Journal of Personality最新文献

Objective: This study examines the relationships between HIV stigma dimensions, self-related mechanisms, and depressive symptoms among persons living with HIV.

Background: HIV stigma hinders the well-being of individuals living with HIV, which is linked to depressive symptoms and increased risk of poor clinical outcomes. However, the mechanisms underlying stigma's impact on depression are poorly understood. Psychosocial theories propose that experiencing HIV stigma leads to internalized stigma, impacting self-concept and mental health.

Method: Using Bayesian network analysis, we explored associations among HIV stigma processes (experienced, anticipated, internalized, perceived community stigma, and HIV status disclosure) and self-related mechanisms (self-esteem, fear of negative evaluation [FNE], self-blame coping, and social exclusion), and depressive symptoms.

Results: Our diverse sample of 204 individuals, primarily men, gay/bisexual, Black, and lower-middle SES, who experienced stigma showed increased anticipated, internalized, and perceived community stigma, FNE, and depressive symptoms. Internalized stigma contributed to self-blame coping and higher depressive symptoms. Anticipated and perceived community stigma and FNE correlated with increased social exclusion.

Discussion: This study investigates potential mechanisms through which HIV stigma may impact depression. Identifying these mechanisms establishes a foundation for future research to inform targeted interventions, enhancing mental health and HIV outcomes among individuals living with HIV, especially from minority backgrounds. Insights gained guide evidence-based interventions to mitigate HIV stigma's detrimental effects, ultimately improving overall well-being and health-related outcomes for people with HIV.

Objective: Increasing evidence indicates discrimination is an emerging risk factor for reducing psychological well-being. Negative affectivity is a personality trait that has been associated with discrimination. Yet, few studies to date have examined the longitudinal relationship between discrimination and personality. The current study addresses this gap by examining how general discrimination and negative affectivity influence each other longitudinally.

Method: The Midlife in the United States (MIDUS) dataset was used for the current study. The MIDUS sample (N = 4244) was predominately white (90.7%), 52% female, and had an average age of 46 years old. Individuals completed follow-up measures 10 and 20 years after baseline. Data were analyzed using a random-intercept cross-lagged panel model.

Results: Individuals that scored higher on trait negative affectivity also tended to score higher on perceived daily discrimination. We found general perceived discrimination at age 55 unidirectionally predicted changes in negative affectivity around retirement age, but not from age 45 to 55. In contrast, negative affectivity did not significantly predict increases in perceived discrimination at any timepoint.

Conclusion: Our results indicate that perceived discrimination has pernicious impacts on well-being up to a decade later and may do so by increasing an individual's tendency to experience negative emotions (i.e., negative affectivity).

Objective: Theories about within-person (WP) variation are often tested using between-person (BP) research, despite the well-established fact that results may not generalize across levels of analysis. One possible explanation is vague theories that do not specify which level of analysis is of interest. We illustrate such a case using the construct of self-compassion. The factor structure at the BP level has been highly debated, although the theory is actually concerned with relationships at the WP level.

Method: Multilevel confirmatory factor analysis was applied to experience-sampling data of self-compassion (N = 213, with n = 4052 measurement occasions).

Results: At both levels of analysis, evidence for a two-factor model was found. However, the factors were moderately related at the WP level (r = 0.37, p < 0.001) but largely independent at the BP level (r = 0.04, p = 0.696). Exploratory analyses revealed considerable heterogeneity in the WP relationship among individuals.

Conclusion: We discuss how our results provide new impulses to move the debate around self-compassion forward. Lastly, we outline how the WP level-which is of major interest for self-compassion and other constructs in psychology-can guide the conceptualization and assessment to promote advancements of the theory and resulting applications.

Objective: We tested the hypothesis that complex behaviors are commonly supported by self-regulation strategies, even when those behaviors are supported by strong instigation habits.

Background: Goal-directed and habit-mediated processes arise from separable systems that have been suggested to seldomly interact.

Results: Self-regulation strategy use was lower for habitually instigated simple behaviors compared to nonhabitually instigated simple behaviors. However, participants' use of self-regulation strategies increased with the increasing complexity of behaviors, even when complex behaviors were habitually instigated. The difference in the extent of strategy use between habitually and nonhabitually instigated actions was absent when behavioral complexity was particularly high.

Conclusion: These results point to a qualitative distinction-while simple behaviors may progress in a relatively automatic and unthinking manner, complex behaviors receive frequent support from self-regulation strategies, even if they are instigated habitually.

People vary in how they perceive, think about, and respond to moral issues. Clearly, we cannot fully understand the psychology of morality without accounting for individual differences in moral functioning. But decades of neglect of and explicit skepticism toward such individual differences has resulted in a lack of integration between moral psychology and personality psychology—the study of psychological differences between people. In recent years, these barriers to progress have started to break down. This special issue aims to celebrate and further increase the visibility of the personality psychology of morality. Here, we introduce the articles in this special issue by highlighting some important contributions a personality-based perspective has to offer moral psychology—particularly in comparison to the currently prominent social psychological approach. We show that personality psychology is well-placed to (a) contribute toward a rigorous empirical foundation for moral psychology, (b) tackle the conceptualization and assessment of stable moral tendencies, (c) assess the predictive validity of moral traits in relation to consequential outcomes, (d) uncover the mechanisms underlying individual differences in moral judgments and behavior, and (e) provide insights into moral development. For these reasons, we believe that moral psychology needs personality psychology to reach its full scholarly potential.

Objective: This study reconceptualized trait resilience, defining it as a network of systems; utilizing direct resilience assessments-engineering, ecological, adaptive capacity, social cohesion-and proxy resilience assessments-personality, cognitive, emotional, eudaimonia, and health.

Background: The background of the study addresses the fragmented conceptualization of trait resilience by proposing a unifying network model based on ecological systems theory, illustrating the dynamic interplay of resilience factors across varying levels of disturbance.

Method: In Study One, four USA or UK samples (total n = 2396) were used to depict the trait resilience network. Study Two (n = 1091) examined the relationship between the network and disturbance at two time-points, using mental health levels as a disturbance metric.

Results: Study One found that adaptive capacity, and sometimes positive emotional processes, were central variables to the network. Study Two found that in lower disturbance groups, adaptive capacity remained important, while in higher disturbance groups, a broader set of variables became central to the network.

Conclusions: Study One suggests a Broaden-and-Build approach, where adaptive capacity is a foundational resilience capability, reciprocally associated with positive emotional mechanisms. Study Two suggests a new "Dynamic Resilience Spectrum Theory," proposing that increased disturbances necessitate the use of a more diverse set of resilience traits.