A Point Can Be Defined By

1
(No Transcript)
2
Goals
3
Questionnaire

• Think about goals that are currently important to
  you and the specific things you will do to attain
  these goals.

4
Questionnaire
5
Goals

• Goals influence. . . . .
• what you attend to
• what you think about
• what you do
• Idiographic
• Goals that are unique to an individual
• Get a date with Bob
• Nomothetic
• Goals that are common in almost everyone
• Be loved by others

6
Goals
Markey, 2002
Long-Term Nomothetic
Experience love

• Hierarchal

Want a balance focused on goal types
Find romantic partner
Go to a party
Buy nice clothes
Short-Term Idiographic
Get a job
Take a shower
Call friends
7
Goals

• Are there basic nomothetic goals?
• Much research in this area is trying to reduce
  idographic goals into broader nomothetic goals
• Like the Big-Five did with traits!
• Kaiser why study
• Markey and Ozers Agency and Communion
• McClellands needs

8
Nomothetic Goals

• Markey Ozer, 2002
• Agency
• Focuses on personal achievement, independence, or
  mastery
• Communion
• Focuses on concerns about relationship and
  connections to others
• Next to each goal write an A, C, or N

9
Nomothetic Goals

• 770 goals collected
• Classified by subjects as agency or communion
  goals
• Classified by judges as type of goal

10
Agency Goals
11
Communion Goals
12
Goal Rating Agency Communion Mean Difference
Importance Difficulty Success Enjoyment Stress Commitment Typicality Value Approach-Avoidance 3.12 2.89 3.25 2.94 2.69 3.34 3.31 3.46 3.49 3.31 2.49 3.26 3.23 2.11 3.35 3.21 3.66 3.45 -.18 .39 -.01 -.29 .55 -.01 .09 -.20 .04
13
Putting it all together
14
Judgment and Development goals

• Judgment Goals
• Goals that seek to judge or validate an attribute
  in oneself
• e.g., Make others know that I am the smartest
  one in the class
• Development Goals
• Goals that attempt to improve once
• e.g., Become the smartest person in the class

15
Judgment and Development goals

• Help determine how a person will react to failure
• F

16
Judgment and Development goals

• Judgment Goals
• Helpless pattern pattern
• Will not try harder.just conclude I cant do
  it
• Development Goals
• Mastery-oriented pattern
• Tries harder next time

17
Judgment and Development goals

• What caused these different goals to be set?
• A stable characteristic (i.e., a trait)

18
Questionnaire

• You have a certain amount of intelligence and you
  really cant do much to change it
• Your intelligence is something about you that you
  cant change very much
• You can learn new things but you cant really
  change your basic intelligence

19
Entity and Incremental Theories

• Entity Theory
• Personal qualities are fixed an unchangeable
• e.g., IQ, happiness, etc.
• Incremental Theories
• Personal qualities can change over time and with
  experience
• e.g., IQ, happiness, etc.

20
Putting it together
Failure
Helpless Pattern
Judgment Goals
Entity theory
Developmental Goals
Mastery-Oriented Pattern
Incremental theory
21
(No Transcript)
22
Contemporary Research
23

• During interpersonal interactions can a circle
  tell us how the behavior of one person affects
  the behavior of another person?

24
Concrete examples
25
Abstract examples
26
Interpersonal Theory

• Sullivans reciprocal emotion
• An individuals behavior is interrelated with the
  behavior of others
• Learys complementarity
• Interpersonal reflexes tend to initiate or invite
  reciprocal interpersonal responses from the
  other person in the interaction

27
Interpersonal Circumplex
28
Complementarity

• Leary / Carsons definition
• Opposite on dominance
• Dominance induces submission and submission
  induces dominance
• Same on warmth
• Warmth induces warmth and coldness induces
  coldness

29
Learys Orientation
30
Strong et al.s Orientation
31
Myllyniemi's Orientation
32
Wigginss Definition
33
The Complementarity of Behaviors During Brief
Interactions

• 1) Do behaviors exhibited during dyadic
  interactions occur in a circular pattern?
• 2) Does the behavior of one person in an
  interaction affect the behavior of the other
  person?
• 3) Which model of complementarity predicts these
  behaviors best?

