Reflexive characteristic adaptations: a review of the current research

Psychology

Authors

  • Sergey Alexandrovich Shchebetenko Perm State University, 15, Bukirev st., Perm, 614990, Russia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17072/2078-7898/2017-1-63-70

Keywords:

personality traits, models of personality, reflection

Abstract

The article aims at the general idea of reflexive characteristic adaptations (RCA) and a review of their current research. RCA represent self-schemas responsible for management and monitoring the information about personality traits by a person. Along with the traits, RCA are a component of the personality structure. In a sense, by means of RCA, the decomposition of traits, their «vertical» elaboration is implemented, if one considers the «horizontal» elaboration as a composition of traits themselves. The extant literature examines four types of RCA including attitudes toward traits, meta-traits, meta-attitudes toward traits, and trait efficacy. RCA have been found to supplementary contribute to the associations of traits with life and behavioral criteria. RCA have been also found to reveal newlinks with various criteria, the links which were not observed with traits. RCA also differ in their effects. In particular, the evaluation RCA (i.e., attitudes and meta-attitudes toward traits) contribute to building by the person his or her social environment. On the contrary, the identification RCA (i.e., meta-traits and trait efficacy) may produce incremental contributions to the associations between traits and criteria.

Author Biography

Sergey Alexandrovich Shchebetenko , Perm State University, 15, Bukirev st., Perm, 614990, Russia

Ph.D. in Psychology, Docent, Professorof the Department of Developmental Psychology

References

Eysenck H.J. Dimensions of personality: 16, 5 or 3? – Criteria for a taxonomic paradigm // Personality and Individual Differences. 1991. Vol. 12. P. 773–790. DOI: 10.1016/0191-8869(91)90144-z.

Lee K., Ashton M.C. Psychometric properties of the HEXACO Personality Inventory // Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2004. Vol. 39. P. 329–358. DOI: 10.1207/s15327906mbr3902_8.

Costantini G., Epskamp S., Borsboom D. et al. State of the aRt personality research: A tutorial on network analysis of personality data in R // Journal of Research in Personality. 2015. Vol. 54. P. 13–29. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrp.2014.07.003.

Mõttus R., Allerhand M. Why do traits come together? The underlying trait and network approaches // SAGE handbook of personality and individual differences: Vol. 1: The science of personality and individual differences / ed. by V. Zeigler-Hill, T.K. Shackelford. London, UK: SAGE (in press). URL: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312341252_Why_do_traits_come_together_The_underlying_trait_and_network_approaches (accessed: 20.01.2017).

Rauthmann J.F., Sherman R.A., Funder D.C. Principles of situation research: Towards a better understanding of psychological situations // European Journal of Personality. 2015. Vol. 29. P. 363–381. DOI: 10.1002/per.1994.

Gallagher P., Yancy Jr. W.S., Denissen J.J.A., Kühnel A., Voils C.I. Correlates of daily leisure-time physical activity in a community sample: Narrow personality traits and practical barriers // Health Psychology. 2013. Vol. 32. P. 1227–1235. DOI: 10.1037/a0029956.

Vazire S., Mehl M.R. Knowing me, knowing you: The accuracy and unique predictive validity of self-ratings and other-ratings of daily behavior // Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2008. Vol. 95. P. 1202–1216. DOI: 10.1037/a0013314.

Hogan R., Foster J. Rethinking personality // International Journal of Personality Psychology. 2016. Vol. 2, № 1. P. 37–43.

Mischel W. Continuity and change in personality // American Psychologist. 1969. Vol. 24. P. 1012–1018. DOI: 10.1037/h0028886.

John O.P., Donahue E.M., Kentle R.L. The Big Five Inventory – Versions 4a and 54. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley, Institute of Personality and Social Research, 1991.

Eysenck H.J., Eysenck S.B.G. Manual for the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire:(EPQ-R Adult). San Diego, CA: Educational Industrial Testing Service, 1994.

Рубинштейн С.Л. О мышлении и путях его исследования. М.: Академия наук СССР, 1958. 147 c.

Шадриков В.Д. Роль рефлексии и рефлексивности в развитии способностей учащихся // Психология. Журнал Высшей школы экономики. 2012. Т. 9, № 4. С. 133–144.

