2013). The general factor of personality: A general critique. Journal of Research in Personality, 47, 493–504.Google Scholar
Riemann, R., Angleitner, A., & Strelau, J. (1997). Genetic and environmental influences on personality: A study of twins reared together using self- and peer report NEO-FFI scales. Journal of Personality, 65, 449–475.Google Scholar
Riemann, R., & Kandler, C. (2010). Construct validation using multitrait-multimethod-twin data: The case of a general factor of personality. European Journal of Personality, 24, 258–277.Google Scholar
Roberts, B. W., & DelVecchio, W. F. (2000). The rank-order consistency of personality traits from childhood to old age: A quantitative review of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 3–25.Google Scholar
Roberts, B. W., Kuncel, N. R., Shiner, R., Caspi, A., & Goldberg, L. R. (2007). The power of personality: The comparative validity of personality traits, socioeconomic status, and cognitive ability for predicting important life outcomes. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2, 313–345.Google Scholar
Rusten, J. (1993). Theophrastus, Characters. Herodas, Mimes. Cercidas and the Choliambic poets (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Sanchez-Roige, S., Gray, J. C., MacKillop, J. K., Chen, C.-H., & Palmer, A. A. (2017). The genetics of human personality. Genes, Brain and Behavior, 17, e12439.Google Scholar
Sanderman, R., & Ranchor, A. V. (1994). Stability of personality traits and psychological distress over six years. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 78, 89–90.Google Scholar
Saucier, G., Georgiades, S., Tsaousis, I., & Goldberg, L. R. (2005). The factor structure of Greek personality adjectives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 856–875.Google Scholar
Saucier, G., & Ostendorf, F. (1999). Hierarchical subcomponents of the Big Five personality factors: A cross-language replication. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 613–627.Google Scholar
Schmitt, D. P., Allik, J., McCrae, R. R., Benet-Martinez, V., Alcalay, L., Ault, L., … Zupaneic, A. (2007). The geographic distribution of Big Five personality traits: Patterns and profiles of human self-description across 56 nations. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 38, 173–212.Google Scholar
Shoda, Y., & Mischel, W. (1996). Toward a unified, intra-individual dynamic conception of personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 30, 414–428.Google Scholar
Smith, D. J., Escott-Price, V., Davies, G., Bailey, M. E. S., Colodro-Conde, L., Ward, J., … O’Donovan, M. C. (2016). Genome-wide analysis of over 106 000 individuals identifies 9 neuroticism-associated loci. Molecular Psychiatry, 21, 749–757.Google Scholar
Steel, P., Schmidt, J., & Shultz, J. (2008). Refining the relationship between personality and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 138–161.Google Scholar
Steger, M. F., Hicks, B. M., Kashdan, T. B., Krueger, K. R., & Bouchard, T. J. Jr. (2007). Genetic and environmental influences on the positive traits of the values in action classification, and biometric covariance with normal personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 524–539.Google Scholar
Stelmack, R. M., & Stalikas, A. (1991). Galen and the humour theory of temperament. Personality and Individual Differences, 12, 255–263.Google Scholar
Strickhouser, J. E., Zell, E., & Krizan, Z. (2017). Does personality predict health and well-being? A metasynthesis. Health Psychology, 36, 797–810.Google Scholar
Tellegen, A. (1991). Personality traits: Issues of definition, evidence, and assessment. In Grove, W. M. & Ciccetti, D. (Eds.), Thinking clearly about psychology: Essays in honor of Paul E. Meehl, Personality and psychopathology (Vol. 2, pp. 10–35). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Terracciano, A., Costa, P. T. Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (2006). Personality plasticity after age 30. Personality and Social Psychological Bulletin, 32, 999–1009.Google Scholar
Thurstone, L. L. (1947). Multiple-factor analysis. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Thurstone, L. L., & Thurstone, T. G. (1930). A neurotic inventory. Journal of Social Psychology, 1, 3–30.Google Scholar
Trull, T. J., & Widiger, T. A. (2013). Dimensional models of personality: The Five-Factor Model and the DSM-5. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, 15, 135–146.Google Scholar
Tupes, E. C., & Christal, R. E. (1961). Recurrent personality factors based on trait ratings (USAF ASD Tech. Rep. No. 61–97). Lackland Air Force Base, TX: United States Air Force.Google Scholar
Tupes, E. C., & Christal, R. E. (1992). Recurrent personality factors based on trait ratings. Journal of Personality, 60, 225–251.Google Scholar
van Oers, K., de Jong, G., van Noordwijk, A. J., Kempenaers, B., & Drent, P. J. (2005). Contribution of genetics to animal personalities: A review of case studies. Behaviour, 142, 1191–1212.Google Scholar
von Luxburg, U. (2007). A tutorial on spectral clustering. Statistics and Computing, 17, 395–416.Google Scholar
Webb, E. (1915). Character and intelligence. British Journal of Psychology Monographs, 1, 1–99.Google Scholar
Widiger, T. A., & Mullins-Sweatt, S. N. (2009). Five-Factor Model of personality disorder: A proposal for DSM-V. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 5, 197–220.Google Scholar
Yamagata, S., Suzuki, A., Ando, J., Ono, Y., Kijima, N., Yoshimura, K., … Jang, K. L. (2006). Is the genetic structure of human personality universal? A cross-cultural twin study from North America, Europe, and Asia. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 987–998.Google Scholar
References
Alaei, R., & Rule, N. O. (2016). Accuracy of perceiving social attributes. In Hall, J. A., Mast, M. S. & West, T. V. (Eds.), The social psychology of perceiving others accurately (pp. 125–142). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Allport, G. W., & Odbert, H. S. (1936). Trait-names: A psycho-lexical study. Psychological Monographs, 47, i–171.Google Scholar
Ambady, N., Hallahan, M., & Conner, B. (1999). Accuracy of judgments of sexual orientation from thin slices of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 538–547.Google Scholar
Ambady, N., & Rosenthal, R. (1993). Half a minute: Predicting teacher evaluations from thin slices of nonverbal behavior and physical attractiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 431–441.Google Scholar
Asch, S. E. (1946). Forming impressions of personality. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 41, 258–290.Google Scholar
Biesanz, J. C. (2010). The social accuracy model of interpersonal perception: Assessing individual differences in perceptive and expressive accuracy. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 45, 853–885.Google Scholar
Biesanz, J. C., & West, S. G. (2000). Personality coherence: Moderating self–other profile agreement and profile consensus. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 425–437.Google Scholar
Biesanz, J. C., West, S. G., & Millevoi, A. (2007). What do you learn about someone over time? The relationship between length of acquaintance and consensus and self-other agreement in judgments of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 119–135.Google Scholar
Bond, C. F., & DePaulo, B. M. (2006). Accuracy of deception judgments. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 214–234.Google Scholar
Borkenau, P., & Liebler, A. (1992). Trait inferences: Sources of validity at zero acquaintance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 645–657.Google Scholar
Borkenau, P., & Liebler, A. (1993). Convergence of stranger ratings of personality and intelligence with self-ratings, partner ratings, and measured intelligence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 546–553.Google Scholar
Borkenau, P., Mauer, N., Riemann, R., Spinath, F. M., & Angleitner, A. (2004). Thin slices of behavior as cues of personality and intelligence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 599–614.Google Scholar
Borkenau, P., Mosch, A., Tandler, N., & Wolf, A. (2016). Accuracy of judgments of personality based on textual information on major life domains. Journal of Personality, 84, 214–224.Google Scholar
Brunswik, E. (1956). Perception and the representative design of psychological experiments. Berkley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Buffardi, L. E., & Campbell, W. K. (2008). Narcissism and social networking web sites. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 1303–1314.Google Scholar
Buller, D. B., Strzyzewski, K. D., & Hunsaker, F. G. (1991). Interpersonal deception: II. The inferiority of conversational participants as deception detectors. Communication Monographs, 58, 25–40.Google Scholar
Burgoon, J. K., Buller, D. B., Floyd, K., & Grandpre, J. (1996). Deceptive realities: Communication Research, 23, 724–748.Google Scholar
Burgoon, J. K., & Dunbar, N. E. (2016). Accuracy of distinguishing truth from lie. In Hall, J. A., Mast, M. S. & West, T. V. (Eds.), The social psychology of perceiving others accurately (pp. 71–97). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carahaly, L. (2000). Listener accuracy in identifying the sexual orientation of male and female speakers. (Master’s thesis, Ohio State University.)Google Scholar
Chung, Y. S., Barch, D., & Strube, M. (2013). A meta-analysis of mentalizing impairments in adults with schizophrenia and autism spectrum disorder. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 40, 602–616.Google Scholar
Conley, J. J. (1985). Longitudinal stability of personality traits: A multitrait–multimethod–multioccasion analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49, 1266–1282.Google Scholar
Cronbach, L. J. (1955). Processes affecting scores on “understanding of others” and “assumed similarity.” Psychological Bulletin, 52, 177–193.Google Scholar
Elfenbein, H. A., & Ambady, N. (2002). On the universality and cultural specificity of emotion recognition: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 128, 203–235.Google Scholar
Elfenbein, H. A., Foo, M. D., White, J., Tan, H. H., & Aik, V. C. (2007). Reading your counterpart: The benefit of emotion recognition accuracy for effectiveness in negotiation. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 31, 205–223.Google Scholar
Emmons, R. A. (1995). Levels and domains in personality: An introduction. Journal of Personality, 63, 341–364.Google Scholar
Epstein, S. (1983). Aggregation and beyond: Some basic issues on the prediction of behavior. Journal of Personality, 51, 360–392.Google Scholar
Fleeson, W. (2001). Toward a structure- and process-integrated view of personality: Traits as density distributions of states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 1011–1027.Google Scholar
Funder, D. C. (1995). On the accuracy of personality judgment: A realistic approach. Psychological Review, 102, 652–670.Google Scholar
Funder, D. C. (1999). Personality judgment: A realistic approach to person perception. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Funder, D. C., & Ozer, D. J. (1983). Behavior as a function of the situation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 107–112.Google Scholar
Furr, R. M. (2008). Framework for profile similarity: Integrating similarity, normativeness, and distinctiveness. Journal of Personality, 76, 1267–1316.Google Scholar
Gangestad, S. W., Simpson, J. A., DiGeronimo, K., & Biek, M. (1992). Differential accuracy in person perception across traits: Examination of a functional hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 688–698.Google Scholar
