Social Behavior and Personality (Psychology Revivals)

Arnold H. Buss

• Editorial: Routledge
• Año: 2014
• ISBN:
  9781317574095
• Edición: 1
• Categoría: Psychologie
• Categoría: Persönlichkeit in der Psychologie

The fields of social behaviour and personality had for the most part been studied separately, originally published in 1986, this title was one of the first to consider them together. Social behaviours and contexts are analysed and distinctions are suggested. Social behaviours not previously seen as similar are linked. This a great opportunity to rediscover the work of Arnold Buss one of the greats in Social Psychology.

1 Introduction

The Journal of Personality and Social Psychology has separate sections devoted to social psychology and to personality psychology, a division that reflects the different goals and methods of the respective psychologists. Most of those who study social behavior focus on the processes assumed to underlie such behavior, and they tend to neglect the personality traits of their subjects. Most of those who study personality focus on the dimensions of individual differences and tend to neglect the social contexts and processes that are important determinants of behavior. There are exceptions, to be sure, but two adjacent areas of investigation are usually cut off from each other. The isolation may originate in the separate historical development of each field and in the way students are trained to specialize in particular areas of study. These reasons notwithstanding, social behavior is influenced by personality dispositions, and personality traits can emerge from enduring, oft-repeated social contexts, and so there must be value in considering the two fields together.

This book is not the first to make this attempt. Carson (1969) attempted to integrate a social psychological theory with two personality theories. The social psychological theory was the exchange theory of Thibaut and Kelley (1959), which assigns rewards and costs in dyadic relationships and attempts quantitative predictions about outcomes through the use of cost-benefit matrices. One personality conception was Sullivan's (1953) interpersonal approach to personality and abnormal behavior. The other was the taxonomy of interpersonal traits introduced by Leary (1957).

A recent book by Aronoff and Wilson (1985) is more ambitious and detailed in its specification of social behavior. It resembles Carson's book in using one major personality conception, that of Murray (1938), though the theories of Maslow, Freud, Fromm, Jung, and Erikson are also cited. The book also uses modern concepts and research on social perception, information processing, and attraction. In addition to dyadic behavior, it attempts to explain group processes.

Veroff and Veroff (1980) offer their own personality theory, using stages of development to integrate social motives (which they call incentives). Not all their motives are social in nature, but three of them are, and the flavor of their approach may be seen in the following quotations about these three. Concerning attachment, "The organism learns to enjoy attachment to certain others. The major reason this attachment incentive is generated is because familiar others anchor growing infants, who must often experience their burgeoning cognitive experiences as sea of overstimulation" (p. 23). Concerning social relatedness, "The major basis of reinforcement of this social incentive is the pleasure and approval of significant others ... any time a person considers that his own actions will be evaluated by others, the person will have the potential for experiencing a social-relatedness incentive" (p. 25). Concerning helongingness, it arises from "the child's growing exploration of how he fits into the social system; where he belongs, who his reference groups are, what he is likely to achieve, how other people will react to him" (p. 25).

These three books do not exhaust the approaches that might be used to integrate personality with social behavior, nor do they exhaust the field of social behavior. Furthermore, it is assumed here that no single conception or pair of conceptions can adequately account for the variety of social behaviors and personality traits. It seems preferable to keep one's options open and to inquire about which theoretical conception is especially applicable to a particular domain of social behavior or personality. Of particular relevance are ideas about the origin of social behaviors and personality traits. Social psychological theories tend to be curiously silent about the origin of social behaviors or their developmental course, but an attempt to fill this gap would be beyond the scope of this book. Personality theories, however, do discuss the source of personality traits, usually in terms of development.

Models of Personality

The term models is used deliberately, for none of the traditional theories of personality are discussed here. There is considerable debate about their importance beyond material for textbooks and courses on theories of personality. The traditional theories, although perhaps worthwhile as general theories of personality, are not oriented specifically to the study of social behavior. As a general background for what follows, however, two models of the origins of personality traits require discussion.

The passive model assumes that the environment acts directly on individuals to produce personality traits, and each person is an available vessel into which personality contents are poured. The psychological processes that mediate these environmental effects are classical conditioning, instrumental conditioning, observational learning, and cognitive learning. For social behavior, families presumably play a crucial role, and a large research effort has focused on how one family differs from the next. The net result of this research has been a consensus that differences among families contribute little to the development of personality traits, and the place to look may be within families (Buss & Plomin, 1984). Families are not the only source of environmental effects, and it is known from research on twins that the environment contributes substantially to personality traits (Loehlin & Nichols, 1976). These authors, however, after reviewing their own and others' research, concluded that, "in the personality domain we seem to see environmental effects that operate almost randomly with respect to the sorts of variables that psychologists (and other people) have traditionally deemed important in personality development" (p. 92).

