Automatic and controlled processes in behavioural control: Implications for personality psychology

Abstract This paper highlights a number of unresolved theoretical issues that, it is argued, continue to impede the construction of a viable model of behavioural control in personality psychology. It is contended that, in order to integrate motivation, emotion, cognition and conscious experience within a coherent framework, two major issues need to be recognised: (a) the relationship between automatic (reflexive) and controlled (reflective) processing and (b) the lateness of controlled processing (including the generation of conscious awareness)-phenomenally, such processing seems to 'control' behaviour, but experimentally it can be shown to postdate the behaviour it represents. The implications of these two major issues are outlined, centred on the need to integrate theoretical perspectives within personality psychology, as well as the greater unification of personality psychology with general psychology. A model of behavioural control is sketched, formulated around the concept of the behavioural inhibition system (BIS), which accounts for: (a) why certain stimuli are extracted for controlled processing (i.e. those that are not 'going to plan', as detected by an error mechanism) and (b) the function of controlled processing (including conscious awareness) in terms of adjusting the cybernetic weights of automatic processes (which are always in control of immediate behaviour) which, then, influence future automatically controlled behaviour. The relevance of this model is illustrated in relation to a number of topics in personality psychology, as well related issues of free-will and difficult-to-control behaviours

A facial expression for anxiety.

Anxiety and fear are often confounded in discussions of human emotions. However, studies of rodent defensive reactions under naturalistic conditions suggest anxiety is functionally distinct from fear. Unambiguous threats, such as predators, elicit flight from rodents (if an escape-route is available), whereas ambiguous threats (e.g., the odor of a predator) elicit risk assessment behavior, which is associated with anxiety as it is preferentially modulated by anti-anxiety drugs. However, without human evidence, it would be premature to assume that rodent-based psychological models are valid for humans. We tested the human validity of the risk assessment explanation for anxiety by presenting 8 volunteers with emotive scenarios and asking them to pose facial expressions. Photographs and videos of these expressions were shown to 40 participants who matched them to the scenarios and labeled each expression. Scenarios describing ambiguous threats were preferentially matched to the facial expression posed in response to the same scenario type. This expression consisted of two plausible environmental-scanning behaviors (eye darts and head swivels) and was labeled as anxiety, not fear. The facial expression elicited by unambiguous threat scenarios was labeled as fear. The emotion labels generated were then presented to another 18 participants who matched them back to photographs of the facial expressions. This back-matching of labels to faces also linked anxiety to the environmental-scanning face rather than fear face. Results therefore suggest that anxiety produces a distinct facial expression and that it has adaptive value in situations that are ambiguously threatening, supporting a functional, risk-assessing explanation for human anxiet

A consensual paradigm for personality: Introduction to special issue

This Special Issue poses a pertinent question: Is a consensual paradigm needed, possible, or even desirable, in personality psychology? One seems necessary to unify the disparate perspectives that characterise the field, as well as to make a major contribution to the broader unification of psychology in which individual differences loom large. This discussion is presented in relation to standard models in mature science where scientific progress seems more assured. Additionally, such a consensual paradigm would contribute positively to a (at least, partial) resolution of the reproduction and replication problems in psychology and the social sciences more widely - by taking seriously the influences of personality factors and processes that can play havoc with the interpretation of main effects and how to account for error terms. In this Special Issue, 14 papers span a wide range of perspectives: Descriptive/taxonomic models, meta-theories, cognitive and motivation processes, measurement and statistics, environmental factors, and more abstract notions of human nature and the mind. Although there may be scant evidence of a consensus regarding the preferred approach, it seems clear enough that synthesis is now needed. Progress along this path should make a major contribution to the construction of a viable consensual paradigm for personality

Individual differences in emotion elicitation in university examinations: A quasi-experimental study

a b s t r a c t In a quasi-experimental study, we examined the role of individual differences in the elicitation of emotional states in university examinations. Specifically, we assessed emotional states (a) before the first examination (baseline), (b) after receiving positive or negative feedback, and (c) then, again, before a series of subsequent examinations. We also measured effort in examination preparation and interest for studying. Data were collected during a university course that consisted of seven examinations in one semester; and 94 female students completed the BIS/BAS scales and SPSRQ (to measure sensitivity to punishment, SP, and reward, SR). Results revealed that higher BAS, but not SR, individuals experienced higher positive affect (PA) following positive feedback and they also showed higher levels of interest in studying. More generally, higher BIS and SP individuals experienced higher level of negative affect (NA) and they invested more effort in examination preparation; and both higher levels of SP and SR correlated positively with NA after receiving negative feedback. In addition, following negative feedback, higher BAS individuals experienced lower levels of PA, and higher SR individuals invested less effort in examination preparation. Results are discussed in terms of the reinforcement sensitivity theory (RST) of personality and directions for future research

Avanzando con el SAC: Hacia la neurobiología del modelo multidimensional de la motivación de acercamiento