Gillath, O., Bahns, A. J., Ge, F., & Crandall, C. S. (2012). Shoes as a source of first impressions. Journal of Research in Personality, 46, 423–430.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R. (1993). The structure of phenotypic personality traits. American Psychologist, 48, 26–34.Google Scholar
Gosling, S. D., Ko, S. J., Mannarelli, T., & Morris, M. E. (2002). A room with a cue: Personality judgments based on offices and bedrooms. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 379–398.Google Scholar
Guion, R. M., & Gottier, R. F. (1965). Validity of personality measures in personnel selection. Personnel Psychology, 18, 135–164.Google Scholar
Hall, J. A., Mast, M. S., & West, T. (2016). Accurate interpersonal perception: Many traditions, one topic. In Hall, J. A., Mast, M. S. & West, T. (Eds.), The social psychology of perceiving others accurately (pp. 3–22). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hartwig, M., & Bond, C. F. (2011). Why do lie-catchers fail? A lens model meta-analysis of human lie judgments. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 643–659.Google Scholar
Hirschmüller, S., Egloff, B., Nestler, S., & Back, M. D. (2013). The dual lens model: A comprehensive framework for understanding self–other agreement of personality judgments at zero acquaintance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104, 335–353.Google Scholar
Human, L. J., & Biesanz, J. C. (2013). Targeting the good target an integrative review of the characteristics and consequences of being accurately perceived. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17, 248–272.Google Scholar
Human, L. J., Biesanz, J. C., Parisotto, K. L., & Dunn, E. W. (2012). Your best self helps reveal your true self: Positive self-presentation leads to more accurate personality impressions. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3, 23–30.Google Scholar
Ickes, W. (2001). Measuring empathic accuracy. In Hall, J. A. & Bernieri, F. J. (Eds.), The LEA series in personality and clinical psychology. Interpersonal sensitivity: Theory and measurement (pp. 219–241). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
James, W. (1897). The will to believe: And other essays in popular philosophy. New York: Longmans, Green and Company.Google Scholar
John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In Pervin, L. A. & John, O. P. (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (Vol. 2, pp. 102–138). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Kaminski, G., Ravary, F., Graff, C., & Gentaz, E. (2010). Firstborns’ disadvantage in kinship detection. Psychological Science, 21, 1746–1750.Google Scholar
Kenny, D. A. (1994). Interpersonal perception: A social relations analysis. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Kenny, D. A., West, T. V., Cillessen, A. H. N., Coie, J. D., Dodge, K. A., Hubbard, J. A., & Schwartz, D. (2007). Accuracy in judgments of aggressiveness. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 1225–1236.Google Scholar
Kenny, D. A., West, T. V., Malloy, T. E., & Albright, L. (2006). Componential analysis of interpersonal perception data. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 282–294.Google Scholar
Kenrick, D. T., & Funder, D. C. (1988). Profiting from controversy: Lessons from the person- situation debate. American Psychologist, 43, 23–34.Google Scholar
Kenrick, D. T., Neuberg, S. L., Griskevicius, V., Becker, D. V., & Schaller, M. (2010). Goal-driven cognition and functional behavior. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19, 63–67.Google Scholar
Kilianski, S. E. (2008). Who do you think I think I am? Accuracy in perceptions of others’ self-esteem. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 386–398.Google Scholar
Macrae, C. N., & Martin, D. (2006). A boy primed Sue: Feature-based processing and person construal. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 793–805.Google Scholar
Mast, M. S., & Ickes, W. (2007). Empathic accuracy: Measurement and potential clinical applications. In Farrow, T. F. D. & Woodruff, P. W. R. (Eds.), Empathy in mental illness (pp. 408–427). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McAdams, D. P. (1995). What do we know when we know a person? Journal of Personality, 63, 365–396.Google Scholar
McArthur, L. Z., & Baron, R. M. (1983). Toward an ecological theory of social perception. Psychological Review, 90, 215–238.Google Scholar
Moskowitz, D. S., & Schwarz, J. C. (1982). Validity comparison of behavior counts and ratings by knowledgeable informants. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 518–528.Google Scholar
Murphy, N. A., Hall, J. A., & Colvin, C. R. (2003). Accurate intelligence assessments in social interactions: Mediators and gender effects. Journal of Personality, 71, 465–493.Google Scholar
Naumann, L. P., Vazire, S., Rentfrow, P. J., & Gosling, S. D. (2009). Personality judgments based on physical appearance. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 35, 1661–1671.Google Scholar
Nave, G., Minxha, J., Greenberg, D. M., Kosinski, M., Stillwell, D., & Rentfrow, J. (2018). Musical preferences predict personality: Evidence from active listening and Facebook likes. Psychological Science, 29, 1145–1158.Google Scholar
Neel, R., Kenrick, D. T., White, A. E., & Neuberg, S. L. (2016). Individual differences in fundamental social motives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110, 887–907.Google Scholar
Nestler, S., & Back, M. D. (2013). Applications and extensions of the lens model to understand interpersonal judgments at zero acquaintance. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22, 374–379.Google Scholar
Nestler, S., Egloff, B., Kufner, A. C. P., & Back, M. D. (2012). An integrative lens model approach to bias and accuracy in human inferences: Hindsight effects and knowledge updating in personality judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 689–717.Google Scholar
Park, G., Schwartz, H. A., Eichstaedt, J. C., Kern, M. L., Kosinski, M., Stillwell, D. J., … Seligman, M. E. P. (2015). Automatic personality assessment through social media language. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108, 934–952.Google Scholar
Rogers, K. H., & Biesanz, J. C. (2015). Knowing versus liking: Separating normative knowledge from social desirability in first impressions of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 1105–1116.Google Scholar
Rogers, K. H., & Biesanz, J. C. (2018). Reassessing the good judge of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1–15.Google Scholar
Saucier, G., & Goldberg, L. R. (1996). The language of personality: Lexical perspectives on the five-factor model. In Wiggins, J. S. (Ed.), The Five-Factor Model of personality: Theoretical perspectives (pp. 21–50). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Shuman, V., Clark-Polner, E., Meuleman, B., Sander, D., & Scherer, K. R. (2015). Emotion perception from a componential perspective. Cognition and Emotion, 31, 47–56.Google Scholar
Skowron, M., Tkalčič, M., Ferwerda, B., & Schedl, M. (2016). Fusing social media cues. In Proceedings of the 25th international conference companion on world wide web – WWW’16 companion. ACM Press.Google Scholar
Stinson, L., & Ickes, W. (1992). Empathic accuracy in the interactions of male friends versus male strangers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 787–797.Google Scholar
Sunnafrank, M., & Ramirez, A. (2004). At first sight: Persistent relational effects of get- acquainted conversations. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 21, 361–379.Google Scholar
Tagiuri, R., & Petrullo, L. (Eds.) (1958). Person perception and interpersonal behavior. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Tskhay, K. O., & Rule, N. O. (2014). Perceptions of personality in text-based media and OSN: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research in Personality, 49, 25–30.Google Scholar
Vazire, S. (2010). Who knows what about a person? The self–other knowledge asymmetry (SOKA) model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 281–300.Google Scholar
Wessels, N. M., Zimmermann, J., Biesanz, J. C., & Leising, D. (2020). Differential associations of knowing and liking with accuracy and positivity bias in person perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 118, 149–171.Google Scholar
Wiggins, J. (Ed.) (1996). The Five-Factor Model of personality: Theoretical perspectives. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Zaki, J., Bolger, N., & Ochsner, K. (2008). It takes two: The interpersonal nature of empathic accuracy. Psychological Science, 19, 399–404.Google Scholar
References
Allport, G. W. (1937). Personality: A psychological interpretation. New York, NY: Holt.Google Scholar
Asendorpf, J. B. (1996). Psychologie der Persönlichkeit [Psychology of personality]. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Asendorpf, J. B. (2017). Personality as a situation: A target-centered perspective on social situations. In Rauthmann, J. F., Funder, D. C. & Sherman, R. (Eds.) (published online), The Oxford handbook of psychological situations. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Asendorpf, J. B., & Motti-Stefanidi, F. (2018). Mediated disposition - environment transactions: The DAE model. European Journal of Personality, 32, 167–185.Google Scholar
Asendorpf, J. B., Penke, L., & Back, M. D. (2011). From dating to mating and relating: Predictors of initial and long-term outcomes of speed-dating in a community sample. European Journal of Personality, 25, 16–30.Google Scholar
Back, M. D., Baumert, A., Denissen, J. J. A., Hartung, F.-M., Penke, L., Schmukle, S. C., … Wrzus, C. (2011). PERSOC: A unified framework for understanding the dynamic interplay of personality and social relationships. European Journal of Personality, 25, 90–107.Google Scholar
Baldwin, M. W. (1992). Relational schemas and the processing of social information. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 461–484.Google Scholar
Barker, R. G. (1987). Prospecting in environmental psychology: Oskaloosa revisited. In Stokols, D. & Altman, I. (Eds.), Handbook of environmental psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 1413–1432). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Baumert, A., Schmitt, M., Perugini, M., Johnson, W., Blum, G., Borkenau, P., … Wrzus, C. (2017). Integrating personality processes, personality structure, and personality development. Target Article. European Journal of Personality, 31, 503–528.Google Scholar
Bleidorn, W., Hopwood, C. J., & Lucas, R. E. (2018). Life events and personality change. Journal of Personality, 86, 83–96.Google Scholar
Bolger, N., & Laurenceau, J. P. (2013). Intensive longitudinal methods: An introduction to diary and experience sampling research. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Bond, M. H. (2013). A general model for explaining situational influence on individual social behavior: Refining Lewin’s formula. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 16, 1–15.Google Scholar
Brown, N. A., Blake, A. B., & Sherman, R. A. (2017). A snapshot of the life as lived: Wearable cameras in social and personality psychological science. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8, 592–600.Google Scholar