McCrae R.R., Costa Jr. P.T. Introduction to the empirical and theoretical status of the five-factor model of personality traits // Personality disorders and the five-factor model of personality (3rd ed.) / ed. by T.A. Widiger, P.T. Costa. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2013. P. 15–27. DOI: 10.1037/13939-002.

Shchebetenko S. Thinking about personality: Comment on Hogan and Foster (2016) // International Journal of Personality Psychology. 2017. Vol. 3, № 1. P. 9–12.

DeYoung C.G. Cybernetic Big Five Theory // Journal of Research in Personality. 2015. Vol. 56. P. 33–58. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrp.2014.07.004.

Дорфман Л.Я. Каузальный плюрализм и холизм в концепции метаиндивидуального мира // Психология. Журнал Высшей школы экономики. 2016. Т. 13, № 1. С. 115–153.

Карпов А.В. Рефлексия в структуре сознания // Вестник Ярославского государственного университета им. П.Г. Демидова. Серия Гуманитарные науки. 2012. № 1(19). С. 6–12.

Леонтьев Д.А., Осин Е.Н. Рефлексия «хорошая» и «дурная»: от объяснительной модели к дифференциальной диагностике // Психология. Журнал Высшей школы экономики. 2014. Т. 11, № 4. С. 110–135.

Петровский В.А. Состоятельность и рефлексия: модель четырех ресурсов // Психология. Журнал Высшей школы экономики. 2008. Т. 5, № 1. С. 77–100.

Старовойтенко Е.Б. Отношение к себе: от культурогенеза к индивидуальному развитию // Психология. Журнал Высшей школы экономики. 2011. Т. 8, № 4. С. 3–28.

Higgins E.T. Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect // Psychological Review. 1987. Vol. 94. P. 319–340. DOI: 10.1037//0033-295x.94.3.319.

Conway M.A. Memory and the self // Journal of Memory and Language. 2005. Vol. 53. P. 594–628. DOI: doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2005.08.005.

Efklides A. Metacognition: Defining its facets and levels of functioning in relation to self-regulation and co-regulation // European Psychologist. 2008. Vol. 13. P. 277–287. DOI: 10.1027/1016-9040.13.4.277.

Шмелев А.Г. Психосемантика и психодиагностика личности: дис. … д-ра психол. наук. М.: МГУ, 1994. 513 с.

Shchebetenko S. «The best man in the world»: Attitudes toward personality traits // Психология. Журнал Высшей школы экономики.Т. 11, № 3. С. 129–148.

Щебетенко С.А., Тютикова Е.А. «Картина хороша, потому что хороша открытость опыту»: опосредующая роль установок на черты личности в индивидуальных различиях отношения к живописи // Психология. Журнал Высшей школы экономики. 2015. Т.12, №122–141.

Shchebetenko S. Reflexive characteristic adaptations within the five-factor theory: Between basic tendencies and external outcomes // Personality and Individual Differences. 2016. Vol. 101. P. 35–41. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2016.05.055.

Балабина А.Д. Рефлексивные адаптации характера и социометрический статус // Вестник Пермского университета. Философия. Психология. Социология. 2015. Вып. 2(22). С. 55–64.

Щебетенко С.А. «Скажи, какой человек хорош, и я скажу, насколько ты популярен»: установки на черты личности как предиктор активности «друзей» пользователя социальной сети «Вконтакте» // Национальный психологический журнал. 2016. № 4(24). С. 34–44.

Щебетенко С.А. Черты личности и рефлексивные адаптации характера: изоморфизм или полиморфизм? // Вестник Пермского университета. Философия. Психология. Социология. 2016. Вып. 1(25). С. 57–73.

Shchebetenko S., Bergfeld A.Y. The relationship between extraversion and physical attractiveness of online network users assessed by personnel recruiters // Australian Journal of Psychology. 2016. Vol. 68. P. 301–311. DOI: 10.1111/ajpy.12108.

Strack F., Deutsch R. Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behavior // Personality and Social Psychology Review. Vol.P.220–247. DOI: 10.1207/s15327957pspr

Щебетенко С.А. Диспозициональная эффективность: на пересечении диспозиционального и когнитивного подходов // Психология и психотехника. 2015. № 9. C. 923–933. DOI: 10.7256/2070-8955.2015.9.16060.

