Personality and Integrative Negotiations: A Hexaco Investigation of Actor, Partner, and Actor–Partner Interaction Effects on Objective and Subjective Outcomes

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 427-442 ◽  
Author(s):  
Clark Amistad ◽  
Patrick D. Dunlop ◽  
Ryan Ng ◽  
Jeromy Anglim ◽  
Ray Fells
Keyword(s):  
European Association ◽  
Subjective Experience ◽  
Economic Value ◽  
Economic Outcomes ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Integrative Negotiation ◽  
Partner Interaction ◽  
Dyadic Negotiation ◽  
Hexaco Model ◽  
Subjective Outcomes

The present study sought to expand the literature on the relations of major dimensions of personality with integrative negotiation outcomes by introducing the HEXACO model, investigating both effects of the negotiators’ and their counterparts’ personality traits on objective and subjective negotiation outcomes, and investigating two interactions between the negotiators’ and counterparts’ personalities. One hundred forty–eight participants completed the HEXACO–100 measure of personality. Participants then engaged in a dyadic negotiation task that contained a mix of distributive and integrative elements (74 dyads). Measures of subjective experience and objective economic value were obtained, and actor–partner interdependence models were estimated. Personality was generally a better predictor of subjective experience than objective economic value. In particular, partner honesty–humility, extraversion, and openness predicted more positive negotiation experiences. An actor–partner interaction effect was found for actor–agreeableness by partner–honesty–humility on economic outcomes; agreeable actors achieved worse (better) economic outcomes when negotiating with partners that were low (high) on honesty–humility. © 2018 European Association of Personality Psychology

Objections to the HEXACO Model of Personality Structure—and why those Objections Fail

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 492-510 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael C. Ashton ◽  
Kibeom Lee
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
European Association ◽  
Personality Structure ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Personality Research ◽  
Target Article ◽  
Social Media Platforms ◽  
Dimensional Models ◽  
Hexaco Model

The six–dimensional HEXACO model of personality structure and its associated inventory have increasingly been used in personality research. But in spite of the evidence supporting this structure and demonstrating its advantages over five–dimensional models, some researchers continue to use and promote the latter. Although there has been little overt, organized argument against the adoption of the HEXACO model, we do hear sporadic offerings of reasons for retaining the five–dimensional systems, usually in informal conversations, in manuscript reviews, on social media platforms, and occasionally in published works. In this target article, we list all of the objections to the HEXACO model that we have heard of, and we then explain why each objection fails. © 2020 European Association of Personality Psychology

Solidarity and Social Justice: Effect of Individual Differences in Justice Sensitivity on Solidarity Behaviour

2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olga Stavrova ◽  
Thomas Schlösser
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
Individual Differences ◽  
European Association ◽  
Antisocial Behaviour ◽  
The Other ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Psychological Mechanisms ◽  
Justice Sensitivity ◽  
Random Draw ◽  
Hexaco Model

We investigate the effect of individual differences in justice sensitivity (JS) on giving behaviour in a solidarity game, its potential moderators and the underlying psychological mechanisms. In a solidarity game, subjects are asked to make decisions about transferring money to other players in a case in which they win a random draw and the other players lose. The results of four studies showed the following: (1) JS explains a unique portion of variance in the solidarity behaviour, above and beyond other basic personality dimensions (e.g. HEXACO model); (2) its effect does not depend on contextual factors, such as the degree of moral entitlement not to share and the possibility to attribute the recipients’ disadvantage to their own responsibility; and (3) individual differences in the emotions anticipated in response to different outcomes of a random draw and the cognitive interpretation of the allocation situation partially mediate the effect of JS on solidarity behaviour. We also provided the first evidence that JS predicts individual differences in the propensity to take away others’ earnings (antisocial behaviour). The results are discussed with respect to the research on personality as a predictor of prosocial and antisocial behaviour. Copyright © 2015 European Association of Personality Psychology

scholarly journals Lead Us (Not) into Temptation: Testing the Motivational Mechanisms Linking Honesty–Humility to Cooperation

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 116-127 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin E. Hilbig ◽  
Pascal J. Kieslich ◽  
Felix Henninger ◽  
Isabel Thielmann ◽  
Ingo Zettler
Keyword(s):  
Individual Differences ◽  
European Association ◽  
Rank Order ◽  
Cooperative Behaviour ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Economic Games ◽  
The Past ◽  
Person Game ◽  
Hexaco Model ◽  
Shed Light