Brown, N. A., Neel, R., & Sherman, R. A. (2015). Measuring the evolutionarily important goals of situations: Situational affordances for adaptive problems. Evolutionary Psychology, 13, 1–15.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (1987). Selection, evocation, and manipulation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 1214–1221.Google Scholar
Cantor, N., Mischel, W., & Schwartz, J. (1982). A prototype analysis of psychological situations. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 45–77.Google Scholar
Caspi, A., McClay, J., Moffitt, T. E., Mill, J., Martin, J., Craig, I. W., … Pulton, R. (2002). Role of genotype in the cycle of violence in maltreated children. Science, 297, 851–854.Google Scholar
Cronbach, L. J. (1957). The two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 12, 671–684.Google Scholar
Cuperman, R., & Ickes, W. (2009). Big Five predictors of behavior and perceptions in initial, dyadic interactions: Personality similarity helps extraverts and introverts, but hurts “disagreeables.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 667–684.Google Scholar
Denissen, J. J.A., van Aken, M. A. G., Penke, L., & Wood, D. (2013). Self‐regulation underlies temperament and personality: An integrative developmental framework. Child Development Perspectives, 7, 255-260.Google Scholar
Diener, E., & Larsen, R. J. (1984 ). Temporal stability and cross-situational consistency of affective, behavioral, and cognitive responses. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 871–883.Google Scholar
Duckworth, A. L., Gendler, T. S., & Gross, J. J. (2016). Situational strategies for self-control. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11, 35–55.Google Scholar
Edwards, J. R., Caplan, R. D., & Harrison, R. V. (1998). Person-environment fit theory: Conceptual foundations, empirical evidence, and directions for future research. In Cooper, C. L. (Ed.), Theories of organizational stress (pp. 28–67). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Endler, N. S., & Hunt, J. M. (1966). Sources of behavioral variance as measured by the S-R Inventory of Anxiousness. Psychological Bulletin, 65, 336–346.Google Scholar
Epstein, S. (1979). The stability of behavior: I. On predicting most of the people much of the time. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 1097–1126.Google Scholar
Fleeson, W. (2001). Towards a structure- and process-integrated view of personality: Traits as density distributions of states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 1011–1027.Google Scholar
Fleeson, W. (2012). Perspectives on the person: Rapid growth and opportunities for integration. In Deaux, K. & Snyder, M. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of personality and social psychology (pp. 33–63). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fleeson, W., & Gallagher, P. (2009). The implications of Big Five standing for the distribution of trait manifestation in behavior: Fifteen experience-sampling studies and a meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 1097–1114.Google Scholar
Fleeson, W., & Jayawickreme, E. (2015). Whole trait theory. Journal of Research in Personality, 56, 82–92.Google Scholar
Fleeson, W., & Noftle, E. E. (2008a). Where does personality have its influence? A supermatrix of consistency concepts. Journal of Personality, 76, 1355–1385.Google Scholar
Fleeson, W., & Noftle, E. (2008b). The end of the person-situation debate: An emerging synthesis in the answer to the consistency question. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2, 1667–1684.Google Scholar
Funder, D. C. (1991). Global traits: A neo-Allportian approach to personality. Psychological Science, 2, 31–39.Google Scholar
Funder, D. C. (2008). Persons, situations, and person-situation interactions. In John, O. P., Robins, R. W. & Pervin, L. A. (Eds.), Handbook of personality (3rd ed., pp. 568–580). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Funder, D. C. (2016). Taking situations seriously: The Situation Construal Model and the Riverside Situational Q-sort. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 25, 203–208.Google Scholar
Gerpott, F. H., Balliet, D., Columbus, S., Molho, C., & de Vries, R. E. (2017). How do people think about interdependence? A multidimensional model of subjective outcome interdependence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 115, 716–742.Google Scholar
Geukes, K., Nestler, S., Hutteman, R., Küfner, A. C. P., & Back, M. D. (2017). Trait personality and state variability: Predicting individual differences in within- and cross-context fluctuations in affect, self-Evaluations, and behavior in everyday life. Journal of Research in Personality, 69, 124–138.Google Scholar
Geukes, K., van Zalk, M. H., & Back, M. D (2018). Understanding personality development: An integrative state process model. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 42, 43–51.Google Scholar
Gignac, G. E., & Szodorai, E. T. (2016). Effect size guidelines for individual differences researchers. Personality and Individual Differences, 102, 74–78.Google Scholar
Gnambs, T. (2014). A meta-analysis of dependability coefficients (test–retest reliabilities) for measures of the Big Five. Journal of Research in Personality, 52, 20–28.Google Scholar
Grant, A. M., Gino, F., & Hofmann, D. (2011). Reversing the extraverted leadership advantage: The role of employee proactivity. Academy of Management Journal, 54, 528–550.Google Scholar
Haase, C., Heckhausen, J., & Wrosch, C. (2013). Developmental regulation across the life span: Toward a new synthesis. Developmental Psychology, 49, 964–972.Google Scholar
Hartshorne, H., & May, M. A. (1928). Studies in the nature of character: Studies in deceit (Vol. 1). New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Hemphill, J. F. (2003). Interpreting the magnitude of correlation coefficients. American Psychologist, 58, 78–79.Google Scholar
Horstmann, K. T., Rauthmann, J. F., & Sherman, R. A. (2017). The measurement of situational influences. In Zeigler-Hill, V. & Shackelford, T. K. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of personality and individual differences (pp. 465–484). London: Sage.Google Scholar
Ickes, W., Snyder, M., & Garcia, S. (1997). Personality influences on the choice of situations. In Hogan, R. & Johnson, J. A. (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 165–195). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Johnson, W. (2007). Genetic and environmental influences on behavior: Capturing all the interplay. Psychological Review, 114, 423-440.Google Scholar
Jones, A. B., Brown, N. A., Serfass, D. G., & Sherman, R. A. (2017). Personality and density distributions of behavior, emotions, and situations. Journal of Research in Personality, 69, 225–236.Google Scholar
Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Cook, W. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Kenrick, D. T., & Funder, D. C. (1988). Profiting from controversy: Lessons from the person-situation debate. American Psychologist, 43, 23–34.Google Scholar
Krahé, B. (2014). Media violence use as a risk factor for aggressive behaviour in adolescence. European Review of Social Psychology, 25, 71–106.Google Scholar
Kristof-Brown, A. L., & Guay, R. P. (2011). Person-environment fit. In Zedeck, S. (Ed.), American Psychological Association handbook of industrial and organizational psychology (Vol. 3, pp. 3–50). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Lewin, K. (1946). Behavior and development as a function of the total situation. In Carmichael, L. (Ed.), Manual of child psychology (pp. 791–844). New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Magnusson, D. (1981). Wanted: A psychology of situations. In Magnusson, D. (Ed.), Toward a psychology of situations: An interactional perspective (pp. 9–36). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Marsh, H. W. (1987). The big-fish-little-pond effect on academic self-concept. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 280–295.Google Scholar
McCabe, K. O., & Fleeson, W. (2012). What is extraversion for? Integrating trait and motivational perspectives and identifying the purpose of extraversion. Psychological Science, 23, 1498–1505.Google Scholar
Miller, G. F. (2007). Reconciling evolutionary psychology and ecological psychology: How to perceive fitness affordances. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 39, 546–555.Google Scholar
Mischel, W., & Shoda, Y. (1995). A cognitive-affective system theory of personality: Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics, and invariance in personality structure. Psychological Review, 102, 246–268.Google Scholar
Mõttus, R., Allerhand, M., & Johnson, W. (2017). Computational modeling of person-situation transactions: How accumulation of situational experiences can shape the distributions of trait scores. In Rauthmann, J. F., Funder, D. C. & Sherman, R. A. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of psychological situations. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Neyer, F. J., Mund, M., Zimmermann, J., & Wrzus, C. (2014). Personality-relationship transactions revisited. Journal of Personality, 82, 539–550.Google Scholar
Noftle, E. E., & Gust, C. J. (2015). Powerful situations: Some real progress but some future considerations: Comment on EJP target article by Rauthmann et al. (2015). European Journal of Personality, 29, 404–405.Google Scholar
Ozer, D. J., & Benet-Martínez, V. (2006). Personality and the prediction of consequential outcomes. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 401–421.Google Scholar
Parrigon, S., Woo, S. E., Tay, L., & Wang, T. (2017). CAPTION-ing the situation: A lexically-derived taxonomy of psychological situation characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112, 642–681.Google Scholar
Plomin, R., DeFries, J. C., & Loehlin, J. C. (1977). Genotype-environment interaction and correlation in the analysis of human behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 84, 309–322.Google Scholar
Rauthmann, J. F. (2015). Structuring situational information. European Psychologist, 20, 176–189.Google Scholar
Rauthmann, J. F. (2016). Motivational factors in the perception of psychological situation characteristics. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 10, 92–108.Google Scholar
Rauthmann, J. F. (2017, June 23). Situation Management Strategies Dendrogram (Figure). http://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/D3562Google Scholar
Rauthmann, J. F. (2018). Person-situation transactions can illuminate personality dynamics and processes. Comment on target article by Baumert et al. European Journal of Personality, 31, 561–564.Google Scholar
Rauthmann, J. F., Gallardo-Pujol, D., Guillaume, E. M., Todd, E., Nave, C. S., Sherman, R. A., … Funder, D. C. (2014). The Situational Eight DIAMONDS: A taxonomy of major dimensions of situation characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 107, 677–718.Google Scholar
Rauthmann, J. F., & Horstmann, K. T. (2017, February 22). Overview of Situation Characteristic Taxonomies. http://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/M3R6MGoogle Scholar
Rauthmann, J. F., Jones, A. B., & Sherman, R. A. (2016). Directionality of person-situation transactions: Are there spill-overs among and between situation experiences and personality states? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 42, 893–909.Google Scholar
Rauthmann, J. F., & Sherman, R. A. (2016a). Measuring the Situational Eight DIAMONDS characteristics of situations: An optimization of the RSQ-8 to the S8*. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 32, 155–164.Google Scholar
