Individual Consistencies as Interactive Styles under Decision and Ambiguity Contingencies
Mainstream study of individual differences, including so-called personality, are based on responses to items and scores in tests that are not directly descriptive or predictive of actual behaviors in real-time situations. A behavioral account of individual differences should deal with the idiosyncratic consistencies of individuals´ behavior that make every individual different to others in the way in which interact with situational events. An alternative methodology is presented to study individual consistencies as interactive styles. Styles are conceived as idiosyncratic profiles that characterize individuals interacting with gradients defining situational contingencies. Two experimental studies were carried out to find individual consistencies in two different situations: decision and ambiguity contingencies. Six college students participated in two studies exploring individual consistencies in each of the two contingency situations. They were exposed to four different computer tasks, of which two corresponded to each contingency situation. One of the tasks in each situation was presented twice, within a 1-month interval. All participants performed differently in both contingency situations but showed within-subject consistent functional profiles as depicted by 8-degree polynomial regression analyses. Findings support the possibility of identifying individual consistencies across time and across situations in real-time performances.
KeywordsIndividual differences Interactive styles Individual consistencies Ambiguity contingencies Decision contingencies
The second author acknowledges the doctoral fellowship granted by the National Council of Science and Technology of México (CONACYT) to carry out this research.
This study was funded by the National Council of Science and Technology of México (CONACYT) (grant number 286405).
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
Emilio Ribes-Iñesta declares that he has no conflict of interest. Darcy Raúl Martínez-Montor declares that he has no conflict of interest.
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
- Allport, G. W. (1961). Pattern and growth in personality. New York: Holt.Google Scholar
- Cattell, R. B. (1965). The scientific analysis of personality. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
- Cattell, R. B., Eber, H. W., & Tatsuoka, M. M. (1970). Handbook for the sixteen personality factor questionnaire (16PF). Champaign: IPAT.Google Scholar
- Kantor, J. R. (1924–1926). Principles of psychology (Vols. 1–2). Chicago: Principia Press.Google Scholar
- Mischel, W. (1968). Personality and assessment. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
- Ribes, E. (2018). El estudio científico de la conducta individual: Una introducción a la Psicología Científica. Ciudad de México: Manual Moderno.Google Scholar
- Ribes, E., & Sánchez, S. (1990). El problema de las diferencias individualidad: un análisis conceptual de la personalidad. In E. Ribes (Ed.), Problemas conceptuales en el análisis del comportamiento humano (pp. 79–99). Mexico City: Trillas.Google Scholar
- Ryle, G. (1949). The concept of mind. New York: Barnes & Noble.Google Scholar