A hypothesized need to form and maintain strong, stable interpersonal relationships is evaluated in light of the empirical literature. The need is for frequent, nonaversive interactions within an ongoing relational bond. Consistent with the belongingness hypothesis, people form social attachments readily under most conditions and resist the dissolution of existing bonds. Belongingness appears to have multiple and strong effects on emotional patterns and on cognitive processes. Lack of attachments is linked to a variety of ill effects on health, adjustment, and well-being. Other evidence, such as that concerning satiation, substitution, and behavioral consequences, is likewise consistent with the hypothesized motivation. Several seeming counterexamples turned out not to disconfirm the hypothesis. Existing evidence supports the hypothesis that the need to belong is a powerful, fundamental, and extremely pervasive motivation.

The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation.

Thank you for downloading using multivariate statistics. As you may know, people have look hundreds times for their favorite novels like this using multivariate statistics, but end up in infectious downloads. Rather than reading a good book with a cup of tea in the afternoon, instead they juggled with some harmful bugs inside their laptop. using multivariate statistics is available in our digital library an online access to it is set as public so you can download it instantly. Our books collection saves in multiple locations, allowing you to get the most less latency time to download any of our books like this one. Merely said, the using multivariate statistics is universally compatible with any devices to read.

Using Multivariate Statistics

2 Taxonomy is always a contentious issue because the world does not come to us in neat little packages (S. Personality has been conceptualized from a variety of theoretical perspectives, and at various levels of Each of these levels has made unique contributions to our understanding of individual differences in behavior and experience. However, the number of personality traits, and scales designed to measure them, escalated without an end in sight (Goldberg, 1971). Researchers, as well as practitioners in the field of personality assessment, were faced with a bewildering array of personality scales from which to choose, with little guidance and no overall rationale at hand. What made matters worse was that scales with the same name often measure concepts that are not the same, and scales with different names often measure concepts that are quite similar. Although diversity and scientific pluralism are useful, the systematic accumulation of findings and the communication among researchers became difficult amidst the Babel of concepts and scales. Many personality researchers had hoped that they might devise the structure that would transform the Babel into a community speaking a common language. However, such an integration was not to be achieved by any one researcher or by any one theoretical perspective. As Allport once put it, " each assessor has his own pet units and uses a pet battery of diagnostic devices " (1958, p. 258). What personality psychology needed was a descriptive model, or taxonomy, of its subject matter. One of the central goals of scientific taxonomies is the definition of overarching domains within which large numbers of specific instances can be understood in a simplified way. Thus, in personality psychology, a taxonomy would permit researchers to study specified domains of personality characteristics, rather than examining separately the thousands of particular attributes that make human beings individual and unique. Moreover, a generally accepted taxonomy would greatly facilitate the accumulation and communication of empirical findings by offering a standard vocabulary, or nomenclature. After decades of research, the field is approaching consensus on a general taxonomy of personality traits, the " Big Five " personality dimensions. These dimensions do not represent a particular theoretical perspective but were derived from analyses of the natural-language terms people use to describe themselves 3 and others. Rather than replacing all previous systems, the Big Five taxonomy serves an integrative function because it can represent the various and diverse systems of personality …

The Big Five Trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives.