Rauthmann, J. F., & Sherman, R. A. (2016b). Ultra-brief measures for the Situational Eight DIAMONDS domains. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 32, 165–174.Google Scholar
Rauthmann, J. F., & Sherman, R. A. (2016c). Situation change: Stability and change of situation variables between and within persons. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1938.Google Scholar
Rauthmann, J. F., Sherman, R. A., & Funder, D. C. (2015a). Principles of situation research: Towards a better understanding of psychological situations. European Journal of Personality, 29, 363–381.Google Scholar
Rauthmann, J. F., Sherman, R. A., & Funder, D. C. (2015b). New horizons in research on psychological situations and environments: Rejoinder to Target Article. European Journal of Personality, 29, 382–432.Google Scholar
Rauthmann, J. F., Sherman, R. A., Nave, C. S., & Funder, D. C. (2015). Personality-driven situation experience, contact, and construal: How people’s personality traits predict characteristics of their situations in daily life. Journal of Research in Personality, 55, 98–111.Google Scholar
Reis, H. T. (2008). Reinvigorating the concept of situation in social psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12, 311–329.Google Scholar
Roberts, B. W. (2017). A revised sociogenomic model of personality traits. Journal of Personality, 86, 23–35.Google Scholar
Roberts, B. W., Kuncel, N. R., Shiner, R., Caspi, A., & Goldberg, L. R. (2007). The power of personality: The comparative validity of personality traits, socioeconomic status, and cognitive ability for predicting important life outcomes. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 2, 313–345.Google Scholar
Scarr, S., & McCartney, K. (1983). How people make their own environments: A theory of genotype → environment effects. Child Development, 54, 424–435.Google Scholar
Schmitt, M., Gollwitzer, M., Baumert, A., Blum, G., Geschwendner, T., Hofmann, W., & Rothmund, T. (2013). Proposal of a nonlinear interaction of person and situation (NIPS) model. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 499.Google Scholar
Schönbrodt, F. D., Back, M. D., & Schmukle, S. C. (2011). TripleR: An R package for social relations analyses based on round-robin designs. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 455–470.Google Scholar
Sherman, R. A., Rauthmann, J. F., Brown, N. A., Serfass, D. G., & Jones, A. B. (2015). The independent effects of personality and situations on real-time expressions of behavior and emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 872–888.Google Scholar
Shoda, Y., Mischel, W., & Wright, J. C. (1994). Intraindividual stability in the organization and patterning of behavior: Incorporating psychological situations into the idiographic analysis of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 674–687.Google Scholar
Srivastava, S. (2010). The Five-Factor Model describes the structure of social perceptions. Psychological Inquiry, 21, 69–75.Google Scholar
Stern, W. (1911). Die differentielle Psychologie in ihren methodischen Grundlagen [Methodological foundations of differential psychology]. Leipzig, Germany: Barth (Reprint 1994, Bern: Huber).Google Scholar
ten Berge, M. A., & de Raad, B. (1999). Taxonomies of situations from a trait psychological perspective: A review. European Journal of Personality, 13, 337–360.Google Scholar
Tett, R. P., & Guterman, H. A. (2000). Situation trait relevance, trait expression, and cross-situational consistency: Testing a principle of trait activation. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 397–423.Google Scholar
van Heck, G. L. (1984). The construction of a general taxonomy of situations. In Bonarius, H., van Heck, G. L. & Smid, N. (Eds.), Personality psychology in Europe: Theoretical and empirical developments (pp. 149–164). Lisse, Netherlands: Swets and Zeitlinger.Google Scholar
van Heck, G. L. (1989). Situation concepts: Definitions and classification. In Hettema, P. J. (Ed.), Personality and environment: Assessment of human adaptation (pp. 53–69). Oxford, UK: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Wahlsten, D. (1990). Insensitivity of the analysis of variance to heredity-environment interaction. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 13, 109–161.Google Scholar
Wagerman, S. A., & Funder, D. C. (2009). Situations. In Corr, P. J. & Matthews, G. (Eds.), Cambridge handbook of personality psychology (pp. 27–42). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wrzus, C., & Mehl, M. (2015). Lab and/or field? Measuring personality processes and their social consequences. European Journal of Personality, 29, 250–271.Google Scholar
Wrzus, C., & Roberts, B. W. (2016). Processes of personality development in adulthood: The TESSERA framework. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 21, 253–277.Google Scholar
Yang, Y., Read, S. J., & Miller, L. (2009). The concept of situations. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 3, 1018–1037.Google Scholar
Ziegler, M. (2014). The Big Five inventory of personality in occupational situations. Mödling, Austria: Schuhfried GmbH.Google Scholar
References
Aquino, K., & Reed, A. (2002). The self-importance of moral identity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1423–1440.Google Scholar
Asendorpf, J. B., Banse, R., & Mücke, D. (2002). Double dissociation between implicit and explicit personality self-concept: The case of shy behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 380–393.Google Scholar
Ashton, M. C., Lee, K., Perugini, M., Szarota, P., de Vries, R. E., Di Blas, L., … De Raad, B. (2004). A six-factor structure of personality-descriptive adjectives: Solutions from psycholexical studies in seven languages. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 356–366.Google Scholar
Back, M. D., & Nestler, S. (2017). Dual process approaches to personality. In Deutsch, R., Gawronski, B. & Hofmann, W. (Eds.), Reflective and impulsive determinants of human behavior (pp. 137–154). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Back, M. D., Schmukle, S. C., & Egloff, B. (2009). Predicting actual behavior from the explicit and implicit self-concept of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 533–548.Google Scholar
Banse, R., Messer, M., & Fischer, I. (2015). Predicting aggressive behavior with the aggressiveness-IAT. Aggressive Behavior, 41, 65–83.Google Scholar
Bargh, J. A. (1994). The four horsemen of automaticity: Awareness, intention, efficiency, and control in social cognition. In Wyer, R. S. Jr. & Srull, T. K. (Eds.), Handbook of social cognition: Basic processes: Applications (pp. 1–40). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bargh, J. A. (2016). Awareness of the prime versus awareness of its influence: Implications for the real-world scope of unconscious higher mental processes. Current Opinion in Psychology, 12, 49–52.Google Scholar
Bargh, J. A., & Morsella, E. (2008). The unconscious mind. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3, 73–79.Google Scholar
Bargh, J. A., Schwader, K. L., Hailey, S. E., Dyer, R. L., & Boothby, E. J. (2012). Automaticity in social-cognitive processes. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16, 593–605.Google Scholar
Barnes-Holmes, D., Barnes-Holmes, Y., Power, P., Hayden, E., Milne, R., & Stewart, I. (2006). Do you know what you really believe? Developing the Implicit Relational Evaluation Procedure (IRAP) as a direct measure of implicit beliefs. The Irish Psychologist, 32, 169–177.Google Scholar
Baumert, A., Schmitt, M., Perugini, M., Johnson, W., Blum, G., Borkenau, P., … Wrzus, C. (2017). Integrating personality structure, personality process, and personality development. European Journal of Personality, 31, 503–528.Google Scholar
Blanton, H., & Jaccard, J. (2006). Arbitrary metrics in psychology. American Psychologist, 61, 27–41.Google Scholar
Bluemke, M., & Friese, M. (2012). On the validity of idiographic and generic self-concept Implicit Association Tests: A core-concept model. European Journal of Personality, 26, 515–528.Google Scholar
Boldero, J. M., Rawlings, D., & Haslam, N. (2007). Convergence between GNAT-assessed implicit and explicit personality. European Journal of Personality, 21, 341–358.Google Scholar
Bosson, J. K., Swann, W. B., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2000). Stalking the perfect measure of implicit self-esteem: The blind men and the elephant revisited? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 631–643.Google Scholar
Carlson, E. N. (2013). Overcoming the barriers to self-knowledge: Mindfulness as a path to seeing yourself as you really are. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 173–186.Google Scholar
Chevance, G., Héraud, N., Guerrieri, A., Rebar, A., & Boiché, J. (2017). Measuring implicit attitudes toward physical activity and sedentary behaviors: Test-retest reliability of three scoring algorithms of the Implicit Association Test and Single Category-Implicit Association Test. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 31, 70–78.Google Scholar
Cicchetti, D. (1994). Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychological Assessment, 6, 284–290.Google Scholar
Cogswell, A., Alloy, L. B., Karpinski, A., & Grant, D. A. (2010). Assessing dependency using self-report and indirect measures: Examining the significance of discrepancies. Journal of Personality Assessment, 92, 306–316.Google Scholar
Conrey, F. R., Sherman, J. W., Gawronski, B., Hugenberg, K., & Groom, C. J. (2005). Separating multiple processes in implicit social cognition: The quad model of implicit task performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 469–487.Google Scholar
Costantini, G., Perugini, M., Dentale, F., Barbaranelli, C., Alessandri, G., Vecchione, M., & Caprara, G. V. (2016). Assessing positive orientation with the Implicit Association Test. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, advance online publication.Google Scholar
Costantini, G., Richetin, J., Borsboom, D., Fried, E. I., Rhemtulla, M., & Perugini, M. (2015). Development of indirect measures of conscientiousness: Combining a facets approach and network analysis. European Journal of Personality, 29, 548–567.Google Scholar
Currie, C. J., Katz, B. A., & Yovel, I. (2017). Explicit and implicit shame aversion predict symptoms of avoidant and borderline personality disorders. Journal of Research in Personality, 71, 13–16.Google Scholar
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 Cuyper, K., Pieters, G., Claes, L., Vandromme, H., & Hermans, D. (2013). Indirect measurement of perfectionism: Construct and predictive validity. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 32, 844–858.Google Scholar
De Houwer, J. (2014). A propositional model of implicit evaluation. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 8, 342–353.Google Scholar
De Houwer, J., & Moors, A. (2010). Implicit Measures: similarity and differences. In Gawronski, B. & Payne, B. K. (Eds.), Handbook of implicit social cognition: Measurement, theory, and applications (pp. 176–193). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Deutsch, R., & Gawronski, B. (2009). When the method makes a difference: Antagonistic effects on “automatic evaluations” as a function of task characteristics of the measure. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 101–114.Google Scholar
Egloff, B., & Schmukle, S. C. (2002). Predictive validity of an implicit association test for assessing anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 1441–1455.Google Scholar
