Is Adaptability of Personality a Trait? A thesis submitted to the University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Humanities. Cook ALLIANCE MANCHESTER BUSINESS SCHOOL CONTENTS Contents 2 List of tables 6 List of figures 8 Abstract 9 Declaration 10 Copyright statement 10 Dedication 11 Acknowledgements 12 1.1 Background to the thesis: a focus on personality 15 1.2 The dominating view in personality research and testing 16 1.3 The current thesis: a focus on Personality adaptability 19 1.1 Evidence for personality adaptability 20 1.2 Individual differences in personality adaptability 24 1.1 Traits and states 29 2.2 Taxonomies of personality 31 2.1 The determinants of variation 49 2.2 Goal directed variation 54 2. The biology of personality adaptability 57 2.1 The biology of personality 57 2. From biology of personality to the biology of personality adaptability 61 2.
The outcomes of personality adaptability 70 2. Satisfaction with life 80 2. Investigating Personality Adaptability 83 3. Aims and hypotheses 84 3.3 Identification of the key study variables 87 3.1 Measurement of the study variables 90 3.
Study 1: laboratory study of personality adaptability 99 4. The study variables 100 4. Personality adaptability in the laboratory 101 4.3 Satisfaction with Life 125 4.6 Personality adaptability as an individual difference 134 4.7 Personality adaptability and self-monitoring 141 4.8 Personality adaptability and task performance 143 4.9 Personality adaptability and satisfaction with life 149 4.1 Personality adaptability as an individual difference 153 4.2 Personality adaptability and self-monitoring 156 4.3 Personality adaptability and task performance 157 4. Personality adaptability and satisfaction with life 159 3 4.
Study 2: workplace study of personality adaptability 168 5. The study variables 170 5. Overt naturalistic observation of stand-up comedians in a comedy club 171 5.3 Background to the stand-up comedy industry 176 5.5 Satisfaction with life 207 5.7 Personality adaptability as an individual difference 210 5.8 Personality adaptability and self-monitoring 210 5.9 Personality adaptability and task performance 211 5.10 Personality adaptability and satisfaction with life 218 5.1 Personality adaptability as an individual difference 221 5.2 Personality adaptability, self-monitoring and trait personality 223 5.3 Personality adaptability and task performance 224 5. Personality adaptability and satisfaction with life 225 5.5 Further findings: self-monitoring 226 5.
The assessment of personality adaptability 248 6.1 Task specific personality adaptability 251 6. Goal directed state range 253 6. Representing personality adaptability for research 256 6. Methods of data collection 258 6.
Common method variance 264 6. Directions for future research 268 6.7 Conclusions 276 References 278 Appendices 309 Word count: 72,477 5 LIST OF TABLES Tables Table 4.1: Task 1 memorability questions 106 Table 4.2: Big Five Inventory extraversion items 108 Table 4.3: Self-Monitoring Scale example items 111 Table 4.4: Correlations between expert’s ratings of behaviour in task 1 and task 2 119 Table 4.5: Rotated factor solution for goal directed state range 121 Table 4.6: Standardised indicator loadings: goal directed state range 122 Table 4.7: Rotated factor solution for task specific personality adaptability 123 Table 4.8: Standardised indicator loadings: task specific personality adaptability 124 Table 4.9: Standardised indicator loadings: trait personality 126 Table 4.10: Standardised indicator loadings: satisfaction with life 127 Table 4.11: Rotated factor solution: three and four factor models of self-monitoring 128 Table 4.12: Standardised factor loadings: self-monitoring 129 Table 4.13 Correlations between all variables derived from the standardised CFA and measurement models 133 Table 4.14: Standardised factor loading for task 1 and task 2 extraversion 138 Table 4. Fit indices for invariance tests 139 Table 4.16: Goal directed state range: descriptive statistics 141 Table 4.17: Standardised factor loadings for goal directed state range and self-monitoring 143 Table 4.18: Factor correlations between goal directed state range and self-monitoring 143 Table 4.19: Parameter estimates and fit statistics for high extraversion requiring Task 1 147 Table 4.20: Parameter estimates and fit statistics for low extraversion requiring Task 2 150 Table 4.21: Parameter estimates and fit statistics for satisfaction with life 153 Table 5.1: BFI example questions 184 Table 5.2: Expert mean need for variance scores for NEO-PIR personality facets 187 Table 5.3: Personality adaptability scale. Example items 188 Table 5.4: Comedy performance scale indicators 190 Table 5.5: Correlations between experts’ ratings of success 194 6 Table 5.6: Rotated factor loadings for the three factor models of performance 195 Table 5.7: Standardised indicator loadings: task Performance 196 Table 5.8: Correlations between expert’s ratings of comedians’ behaviour 197 Table 5.9: Correlations between expert’s ratings of required behaviour 198 Table 5.10: Correlations between the modulus of expert’s difference (adaptability) scores 199 Table 5.11: Rotated factor loading for two and three factor models of personality adaptability 200 Table 5.12: Standardised indicator loadings: personality adaptability 201 Table 5.13: Personality adaptability factor correlations 201 Table 5.14: Standardised indicator loadings: trait personality 203 Table 5.15: Rotated factor loadings for three and four factor models of self-monitoring 205 Table 5.16: Standardised indicator loadings: self-monitoring 206 Table 5.17: Standardised indicator loadings: satisfaction with life 208 Table 5.18: Correlations between all variables derived from the standardised CFA and measurement models 210 Table 5.19: Standardised factor loadings for personality adaptability and self-monitoring 212 Table 5.20: Personality adaptability and self-monitoring factor correlations 212 Table 5.21: Parameter estimates and fit statistics for misjudgement models 215 Table 5.22: Parameter estimates and fit statistics for material models 217 Table 5.23: Parameter estimates and fit statistics for delivery models 219 Table 5.24: Parameter estimates and fit statistics for satisfaction with life models 222 7 LIST OF FIGURES Figures Figure 3.1: Simple conceptual model of the relationships investigated in the empirical research 88 Figure 4.1: Goal directed state range: percentage of participants in each range group 141 Figure 4.2: Prototypic model of the task performance regression analysis (goal directed state range) 144 Figure 4.3: Prototypic model of the task performance regression analysis (task specific personality adaptability) 145 Figure 4.4: Prototypic model of the satisfaction with life regression analysis (goal directed state range) 150 Figure 4.5: Prototypic model of satisfaction with life regression analysis (task specific personality adaptability) 151 Figure 5.1: Prototypic model of the task performance regression analysis 213 Figure 5.2: Prototypic model of satisfaction with life regression analysis 219 8 ABSTRACT A thesis submitted to the University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in January 2016 Candidate: Clare Cook Title: Is Adaptability of personality a trait? Due to the dominance of the trait approach, personality is widely reduced to a set of trait scores which represent ‘usual’ behaviour.
