Skip to main content Accessibility help

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

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-hvd4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-13T21:46:30.301Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

4 - States and Situations, Traits and Environments

from Part I - Foundational Issues: History and Approaches to Personality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 September 2020

By
Jens B. Asendorpf  and
John F. Rauthmann
Edited by
Philip J. Corr  and
Gerald Matthews
Philip J. Corr
Affiliation:
City, University London
Gerald Matthews
Affiliation:
University of Central Florida
Get access

Summary

According to a famous quotation, “Every man is in certain respects (a) like all other men, (b) like some other man, (c) like no other man” (Kluckhohn & Murray, 1953, p. 53). General psychology is concerned with Point (a), and personality psychology with Points (b) and (c) (Allport, 1937, who owed most of his ideas to Stern, 1911). Personality psychology attempts to describe, predict, and explain those recurrent behaviors and experiences that set an individual apart from some or all other age-mates (personality traits; see ). These behaviors and experiences (psychological states) do not occur in a vacuum – they occur in psychological situations, and if these situations recur, these environmental characteristics (environments) also characterize individuals. This chapter is concerned with the relations between these four key constructs of personality psychology: states and traits, situations and environments.

Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Personality Psychology , pp. 56 - 68
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2020

Access options

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

References

Allport, G. W. (1937). Personality: A psychological interpretation. New York, NY: Holt.Google Scholar
Allport, G. W. (1966). Traits revisited. American Psychologist, 21, 1–10.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.CrossRefGoogle 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.CrossRefGoogle 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.CrossRefGoogle 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.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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
Cohen, J. (1988). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112, 155–159.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.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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. (1936). Principles of topological psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill.CrossRefGoogle 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.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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/D3562CrossRefGoogle 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.CrossRefGoogle 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.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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, 337–360.3.0.CO;2-F>CrossRefGoogle 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.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

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

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

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

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

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

Available formats
×