Egloff, B., Weck, F., & Schmukle, S. C. (2008). Thinking about anxiety moderates the relationship between implicit and explicit anxiety measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 771–778.Google Scholar
Gawronski, B., & De Houwer, J. (2014). Implicit measures in social and personality psychology. In Reis, H. T. & Judd, C. M. (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in social and personality psychology (2nd ed., pp. 283–310). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gawronski, B., & Hahn, A. (2019). Implicit measures: procedures, use, and interpretation. In Blanton, H., LaCroix, J. M. & Webster, G. D. (Eds.), Measurement in social psychology (pp. 29–55). New York: Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Gawronski, B., Hofmann, W., & Wilbur, C. J. (2006). Are “implicit” attitudes unconscious? Consciousness and Cognition, 15, 485–499.Google Scholar
Glashouwer, K. A., & de Jong, P. J. (2010). Disorder-specific automatic self-associations in depression and anxiety: Results of The Netherlands study of depression and anxiety. Psychological Medicine, 40, 1101–1111.Google Scholar
Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., & Gough, H. G. (2006). The international personality item pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 84–96.Google Scholar
Greenwald, A. G. (1992). New Look 3: Unconscious cognition reclaimed. American Psychologist, 47, 766–779.Google Scholar
Greenwald, A. G., & Banaji, M. R. (1995). Implicit social cognition: attitudes, self-esteem, and stereotypes. Psychological review, 102, 4–27.Google Scholar
Greenwald, A. G., & Farnham, S. D. (2000). Using the implicit association test to measure self-esteem and self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 1022–1038.Google Scholar
Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E., & Schwartz, J. L. K. (1998). Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: The implicit association test. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 1464–1480.Google Scholar
Greenwald, A. G., Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2003). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 197–216.Google Scholar
Greenwald, A. G., Poehlman, T. A., Uhlmann, E. L., & Banaji, M. R. (2009). Understanding and using the Implicit Association Test: III. Meta-analysis of predictive validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 17–41.Google Scholar
Hahn, A., Judd, C. M., Hirsh, H. K., & Blair, I. V. (2014). Awareness of implicit attitudes. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 1369–1392.Google Scholar
Hassin, R. R., Uleman, J. S., & Bargh, J. A. (Eds.) (2005). The new unconscious. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hofmann, W., Gschwendner, T., Friese, M., Wiers, R. W., & Schmitt, M. (2008). Working memory capacity and self-regulatory behavior: Toward an individual differences perspective on behavior determination by automatic versus controlled processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 962–977.Google Scholar
Hofmann, W., & Wilson, T. D. (2010). Consciousness, introspection, and the adaptive unconsciousness. In Gawronski, B. & Payne, B. K. (Eds.), Handbook of implicit social cognition: Measurement, theory, and applications (pp. 197–215). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Horcajo, J., Rubio, V. J., Aguado, D., Hernández, J. M., & Márquez, M. O. (2014). Using the Implicit Association Test to assess risk propensity self-concept: Analysis of its predictive validity on a risk-taking behaviour in a natural setting. European Journal of Personality, 28, 459–471.Google Scholar
Huntjens, R. J. C., Rijkeboer, M. M., Krakau, A., & de Jong, P. J. (2014). Implicit versus explicit measures of self-concept of self-control and their differential predictive power for spontaneous trait-relevant behaviors. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 45, 1–7.Google Scholar
Jordan, C. H., Spencer, S. J., Zanna, M. P., Hoshino-Browne, E., & Correll, J. (2003). Secure and defensive high self-esteem. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 969–978.Google Scholar
Karpinski, A., & Steinman, R. B. (2006). The single category implicit association test as a measure of implicit social cognition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 16–32.Google Scholar
Klauer, K. C., Voss, A., Schmitz, F., & Teige-Mocigemba, S. (2007). Process components of the Implicit Association Test: A diffusion-model analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 353–368.Google Scholar
Koole, S. L., Govorun, O., Cheng, C. M., & Gallucci, M. (2009). Pulling yourself together: Meditation promotes congruence between implicit and explicit self-esteem. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 1220–1226.Google Scholar
Krause, S., Back, M. D., Egloff, B., & Schmukle, S. C. (2011). Reliability of implicit self-esteem measures revisited. European Journal of Personality, 25, 239–251.Google Scholar
LeBel, E. P., & Gawronski, B. (2009). How to find what’s in a name: Scrutinizing the optimality of five scoring algorithms for the name-letter task. European Journal of Personality, 23, 85–106.Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (2008). Empirical and theoretical status of the Five-Factor Model of personality traits. In Boyle, G., Matthews, G. & Saklofske, D. (Eds.), SAGE handbook of personality theory and assessment: Personality theories and models (Vol. 1, pp. 273–294). London: Sage.Google Scholar
Moors, A. (2016). Automaticity: Componential, causal, and mechanistic explanations. Annual Review of Psychology, 67, 263–287.Google Scholar
Moors, A., & De Houwer, J. (2006). Automaticity: A theoretical and conceptual analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 297–326.Google Scholar
Newell, B. R., & Shanks, D. R. (2014). Unconscious influences on decision making: A critical review. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 37, 1–19.Google Scholar
Nosek, B. A., & Banaji, M. R. (2001). The Go/No-Go Association Task. Social Cognition, 19, 625–666.Google Scholar
Ozer, D. J., & Benet-Martínez, V. (2006). Personality and the prediction of consequential outcomes. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 401–421.Google Scholar
Payne, B. K., Cheng, C. M., Govorun, O., & Stewart, B. D. (2005). An inkblot for attitudes: Affect misattribution as implicit measurement. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 277–293.Google Scholar
Perugini, M., Back, M., Hagemeyer, B., & Wrzus, C. (2020). Dual process models of personality. In Rauthmann, J. F. (Ed.), The handbook of personality dynamics and processes. New York: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Perugini, M., Costantini, G., Richetin, J., & Zogmaister, C. (2015). Implicit Association Tests, then and now. In Ortner, T. M. & van de Vijver, F. J. R. (Eds.), Behavior based assessment in psychology: Going beyond self-report in the personality, affective, motivation, and social domains (pp. 15–28). Göttingen, Germany: Hogrefe.Google Scholar
Perugini, M., & Leone, L. (2009). Implicit self-concept and moral action. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 747–754.Google Scholar
Perugini, M., Richetin, J., & Zogmaister, C. (2010). Prediction of behavior. In Gawronski, B. & Payne, B. K. (Eds.), Handbook of implicit social cognition (pp. 255–278). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Remue, J., Hughes, S., De Houwer, J., & De Raedt, R. (2014). To be or want to be: Disentangling the role of actual versus ideal self in implicit self-esteem. PLOS ONE, 9, e108837.Google Scholar
Richetin, J., Costantini, G., Perugini, M., & Schönbrodt, F. (2015). Should we stop looking for a better scoring algorithm for handling Implicit Association Test data? Test of the role of errors, extreme latencies treatment, scoring formula, and practice trials on reliability and validity. PLOS ONE, 10, e0129601.Google Scholar
Richetin, J., Richardson, D. S., & Mason, G. D. (2010). Predictive validity of IAT aggressiveness in the context of provocation. Social Psychology, 41, 27–34.Google Scholar
Rowatt, W. C., Powers, C., Targhetta, V., Comer, J., Kennedy, S., & Labouff, J. (2006). Development and initial validation of an implicit measure of humility relative to arrogance. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 1, 198–211.Google Scholar
Sava, F. A., Maricutoiu, L. P., Rusu, S., Macsinga, I., Vîrgă, D., Cheng, C. M., & Payne, B. K. (2012). An inkblot for the implicit assessment of personality: The semantic misattribution procedure. European Journal of Personality, 26, 613–628.Google Scholar
Schmukle, S. C., Back, M. D., & Egloff, B. (2008). Validity of the Five-Factor Model for the implicit self-concept of personality. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 24, 263–272.Google Scholar
Schnabel, K., Banse, R., & Asendorpf, J. B. (2006a). Assessment of implicit personality self-concept using the implicit association test (IAT): Concurrent assessment of anxiousness and angriness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 45, 373–396.Google Scholar
Schnabel, K., Banse, R., & Asendorpf, J. (2006b). Employing automatic approach and avoidance tendencies for the assessment of implicit personality self-concept. The Implicit Association Procedure (IAP). Experimental Psychology, 53, 69–76.Google Scholar
Schröder-Abé, M., Rudolph, A., & Schütz, A. (2007). High implicit self-esteem is not necessarily advantageous: Discrepancies between explicit and implicit self-esteem and their relationship with anger expression and psychological health. European Journal of Personality, 21, 319–339.Google Scholar
Sriram, N., & Greenwald, A. G. (2009). The Brief Implicit Association Test. Experimental Psychology, 56, 283–294.Google Scholar
Stieger, S., Göritz, A. S., & Burger, C. (2010). Personalizing the IAT and the SC-IAT: Impact of idiographic stimulus selection in the measurement of implicit anxiety. Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 940–944.Google Scholar
Steffens, M. C., & König, S. S. (2006). Predicting spontaneous Big Five behavior with Implicit Association Tests. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 22, 13–20.Google Scholar
Stieger, S., Voracek, M., & Formann, A. K. (2012). How to administer the initial preference task. European Journal of Personality, 26, 63–78.Google Scholar
Suslow, T., Lindner, C., Kugel, H., Egloff, B., & Schmukle, S. C. (2014). Using Implicit Association Tests for the assessment of implicit personality self-concepts of extraversion and neuroticism in schizophrenia. Psychiatry Research, 218, 272–276.Google Scholar
Teige, S., Schnabel, K., Banse, R., & Asendorpf, J. B. (2004). Assessment of multiple implicit self-concept dimensions using the Extrinsic Affective Simon Task (EAST). European Journal of Personality, 18, 495–520.Google Scholar
Timmermans, B., & Cleeremans, A. (2015). How can we measure awareness? An overview of current methods. In Overgaard, M. (Ed.), Behavioral methods in consciousness research (pp. 21–46). Oxford, UK. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Vazire, S., & Carlson, E. N. (2010). Self‐knowledge of personality: Do people know themselves? Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4, 605–620.Google Scholar
Vecchione, M., Dentale, F., Alessandri, G., & Barbaranelli, C. (2014). Fakability of implicit and explicit measures of the Big Five: Research findings from organizational settings. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 22, 211–218.Google Scholar
Williams, B. J., & Kaufmann, L. M. (2012). Reliability of the Go/No Go Association Task. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 879–891.Google Scholar
