11- CAPS (Cognitive-Affective Processing System) Model Flashcards
1- How do we make sense of the personality-consistency paradox?
Person-Situation Debate
* Personality psychology: Behaviour is determined by personality
* Social psychology: Behaviour is determined by social situation
- Is the person or the situation more influential in determining behavior?
Person Argument
* Knowing someone’s traits allows us to predict
their behaviour
* Assumption that:
-Personality is consistent over time
-Should result in consistent behaviour across
situations * e.g. if person is high on conscientiousness, all behaviours will reflect conscientiousness
Personality Consistency Paradox
* We intuitively see personality as stable over time and across situations but behaviour is actually inconsistent across situations (within-person variability)
* To resolve personality consistency paradox, aggregate individual’s
behaviour on a given dimension across situations to estimate a “true” personality score
* Strengths of this method:
- Personality score accurately predicts behaviour in general * People reliably differ from each other
* Limitations:
- Less accurate at predicting behaviour at any one given time for a specific
individual (within-person variability)
- Cannot explain/predict why people with similar personality scores react
differently in a given situation (between-person variability)
Situation Argument
* Correlation between person’s personality traits
and specific behaviour tested is 0.3
-Means that only about 15% of behaviour can be
predicted by personality
* Inconsistency in behaviour across situations evidence of the power of the situation
* Is there such a thing as personality?
Within-Person Variability
* Assumes that variation in personality across situations is meaningless “noise” and a product of measurement error
Between-Person Variability
* Assumes that people with the same score on a personality trait will
behave in the same way in a particular situation
Summary
* Personality consistency paradox: We intuitively see personality as stable over time and across situations but behaviour is actually
inconsistent across situations
* Situation argument: The situation is more important in determining behaviour and personality doesn’t exist
* Person argument: Personality traits can predict behaviour in general but cannot predict behaviour at a specific time for a specific person
Weather analogy
2- Can we predict a person’s specific behaviour in a specific situation?
CAPS
Cognitive Affective Processing System
* Variation in behaviour across situations is not evidence of the nonexistence of personality or meaningless “noise”, but meaningful and
predictable
* Specific situations predictably elicit specific behavioural responses in
specific people
- To understand variation in people’s behaviour, we need to understand how
they’re interpreting the situation
- Person’s mind is made up of cognitive-affective units
3 - Can we predict a person’s specific behaviour in a specific situation?
CAPS
CAUS
Cognitive-Affective Units (CAUs)
* Encodings and construals
-Way that self, other people, situation is being perceived
* Expectancies and beliefs
- Expectations about outcomes, self-efficacy
* Affective and physiological responses
- Emotions, physical sensations
* Goals
- Relevant to the situation, values
* Behavioural scripts and self-regulatory strategies
- How to go about achieving desired goals
CAUs are
* Organized in an associative network
- Some linked while others not
- Strength of links is stable across situations
* Organization of CAUs is unique to each person
- Determined by past experiences and biological predisposition
Situational Activation of CAUs
* Situations activate a particular set of CAUs
- Not all CAUs are active at the same time
- Specific CAUs become temporarily accessible based on features of the situation
If…Then Behavioural Profiles
* Different situations activate different CAUs causing different behaviours
* Each person’s unique CAUs network results in predictable and stable
if…then behavioural profiles
* If Situation A, then behaviour X
* If Situation B, then behaviour Y
What Counts as a Situation?
* Not specific contexts
- E.g. work, school, home
* What matters are the psychological features of situations
- Usually related to other people
- Not just features that are actually present, but also that are perceived/imagined
- E.g. Being praised, being rejected, being criticized, being asked to hang out by a
friend, being asked to hang out by a romantic interest
Examples:
-If space visible to others (situation A), The CAU activated is “others need to think i’m perfect”, then be clean and organized/conscientious (behaviour X)
-If space not visible to others (situation B), The CAU activated is “I have other priorities”, then be messy/not conscientious (behaviour Y)
(see other examples)
- Organization of CAUs form the core of the personality system
Psychological features
of a situation * Real or imagined…..Activate distinctive pattern
of CAUs……. Leading to unique and stable if…then behavioural profiles
Wediko Summer Camp Study
* Do unique if…then profiles characterize individual differences in social
behaviour?
