© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
CHAPTER 12
Cognitive Topics in Personality
1
Part II. The Cognitive/Experiential
Domain
2

Cognitive Experiences

Emotions
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Individual Differences in Cognition
3

Individual differences in how people process
information

Perception

Interpretation

Goals
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Individual Differences in Perception
4

Field Dependence-Independence Theory

Reducer-Augmenter Theory
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Field Dependence-Independence
(Witkin,1962)
5

Field Dependent
 Perceptions
of environment based on external cues
from the environment (“the field”).

Field Independent
 Perceptions
of environment based on internal cues from
their own bodily sensations.
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
6
Measuring field independence

Rod and Frame Test (RFT)
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Measuring field independence
7

Embedded Figures Test (EFT)
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Dependent or Independent?
8
1.
More attentive to social cues
2.
Greater Responsibility-taking, more self-reliant
3.
Warm, affectionate, tactful, accepting of others
4.
5.
Demanding, inconsiderate, manipulative, cold and
distant in relationships
Shows Initiative
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Field Dependence-Independence:
What does research say?
9

Education:
 Field
independent: natural sciences, math, engineering,
language
 Field dependent: social sciences and education

Careers:
 Field
independent officers performed better on
shooting task and gave more accurate description of
critical event
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Reducer-Augmenter Theory (Petrie)
10



People differ in their reactions to sensory stimulation
Reducers: Nervous system dampens, or “reduces,”
the effects of sensory stimulation.
Augmenters: Nervous system amplified, or
“augments,” the subjective impact of sensory cues.
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
For each pair of activities or events, choose the response
that best indicates your preference:
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
Hard Rock
Music
Soft Pop
Music
Action
Movies
Comedy
Movies
Contact
Sports
Noncontact
Sports
A drum solo
A flute solo
Too much
exercise
Too Little
Exercise
Augmenters
Reducers
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Reducer-Augmenter Theory (Petrie)
12

Ex: Individual Difference in Pain Tolerance: when
people undergo same physical stimulus, but react
differently to the stimulus (report a different level
of pain).
Low
Pain Tolerance
Augmenters
High
Reducers
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Research Says!
13
 Reducers show relatively small brain responses to
flashes of light and bursts of noise compared to
augmenters
 Reducers seek strong stimulation, drink more coffee,
smoke more, and have a lower threshold to become
bored
 Reducers tend to start smoking at an earlier age, and
to engage in minor delinquencies as adolescents
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Match similar terms together!
14
Reducer
 Augmenter
 Field-Independence
 Field-Dependence
 Extraversion
 Introversion
 Psychology Students

© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
INTERPRETATION
Individual Differences in Interpretation
15

Individual differences that determine our construal
of the world
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
16
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Client names a set of 10 to
20 people who are
important in his/her life.
17
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Significant Other
An ex
Myself
18
Researcher selects 3 elements
(people) and asks client which
2 elements are similar and
which element is different?
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Significant Other
An ex
Myself
Client provides label for
similarity.
Laid-back
19
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Significant Other
An ex
Myself
Client provides label for
difference.
Laid-back
20
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Nervous
Significant Other
An ex
Myself
Label for similarity and label
for difference make up
similarity-contrast construct.
Laid-back
21
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Nervous
Kelly’s Personal Construct Theory
22



Construct Systems: personal theories that help us to
understand, control and predict life events.
The ways in which people describe the self and
others (i.e., adjectives) shows how people interpret
the world.
Personal constructs:
 Mature------Childish
 Bad
influence-----------Mentor
 Oddball-----------Mainstream
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Rotter’s Locus of Control:
How responsible are you for the events that occur in your life?
23
External
Internal
Events are outside the
person’s control
Events are under the
person’s control
Even if I study (behavior), I may not receive an A.
**Failure Expectancy
If I study (behavior), then I will receive an A.
**Achievement/Success Expectancy
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Example Items-Which are External or
Internal?
24

#2
 Many
of the unhappy things in people's lives are partly
due to bad luck.
 People's misfortunes result from the mistakes they make.