Wilson, T. D. (2004). Strangers to ourselves: Discovering the Adaptive Unconscious. Cambridge, UK: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Yovel, I., & Friedman, A. (2013). Bridging the gap between explicit and implicit measurement of personality: The questionnaire-based implicit association test. Personality and Individual Differences, 54, 76–80.Google Scholar
References
Aquino, K., Douglas, S., & Martinko, M. J. (2004). Overt anger in response to victimization: Attributional style and organizational norms as moderators. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 9, 152–164.Google Scholar
Arnold, M. B. (1960). Emotion and personality (Vols. 1, 2). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Aunger, R., & Curtis, V. (2013). The anatomy of motivation: An evolutionary-ecological approach. Biological Theory, 14, 49–63.Google Scholar
Barford, K. A., & Smilie, L. (2016). Mixed emotions, Big Five, openness, extraversion, neuroticism. Personality and Individual Differences, 102, 118–122.Google Scholar
Bar-On, R. (1997). Emotional Quotient Inventory: Technical manual. Toronto, Canada: Multi-Health Systems.Google Scholar
Barr, L. K., Kahn, J. H., & Schneider, W. J. (2008). Individual differences in emotion expression: Hierarchical structure and relations with psychological distress. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 27, 1045–1077.Google Scholar
Baumeister, R. F., Vohs, K. D., DeWall, C. N., & Zhang, L. (2007). How emotion shapes behavior: Feedback, anticipation, and reflection, rather than direct causation. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 11, 167–203.Google Scholar
Baumert, A., & Schmitt, M. (2016). Justice sensitivity. In Sabbagh, C. & Schmitt, M. (Eds.), Handbook of social justice theory and research (pp. 161–180). New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Bentham, J. (1789/1970). An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation. London: Athlone Press.Google Scholar
Bleidorn, W., Kandler, C., & Caspi, A. (2014). The behavioral genetics of personality development in adulthood: Classic, contemporary, and future trends. European Journal of Personality, 28, 244–255.Google Scholar
Bouchard, T. J. Jr. (2004). Genetic influence on human psychological traits. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13, 148–151.Google Scholar
Brinker, J. K., & Dozois, D. J. A. (2008). Ruminative thought styles and depressed mood. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 65, 1–19.Google Scholar
Brunstein, J. C., Schultheiss, O. C., & Grässmann, R. (1998). Personal goals and emotional well-being: The moderating role of motive dispositions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 494–508.Google Scholar
Brunstein, J. C., Schultheiss, O. C., & Maier, G. W. (1999). The pursuit of personal goals: A motivational approach to well-being and life adjustment. In Brandtstädter, J. & Lerner, R. M. (Eds.), Action and self-development: Theory and research through the life span (pp. 169–196). New York: Sage.Google Scholar
Buss, D. M. (2009). How can evolutionary psychology successfully explain personality and individual Differences? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4, 359–366.Google Scholar
Byrne, D. (1964). Repression-sensitization as a dimension of personality. In Maher, B. A. (Ed.), Progress in experimental personality research (Vol. 1, pp. 169–220). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., & Feinstein, J. (1996). Dispositional differences in cognitive motivation: The life and times of individuals varying in need for cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 119, 197–253.Google Scholar
Carver, C. S. (2004). Negative affects deriving from the behavioral approach system. Emotion, 4, 3–22.Google Scholar
Carver, C. S. (2006). Approach, avoidance, and the self-regulation of affect and action. Motivation and Emotion, 30, 105–110.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., & Weintraub, J. G. (1989). Assessing coping strategies: A theoretically based approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 267–283.Google Scholar
Cervone, D. (2005). Personality architecture: Within-person structures and processes. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 423–452.Google Scholar
Cox, W. M., & Klinger, E. (2004). Handbook of motivational counseling. Chichester, UK: Wiley.Google Scholar
Davis, M. H. (1983). The effects of dispositional empathy on emotional reactions and helping: A multidimensional approach. Journal of Personality, 51, 167–184.Google Scholar
Day, A. L., Therrien, D. L., & Carroll, S. A. (2005). Predicting psychological health: Assessing the incremental validity of emotional intelligence beyond personality, type A behaviour, and daily hassles. European Journal of Personality, 19, 519–536.Google Scholar
Deffenbacher, J. L., Oetting, E. R., Thwaites, G. A., Lynch, R. S., Baker, D. A., Stark, R. S., Thacker, S., & Eiswerth-Cox, L. (1996). State-trait anger theory and the utility of the trait anger scale. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 43, 131–148.Google Scholar
Deffenbacher, J. L., Stephens, A. N., & Sullman, M. J. M. (2016). Driving anger as a psychological construct: Twenty years of research using the Driving Anger Scale. Transportation Research, Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 42, 236–247.Google Scholar
Del Barrio, V., Aluja, A., & García, L. F. (2004). Relationship between empathy and the Big Five of personality traits in a sample of Spanish adolescents. Social Behavior and Personality, 32, 677–682.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G., Peterson, J. B., & Higgins, D. M. (2005). Sources of Openness/Intellect: Cognitive and neuropsychological correlates of the fifth factor of personality. Journal of Personality, 73, 825–858.Google Scholar
DeYoung, C. G., Quilty, L. C., & Peterson, J. B. (2007). Between facets and domains: 10 Aspects of the Big Five. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 880–896.Google Scholar
Diener, E., Smith, H., & Fujita, F. (1995). The personality structure of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 130–141.Google Scholar
Durán, J. I., Reisenzein, R., & Fernández–Dols, J.-M. (2017). Coherence between emotions and facial expressions: A research synthesis. In Russell, J. A. & Fernández–Dols, J.-M. (Eds.), The science of facial expression (pp. 107–129). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Elfenbein, H. A., & Eisenkraft, N. (2010). The relationship between displaying and perceiving nonverbal cues of affect: A meta-analysis to solve an old mystery. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 301–318.Google Scholar
Ellsworth, P. C., & Scherer, K. R. (2003). Appraisal processes in emotion. In Davidson, R. J., Scherer, K. R. & Goldsmith, H. H. (Eds.), Handbook of Affective Sciences (pp. 572–595). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Emmons, R. A. (1986). Personal strivings: An approach to personality and subjective well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1058–1068.Google Scholar
Emmons, R. A. (1996). Striving and feeling: Personal goals and subjective well-being. In Gollwitzer, P. M. & Bargh, J. A. (Eds.), The psychology of action: Linking cognition and motivation to behavior (pp. 313–337). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Endler, N. S., Speer, R. L., Johnson, J. M., & Flett, G. L. (2001). General self-efficacy and control in relation to anxiety and cognitive performance. Current Psychology: Developmental, Learning, Personality, Social, 20, 36–52.Google Scholar
Fletcher, G. J. O. (1993). The scientific credibility of commonsense psychology. In Craik, K. H., Hogan, R. & Wolde, R. N. (Eds.), Fifty years of personality psychology (pp. 251–268). New York: Springer Science and Media.Google Scholar
Flynn, J. J., Hollenstein, T., & Mackey, A. M. (2010). The effect of suppressing and not accepting emotions on depressive symptoms: Is suppression different for men and women? Personality and Individual Differences, 49, 582–586.Google Scholar
Frijda, N. H. (1994). Emotions are functional, most of the time. In Ekman, P. & Davidson, R. J. (Eds.), The nature of emotion (pp. 112–136). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gray, J. A. (1994). Three fundamental emotion systems. In Ekman, P. & Davidson, R. J. (Eds.), The nature of emotion (pp. 243–248). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Greifeneder, R., Bless, H., & Pham, M. T. (2011). When do people rely on affective and cognitive feelings in judgment? A review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15, 107–141.Google Scholar
Gross, J. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2, 271–299.Google Scholar
Gross, J. J. (2015). Emotion regulation: Current status and future prospects. Psychological Inquiry, 26, 1–26.Google Scholar
Gross, J. J., & John, O. P. (1997). Revealing feelings: Facets of emotional expressivity in self-reports, peer ratings, and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 435–448.Google Scholar
Güsewell, A., & Ruch, W. (2012). Are only emotional strengths emotional? Character strengths and disposition to positive emotions. Applied Psychology: Health and Well-Being, 4, 218–239.Google Scholar
Hastings, M. E., Tangney, J. P., & Stuewig, J. (2008). Psychopathy and identification of facial expressions of emotion. Personality and Individual Differences, 44, 1474–1483.Google Scholar
Hildebrandt, A., Olderbak, S., & Wilhelm, O. (2015). Facial emotion expression, individual differences. In Wright, J. D. (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences (Vol. 8, 2nd ed.) (pp. 667–675). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Higgins, E. T., Bond, R. N., Klein, R., & Strauman, T. (1986). Self-discrepancies and emotional vulnerability: How magnitude, accessibility, and type of discrepancy influence affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 5–15.Google Scholar
Hudlicka, E. (2011). Guidelines for developing computational models of emotions. International Journal of Synthetic Emotions, 2, 26–79.Google Scholar
Izard, C. E., Libero, D. Z., Putnam, P., & Haynes, O. M. (1993). Stability of emotional experiences and their relations to traits of personality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64, 847–860.Google Scholar
Jensen-Campbell, L. A., Knack, J. M., Waldrip, A. M., & Campbell, S. D. (2007). Do Big Five personality traits associated with self-control influence the regulation of anger and aggression? Journal of Research in Personality, 41, 403–424.Google Scholar
John, O. P., & Gross, J. J. (2007). Individual differences in emotion regulation. In Gross, J. J. (Ed.), Handbook of emotion regulation (pp. 351–372). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
John, O. P., & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big Five trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In Pervin, L. A. & John, O. P. (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 102–138). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Junge, M., & Reisenzein, R. (2013). Indirect scaling methods for testing quantitative emotion theories. Cognition and Emotion, 27, 1247–1275.Google Scholar
Kaiser, C. R., Major, B., & McCoy, S. K. (2004). Expectations about the future and the emotional consequences of perceiving prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 173–184.Google Scholar