* Method: Observed children’s behaviour in various situations at summer
camp
- Ages 7-13 years old
* Identified several psychological features of situations (“if”)and recorded
behaviour in these situations (“then”) * Peer approaches * Peer teases * Adult praises * Adult warns * Adult punishes
* Results: Each child’s behaviours were systematically related to
features in their situation
- Unique if…then profiles
- If…then profiles highly stable over time
4- Can we predict a person’s specific behaviour in a specific situation?
Strenghts and implications of CAPS
Strengths of CAPS
* Interactionist consensus of person-situation debate
* Accounts for within-person variability
- Variability is useful to understand underlying personality system
Why?
-Different situations activate different CAUs causing different behaviours
-Stable if…then behavioural profiles
* Accounts for between-person variability
Why?
- Different networks of CAUs between people result in differences in behaviour when faced with the same situation
- Due to different pattern of activation among CAUs
Implications
* Knowing a person’s “mind” (CAUs), not traits, allows us to make specific predictions about how that person is likely to behave in a
novel situation
* We can use a person’s observable if…then behavioural profile to infer
what’s going on in their unobservable mind (CAUs) of CAUs
5- Why do people sometimes behave in paradoxical ways?
The Paradox of Rejection Sensitivity
The Paradox of Rejection Sensitivity
* Some people are dispositionally sensitive to social rejection
* Leads them to be very accommodating of others
* BUT sometimes behave in aggressive ways
- Self-fulfilling prophecy: aggressive behaviour leads to actual rejection
* Why?
- Random/confusing or meaningful/predictable?
Using CAPS to Understand Rejection Sensitivity
* CAUs: Fear rejection but also expect it
* Leads to stable if…then profiles
* If rejection not perceived in immediate situation, then accommodate, but remain vigilant for signs of rejection
- Engage behaviours to prevent rejection
* If rejection detected, then hostility and aggression
- Failure in achieving goal of avoiding rejection
- Attempt at self-protection
Rejection Sensitivity and Anxious Expectations
* Does high rejection sensitivity lead to perceiving rejection in ambiguous situations?
* Method: Participants introduced to confederate with whom they were going to chat with for two short sessions (10mins and 5 mins) - Completed a self-report measure of rejection sensitivity
- Self-report on mood, including feelings of rejection - Pleasant initial session (10 mins)
- Told confederate did not want to continue with the experiment
* Experimental manipulation: - Experimental group: No explanation
- Control: No time for second session
* Self-report on mood, including feelings of rejection, again
Results
* People that are more sensitive to rejection were more likely to feel rejected when told that confederate did not want to continue
* Suggests that they readily perceive rejection in ambiguous behaviour of others, but not in all situations
Rejection Sensitivity and Hot Sauce
* Do people high in rejection sensitivity react to rejection with aggression?
* Experimental manipulation: * Rejection: Not chosen by potential partner * Control: Internet down so email wasn’t sent
* Rejection elicited aggression (putting more hot sauce) only in those high in rejection sensitivity
Rejection Sensitivity and Hostility in Relationships
* Do people high in rejection sensitivity also react to rejection with aggression in their romantic relationships?
* Examined if feelings of rejection predicted experiencing a conflict the
next day (using daily diary for 2 weeks)
Results:
* In low rejection sensitive (RS), feelings of rejection and conflict unrelated
* In high rejection sensitive (RS), feelings of rejection on previous day predicted conflict today
- If high feelings of rejection yesterday, then more
likely to have a conflict today - If low feelings of rejection yesterday, then less
likely to have a conflict today * Evidence that high RS are more reactive to
rejection
6- Applications of CAPS
- Can be used in everyday life to make sense of the people around you
- Can use observable if…then behavioural profiles to make inferences about
unobservable mind (CAUs) - Psychotherapy
- Aims to help people identify their CAUs and change them so that their if…then
profiles are more adaptive