Over the past decades, there has been considerable interest in individual differences in cooperative behaviour and how these can be explained. Whereas the Honesty–Humility dimension from the HEXACO model of personality has been identified as a consistent predictor of cooperation, the underlying motivational mechanisms of this association have remained unclear—especially given the confound between the temptation to exploit others and the fear of being exploited as motivational drivers of defection in social dilemmas. In a reanalysis and a new experiment, we tease apart these mechanisms by manipulating the rank order of pay–offs in a symmetric two–person game paradigm, essentially implementing the classic prisoner's dilemma, stag hunt, and chicken games. Results revealed that Honesty–Humility predicted cooperation specifically in the games in which temptation was a potential motivator of defection, whereas it did not account for cooperation in those games in which only fear implied defection. Our findings thereby shed light on the underlying motivational mechanisms of the Honesty–Humility–cooperation link and, more generally, demonstrate how economic games can be used to disentangle such mechanisms. Copyright © 2018 European Association of Personality Psychology

Personality in Action: Assessing Personality to Identify an ‘Ideal’ Conscientious Response Type with Two Different Behavioural Tasks

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 808-825
Author(s):  
Gabriela Gniewosz ◽  
Tuulia M. Ortner ◽  
Thomas Scherndl
Keyword(s):  
European Association ◽  
Cognitive Styles ◽  
Personality Characteristics ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Subjective Response ◽  
Response Type ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Typological Approach ◽  
Related Response

Performance on achievement tests is characterized by an interplay of different individual attributes such as personality traits, motivation or cognitive styles. However, the prediction of individuals’ performance from classical self–report personality measures obtained during large and comprehensive aptitude assessments is biased by, for example, subjective response tendencies. This study goes beyond by using behavioural data based on two different types of tasks, requiring different conscientious–related response behaviours. Moreover, a typological approach is proposed, which includes different behavioural indicators to obtain information on complex personality characteristics. © 2020 The Authors. European Journal of Personality published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Association of Personality Psychology

scholarly journals Does Cooperation in the Laboratory Reflect the Operation of A Broad Trait?

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-103 ◽  
Author(s):  
William H.B. McAuliffe ◽  
Daniel E. Forster ◽  
Eric J. Pedersen ◽  
Michael E. McCullough
Keyword(s):  
European Association ◽  
Dictator Game ◽  
Bifactor Model ◽  
Trust Game ◽  
General Factor ◽  
Valid Measure ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Economic Games ◽  
Social Settings ◽  
Self Assessments

The Dictator Game, a face valid measure of altruism, and the Trust Game, a face valid measure of trust and trustworthiness, are among the most widely used behavioural measures in human cooperation research. Researchers have observed considerable covariation among these and other economic games, leading them to assert that there exists a general human propensity to cooperate that varies in strength across individuals and manifests itself across a variety of social settings. To formalize this hypothesis, we created an S–1 bifactor model using 276 participants’ Dictator Game and Trust Game decisions. The general factor had significant, moderate associations with self–reported and peer–reported altruism, trust, and trustworthiness. Thus, the positive covariation among economic games is not reducible to the games’ shared situational features. Two hundred participants returned for a second session. The general factor based on Dictator Game and Trust Game decisions from this session did not significantly predict self–reported and peer–reported cooperation, suggesting that experience with economic games causes them to measure different traits from those that are reflected in self–assessments and peer–assessments of cooperativeness. © 2018 European Association of Personality Psychology

Episode 3: Personality Structure and Change (Transcript)

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emorie D Beck
Keyword(s):  
European Association ◽  
Historical Perspective ◽  
Personality Structure ◽  
Personality Psychology

This is a show on the science of how people are different from one another, where these differences come from, how they develop, and why they matter. The podcast's hosts are Lisanne de Moor, René Mõttus, and Rebekka Weidmann, three personality researchers. It is a collaboration of the European Journal of Personality and the European Association of Personality Psychology (EAPP), and sponsored by EAPP. www.personalitypsychologypodcast.com. In this episode, we hear a presentation by Emorie Beck on her research on nomothetic and idiographic approaches to personality structure and change, couched in a historical perspective.

scholarly journals Searching for Prosociality in Qualitative Data: Comparing Manual, Closed–Vocabulary, and Open–Vocabulary Methods

2020 ◽  
Vol 34 (5) ◽  
pp. 903-916
Author(s):  
William H.B. McAuliffe ◽  
Hannah Moshontz ◽  
Thomas G. McCauley ◽  
Michael E. McCullough
Keyword(s):  
Support Vector Machine ◽  
European Association ◽  
Qualitative Data ◽  
Support Vector Machine Classifier ◽  
Goal Pursuit ◽  
Training Sample ◽  
Support Vector ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Self Presentation ◽  
Personal Strivings