Krohne, H. W. (2003). Individual differences in emotional reactions and coping. In Davidson, R. J., Scherer, K. R. & Goldsmith, H. H. (Eds.), Handbook of affective science (pp. 698–725). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kubiak, T., Wiedig-Allison, M., Zgoriecki, S., & Weber, H. (2011). Habitual goals and strategies in anger regulation: The anger-related reactions and goals inventory (ARGI). Journal of Individual Differences, 32, 1–13.Google Scholar
Kuppens, P. (2005). Interpersonal determinants of trait anger: Low agreeableness, perceived low social esteem, and the amplifying role of the importance attached to social relationships. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 13–23.Google Scholar
Kuppens, P. (2008). Individual differences in the relationship between pleasure and arousal. Journal of Research in Personality, 42, 1053–1059.Google Scholar
Kuppens, P., & Tong, E. M. W. (2010). An appraisal account of individual differences in emotional experience. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4, 1138–1150.Google Scholar
Kuppens, P., Van Mechelen, I., Smits, D. J. M., De Boeck, P., & Ceulemans, J. L. (2009). Individual differences in patterns of appraisal and anger experience. Cognition and Emotion, 21, 689–713.Google Scholar
Larsen, R. J., & Ketelaar, T. (1991). Personality and susceptibility to positive and negative emotional states. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 132–140.Google Scholar
Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Lazarus, R. S., Averill, J. R., & Opton, E. M. Jr. (1970). Toward a cognitive theory of emotion. In Arnold, M. B. (Ed.), Feelings and emotions (pp. 207–232). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Leki, E. F., & Wilkowski, B. M. (2017). Trait anger, neuroticism, and the hostile reaction to provocation: Examining the hierarchical organization of affective traits in context. Motivation and Emotion, 41, 713–729.Google Scholar
Lerner, J. S., & Tiedens, L. Z. (2006). Portrait of the angry decision maker: How appraisal tendencies shape anger’s influence on cognition. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 19, 115–137.Google Scholar
Linden, W., Hogan, B. E., Rutledge, T., Chawla, A., Lenz, J. W., & Leung, D. (2003). There is more to anger coping than “in” or “out.” Emotion, 3, 12–29.Google Scholar
Lotz, C., & Sparfeldt, J. R. (2017). Does test anxiety increase as the exam draws near? Students’ state test anxiety recorded over the course of one semester. Personality and Individual Differences, 104, 397–400.Google Scholar
Lucas, R. E., & Fujita, F. (2000). Factors influencing the relation between extraversion and pleasant affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 1039–1056.Google Scholar
Luszczynska, A., Gutiérrez-Doña, B., & Schwarzer, R. (2005). General self-efficacy in various domains of human functioning: Evidence from five countries. International Journal of Psychology, 40, 80–89.Google Scholar
Lyubomirsky, S., & Tkach, C. (2004). The consequences of dysphoric rumination. In Papageorgiou, C. & Wells, A. (Eds.), Depressive rumination: Nature, theory and treatment (pp. 21–42). Chichester, UK: Wiley.Google Scholar
Marsella, S., Gratch, J., & Petta, P. (2010). Computational models of emotion. In Scherer, K., Bänziger, T. & Roesch, E. (Eds.), Blueprint for affective computing (pp. 21–46). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mauss, I. B., & Robinson, M. D. (2009). Measures of emotion: A review. Cognition and Emotion, 23, 209–237.Google Scholar
Mayer, J. D., Roberts, R. D., & Barsade, S. G. (2008). Human abilities: Emotional intelligence. Annual Review of Psychology, 59, 507–536.Google Scholar
Mayer, J. D., Salovey, P., & Caruso, D. R. (2004). Emotional intelligence: Theory, findings, and implications. Psychological Inquiry, 15, 197–215.Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R. (2007). Aesthetic chills as a universal marker of openness to experience. Motivation and Emotion, 31, 5–11.Google Scholar
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. Jr. (1999). A five-factor theory of personality. In Pervin, L. A. & John, O. P. (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 139–153). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Meinong, A. (1894). Psychologisch-ethische Untersuchungen zur Werttheorie [Psychological-ethical investigations in value theory]. Graz, Austria: Leuschner & Lubensky.Google Scholar
Mischel, W., & Shoda, Y. (1995). A cognitive-affective system theory of personality: Reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics, and invariance in personality structure. Psychological Review, 102, 246–268.Google Scholar
Mischel, W., & Shoda, Y. (1998). Reconciling processing dynamics and personality dispositions. Annual Review of Psychology, 49, 229–258.Google Scholar
Mitchell, A. E., Dickens, G. L., & Picchioni, M. M. (2014). Facial emotion processing in borderline personality disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Neuropsychology Review, 24, 166–184.Google Scholar
Mitchell, S. (1995). Function, fitness and disposition. Biology and Philosophy, 10, 39–54.Google Scholar
Mohiyeddini, C., & Schmitt, M. J. (1997). Sensitivity to befallen injustice and reactions to unfair treatment in a laboratory situation. Social Justice Research, 10, 333–353.Google Scholar
Moors, A., Ellsworth, P. C., Scherer, K. R., & Frijda, N. H. (2013). Appraisal theories of emotion: State of the art and future development. Emotion Review, 5, 119–124.Google Scholar
Murray, H. A. (1938). Explorations in personality. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Newell, A. (1973). You can’t play 20 questions with nature and win. In Chase, W. G. (Ed.), Visual information processing (pp. 283–308). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Nolen-Hoeksema, S. (1991). Responses to depression and their effects on the duration of depressive episodes. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 100, 569–582.Google Scholar
Olatunji, B. O., Naragon-Gainey, K., & Wolitzky-Taylor, K. B. (2013). Specificity of rumination in anxiety and depression: A multimodal meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 20, 225–257.Google Scholar
Olderbak, S. G., Mokros, A., Nitschke, J., Habermeyer, E., & Wilhelm, O. (2018). Psychopathic men: Deficits in general mental ability, not emotion perception. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 127, 294–304.Google Scholar
Ortony, A., Clore, G. L., & Collins, A. (1988). The cognitive structure of emotions. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Parrott, W. G. (1993). Beyond hedonism: Motives for inhibiting good moods and for maintaining bad moods. In Wegner, D. M. & Pennebaker, J. W. (Eds.), Handbook of mental control (pp. 278–305). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Pekrun, R. (1988). Emotion, motivation und persönlichkeit [Emotion, motivation and personality]. München: Psychologie Verlags Union.Google Scholar
Peña-Sarrionandia, A., Mikolajczak, A., & Gross, J. J. (2015). Integrating emotion regulation and emotional intelligence traditions: A meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychology, Educational Psychology, 6, 160.Google Scholar
Penke, L., Denissen, J. J. A., & Miller, G. F. (2007). The evolutionary genetics of personality. European Journal of Personality, 21, 549–587.Google Scholar
Peterson, C., & Seligman, M. E. P. (Eds.) (2004). Character strengths and virtues: A handbook and classification. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pfeiler, T. M., Weber, H., & Kubiak, T. (2018). Experiencing anger in a social interaction: The role of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 132, 45–51.Google Scholar
Pretsch, J., Ehrhardt, N., Engl, L., Risch, B., Roth, J., Schumacher, S., & Schmitt, M. (2016). Injustice in school and students’ emotions, well-being, and behavior: A longitudinal study. Social Justice Research, 29, 119–138.Google Scholar
Price, C. (2006). Affect without object: Moods and objectless emotions. European Journal of Analytic Philosophy, 2, 49–68.Google Scholar
Pytlik Zillig, L. M., Hemenover, S. H., & Dienstbier, R. A. (2002). What do we assess when we assess a “Big Five” trait? A content analysis of the affective, behavioral, and cognitive (ABC) processes represented in Big Five personality inventories. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 847–858.Google Scholar
Rafaeli, E., Rogers, G. M., & Revelle, W. (2007). Affective synchrony: Individual differences in mixed emotions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 33, 915–932.Google Scholar
Reisenzein, R. (1996). Emotional action generation. In Battmann, W. & Dutke, S. (Eds.), Processes of the molar regulation of behavior (pp. 151–165). Lengerich, Germany: Pabst Science Publishers.Google Scholar
Reisenzein, R. (2001). Appraisal processes conceptualized from a schema-theoretic perspective: Contributions to a process analysis of emotions. In Scherer, K. R., Schorr, A. & Johnstone, T. (Eds.), Appraisal processes in emotion: Theory, methods, research (pp. 187–201). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Reisenzein, R. (2007). What is a definition of emotion? And are emotions mental-behavioral processes? Social Science Information, 46, 424–428.Google Scholar
Reisenzein, R. (2009). Emotions as metarepresentational states of mind: Naturalizing the belief-desire theory of emotion. Cognitive Systems Research, 10, 6–20.Google Scholar
Reisenzein, R. (2012). What is an emotion in the belief-desire theory of emotion? In Paglieri, F., Tummolini, L., Falcone, R. & Miceli, M. (Eds.), The goals of cognition: Essays in honor of Cristiano Castelfranchi (pp. 181–211). London, UK: College Publications.Google Scholar
Reisenzein, R. (2015). On the universality of the attribution-affect model of helping. International Journal of Psychology, 50, 308–311.Google Scholar
Reisenzein, R. (2017). Cognitive theory of emotion. In Zeigler-Hill, V. & Shackleford, T. K. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of personality and individual differences (pp. 1–11). New York: Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar
Reisenzein, R., & Horstmann, G. (2018). Emotion. In Kiesel, A. & Spada, H. (Eds.), Lehrbuch Allgemeine Psychologie (4. Auflage, pp. 423–492). Bern, Switzerland: Huber.Google Scholar
Reisenzein, R., Hudlicka, E., Dastani, M., Gratch, J., Hindriks, K., Lorini, E., & Meyer, J.-J. C. (2013). Computational modeling of emotion: Toward improving the inter-and intradisciplinary exchange. IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing, 4, 246–266.Google Scholar
Reisenzein, R., Junge, M., Studtmann, M., & Huber, O. (2014). Observational approaches to the measurement of emotions. In Pekrun, R. & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (Eds.), International handbook of emotions in education (pp. 580–606). Philadelphia, PA: Taylor & Francis/Routledge.Google Scholar
Reisenzein, R., & Schimmack, U. (1999). Similarity judgments and covariations of affects: Findings and implications for affect structure research. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 539–555.Google Scholar
Reisenzein, R., & Siemer, M. (2013). Stimmungen aus der Sicht der kognitiv-motivationalen Theorie der Emotion [Moods from the perspective of the cognitive-motivational theory of emotion]. In Reents, F. & Meyer-Sickendiek, B. (Eds.), Stimmung und Methode [Mood and method] (pp. 95–117). Tübingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck.Google Scholar
