< Back to previous page

Project

Individual differences in the process dynamics underlying situation selection.

             </>People are actively involved in the selection and avoidance of the situations they face in everyday life. Furthermore, the kinds of situations they select and avoid typically differ across persons. Understandingsituation selection/avoidance, their underlying dynamics, and individual differences therein is of considerable importance for a good understanding of personality. Moreover, selection/avoidance is not only importantin itself, but could also be a key determinant of individual differences in the actual display of behaviors. Yet, there are quite some gaps in our knowledge about all this. In the present dissertation we will contribute to filling several of these, pertaining to both situation selection/avoidance in itself (Chapter 1 to Chapter 3) and selection/avoidance asa determinant of behavior (Chapter 4). </>
             </>In Chapter 1</> we study individual differences in avoidance profiles or signatures across situations. Two key objectives with regard to such signatures are addressed: (a) identifying the critical situational triggers that elicit avoidance behavior, and (b) identifying the most important individual differences in the link between these triggers and avoidance. Results reveal major individual differences with respect to the features that trigger avoidance behavior, with some peoples avoidance being solely based on the characteristics of the conversation partner, whereas others focus only on how they feel themselves.</>
             </>In Chapter 2</> we study the mechanisms underlying individual differences in situation selection/avoidance in terms of various kinds of cognitive/affective forecasts; at this pointwe also pay special attention to individual differences in the different process links involving those forecasts. Results show that two components underlie the forecast structure, namely positive and negative forecasted affect. People further differ in the features they take into account with regard to the link between hypothetical situations and forecasts.Concerning the link between forecasts and selection/avoidance behavior,on average both positive and negative forecasts appear to predict selection/avoidance, with positive forecasts emerging as the strongest predictor of selection and negative forecasts as the strongest predictor of avoidance. Finally, people appear to differ with respect to the importancethey adhere to the two types of forecasts.</>
In Chapter 3</> we study the process dynamics underlying situation selection/avoidance in daily life. In line with Chapter 2, two components are found to underlie theforecast structure, namely anticipated positive and negative affect. Furthermore, situation occurrence in daily life appears to be predictable on the basis of these forecasts, yet only for freely chosen situations that are not mandatory constituents of participants life and for which the average positive forecast level is not excessively high. Finally, in some situations in which forecasts fail to predict selection behavior, dispositional variables come into play as predictors of selection, yet with the impact of these dispositions on situation selection being highly situation-specific.</></>   </></></>
In Chapter 4 </></>westudy the role of individual differences in situation selection/avoidance as a determinant of individual differences in act trends with regard to some target behavior. To this end, we propose a formal framework and associated methodology in which individual differences in the overall probability of displaying the target behavior results from the conjunctionof two components. The first of these refers to the probability of entering a certain situation, and the second to the probability of displaying the behavior given that one entered the situation in question. Within our framework we address two questions: (1) What is the relative contribution of individual differences in both components to individual differences in the target behavior, and (2) what are the contents of individualdifferences in both components. We illustrate our framework and associated methodology with an application to talking behavior. </></>
Date:1 Oct 2008 →  30 Sep 2013
Keywords:Alcohol dependency, Situation selection, Turkisch Minorities, playfulness, child development, Indirect attitude measures, Attitude accessibility, Attitude ambivalence, Affective priming task
Disciplines:Biological and physiological psychology, Human experimental psychology, Applied psychology
Project type:PhD project