Although most people present themselves as possessing prosocial traits, people differ in the extent to which they actually act prosocially in everyday life. Qualitative data that were not ostensibly collected to measure prosociality might contain information about prosocial dispositions that is not distorted by self–presentation concerns. This paper seeks to characterise charitable donors from qualitative data. We compared a manual approach of extracting predictors from participants’ self–described personal strivings to two automated approaches: A summation of words predefined as prosocial and a support vector machine classifier. Although variables extracted by the support vector machine predicted donation behaviour well in the training sample ( N = 984), virtually, no variables from any method significantly predicted donations in a holdout sample ( N = 496). Raters’ attempts to predict donations to charity based on reading participants’ personal strivings were also unsuccessful. However, raters’ predictions were associated with past charitable involvement. In sum, predictors derived from personal strivings did not robustly explain variation in charitable behaviour, but personal strivings may nevertheless contain some information about trait prosociality. The sparseness of personal strivings data, rather than the irrelevance of open–ended text or individual differences in goal pursuit, likely explains their limited value in predicting prosocial behaviour. © 2020 European Association of Personality Psychology

On Post–Apocalyptic and Doomsday Prepping Beliefs: A New Measure, Its Correlates, and the Motivation to Prep

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 506-525 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adam K. Fetterman ◽  
Bastiaan T. Rutjens ◽  
Florian Landkammer ◽  
Benjamin M. Wilkowski
Keyword(s):  
Social Dominance ◽  
European Association ◽  
Social Dominance Orientation ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Projective Test ◽  
Television Shows ◽  
Societal Relevance ◽  
Political Events ◽  
Popular Television ◽  
Do So

Post–apocalyptic scenarios provide the basis for popular television shows, video games, and books. These scenarios may be popular because people have their own beliefs and visions about the apocalypse and the need to prepare. The prevalence of such beliefs might also hold societal relevance and serve as a type of projective test of personality. However, there are no quantitative accounts of post–apocalyptic or prepping beliefs. As such, we conducted seven studies ( Ntotal = 1034) to do so. In Studies 1 and 2, we developed a post–apocalyptic and prepping beliefs scale, explored its correlates, and confirmed its structure and psychometric properties. In Study 3, we attempted to activate a ‘prepper’ mindset and further explore the correlates of the new scale. In Studies 4 and 5, we investigated covariations in daily feelings, thoughts, and events, and prepping beliefs. In Studies 6a and 6b, we compared scores from ‘real’ preppers and to a non–prepping group. Overall, we found that post–apocalyptic concerns and prepping beliefs are predictive of low agreeableness and humility, paranoia, cynicism, conspiracy mentality, conservatism, and social dominance orientation. We also found that increased belief in the need to prep is associated with God–belief, negative daily experiences, and global political events. © 2019 European Association of Personality Psychology

European Association of Personality Psychology

2020 ◽  
pp. 1427-1428
Author(s):  
Jaap J. A. Denissen ◽  
John F. Rauthmann ◽  
Mitja D. Back
Keyword(s):  
European Association ◽  
Personality Psychology

A Framework for Testing Causality in Personality Research

2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 254-268 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giulio Costantini ◽  
Marco Perugini
Keyword(s):  
Theoretical Model ◽  
European Association ◽  
Laboratory Research ◽  
Personality Psychology ◽  
Causal Explanations ◽  
Personality Research ◽  
Conceptual Clarity ◽  
Candidate Target ◽  
Ecological Momentary ◽  
Over Time

Causal explanations in personality require conceptual clarity about alternative causal conditions that could, even in principle, affect personality. These causal conditions crucially depend on the theoretical model of personality, each model constraining the possibility of planning and performing causal research in different ways. We discuss how some prominent models of personality allow for specific types of causal research and impede others. We then discuss causality from a network perspective, which sees personality as a phenomenon that emerges from a network of behaviours and environments over time. From a methodological perspective, we propose a three–step strategy to investigate causality: (1) identify a candidate target for manipulation (e.g. using network analysis), (2) identify and test a manipulation (e.g. using laboratory research), and (3) deliver the manipulation repeatedly for a congruous amount of time (e.g. using ecological momentary interventions) and evaluate its ability to generate trait change. We discuss how a part of these steps was implemented for trait conscientiousness and present a detailed plan for implementing the remaining steps. Copyright © 2018 European Association of Personality Psychology

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document