It is proposed that motivation may affect reasoning through reliance on a biased set of cognitive processes—that is, strategies for accessing, constructing, and evaluating beliefs. The motivation to be accurate enhances use of those beliefs and strategies that are considered most appropriate, whereas the motivation to arrive at particular conclusions enhances use of those that are considered most likely to yield the desired conclusion. There is considerable evidence that people are more likely to arrive at conclusions that they want to arrive at, but their ability to do so is constrained by their ability to construct seemingly reasonable justifications for these conclusions. These ideas can account for a wide variety of research concerned with motivated reasoning. The notion that goals or motives affect reasoning has a long and controversial history in social psychology. The propositions that motives may affect perceptions (Erdelyi, 1974), attitudes (Festinger, 1957), and attributions (Heider, 1958) have been put forth by some psychologists and challenged by others. Although early researchers and theorists took it for granted that motivation may cause people to make self-serving attributions and permit them to believe what they want to believe because they want to believe it, this view, and the research used to uphold it, came under concentrated criticism in the 1970s. The major and most damaging criticism of the motivational view was that all research purported to demonstrate motivated reasoning could be reinterpreted in entirely cognitive, nonmotivational terms (Miller & Ross, 1975; Nisbett & Ross, 1980). Thus people could draw self-serving conclusions not because they wanted to but because these conclusions seemed more plausible, given their prior beliefs and expectancies. Because both cognitive and motivational accounts could be generated for any empirical study, some theorists argued that the hot versus cold cognition controversy could not be solved, at least in the attribution paradigm (Ross & Fletcher, 1985; Tetlock & Levi, 1982). One reason for the persistence of this controversy lies in the failure of researchers to explore the mechanisms underlying motivated reasoning. Recently, several authors have attempted to rectify this neglect (Kruglanski & Freund, 1983; Kunda, 1987; Pyszczynski & Greenberg, 1987; Sorrentino & Higgins, 1986). All these authors share a view of motivation as having its effects through cognitive processes: People rely on cognitive processes and representations to arrive at their desired conclusions, but motivation plays a role in determining which of these will be used on a given occasion.

/pdf/the-case-for-motivated-reasoning-2ki9tjbrr6.pdf

The case for motivated reasoning.

Behavioral scientists routinely publish broad claims about human psychology and behavior in the world's top journals based on samples drawn entirely from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) societies. Researchers - often implicitly - assume that either there is little variation across human populations, or that these "standard subjects" are as representative of the species as any other population. Are these assumptions justified? Here, our review of the comparative database from across the behavioral sciences suggests both that there is substantial variability in experimental results across populations and that WEIRD subjects are particularly unusual compared with the rest of the species - frequent outliers. The domains reviewed include visual perception, fairness, cooperation, spatial reasoning, categorization and inferential induction, moral reasoning, reasoning styles, self-concepts and related motivations, and the heritability of IQ. The findings suggest that members of WEIRD societies, including young children, are among the least representative populations one could find for generalizing about humans. Many of these findings involve domains that are associated with fundamental aspects of psychology, motivation, and behavior - hence, there are no obvious a priori grounds for claiming that a particular behavioral phenomenon is universal based on sampling from a single subpopulation. Overall, these empirical patterns suggests that we need to be less cavalier in addressing questions of human nature on the basis of data drawn from this particularly thin, and rather unusual, slice of humanity. We close by proposing ways to structurally re-organize the behavioral sciences to best tackle these challenges.

/pdf/the-weirdest-people-in-the-world-480wr4m3kb.pdf

The WEIRDest People in the World

Publisher Summary Agreeableness is probably best conceptualized as a general latent variable that summarizes more specific tendencies and behaviors Agreeableness should certainly qualify as an individual difference having significance for people's daily transactions It can be predominantly an affective evaluation and may be a more diffuse reaction Across a range of studies, agreeableness emerges in the natural language descriptions of the self and peers Furthermore, there is evidence that self-rating and peer evaluations converge in assessing agreeableness Later, the prosocial personality is discussed in this chapter Prosocial behavior can be conceptualized as a form of agreeableness Recent research suggests that there may be important dispositional components to prosocial behavior, and these may be seen even in young children Precise identification of these dispositions has been inhibited by problems of differentiating among social motives, and by weak measures of altruism as an outcome and as a disposition Basic bio-behavioral research suggests that individual differences in agreeableness in adults may have their origins in affective self-regulatory processes in childhood In particular, individual differences in the pattern of inhibition of negative effect may be related to the development of agreeableness and these may be related to health, especially cardiovascular disease