Markey, Funder, Ozer, 2003
34
Method

• Participates
• 79 males 79 females

35
Tasks

• Each participant interacted in three different
  situations with an opposite sex stranger

Unstructured Cooperative Competitive

36
Coding Behaviors

• For each interaction, 64 social behaviors were
  coded by four different judges
• e.g., Speaks quickly
• Displays ambition
• Offers advice

37
Method

• For each octant of the interpersonal circumplex 3
  RBQ items were selected

38
Warm-Agreeable

• Exhibits social skills
• Expresses warmth (to anyone)
• Seems likeable

39
Gregarious-Extraverted

• Shows high enthusiasm and high energy levels.
• Is talkative
• Acts playful

40
Assured-Dominant

• Speaks in a loud voice
• Tries to control the interaction
• Dominates the interaction

41
Arrogant-Calculating

• Talks at rather than with partner (e.g., conducts
  a monolog, ignores what partner says)
• Exhibits condescending behavior (acts as if self
  is superior to partner)
• Emphasizes accomplishments of self, family, or
  housemates

42
Cold-Hearted

• Seems detached from the interaction
• Expresses criticism (of anybody or anything)
• Expresses hostility (to anyone or anything)

43
Aloof-Introverted

• Exhibits an awkward interpersonal style (e.g.,
  mumble, have difficulty knowing what to say)
• Shows physical signs of tension or anxiety (e.g.,
  fidgets nervously, voice wavers)
• Behaves in a fearful or timid manner

44
Unassured-Submissive

• Gives up when faced with obstacles
• Expresses insecurity (e.g., seems touchy or
  overly sensitive)
• Seeks reassurance from partner (e.g., asks for
  agreement, fishes for praise)

45
Unassuming-Ingenuous

• Is interested in what partner has to say
• Expresses agreement frequently
• Seeks advice from partner

46
Results
47
Unstructured Interaction
48
Cooperative Interaction
49
Competitive Interaction
50
Results by Gender
Predictions Met CI p
Male Unstructured Cooperative Competitive 267 263 269 .86 .83 .83 .000 .000 .000
Female Unstructured Cooperative Competitive 253 269 268 .76 .86 .87 .000 .000 .000
51
Next Step

• Does the behavior of one person in an interaction
  affect the behavior of the other person?

52
ComplementarityCooperative Interaction
Females
PA BC DE FG HI JK LM NO
PA -.51 -.13 .29 .54 .38 .39 -.19 -.43
BC -.22 .04 .31 .49 .37 .12 -.31 -.35
DE .15 .10 .07 .23 -.04 -.22 -.09 -.11
FG .44 .32 .03 .03 .07 -.19 -.03 -.02
HI .49 .29 -.05 -.20 -.10 -.26 .00 .19
JK .41 .34 -.10 -.35 -.13 -.19 .02 .20
LM .02 -.10 -.19 -.43 -.27 .01 .18 .30
NO -.25 -.24 -.22 -.20 -.04 .12 .26 .12
Males
df 77
53
Next Step

• Which model of complementarity predicts these
  behaviors best?