However, individuals show substantial variation within their personality (e. Thus there is a need for research into the personality characteristics which underlie this variance so that personality can be more fully quantified. To this end, the current thesis investigated a previously unresearched personality characteristic: personality adaptability, which was defined as: accurate and goal directed selection of personality states across situations which is designed to gain a desired outcomes and which may result in behaviour which is in accordance or discordance with the individual’s personal preferences in any given situation. Two studies were run to investigate whether personality adaptability exists as an individual difference.
The studies also assessed the validity of personality adaptability by establishing its level of divergence from self-monitoring (Snyder, 1974), and role as a predictor of task performance and satisfaction with life (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985). Study 1 utilised a repeated measures design. Participants completed two tasks, within a laboratory setting, designed to require the opposite poles of normal extraversion. Personality adaptability was quantified by calculating the distance between participants’ extraversion level in the two tasks (goal directed state range), and the distance between the required state and observed behaviour in each task (task specific personality adaptability).
Within study 2, overt naturalistic observation of stand-up comedians performing stand-up comedy was undertaken. Personality adaptability was represented by calculating the distance between the required state for achieving a successful task outcome and the observed behaviour of each comedian, along comedy relevant facets of personality. Participants of both studies also completed the Satisfaction with Life Scale (Diener et al., 1985) and Self-Monitoring Scale (Snyder, 1974). The study 1 participants also completed a 7-item version of the Big Five Inventory’s (BFI) (John & Srivastava, 1999) trait extraversion scale while study 2 participants completed the full BFI.
The results of study 1 indicated that, on average, individuals adapted their behaviour in line with the task requirements showing substantially higher levels of extraversion in the high extraversion requiring task, compared to the low extraversion task (d = -1. Consistency between personality (extraversion) state was also shown across the tasks (r = .01) implicating trait personality as a determinant of personality state alongside personality adaptability. Both studies indicated personality adaptability to be an individual difference with the factor models extracted, in both studies, indicating a single factor of personality adaptability. Personality adaptability was also shown to be distinct from self-monitoring and trait personality in both studies, and to be the most pervasive predictor of task performance when compared to trait personality and self-monitoring.
In study 1, personality adaptability represented by goal directed state range accounted for up to 11% of the variance in the measures of task performance while task specific personality adaptability accounted for up to 47%. In study 2, personality adaptability accounted for up to 41% of the variance in measures of task performance. Self-monitoring and trait personality did not account for any unique variance in task performance within study 2. However, trait extraversion showed a similar effect to goal directed state range on task 1 performance, within study 1 (Beta =.
Personality adaptability was not shown in either study to be a significant predictor of satisfaction with life. Rather the trait personality and self-monitoring factors were the unique predictors of this dependent variable. 9 DECLARATION No portion of the work referred to in the thesis has been submitted in support of an application for another degree or qualification of this, or any other university, or other institute of learning. COPYRIGHT The author of this thesis (including any appendices and/or schedules to this thesis) owns certain copyright or related rights in it (the “Copyright”) and she has given The University of Manchester certain rights to use such Copyright, including for administrative purposes.
Copies of this thesis, either in full or in extracts and whether in hard or electronic copy, may be made only in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (as amended) and regulations issued under it or, where appropriate, in accordance with licensing agreements which the University has from time to time. This page must form part of any such copies made. The ownership of certain Copyright, patents, designs, trademarks and other intellectual property (the “Intellectual Property”) and any reproductions of copyright works in the thesis, for example graphs and tables (“Reproductions”), which may be described in this thesis, may not be owned by the author and may be owned by third parties. Such Intellectual Property and Reproductions cannot and must not be made available for use without the prior written permission of the owner(s) of the relevant Intellectual Property and/or Reproductions.
Further information on the conditions under which disclosure, publication and commercialisation of this thesis, the Copyright and any Intellectual Property and/or Reproductions described in it may take place is available in the University IP Policy (see http://documents.aspx?DocID=487), in any relevant Thesis restriction declarations deposited in the University Library, The University Library’s regulations (see http://www.uk/library/aboutus/regulations) and in The University’s policy on Presentation of Theses. 10 DEDICATION For Jason and Layla 11 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank my supervisors Professor Paul Irwing and Dr Sheena Johnson for their guidance over the course of my Ph. I would particularly like to thank Professor Paul Irwing who spent many hours reviewing my drafts and from whom I have learned a substantial amount about methodological issues and statistical analysis. I would also like to thank Jason and Layla for giving me time when I needed it and using their own unique charms to make me laugh.