One of the hottest topics in neuroscience is the study of brain-behavioural circuits underlying the processing of reward-related stimuli. A growing body of studies has shed new light on the neural structure of this reward system. In this paper, we discuss the significance of these studies from the perspective of a neuropsychological theory of personality, namely the Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST). RST assumes that variation in sensitivity/reactivity of the reward system is the cause of individual differences in approach motivation (e.g. desire or need for achievement, persistence, and positive emotionality). Within RST, these individual differences are contained in the construct of the Behavioural Approach System (BAS). However, there is an ongoing debate as regards the nature of the BAS. This fact motivated us to review the latest refinements in the neuroscience of the BAS in the context of the reward system. In this review, we identity four distinctive aspects of the BAS: wanting, incentive motivation, striving and liking. Their behavioural effects are compared with the behavioural manifestations of testosterone, dopamine, serotonin and endogenous opioids, respectively. We conclude that the unidimensional view of the BAS is overly oversimplified; and we suggest that it should be studied as a multidimensional construct and, by implication, so too should the reward system.Uno de los temas candentes en la neurociencia es es el estudio de circuitos cerebro-conductuales que están en la base del procesamiento de estímulos relacionados con la recompensa. El número creciente de investigaciones han arrojado una nueva luz sobre la estructura neuronal de este sistema de recompensas. En este trabajo discutimos la importancia estos estudios desde la perspectiva de la teoría neuropsicológica de la personalidad, más concreto, la Teoría de la Sensibilidad al Refuerzo (TSR). TSR supone que la variación en la sensibilidad/reactividad del sistema de recompensas es la causa de diferencias individuales en la motivación de acercamiento (p. ej. deseo o necesidad de logro, perseverancia y emocionalidad positiva). Dentro de TSR estas diferencias individuales se encuentran en el constructo del Sistema de activación conductual (SAC). Sin embargo, existe un debate sobre la índole de SAC. Este hecho nos ha motivado a revisar los últimos hallazgos en la neurociencia de SAC en el contexto del sistema de recompensas. En esta revisión identificamos cuatro aspectos distintivos de SAC: carencia, motivación de incentivo, esfuerzos y gustos. Sus efectos conductuales se comparan con las manifestaciones de testosteronas, dopamina, serotonina y opioides endógenos, respectivamente. Concluimos que la vista unidimensional de SAC es demasiado simplificada y sugerimos estudiarlo como un constructo multidimensional, lo que implica lo mismo para el sistema de recompensas

Perfectionism and personality

This chapter provides a synopsis of research on where multidimensional perfectionism “fits” within the broader framework of contemporary personality theory. Focusing on Hewitt and Flett’s (1991) model of perfectionism--differentiating self-oriented, other-oriented, and socially prescribed perfectionism--the chapter presents a summary and critical discussion of how multidimensional perfectionism relates to the dimensions and facets of two major structural models of personality (the five-factor model and the HEXACO model) and one neuropsychological model of personality (reinforcement sensitivity theory). Implications of the findings for multidimensional theories and models of perfectionism, as well as future perfectionism research, are discussed

Perfectionism, personality, and future-directed thinking: Further insights from revised Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory

In a recent study, Stoeber and Corr (2015) examined how three forms of perfectionism (self-oriented, other-oriented, socially prescribed) predicted participants' affective experiences in the past two weeks, and found that revised Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (rRST) components explained the relations between perfectionism and affective experiences. As an extension, this study investigated whether rRST components—capturing individual differences in the Behavioral Approach System (BAS), Behavioral Inhibition System (BIS), Fight-Flight-Freeze System (FFFS), and defensive fight—also explained the relations between perfectionism and future-directed thinking. 343 university students completed measures of perfectionism, rRST, and positive and negative expectations for the next two weeks. Mediation analyses showed that all BAS components (reward interest, goal-drive persistence, reward reactivity, impulsivity) and the BIS, but not the FFFS and defensive fight, explained how the different forms of perfectionism predicted future-directed expectations. The findings suggest that the BAS and BIS components of rRST, which reflect fundamental emotion-motivational systems of personality, play a role not only in the relations of perfectionism and past affective experiences, but also in those of perfectionism and future-directed thinking

Perfectionism, personality, and affective experiences: New insights from revised Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory

Previous studies have linked perfectionism to differences in reinforcement sensitivity, but findings have been mixed. The present study explored the relationships between three forms of perfectionism (self-oriented, other-oriented, socially prescribed) and components of the revised Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory of personality in relation to the experience of positive and negative affect. In a sample of 388 university students, we found consistent evidence of significant bivariate and semipartial correlations controlling for the overlap between the three forms of perfectionism: self-oriented perfectionism showed positive relationships with the Behavioral Approach System (BAS), the Behavioral Inhibition System (BIS), and the Fight-Flight-Freeze System (FFFS); other-oriented perfectionism showed a negative relationship with the BIS (and was unrelated to the FFFS); and socially prescribed perfectionism showed positive relationships with the BIS and BAS impulsiveness, and a negative relationship with BAS goal-drive persistence (and was unrelated to the FFFS). Furthermore, mediation analyses indicated that the reinforcement sensitivity components (BIS and BAS, but not FFFS) explained differences in how the three forms of perfectionism predicted recent positive and negative affect. These findings open up new empirical avenues in suggesting that fundamental emotion-motivational systems play a key role in the relationship of perfectionism and affective experiences

Managing ‘academic value’: the 360-degree perspective

The raison d'etre of all universities is to create and deliver ‘academic value’, which we define as the sum total of the contributions from the 360-degree ‘angles’ of the academic community, including all categories of staff, as well as external stakeholders (e.g. regulatory, commercial, professional and community interests). As a way to conceptualise these complex relationships, we present the ‘academic wheel’ to illustrate the structural nature of them. We then discuss the implications of the different – and sometimes difficult – perspectives of academic, professional and administrative groups in the context of a number of important social psychological processes. We ask whether it is possible to reconcile, what is sometimes perceived as, managerial Taylorism with the academic freedom of (Laurie) Taylorism. We conclude that recognition and active management of these processes are required for each university to optimise its own brand of core academic value