Part of the problem may reside in the passive model, which is beguiling in its simplicity and its appeal to psychologists who tend to manipulate environmental variables. Few psychologists seriously doubt that the environment has an impact on personality, but it is becoming increasingly clear that the recipient of this impact is not an organism that will accommodate to just any environmental determinant.

The solution is to add the active model, which assumes that individuals are curious and manipulative, and they are major determiners of what happens to them. One origin of individual differences is genetic endowment, which can lead to personality traits not only directly but also through interaction with the environment (Buss & Plomin, 1984; Scarr & McCartney, 1983). Whatever the source of personality traits, once established they can modify and interact with the environment, especially the social environment, as follows.

Adults often select work environments, which can vary from the sociable atmosphere of sales work to the isolation of the starwatching of astronomers. They can decide whether to play group or individual sports and competitive or noncompetitive games. They can choose to attend parties or remain home alone with the television set. Students can study with classmates or alone. Although the options of children are more limited, they also can choose playmates, sports, games, and other avocations that vary in sociality, competition, skill, and excitement. Some people schedule their lives so that there is no free time and they are always under pressure, whereas others avoid taking on demanding tasks and therefore live in a more relaxed environment. This is not to say that there are unlimited choices but only that we at least partly determine the environments that can affect us.

Individuals are of course elements of the social environment and can therefore set the tone for social behavior. Consider two people in conversation about to be joined by a third person. The pair might be talking volubly and excitedly or hardly conversing at all; their faces might be contorted in anger or smiling in friendship. Thus, the ambience of the social situation that confronts the third person has been established by the personalities and interaction of the two participants. When there is a party, the guests often know in advance that it probably will be dull and lifeless or exciting and perhaps even dangerous. In many social contexts, then, the tone for social behavior often is set by the participants.

When in a social context, each of us reacts to the behavior of others, thereby affecting what they do presently and subsequently. Thus a humorist may find the jokes greeted by roaring laughter or silence and polite smiles. Attempts at conversation can result in eager responsivity or thinly disguised rejection. Each of us repeatedly rewards or punishes the social behavior of others, that is, provides an environment that has consequences for subsequent social encounters and perhaps even for personality.

The active model also implies that the impact of the environment will be modified by the personality of the recipient. If a sociable person is thrown in with a group of people and must interact with them, this environment matches the need established by the personality trait, and the person should be content, even happy. If an unsociable person is forced to be in such an environment, the mismatch may cause annoyance and strain. For some people, a safe job laden with routine fits their needs for order and security, whereas excitement seekers would find such a job tedious and boring.

Social interaction provides an especially important environment, and the parent-child dyad provides appropriate examples. Suppose a parent tends to dominate a child, demanding exact obedience. One child may agree with the parental demands, another may be coerced into submission, a third may respond with surly compliance, and a fourth may openly rebel. The impact of a consistently domineering parent is likely to depend on the child's prior personality, and the enduring outcome might range from abject submissiveness to aggressive rebelliousness. Similarly, a child might react to head-to-head competition as something to be feared because of likely failure or as a challenge that might establish superiority.

Thus the active model suggests several types in interactions between person and environment. The individual can select from an array of environments, set the tone for the social behavior of others, or become part of the environment by acting as a reinforcing agent. Any particular environment, especially social contexts, can affect people in divergent ways, which means that each person may modify the impact of the environment. These interactions are especially important for social behavior, which by definition occurs in a social environment.

What this Book is About

In this volume, social behaviors and contexts are analyzed, and distinctions are suggested. Social behaviors not previously seen as similar are linked. The conceptions of others are borrowed but typically applied to a narrower domain than heretofore. The emphasis, however, is on original formulations.

Not all social behavior is examined. The focus is on the interpersonal behavior that occurs in face-to-face interaction. Not all interpersonal behavior is appropriate for the task, and two criteria determine inclusion: The social behavior must be important in everyday life, and personality traits must be strongly involved. Presumably, the two criteria are correlated, for if a given social behavior is significant in everyday life, it is likely to be affected by personality traits.

A sketchy account of the various topics furnishes examples of the general approach. What are the truly social rewards, the ones that can be obtained only from others directly, in contrast to those that can be obtained impersonally as well? Two types of such rewards are suggested, together with an exposition of their dimensions, occurrence during development, and their linkage with relationships.

The primordial social relationship is the mother-infant bond. It has implications for the origin of self-esteem, and it shares features with adult attachments. Concerning dominance, there are four means of achieving it. Each has its own rewards, its own impact on others, and its own associated personality traits. Prosocial behavior is examined from the twin perspectives of social and cognitive maturity. Altruism is examined from several perspectives, and multiple parental roles are viewed in light of knowledge about altruism, dominance, and social rewards.

The self in social interaction can be observed, but there are also implicit private aspects of the self that are either kept from others or allowed to become public. The contingencies of social behavior may reinforce social manipulation, but we need to specify the individuals who tend to manage impressions or adhere closely to social rules, the details of these behaviors, and the conditions under which they are likely to occur.