54
ComplementarityLearys Model
Females
PA BC DE FG HI JK LM NO
PA -1.00 -0.707 0.00 0.707 1.00 0.707 0.00 -0.707
BC -0.707 0.00 0.707 1.00 0.707 0.00 -0.707 -1.00
DE 0.00 0.707 1.00 0.707 0.00 -0.707 -1.00 -0.707
FG 0.707 1.00 0.707 0.00 -0.707 -1.00 -0.707 0.00
HI 1.00 0.707 0.00 -0.707 -1.00 -0.707 0.00 0.707
JK 0.707 0.00 -0.707 -1.00 -0.707 0.00 0.707 1.00
LM 0.00 -0.707 -1.00 -0.707 0.00 0.707 1.00 0.707
NO -0.707 -1.00 -0.707 0.00 0.707 1.00 0.707 0.00
Males
55
Complementarity Myllyniemi's Model
Females
PA BC DE FG HI JK LM NO
PA -0.707 -1.00 -0.707 0.00 0.707 1.00 0.707 0.00
BC -1.00 -0.707 0.00 0.707 1.00 0.707 0.00 -0.707
DE -0.707 0.00 0.707 1.00 0.707 0.00 -0.707 -1.00
FG 0.00 0.707 1.00 0.707 0.00 -0.707 -1.00 -0.707
HI 0.707 1.00 0.707 0.00 -0.707 -1.00 -0.707 0.00
JK 1.00 0.707 0.00 -0.707 -1.00 -0.707 0.00 0.707
LM 0.707 0.00 -0.707 -1.00 -0.707 0.00 0.707 1.00
NO 0.00 -0.707 -1.00 -0.707 0.00 0.707 1.00 0.707
Males
56
ComplementarityStrong et al.s Model
Females
PA BC DE FG HI JK LM NO
PA -0.707 0.00 0.707 1.00 0.707 0.00 -0.707 -1.00
BC 0.00 0.707 1.00 0.707 0.00 -0.707 -1.00 -0.707
DE 0.707 1.00 0.707 0.00 -0.707 -1.00 -0.707 0.00
FG 1.00 0.707 0.00 -0.707 -1.00 -0.707 0.00 0.707
HI 0.707 0.00 -0.707 -1.00 -0.707 0.00 0.707 1.00
JK 0.00 -0.707 -1.00 -0.707 0.00 0.707 1.00 0.707
LM -0.707 -1.00 -0.707 0.00 0.707 1.00 0.707 0.00
NO -1.00 -0.707 0.00 0.707 1.00 0.707 0.00 -0.707
Males
57
ComplementarityWigginss Model
Females
PA BC DE FG HI JK LM NO
PA 0.00 -0.707 -1.00 -0.707 0.00 0.707 1.00 0.707
BC -0.707 -1.00 -0.707 0.00 0.707 1.00 0.707 0.00
DE -1.00 -0.707 0.00 0.707 1.00 0.707 0.00 -0.707
FG -0.707 0.00 0.707 1.00 0.707 0.00 -0.707 -1.00
HI 0.00 0.707 1.00 0.707 0.00 -0.707 -1.00 -0.707
JK 0.707 1.00 0.707 0.00 -0.707 -1.00 -0.707 0.00
LM 1.00 0.707 0.00 -0.707 -1.00 -0.707 0.00 0.707
NO 0.707 0.00 -0.707 -1.00 -0.707 0.00 0.707 1.00
Males
58
ComplementarityCooperative Interaction
Females
PA BC DE FG HI JK LM NO
PA -.51 -.13 .29 .54 .38 .39 -.19 -.43
BC -.22 .04 .31 .49 .37 .12 -.31 -.35
DE .15 .10 .07 .23 -.04 -.22 -.09 -.11
FG .44 .32 .03 .03 .07 -.19 -.03 -.02
HI .49 .29 -.05 -.20 -.10 -.26 .00 .19
JK .41 .34 -.10 -.35 -.13 -.19 .02 .20
LM .02 -.10 -.19 -.43 -.27 .01 .18 .30
NO -.25 -.24 -.22 -.20 -.04 .12 .26 .12
Males
df 77
59
Results
Learys Model Mylly.s Model Strongs Model Wigginss Model
Situation CI p CI p CI p CI p
Unst. .57 .0003 .62 .0003 .17 .1126 .27 .0409
Coop. .71 .0001 .55 .0001 .41 .0036 .08 .2476
Comp. .76 .0001 .34 .0169 .65 .0001 -.19 .9046
Average .68 .50 .41 .05
60
(No Transcript)
61
Questions

• 1) Do behaviors exhibited during dyadic
  interactions occur in a circular pattern?
• 2) Does the behavior of one person in an
  interaction affect the behavior of the other
  person?
• 3) Which model of complementarity predicts these
  behaviors best?

62
Answers

• 1) Do behaviors exhibited during dyadic
  interactions occur in a circular pattern?
• YES!
• 2) Does the behavior of one person in an
  interaction affect the behavior of the other
  person?
• 3) Which model of complementarity predicts these
  behaviors best?

63
Answers

• 1) Do behaviors exhibited during dyadic
  interactions occur in a circular pattern?
• YES!
• 2) Does the behavior of one person in an
  interaction affect the behavior of the other
  person?
• YES!
• 3) Which model of complementarity predicts these
  behaviors best?

64
Answers

• 1) Do behaviors exhibited during dyadic
  interactions occur in a circular pattern?
• YES!
• 2) Does the behavior of one person in an
  interaction affect the behavior of the other
  person?
• YES!
• 3) Which model of complementarity predicts these
  behaviors best?
• Learys model