References

Eysenck H.J. Dimensions of personality: 16, 5 or 3? – Criteria for a taxonomic paradigm. Personality and Individual Differences. 1991, vol. 12, pp. 773–790. DOI: 10.1016/0191-8869(91)90144-z. (In English).

Lee K., Ashton M.C. Psychometric properties of the HEXACO Personality Inventory. Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2004, vol. 39, pp. 329–358. DOI: 10.1207/s15327906mbr3902_8. (In English).

Costantini G., Epskamp S., Borsboom D. et al. State of the aRt personality research: A tutorial on network analysis of personality data in R. Journal of Research in Personality. 2015, vol. 54, pp. 13–29. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrp.2014.07.003. (In English).

Mõttus R., Allerhand M. Why do traits come together? The underlying trait and network approaches. SAGE handbook of personality and individual differences: Vol. 1: The science of personality and individual differences / ed. by V. Zeigler-Hill, T.K. Shackelford. London, UK: SAGE (in press). Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/312341252_ Why_do_traits_come_together_The_underlying_trait_ and_network_approaches (accessed: 20.01.2017). (In English).

Rauthmann J.F., Sherman R.A., Funder D.C. Principles of situation research: Towards a better understanding of psychological situations. European Journal of Personality. 2015, vol. 29, pp. 363–381. DOI: 10.1002/per.1994. (In English).

Gallagher P., Yancy Jr. W.S., Denissen J.J.A., Kühnel A., Voils C.I. Correlates of daily leisure-time physical activity in a community sample: Narrow personality traits and practical barriers. Health Psychology. 2013, vol. 32, pp. 1227–1235. DOI: 10.1037/a0029956. (In English).

Vazire S., Mehl M.R. Knowing me, knowing you: The accuracy and unique predictive validity of self-ratings and other-ratings of daily behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 2008, vol. 95, pp. 1202–1216. DOI: 10.1037/a0013314. (In English).

Hogan R., Foster J. Rethinking personality. International Journal of Personality Psychology. 2016, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 37–43. (In English).

Mischel W. Continuity and change in personality. American Psychologist. 1969, vol. 24, pp. 1012–1018. DOI: 10.1037/h0028886. (In English).

John O.P., Donahue E.M., Kentle R.L. The Big Five Inventory – Versions 4a and 54. Berkeley: Institute of Personality and Social Research, 1991. (In English).

Eysenck H.J., Eysenck S.B.G. Manual for the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire: (EPQ-R Adult). San Diego, CA: Educational Industrial Testing Service, 1994. (In English).

Rubinshteyn S.L. O myshlenii i putyakh ego issledovaniya [Thinking and ways to research it]. Moscow, Akademiya nauk USSR Publ., 1958, 147 p. (In Russian).

Shadrikov V.D. [The Role of Reflection and Reflexivity in Ability Development in Students]. Psikhologiya. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki [Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics]. 2012, vol. 9, no. 4, pp. 133–144. (In Russian).

McCrae R.R., Costa Jr. P.T. Introduction to the empirical and theoretical status of the five-factor model of personality traits. Personality disorders and the fivefactor model of personality (3rd ed.) / ed. by T.A. Widiger, P.T. Costa, Washington, APA Publ., 2013, pp. 15–27. DOI: 10.1037/13939-002. (In English).

Shchebetenko S. Thinking about personality: Comment on Hogan and Foster (2016). International Journal of Personality Psychology. 2017, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 9–12. (In English).

DeYoung C.G. Cybernetic Big Five Theory. Journal of Research in Personality. 2015, vol. 56, pp. 33–58. DOI: 10.1016/j.jrp.2014.07.004. (In English).

Dorfman L.Ya. [The Causal Pluralism and Holism in the Meta-Individual World Theory]. Psikhologiya. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki [Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics]. 2016, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 115–153. (In Russian).

Karpov A.V. [Reflection in the Structure of Consciousness]. Vestnik Yaroslavskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta im. P.G. Demidova. Seriya Gumanitarnye nauki [P.G. Demidov Yaroslavl State University Herald. Series the Humanities]. 2012, no. 1(19), pp. 6–12. (In Russian).