#10
 In
the case of the well prepared student there is rarely
if ever such a thing as an unfair test.
 Many times exam questions tend to be so unrelated to
course work that studying in really useless.
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Learned Helplessness
25

2-Part Study
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Learned Helplessness
26




Explanatory style: The way in which people
explain (“attribute”) bad or good events that
happen in their lives
External or internal
Stable or unstable
Global or specific
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
27
Internal vs.
External
• Did I or an outside force cause this
event?
Stable vs.
Unstable
• Will this good or bad event happen
again?
Universal
vs. Specific
• Is this good or bad event a reflection
of my global self or a specific life
domain?
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Bad Event
28
Optimist
• External
• Unstable
• Specific
Pessimist
• Internal
• Stable
• Universal
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Good Event
29
Optimist
• Internal
• Stable
• Universal
Pessimist
• External
• Unstable
• Specific
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
On Spring Break in
Vegas, Alan wins $3,000
playing blackjack. Alan
is a pessimist. How would
Alan explain the reason
for his winnings?
30
On Spring Break in
Vegas, Kate wins
$3,000 playing
blackjack. Kate is an
optimist. How would
Kate explain the
reason for her
winnings?
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Meg received a D on her
psychology mid-term.
Meg is a pessimist. How
would Meg explain the
reason for her poor
grade?
31
Calvin received a D on
his psychology midterm. Calvin is an
optimist. How would
Calving explain the
reason for his poor
grade?
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Need for Cognition
(Cacioppo & Petty, 1982)
32


Individual difference variable in interpretation
Need to understand and explain the world
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
NFC- Example Items
33




I would prefer complex to simple problems.
Thinking is not my idea of fun. R
I feel relief rather than satisfaction after completing
a task that required a lot of mental effort. R
The notion of thinking abstractly is appealing to me.
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Need for Cognition is positively
correlated with:
34
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
Agreeableness
Conscientiousness
Emotional Stability
Openness to Experience
Extraversion
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
For each print ad…
35
1.
What was the product?
2.
What was the brand?
3.
What did the ad claim?
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Individual Differences in Goals
36

People differ in their goals, and these differences
are part of personality
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Dweck: Lay Theories of Intelligence
37
Entity
Theory
Incremental
Theory
• Intelligence is a fixed internal
characteristic
• People cannot change their
intelligence level
• Intelligence is not fixed and is
changeable
• Intelligence can improve through
effort, persistence, etc.
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Knee: Lay Theories of Relationships
(ITRs)
38
Destiny
Theory
• Entity theory
• Relationship is or is not
meant to last
Growth
Theory
• Incremental Theory
• Relationships can be
improved and worked on
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood(Knee,
Patrick, & Lonsbary, 2003)
ITR: Example Items: Growth or Destiny?
39
1.
2.
3.
4.
The ideal relationship develops gradually over
time.
Problems in a relationship can bring partners
closer together.
Relationships that do not start off well inevitably
fail.
Potential relationship partners are either destined
to get along or they are not.
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
ITR: Example Items: Growth or Destiny?
40




The ideal relationship develops gradually over time. G
Life Outcomes?
Favorable?
Unfavorable?
Problems
in a relationship
can bring partners
closer
together. G
Relationships that do not start off well inevitably fail. D
Potential relationship partners are either destined to get
along or they are not. D
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
41
Growth
Destiny
Fewer one night-stands
If believe RR is meant to be,
then RR lasts long time
More time dating same person
If problem arises early on, more
likely to terminate
More likely to repair
relationship when problems
arise
If initial satisfaction/closeness is
low, more likely to terminate
Greater use of ineffective
coping strategies
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
ITRs and Big Five
42
Destiny
Growth
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Growth
Destiny
↑ Conscientiousness
↑ Openness to
Experience
↑ Agreeableness
↑ Extraversion
↑ Neuroticism
43
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Higgins: Theory of Regulatory Focus
44
Promotion
Focus
• Focused on advancement, growth,
accomplishments
• Behaviors = eagerness, approach
Prevention
Focus
• Focused on protection, safety, prevention
of negative outcomes and failures
• Behaviors = vigilance, caution, attempts
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Focus determines motivation
45

Promotion-Focus
 “If
you solve 22 of the 25 anagrams, you will play
Wheel of Fortune”

Prevention Focus
 “If
you get 4 or more of the 25 anagrams wrong, you
will play the unvaried repetition task”

DV = Time spent working on unsolvable anagrams
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood
Higgins: Theory of Regulatory Focus
Positively correlated with E
and Behavioral Activation
46
Promotion
Focus
• Focused on advancement, growth,
accomplishments
• Behaviors = eagerness, approach
Prevention
Focus
• Focused on protection, safety, prevention
of negative outcomes and failures
• Behaviors = vigilance, caution, attempts
Positively correlated with
© 2015 M. Guthrie Yarwood N and Harm Avoidance