Behavioral variability and consistency: Experimental bases for a psychological theory of personality

Authors

  • José Santacreu Mas Universidad Autónoma de Madrid Spain

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24310/espsiescpsi.v6i1.13272

Keywords:

Effective Contingencies, Programmed Contingencies, Exploration, Consistency, Variability, Individual Differences, Personality

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to explain how and why individual differences emerge despite accounting for biological and socio-cultural differences, why people behave differently in the same context, and how behavior becomes stable and consistent. We review the experimental work on variability and stereotypy. In animal research, in contrast to expectations, there is interindividual variability in behavior under extreme environmental control. In addition, intraindividual consistency (stereotypy) is detected in animals whose behavior is not fully adjusted to the contingencies. The differences in what is learned (the kind of contingency relations) among laboratory animals can be explained by: a) the differences between effective contingencies and programmed contingencies, and b) the relationship between exploration and rate of reinforcement. In experimental studies in humans, learning differences in identical environments depend, further to the above, on what was previously learned by the individual (experience and education) and the thoroughness and internal consistency of task instructions. From these concepts, we propose a psychological theory of personality that explains: (a) how we learn different relationships from the same experience; (b) how behavioral individual differences emerge (variability); and (c) why each individual’s behavior becomes stable and consistent.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Balsam, P. D., Deich, J. D., Ohyama, T. & Stokes, P. D. (1998). Origins of new behavior. In W. O’Donohue (Ed.), Learning and behavior therapy (pp. 403-420). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Cattell, R. B. (1980). Personality and learning theory: Vol. 2. A systems theory of maturation and structured learning. New York: Springer.

Cronbach, L. J. (1957). The two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 12, 671-684. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0043943

Cronbach, L. J. (1975). Beyond the two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 30, 116-127. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0076829

Dam, G. & Körding, K. (2009). Exploration and exploita tion during sequential search. Cognitive Science, 33, 530541. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01021.x

Funder, D. C. (2009). Persons, behaviors and situations: An agenda for personality psychology in the postwar era. Journal of Research in Personality 43, 120–126. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2008.12.041

Hernández, J.M., Santacreu, J. & Rubio, V. (1999). Evaluación de la personalidad: Una alternativa teórico metodológica [Personality assessment: A theoretical methodological alternative]. Escritos de Psicología, 3, 20-28.

Hernández, J.M., Rubio, V.J., Revuelta, J. & Santacreu, J. (2006). A Procedure for Estimating Intrasubject Behavior Consistency. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 417-434. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0013164405275667

Hernández, J. M., Santacreu J. Revuelta, J. & Rubio, V. (2011). Are We more Consistent when Talking about Ourselves than when Behaving? Consistency Differences through a Questionnaire and an Objective Task. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 14, 207-217. http://dx.doi.org/10.5209/rev_SJOP.2011.v14.n1.18

Katila, R & Ahuja, G. (2002). Something old, something new: a longitudinal study of search behavior and new product introduction. Academy of Management Journal, 45, 1183-1194. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/3069433

Kinloch, J. M., Foster, T. M. & McEwan, J. S. A. (2009). Extinction-induced variability in human behavior. The Psychological Record, 59, 347–370.

Lozano, J. H., Hernandez, J. M. & Santacreu, J. (2011). Fluid intelligence and discriminative operant learning of reinforcement contingencies in a fixed-ratio 3 schedule. Learning and Individual Differences, 21, 585–589. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2011.07.009

March, J. G. (1991). Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning.organization Science, 2, 71-87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2.1.71

Martínez, H., Ortiz, G. & González, A. (2007). Efectos diferenciales de instrucciones y consecuencias en ejecuciones de discriminación condicional humana [Differential effects of instructions and consequences in performances of human conditional discrimination]. Psicothema, 19, 14-22.

Mechner, F., Hyten, C., Field, D. P. & Madden, G. (1997). Using revealed operants to study the structure and properties of human operant behavior. Psychological Record, 47, 45-68.

Moreno R., & Hunziker, M. H. L. (2008). Behavioral variability: A unified notion and some criteria for experimental analysis. Mexican Journal of Behavior Analysis, 34, 133-143.

Neuringer, A. (2002). Operant variability: Evidence, functions, and theory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 672-705. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03196324

Neuringer, A. (2004). Reinforced variability in animals and people: Implications for adaptative behavior. American Psychologist, 59, 891-906. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.59.9.891

Odum, A. L., Ward, R. D., Burke, K. & Barnes, C. A. (2006). The effects of delayed reinforcement on variability and repetition of response sequences. Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 86, 159–179. http://dx.doi.org/10.1901/jeab.2006.58-05

Pervin, L. A. & John, P.A. (2008). Personality: Theory and research London Guilford Press.

Pervin, L.A. (2003). The science of personality. (2nd ed.) New York: Oxford University Press.

Rubio, V. J., Hernández, J. M. Revuelta, J. & Santacreu, J (2011). Are we more consistent when talking about ourselves than when behaving? Consistency differences through a questionnaire and an objective task. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 14, 207-217. http://dx.doi.org/10.5209/rev_SJOP.2011.v14.n1.18

Rubio, V. J., Hernández, J. M., Zaldívar, F., Márquez, M. O. & Santacreu, J. (2010). Can we predict risk-taking behavior? Two tasks for predicting guessing tendencies in a multiple option test. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 26, 87–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000013

Rubio, V. J., Santacreu, J. & Hernández, J. M. (2004). The objective assessment of personality. An alternative to self-report based assessment. Análisis & Modificación de Conducta, 30, 827-840.

Santacreu, J. (2005). La síntesis de la historia de aprendizaje: Perspectiva conductual sobre la personalidad [The synthesis of learning history: Behavioral perspective of personality]. Acta comportamentalia, 13, 53-56.

Santacreu, J., Rubio, V. J. & Hernández, J. M. (2006). The objective assessment of personality: Cattells´s T-Data revised and more. Psychology Science, 48, 53-68.

Segal, E. F. (1972). Induction and the provenance of operants. In R. M. Gilbert & J. R. Millenson (Eds.), Reinforcement: Behavioral analyses (pp. 1-34). New York: Academic Press.

Svrakic, D.M. &. Cloninger R.C. (2010). Epigenetic perspective on behavior development, personality, and personality disorders Psychiatria Danubina, 22, 153–166.

Staddon, J. E. R. & Cerutti, D. T. (2003). Operant conditioning. Annual Review of Psychology, 54, 115–44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.54.101601.145124

Sutton, R. S. & Barto A. G. (1998). Reinforcement learning: An introduction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Wagner, K. & Neuringer, A. (2006). Operant variability when reinforcement is delayed. Learning & Behavior, 24, 111-123. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03193187

Witkin, H.A. (1974). Psychological differentiation: Studies of development (2nd ed.) New York: Wiley.

Published

2013-05-01

How to Cite

Santacreu Mas, J. (2013). Behavioral variability and consistency: Experimental bases for a psychological theory of personality. Escritos De Psicología - Psychological Writings, 6(1), 20–27. https://doi.org/10.24310/espsiescpsi.v6i1.13272

Issue

Section

Revisión teórica