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.

Conceptual distinctions among Carver and White's (1994) BAS scales: A reward-reactivity versus trait impulsivity perspective

The 'BIS/BAS scales' (Carver & White, 1994) is the most widely cited inventory for assessing Gray's (1982,1991) Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory (RST) of personality. A peculiarity of this instrument is its three-factor representation of Gray's Behavioural Activation System (BAS), which mediates reactions to reward. While the BAS was initially proposed as the causal basis of Impulsivity, recent arguments suggest that Impulsivity is related to but distinct from reward-reactivity. In this paper, two studies examined Carver and White's BAS scales in terms of factor structure, and convergent/divergent validity when predicting proxies of Impulsivity and reward-reactivity. Confirmatory Factor Analysis revealed structural distinctions between the three BAS scales, and multivariate regression suggested that two of the scales (Drive and Reward-Responsiveness) reflect key concepts of the BAS, while the third (Fun-Seeking) has a broader focus, being equally related to reward-reactivity and Impulsivity. (c) 2005 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.