Personality as a Dynamical System: Emergence of Stability and Distinctiveness from Intra and Interpersonal Interactions

The implications of conceptualizing personality as a cognitive-affective processing system that functions as a parallel constraint satisfaction network are explored. Computer simulations show that from dynamic interactions among the units in such a network, a set of stable attractor states and functionally equivalent groups of situations emerge, such that IF exposed to situation group X, THEN the system settles in attractor Y. This conceptualization explicitly models the effect of situations on a given individual, and therefore can also be used to model the function of interpersonal systems. We demonstrate this possibility by modeling dyadic systems in which one partner's behavior becomes the situational input into the other partner's personality system, and vice versa. The results indicate that each member of the dyad will, in general, exhibit new attractor states. This suggests that the thoughts, affects, and behaviors that an individual typically experiences are a function not of that individual's personality system alone, but rather a function of the interpersonal system of which the individual is a part. Just as individuals have distinctive and stable IF-THEN signatures, so do interpersonal relationships. Understanding the structure of the cognitive-affective processing system of each relationship partner also should enable predictions of their distincitve relational signatures as emergent properties of the interpersonal system that develops.

[1]  Barbara A. Spellman,et al.  If Saddam is Hitler then who is George Bush? Analogical mapping between systems of social roles , 1992 .

[2]  Stephen A. Ritz,et al.  Distinctive features, categorical perception, and probability learning: some applications of a neural model , 1977 .

[3]  Robin R. Vallacher,et al.  Dynamical Social Psychology , 1998 .

[4]  W. Mischel,et al.  Personality as a stable cognitive-affective activation network: Characteristic patterns of behavior variation emerge from a stable personality structure. , 1998 .

[5]  W. Mischel,et al.  Beyond déjà vu in the search for cross-situational consistency. , 1982 .

[6]  S. Read,et al.  Adult attachment, working models, and relationship quality in dating couples. , 1990, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[7]  S. Read,et al.  Explanatory coherence in social explanations : a parallel distributed processing account , 1993 .

[8]  J J Hopfield,et al.  Neurons with graded response have collective computational properties like those of two-state neurons. , 1984, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[9]  P. Thagard,et al.  FORMING IMPRESSIONS FROM STEREOTYPES, TRAITS, AND BEHAVIORS : A PARALLEL-CONSTRAINT-SATISFACTION THEORY , 1996 .

[10]  Jacob Cohen.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences , 1969, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[11]  Keith J. Holyoak,et al.  A Coherence Model of Cognitive Consistency: Dynamics of Attitude Change During the Persian Gulf War , 1993 .

[12]  Richard,et al.  The “Brain-State-in-a-Box” Neural Model Is a Gradient Descent Algorithm , 2003 .

[13]  James L. McClelland,et al.  A distributed model of human learning and memory , 1986 .

[14]  E. Higgins.  Personality, social psychology, and person-situation relations: Standards and knowledge activation as a common language. , 1990 .

[15]  E. Higgins.  Knowledge activation: Accessibility, applicability, and salience. , 1996 .

[16]  Walter Mischel,et al.  The self as a psycho-social dynamic processing system: A meta-perspective on a century of the self in psychology. , 2003 .

[17]  W. Lonner.  Merging Past, Present, and Future in Cross-Cultural Psychology , 2020 .

[18]  J. Gottman,et al.  A General Systems Theory of Marriage : Nonlinear Difference Equation Modeling of Marital Interaction , 2002 .

[19]  Peter J. Rousseeuw,et al.  Finding Groups in Data: An Introduction to Cluster Analysis , 1990 .

[20]  James A. Anderson,et al.  A simple neural network generating an interactive memory , 1972 .

[21]  J J Hopfield,et al.  Neural networks and physical systems with emergent collective computational abilities. , 1982, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America.

[22]  W. Mischel,et al.  A cognitive-affective system theory of personality: reconceptualizing situations, dispositions, dynamics, and invariance in personality structure. , 1995, Psychological review.

[23]  T. Shultz,et al.  Cognitive dissonance reduction as constraint satisfaction. , 1996, Psychological review.

[24]  S. Andersen,et al.  Transference in interpersonal relations: inferences and affect based on significant-other representations. , 1994, Journal of personality.

[25]  S. Read,et al.  Dissonance and balance in belief systems: The promise of parallel constraint satisfaction processes and connectionist modeling approaches. , 1994 .

[26]  Vivian Zayas,et al.  Personality in context: an interpersonal systems perspective. , 2002, Journal of personality.

[27]  R. Golden.  The :20Brain-state-in-a-box Neural model is a gradient descent algorithm , 1986 .

[28]  Yoshihisa Kashima,et al.  A Distributed Memory Model of Averaging Phenomena in Person Impression Formation , 1994 .

[29]  P. Thagard,et al.  Explanatory coherence , 1993 .

[30]  Teuvo Kohonen,et al.  Correlation Matrix Memories , 1972, IEEE Transactions on Computers.

[31]  S. Cole,et al.  "Do I know you?" The role of significant others in general social perception. , 1990, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[32]  W. Mischel,et al.  Intraindividual stability in the organization and patterning of behavior: incorporating psychological situations into the idiographic analysis of personality. , 1994, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[33]  H. Hollingworth.  Personality a psychological interpretation. , 1938 .

[34]  Stephen J. Read,et al.  Traits as Goal-Based Categories: The Importance of Goals in the Coherence of Dispositional Categories , 1990 .