Social anxiety, which is discomfort in social contexts, is an important aspect of social behavior, especially early in the acquaintance process. An examination of both infant and adolescent behavior reveals the presence of two kinds of shyness, one starting early in life and one starting later. The other major variety of social anxiety is speech anxiety, one of the most frequent fears in the population. These various issues converge on the concept of attention from others, which can be aversive for those who are socially anxious or rewarding for exhibitionists.

Most research and theory centers on the content of social behavior and the processes underlying it. The stylistic aspect of social behavior, the how of responses, plays an important role in our impact on others, including their perceptions of us. Two conceptions are offered, one for the physical elements of style and one for the psychological dimensions of style.

Ordinarily, each chapter would start with a review of previous work, followed by the particular contributions of this book. This sequence would not work here, however, because the reader would be lost in a review of literature presented prior to the integrating conceptions that would give the review coherence and meaning. Therefore, the usual sequence is reversed, and each chapter starts with and consists mainly of original conceptions or the integration (or reformulation) of past conceptions. Previous work that is highly relevant is summarized at the end of each chapter in a section called Notes.

When personality traits are mentioned in published work on social behavior, the traits are usually named and the trait measure is cited, but the reader rarely knows precisely what was assessed. The items in a self-report questionnaire may not reflect its name, or the scale may contain several different kinds of items, leaving a reader to wonder what the trait really is. One solution is to present sufficient details of the trait measure for the reader to see exactly what is being assessed, and that is done here. The first time a personality trait is mentioned, the personality scale is presented. Thereafter, whenever the trait is mentioned, there is only a literature citation, but all the trait measures mentioned in the book also appear in an alphabetical appendix.

This solution imposes two limitations on the selection of measures of personality traits. The first is that they can be published here, which excludes omnibus personality inventories and some other questionnaires as well. The second is that virtually all the measures are self-report questionnaires, not because they dominate the field but because they provide the reader with a reasonable idea of the content of the trait. Projective techniques, for instance, require complex scoring or coding, and copyright laws prevent displaying the stimulus materials. When there are several self-report measures of the same trait, these criteria are used to select one: use of standard psychometric procedures and appropriateness to the social behavior with which the personality trait is linked.

Finally, there are two kinds of personality traits discussed: inputs and outputs. The major emphasis is on traits that affect interpersonal behavior (inputs), but also included are personality traits likely to emerge from social interactions that occur over months and years (outputs).

Notes

Theories of Social (Interpersonal) Behavior

Two theories derive from sociology. The first is role theory, which uses the analogue of stage performance. People in everyday life play social and vocational roles in a manner analogous to an actor playing a stage role: "Individuals in society occupy positions, and their role performance in these positions is determined by social norms, demands, and rules; by the role performances of others in their respective positions; by those who observe and react to the performance; and by the individual's particular capabilities and personality" (Thomas & Biddle, 1966, p. 4). There are societal expectations for social roles, and one of the major determinants of how closely role performance approximates expectations is the personality of the person who plays the role.

The stage metaphor is also involved in the other sociological conception, self-presentation. Presumably, just as an actor conveys impressions of a particular character to the audience, so in everyday life an individual conveys particular self-images to others, thereby managing the impressions they receive. For some social psychologists, impression management is the central and incontrovertible aspect of social interaction (Schlenker, 1980). In bare outline, managing impressions requires: "(a) an awareness of the interpretations that others place upon our acts, (b) a desire to maintain face or the appropriate situated identity, (c) a wide range of self-presentational skills, and (d) the willingness to use this repertoire of impression-management strategies" (Snyder, 1981, p. 120).

Another perspective emphasizes the motivational basis of social behavior. One focus is on the rewards that can be obtained in social interaction: the kindliness or physical attractiveness of others; their approval, agreement, or praise; their assistance in obtaining goods or escaping from danger; and the pleasures of social relaxation, the stimulation of conversation, or the excitement of a party (Lott & Lott, 1974). The way these rewards are balanced against costs and the consequences for relationships constitute the thrust of exchange theory (Thibaut & Kelley, 1959).

Another focus within the motivational perspective is on needs or instincts. The instincts may be of the Freudian variety, or the innate tendencies may be the primary drives of learning theorists, but in terms of social behavior the most relevant innate motivational tendencies are those posited by ethologists in their attempt to understand animal behavior. Some ethologists believe that in motivational terms, humans are just like other animals. Thus Lorenz (1966) views aggression...

Índice

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Original Title
• Original Copyright
• Contents
• Dedication
• Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION
• Chapter 2 SOCIAL REWARDS
• Chapter 3 ATTACHMENT AND LOVE
• Chapter 4 DOMINANCE
• Chapter 5 PROSOCIAL BEHAVIOR
• Chapter 6 PUBLIC AND PRIVATE
• Chapter 7 SOCIAL ANXIETY
• Chapter 8 STYLE
• Appendix: Personality Scales
• References
• Author Index
• Subject Index