Reisenzein, R., Meyer, W.-U., & Niepel, M. (2012). Surprise. In Ramachandran, V. S. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of human behavior (2nd ed., pp. 564–570). Oxford, UK: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Reisenzein, R., & Spielhofer, C. (1994). Subjectively salient dimensions of emotional appraisal. Motivation and Emotion, 18, 1–47.Google Scholar
Reiss, S. (2000). Who am I? The 16 basic desires that motivate our actions and define our personality. New York: Tarcher Putnam.Google Scholar
Revelle, W., & Wilt, J. (2016). The data box and within subject analyses: A comment on Nesselroade and Molenaa. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 51, 419–423.Google Scholar
Riggio, H. R., & Riggio, R. (2002). Emotional expressiveness, extraversion, and neuroticism: A meta-analysis. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 26, 195–218.Google Scholar
Roseman, I. J. (1979, September). Cognitive aspects of emotions and emotional behavior. Paper presented at the 87th Annual Convention of the APA, New York City.Google Scholar
Roseman, I. J., Antoniou, A. A., & Jose, P. E. (1996). Appraisal determinants of emotions: Constructing a more accurate and comprehensive theory. Cognition and Emotion, 10, 241–277.Google Scholar
Roseman, I. R., & Smith, C. A. (2001). Appraisal theory: Overview, assumptions, varieties, controversies. In Scherer, K. R., Schorr, A. & Johnstone, T. (Eds.), Appraisal processes in emotion: Theory, methods, research (pp. 3–19). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ruch, W. (1997). State and trait cheerfulness and the induction of exhilaration: A FACS study. European Psychologist, 2, 328–341.Google Scholar
Rudolph, U., Roesch, S., Greitemeyer, T., & Weiner, B. (2004). A meta-analytic review of help giving and aggression from an attributional perspective: Contributions to a general theory of motivation. Cognition and Emotion, 18, 815–848.Google Scholar
Russell, J. A. (2003). Core affect and the psychological construction of emotion. Psychological Review, 110, 145–172.Google Scholar
Russell, J. A., & Carroll, J. M. (1999). On the bipolarity of positive and negative affect. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 3–30.Google Scholar
Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 9, 185–211.Google Scholar
Scheier, M. F., Carver, C. S., & Bridges, M. W. (2001). Optimism, pessimism, and psychological well-being. In Chang, E. C. (Ed.), Optimism and pessimism: Implications for theory, research, and practice (pp. 189–216). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Scherer, K. R. (2007). Componential emotion theory can inform models of emotional competence. In Matthews, G., Zeidner, M. & Roberts, R. (Eds.), Science of emotional intelligence: Knowns and unknowns (pp. 101–126). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Scherer, K. R. (1984). On the nature and function of emotion: A component process approach. In Scherer, K. R. & Ekman, P. (Eds.), Approaches to emotion (pp. 293–317). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Scherer, K. R. (2001). Appraisal considered as a process of multilevel sequential checking. In Scherer, K. R., Schorr, A. & Johnstone, T. (Eds.), Appraisal processes in emotion: Theory, methods, research (pp. 92–120). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schimmack, U. (1997). Affect intensity: Separating intensity and frequency in repeatedly measured affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 1313–1329.Google Scholar
Schimmack, U. (2001). Pleasure, displeasure, and mixed feelings: Are semantic opposites mutually exclusive? Cognition and Emotion, 15, 81–97.Google Scholar
Schimmack, U. (2003). Affect measurement in experience sampling research. Journal of Happiness Studies, 4, 79–106.Google Scholar
Schimmack, U., Oishi, S., & Diener, E. (2002). Cultural influences on the relation between pleasant emotions and unpleasant emotions: Asian dialectic philosophies or individualism-collectivism? Cognition and Emotion, 16, 705–719.Google Scholar
Schmitt, M. (1996). Individual differences in sensitivity to befallen injustice. Personality and Individual Differences, 21, 3–20.Google Scholar
Schmukle, S. C., Egloff, B., & Burns, L. R. (2002). The relationship between positive and negative affect in the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule. Journal of Research in Personality, 36, 463–475.Google Scholar
Schutte, N., Malouff, J., Thorsteinsson, E., Bhullar, N., & Rooke, S. (2007). A meta-analytic investigation of the relationship between emotional intelligence and health. Personality and Individual Differences, 42, 921–933.Google Scholar
Schwarz, N., & Clore, G. L. (2007). Feelings and phenomenal experiences. In Kruglanski, A. W. & Higgins, E. T. (Eds.), Social psychology: Handbook of basic principles (2nd ed., pp. 385–407). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1995). Generalized Self-Efficacy scale. In Weinman, J., Wright, S. & Johnston, M. (Eds.), Measures in health psychology: A user’s portfolio. Causal and control beliefs (pp. 35–37). Windsor, UK: NFER-NELSON.Google Scholar
Schwarzer, R., & Jerusalem, M. (1999). Skalen zur Erfassung von Lehrer- und Schülermerkmalen [Scales for the assessment of teacher and student characteristics]. Berlin, Germany: Freie Universität Berlin.Google Scholar
Sheldon, K. M., Elliot, A. J., Kim, Y., & Kasser, T. (2001). What is satisfying about satisfying events? Testing 10 candidate psychological needs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 325–339.Google Scholar
Shiota, M. N., Keltner, D., & John, O. P. (2006). Positive emotion dispositions differentially associated with Big Five personality and attachment style. Journal of Positive Psychology, 1, 61–71.Google Scholar
Siemer, M. (2009). Mood experience: Implications of a dispositional theory of moods. Emotion Review, 1, 256–263.Google Scholar
Siemer, M. (2001). Mood-specific effects on appraisal and emotion judgments. Cognition & Emotion, 15, 453–485.Google Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1967). Motivational and emotional controls of cognition. Psychological Review, 74, 29–39.Google Scholar
Slovic, P., Peters, E., Finucane, M. L., & MacGregor, D. G. (2005). Affect, risk, and decision making. Health Psychology, 24, 35–40.Google Scholar
Smith, C. A., & Kirby, L. D. (2001). Toward delivering on the promise of appraisal theory. In Scherer, K. R., Schorr, A. & Johnstone, T. (Eds.), Appraisal processes in emotion: Theory, methods, research (pp. 121–138). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, T. W. (1992). Hostility and health: Status of a psychosomatic hypothesis. Health Psychology, 11, 139–150.Google Scholar
Smits, D. J. M., De Boeck, P., Kuppens, P., & van Mechelen, I. (2002). The structure of negative emotion scales: Generalization over contexts and comprehensiveness. European Journal of Personality, 16, 127–141.Google Scholar
Solberg Nes, L., & Segerstrom, S. C. (2006). Dispositional optimism and coping: A meta-analytic review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 235–251.Google Scholar
Spielberger, C. D. (1999). Manual for the State-Trait Anger Expression Inventory-2. Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.Google Scholar
Stark, R., Walter, B., Schienle, A., & Vaitl, D. (2005). Psychophysiological correlates of disgust and disgust sensitivity. Journal of Psychophysiology, 19, 50–60.Google Scholar
Stouten, J., De Cremer, D., & van Dijk, E. (2006). Violating equality in social dilemmas: Emotional and retributive reactions as a function of trust, attribution, and honesty. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 894–906.Google Scholar
Symister, P., & Friend, R. (2003). The influence of social support and problematic support on optimism and depression in chronic illness: A prospective study evaluating self-esteem as a mediator. Health Psychology, 4, 249–288.Google Scholar
Tamir, M., Chiu, C.-Y., & Gross, J. E. (2007). Business or pleasure? Utilitarian versus hedonic considerations in emotion regulation. Emotion, 7, 546–554.Google Scholar
Tellegen, A. (1985). Structures of mood and personality and their relevance to assessing anxiety, with an emphasis on self-report. In Tuma, A. H. & Maser, J. D. (Eds.), Anxiety and the anxiety disorders (pp. 681–706). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Terracciano, A., McCrae, R. R., Hagemann, D., & Costa, P. T. Jr. (2003). Individual difference variables, affective differentiation, and the structures of affect. Journal of Personality, 71, 669–703.Google Scholar
Thomas, N., Baumert, A., & Schmitt, M. (2013). Moderators of the link between the perception of injustice and emotional reactions. In Mohiyeddini, C. (Ed.), Emotional relationships: Types, challenges and physical/mental health impacts (pp. 23–38). New York: Nova Publishers.Google Scholar
Thomsen, D. K. (2006). The association between rumination and negative affect: A review. Cognition and Emotion, 20, 1216–1235.Google Scholar
Tignor, S. M., & Colvin, C. R. (2017). The interpersonal adaptiveness of dispositional guilt and shame: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Personality, 85, 341–363.Google Scholar
Tong, E. M. W. (2010). Personality influences in appraisal-emotion relationships: The role of neuroticism. Journal of Personality, 78, 398–417.Google Scholar
Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1990). On the universality of human nature and the uniqueness of the individual: The role of genetics and adaptation. Journal of Personality, 58, 17–67.Google Scholar
Vanderbeeken, R., & Weber, E. (2002). Dispositional explanations of behavior. Behavior and Philosophy, 30, 43–59.Google Scholar
Van Rooy, D. L., & Viswesvaran, C. (2004). Emotional intelligence: A meta-analytic investigation of predictive validity and nomological net. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 65, 71–95.Google Scholar
Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1992). On traits and temperament: General and specific factors of emotional experience and their relation to the Five-Factor Model. Journal of Personality, 60, 441–476.Google Scholar
Watson, D., & Clark, L. A. (1997). Measurement and mismeasurement of mood: Recurrent and emergent issues. Journal of Personality Assessment, 68, 267–296.Google Scholar
Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063–1070.Google Scholar
Weber, H., & Wiedig-Allison, M. (2007). Sex differences in anger-related behaviour: Comparing expectancies to actual behaviour. Cognition and Emotion, 21, 1669–1698.Google Scholar
Weiner, B. (1995). Judgments of responsibility: A foundation for a theory of social conduct. New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Wilkowski, B. M., & Robinson, M. D. (2008). The cognitive basis of trait anger and reactive aggression: An integrative analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 12, 3–21.Google Scholar
Wilt, J., & Revelle, W. (2008). Extraversion. In Leary, M. & Hoyle, R. H. (Eds.), Handbook of individual differences in social behavior (pp. 27–45). New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Wolpe, J., & Lang, P. J. (1964). A fear survey schedule for use in behavior therapy. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 2, 27–30.Google Scholar
Wrzus, C., & Roberts, B. W. (2017). Processes of personality development in adulthood: The TESSERA Framework. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 21, 253–277.Google Scholar
Zeidner, M. (2014). Anxiety in education. In Pekrun, R. & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. (Eds.), International handbook of emotions in education (pp. 265–288). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar