Gray's model of personality and aggregate level factor analysis

Previous research shows that correlations tend to increase in magnitude when individuals are aggregated across groups. This suggests that uncorrelated constellations of personality variables (such as the primary scales of Extraversion and Neuroticism) may display much higher correlations in aggregate factor analysis. We hypothesize and report that individual level factor analysis can be explained in terms of Giant Three (or Big Five) descriptions of personality, whereas aggregate level factor analysis can be explained in terms of Gray's physiological based model. Although alternative interpretations exist, aggregate level factor analysis may correctly identify the basis of an individual's personality as a result of better reliability of measures due to aggregation. We discuss the implications of this form of analysis in terms of construct validity, personality theory, and its applicability in general. Copyright (C) 2003 John Wiley Sons, Ltd.

The role of impulsivity in the development of substance use and eating disorders

Impulsivity is now widely viewed as a multidimensional construct consisting of a number of related dimensions. Although many measures of impulsivity are correlated, most recent factor analyses support at least a two-factor model. In the current paper, these two factors have been labelled reward sensitivity, reflecting one of the primary dimensions of Gray's personality theory, and rash-spontaneous impulsiveness. The evidence supporting the existence of two dimensions of impulsivity is reviewed in relation to substance misuse and binge eating. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Reward drive and rash impulsiveness as dimensions of impulsivity: Implications for substance misuse

One of the primary personality dimensions or traits that has consistently been linked to substance abuse is impulsivity. However, impulsivity is not a homogenous construct and although many of the measures of impulsivity are correlated, the most recent review of published factor analytic studies has proposed two independent dimensions of impulsivity: reward sensitivity, reflecting one of the primary dimension of J. A. Gray's personality theory, and rash impulsiveness. These two facets of impulsivity derived from the field of personality research parallel recent developments in the neurosciences where changes in the incentive value of rewarding substances has been linked to alterations in neural substrates involved in reward seeking and with a diminished capacity to inhibit behavior due to chronic drug exposure. In this paper, we propose a model that integrates the findings from research into individual differences with recent models of neural substrates implicated in the development of substance misuse. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

The appetitive motivation scale and other BAS measures in the prediction of Approach and Active Avoidance

The Appetitive Motivation Scale (Jackson & Smillie, 2004) is a new trait conceptualisation of Gray's (I 970 199 1) Behavioural Activation System. In this experiment we explore relationships that the Appetitive Motivation Scale and other measures of Gray's model have with Approach and Active Avoidance responses. Using a sample of 144 undergraduate students, both Appetitive Motivation and Sensitivity to Reward (from the Sensitivity to Punishment and Sensitivity to Reward Questionnaire, SPSRQ; Torrubia, Avila, Molto, & Ceseras, 2001), were found to be significant predictors of Approach and Active Avoidance response latency. This confirms previous experimental validations of the SPSRQ (e.g., Avila, 2001) and provides the first experimental evidence for the validity of the Appetitive Motivation scale. Consistent with interactive views of Gray's model (e.g., Corr, 2001), high SPSRQ Sensitivity to Punishment diminished the relationship between Sensitivity to Reward and our BAS criteria. Measures of BIS did not however interact in this way with the appetitive motivation scale. A surprising result was the failure for any of Carver and White's (1994) BAS scales to correlate with RST criteria. Implications of these findings and potential future directions are discussed. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

The new reinforcement sensitivity theory: Implications for personality measurement

In this article, we review recent modifications to Jeffrey Gray's (1973, 1991) reinforcement sensitivity theory (RST), and attempt to draw implications for psychometric measurement of personality traits. First, we consider Gray and McNaughton's (2000) functional revisions to the biobehavioral systems of RST Second, we evaluate recent clarifications relating to interdependent effects that these systems may have on behavior, in addition to or in place of separable effects (e.g., Corr 2001; Pickering, 1997). Finally, we consider ambiguities regarding the exact trait dimension to which Gray's It reward system corresponds. From this review, we suggest that future work is needed to distinguish psychometric measures of (a) fear from anxiety and (b) reward-reactivity-from trait impulsivity. We also suggest, on the basis of interdependent system views of RST and associated exploration using formal models, that traits that are based upon RST are likely to have substantial intercorrelations. Finally, we advise that more substantive work is required to define relevant constructs and behaviors in RST before we can be confident in our psychometric measures of them.

Polytomous item response theory models

Polytomous Item Response Theory Models provides a unified, comprehensive introduction to the range of polytomous models available within item response theory (IRT). It begins by outlining the primary structural distinction between the two major types of polytomous IRT models. This focuses on the two types of response probability that are unique to polytomous models and their associated response functions, which are modeled differently by the different types of IRT model. It describes, both conceptually and mathematically, the major specific polytomous models, including the Nominal Response Model, the Partial Credit Model, the Rating Scale model, and the Graded Response Model. Important variations, such as the Generalized Partial Credit Model are also described as are less common variations, such as the Rating Scale version of the Graded Response Model. Relationships among the models are also investigated and the operation of measurement information is described for each major model. Practical examples of major models using real data are provided, as is a chapter on choosing an appropriate model. Figures are used throughout to illustrate important elements as they are described.

A social identity theory of leadership

A social identity theory of leadership is described that views leadership as a group process generated by social categorization and prototype-based depersonalization processes associated with social identity. Group identification, as self-categorization, constructs an intragroup prototypicality gradient that invests the most prototypical member with the appearance of having influence; the appearance arises because members cognitively and behaviorally conform to the prototype. The appearance of influence becomes a reality through depersonalized social attraction processes that make followers agree and comply with the leader's ideas and suggestions. Consensual social attraction also imbues the leader with apparent status and creates a status-based structural differentiation within the group into leader(s) and followers, which has characteristics of unequal status intergroup relations. In addition, a fundamental attribution process constructs a charismatic leadership personality for the leader, which further empowers the leader and sharpens the leader-follower status differential. Empirical support for the theory is reviewed and a range of implications discussed, including intergroup dimensions, uncertainty reduction and extremism, power, and pitfalls of prototype-based leadership.

Comparison between Eysenck's and Gray's models of personality in the prediction of motivational work criteria

Impulsivity based on Gray's [Gray, J. A. (1982) The neuropsychology of anxiety: an enquiry into the function of the septo-hippocampal system. New York: Oxford University Press: (1991). The neurophysiology of temperament. In J. Strelau & A. Angleitner. Explorations in temperament: international perspectives on theory and measurement. London. Plenum Press]. physiological model of personality was hypothesised to be more predictive of goal oriented criteria within the workplace than scales derived From Eysenck's [Eysenck. H.J. (1967). The biological basis of personality. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thompson.] physiological model of personality. Results confirmed the hypothesis and also showed that Gray's scale of Impulsivity was generally a better predictor than attributional style and interest in money. Results were interpreted as providing support for Gray's Behavioural Activation System which moderates response to reward. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Evaluating two morningness scales with item response theory

Using a student sample (n = 692) and an organization sample (n = 180), we scrutinized two morning-evening orientation scales using item response theory (IRT) methods. We used IRT to compare the measurement precision of the Composite Scale (CS) and the Early/Late Preferences Scale (PS). The CS had slightly higher measurement precision at all ranges of orientations, except for extreme morning and evening orientations for which the PS had slightly higher precision. IRT item-level statistics were also computed to try to understand how morning-orientation items functioned. Items that asked questions about morning activities tended to be more discriminating indicators of morning-orientation than items that asked about evening or peak performance activities. Items that involved unpleasant activities were less frequently endorsed than items that involved neutral or enjoyable activities. Implications for measurement of morning-evening orientation are discussed. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Mapping Gray's model of personality onto the Eysenck Personality Profiler (EPP)

The aim of this study was to determine how well Gray's model of personality [Gray, J.A. (1982). The neuropsychology of anxiety: an enquiry into the functions of the septo-hippocampal system. Oxfords: Oxford University Press, Gray, J.A. (1987). The psychology of fear and stress. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press], as measured by the Gray Wilson Personality Questionnaire (GWPQ), can provide a full description of personality as measured by the primary scales of the Eysenck Personality Profiler (EPP) and the type scales of the short version or the EPQ-R. Factor analysis of the GWPQ the Anxiety and linpulsivity scales of the EPP and the Learning Styles Questionnaire (LSQ) showed that the GWPQ seemed to measure general activation and inhibition factors, but not the finer features of Gray's theory. When the GWPQ scales were regressed against each scale of the EPP., it was round that they generally provide only a reasonable explanation of the EPP primary scales. It is concluded that the GWPQ measures general propel-ties of Gray's model, that the linpulsivity and Anxiety scales of the EPP also scent related to the GWPQ scales, and that Gray's model of personality provides only a partial explanation of personality in general. (C) 2002 Published by Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Gray's Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory: a psychometric critique

This study identifies valid orthogonal scales of Gray's animal learning paradigms, upon which his Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST) is based, by determining a revised structure to the Gray-Wilson Personality Questionnaire (GWPQ) (Wilson, Gray, & Barrett, 1990). It is also determined how well Gray's RST scales predict the surface scales of personality, which were measured in terms of Eysenck Personality Profiler (EPP) scales, the EPQ-R and the learning styles questionnaire (LSQ) scales. First, results suggest that independent pathways of RST scales may exist in humans. Second, Fight seems related to Anxiety and not the Fight/Flight system as proposed by RST. Third. a remarkably consistent story emerges in that Extraversion scales are predicted by Fight, Psychoticism scales are predicted by Active-avoidance, Fight and/or Flight, and Neuroticism scales tend not to be predicted at all (except for Anxiety). Fourth, Gray's revised scales are Unrelated to gender and age effects and show a predictable overlap with the LSQ and original GWPQ scales. It is concluded that Gray's model of personality might provide a stable biological basis of many surface scales of personality, but that there must also be other influences on personality. These results question the finer structure of Gray's RST whilst also showing that RST has greater range of applicability than a strict interpretation of theory implies. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Appetitive motivation predicts the majority of personality and an ability measure: a comparison of BAS measures and a re-evaluation of the importance of RST

Our first study develops a measure of appetitive motivation and our second study compares several measures of Gray's (1987) behaviour activation system (BAS) in the prediction of the surface scales of personality. In particular, we were interested in determining the utility of the new appetitive motivation scale and Dickman's functional impulsivity scale. In comparison to other well-known measures, both scales were generally good predictors. We conclude that the appetitive motivation scale is a promising measure of BAS based upon construct validation. Contrary to previous studies which have suggested that BAS is a generally poor predictor of the surface scales of personality, we discovered appetitive motivation to be an important predictor of personality in general. Interestingly, the scale was also predictive of scores on the Baddeley reasoning test. (C) 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Are interactions in Gray's Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory proximal or distal in the prediction of religiosity: a test of the joint subsystems hypothesis

Gray's Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST) consists of the Behavioural Activation System (BAS) which is the basis of Impulsivity, and Behavioural Inhibition System (BIS) which is the basis of Anxiety. In this study, Impulsivity and Anxiety were used as distal predictors of attitudes to religion in the prediction of three religious dependent variables (Church attendance, Amount of prayer, and Importance of church). We hypothesised that Impulsivity would independently predict a Rewarding attitude to the Church and that Anxiety would independently predict an Anxious attitude to the church, and that these attitudes would be proximal predictors of our dependent variables. Moreover, we predicted that interactions between predictors would be proximal. Using structural equation modelling, data from 400 participants supported the hypotheses. We also tested Eysenck's personality scales of Extraversion and Neuroticism and found a key path of the structural equation model to be non-significant. (C) 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

How preferred ear for listening moderates emotional cognitions in the prediction of personality

Two studies investigate how cognitions of aurally presented information interact with aural preference (self-reported preferred ear for listening) in the prediction of personality. In Study 1, participants provided attractiveness cognitions of various statements after listening to aurally presented material. Aural preference x attractiveness interactions significantly predicted Extraversion and Neuroticism. In Study 2, participants provided cognitions of pleasantness from various scenarios. An aural preference x pleasantness interaction significantly predicted Neuroticism. Although other interpretations are possible, I conclude that these findings support the idea of aural preference as a useful measure of hemispheric asymmetry, such that the right hemisphere (left aural preference) provides facilitation of emotional expression, whereas the left hemisphere (right aural preference) provides suppression. My findings support a more historical view of emotional asymmetry than the more modem approach-avoidance perspective and suggest that moderating effects of hemispheric asymmetry are important to include in studies investigating emotions associated with personality.