Agreeableness: A Dimension of Personality

Two converging, multimethod studies probed the hypothesis that individual differences in Agreeableness are related to patterns of interpersonal conflict. In Study 1, participants (N = 263) evaluated the efficacy of 11 modes of conflict resolution within the context of 5 different interpersonal relationships. Across all relationships, high- and low-agreeable participants rated negotiation and disengagement tactics as better choices that power assertion tactics. However, low-agreeable participants rated power assertion as a better choice than did high-agreeable participants. In Study 2, participants (N = 124) were assigned partners and were asked to resolve jointly 2 social conflict problems. Partners were videotaped, and observers coded behaviors. Participants also completed ratings of perceived conflict, partner perception, and liking of their partner. Agreeableness differences, sex of participant, and type of dyad partner were related to patterns of interpersonal conflict. Results were discussed in terms of personality and social influences during interpersonal conflict.

Perceiving interpersonal conflict and reacting to it: the case for agreeableness.

This research program explored links among prosocial motives, empathy, and helping behavior. Preliminary work found significant relations among components of self-reported empathy and personality (N = 223). In Study 1, the authors examined the generality of prosocial behavior across situations and group memberships of victims (N = 622). In Study 2, empathic focus and the victim's outgroup status were experimentally manipulated (N = 87). Study 3 (N = 245) replicated and extended Study 2 by collecting measures of prosocial emotions before helping. In Study 4 (N = 244), empathic focus and cost of helping as predictors of helping behavior were experimentally manipulated. Overall, prosocial motivation is linked to (a) Agreeableness as a dimension of personality, (b) proximal prosocial cognition and motives, and (c) helping behavior across a range of situations and victims. In persons low in prosocial motivation, when costs of helping are high, efforts to induce empathy situationally can undermine prosocial behavior.

Agreeableness, empathy, and helping: a person x situation perspective.

This multimethod research linked the Big Five personality dimensions to interpersonal conflicts. Agreeableness was the focus because this dimension is associated with motives to maintain positive interpersonal relations. Converging responses to both hypothetical conflicts and to diary records of actual daily interpersonal conflicts across a two-week period were assessed. Agreeableness was expected to moderate affective responses and tactical choices during conflicts. Patterns of daily conflict were related to self-reported reactions to hypothetical conflicts and to teacher-rated adjustment in adolescents. As predicted, Agreeableness was related to responsiveness to conflict. Agreeableness differences and use of destructive tactics in conflict were significantly related to evaluations of the individual's adjustment by knowledgeable raters. Among the Big Five dimensions, Agreeableness was most closely associated with processes and outcomes during interpersonal conflict.

Agreeableness as a moderator of interpersonal conflict.

Theoretical and empirical work on the processes by which we attribute dispositional characteristics to others has focused almost exclusively on how such processes proceed once the perceiver has been motivated to initiate them. The problem of identifying the factors which prompt the perceiver to engage in an attributional analysis in the first place has been relatively ignored, even though the influence of such factors may extend beyond the initiation of the causal analysis to affect the manner in which it unfolds and, ultimately, the form and substance of its conclusion. From the assumption that the function of an attributional analysis is effective control of the social environment, it was hypothesized that high outcome dependency upon another, under conditions of high unfamiliarity, is associated with the initiation of an attributional analysis as evidenced by increased attention to the other, better memory of the other's characteristics and behavior, more extreme and confidently given evaluations of the other on a variety of dispositional trait dimensions, and increased attraction to the other. These hypotheses were tested within the context of a study of heterosexual dating relationships in which men and women volunteers anticipated varying degrees of dependence upon another for their dating outcomes. The findings support the view that the data processing operations of the social perceiver—from attention to memory to attribution—are part of a unified whole and may be viewed as manifestations of an underlying motivation to predict and control the social environment.

William G. Graziano

Papers

Agreeableness: A Dimension of Personality

Perceiving interpersonal conflict and reacting to it: the case for agreeableness.

Agreeableness, empathy, and helping: a person x situation perspective.

Agreeableness as a moderator of interpersonal conflict.

Outcome dependency: Attention, attribution, and attraction.