Leontev D.A., Osin E.N. [«Good» and «Bad» Reflection: From An Explanatory Model To Differential Assessment]. Psikhologiya. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki [Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics]. 2014, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 110–135. (In Russian).

Petrovskiy V.A. [Opulence and Reflection: Four Resources Model]. Psikhologiya. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki [Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics]. 2008, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 77–100. (In Russian).

Starovoytenko E.B. [Relationship to Oneself: From Cultural Genesis to Individual Development]. Psikhologiya. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki [Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics], 2011, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 3–28. (In Russian).

Higgins E.T. Self-discrepancy: A theory relating self and affect. Psychological Review. 1987, vol. 94, pp. 319–340. DOI: 10.1037//0033-295x.94.3.319. (In English).

Conway M.A. Memory and the self. Journal of Memory and Languag. 2005, vol. 53, pp. 594–628. DOI: doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2005.08.005. (In English).

Efklides A. Metacognition: Defining its facets and levels of functioning in relation to self-regulation and co-regulation. European Psychologist. 2008, vol. 13, pp. 277–287. DOI: 10.1027/1016-9040.13.4.277. (In English).

Shmelev A.G. Psikhosemantika i psikhodiagnostika lichnosti: dis. … d-ra psikhol. nauk [Psychosemantics and psychodiagnosis of personality: dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Psychology]. Moskow, MSU Publ., 1994, 513 p. (In Russian).

Shchebetenko S. «The best man in the world»: Attitudes toward personality traits. Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics. 2014, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 129–148. (In English).

Schebetenko S.A., Tyutikova E.A. [«The Picture is Good Because Openness to Experience is Good»: The Mediating Role of Attitudes toward Personality Traits in Individual Differences in Painting Preferences]. Psikhologiya. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki [Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics]. 2015, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 122–141. (In Russian).

Shchebetenko S. Reflexive characteristic adaptations within the five-factor theory: Between basic tendencies and external outcomes. Personality and Individual Differences. 2016, vol. 101, pp. 35–41. DOI: 10.1016/j.paid.2016.05.055. (In English).

Balabina A.D. [Reflexive characteristic adaptations and sociometric status]. Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Filosofiya. Psikhologiya. Sotsiologiya [Perm University Herald. Series «Philosophy. Psychology. Sociology»]. 2015, no. 2(22), pp. 55–64. (In Russian).

Schebetenko S.A. [«Tell me, what kind of person is good, and I’ll tell you how popular you are»: setting personality traits as a predictor of the activity of «friends» of the user of the social network «Vkontakte»]. Psikhologiya. Zhurnal Vysshey shkoly ekonomiki [Psychology. Journal of the Higher School of Economics]. 2016, no 4(24), pp. 34–44. (In Russian).

Schebetenko S.A. [Personality traits and reflexive characteristic adaptations: the isomorphism or a polymorphism?]. Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Filosofiya. Psikhologiya. Sotsiologiya [Perm University Herald. Series «Philosophy. Psychology. Sociology»]. 2016, no. 1(25), pp. 57–73. (In Russian).

Shchebetenko S., Bergfeld A.Y. The relationship between extraversion and physical attractiveness of online network users assessed by personnel recruiters. Australian Journal of Psychology. 2016, vol. 68, pp. 301–311. DOI: 10.1111/ajpy.12108. (In English).

Strack F., Deutsch R. Reflective and impulsive determinants of social behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review. 2004, vol. 8, pp. 220–247. DOI: 10.1207/s15327957pspr0803_1. (In English).

Schebetenko S.A. [Trait Efficacy: At the Crossroads of the Dispositional and Cognitive Approaches to Personality]. Psikhologiya i psikhotekhnika [Psychology and Psychotechnics]. 2015, no. 9, pp. 923–933. DOI: 10.7256/2070-8955.2015.9.16060. (In Russian).

Published

2017-03-30

Issue

Вестник 2017 Выпуск 1 (1)

Section

Статьи

License

Copyright (c) 2022 Perm University Herald. Philosophy. Psychology. Sociology

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.