ArticlePublisher preview available

Individual Differences in Within-Person Variability in Personality Positively Predict Economic Gains and Satisfaction in Negotiations

Authors:
To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.

Abstract

Prior research on the value of personality traits for predicting negotiation outcomes is rather inconclusive. Building on prior research and in light of recent personality and negotiation theories, we discuss why the traditional approach to personality traits has had limited success and propose an alternative approach to predicting negotiation outcomes from personality assessments. More specifically, we argue that negotiations are tasks in which performance is conditioned by the ability to adjust one’s mental states and behaviors according to situational demands. We therefore hypothesize that it is especially individual differences in within-person variability in personality – that is, the variability trait – that can be expected to predict negotiation outcomes, rather than individual differences in average traits. We show in two empirical studies involving dyads that the variability trait is indeed a better predictor of economic gains and satisfaction than average traits. Implications for theory, education, and practice are discussed.
Vol.:(0123456789)
Group Decision and Negotiation (2022) 31:683–702
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10726-022-09778-x
1 3
Individual Differences inWithin‑Person Variability
inPersonality Positively Predict Economic Gains
andSatisfaction inNegotiations
PinarCelik1 · MartinStorme2 · NilsMyszkowski3
Accepted: 18 February 2022 / Published online: 16 March 2022
© The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V. 2022
Abstract
Prior research on the value of personality traits for predicting negotiation outcomes
is rather inconclusive. Building on prior research and in light of recent personal-
ity and negotiation theories, we discuss why the traditional approach to personal-
ity traits has had limited success and propose an alternative approach to predicting
negotiation outcomes from personality assessments. More specifically, we argue that
negotiations are tasks in which performance is conditioned by the ability to adjust
one’s mental states and behaviors according to situational demands. We therefore
hypothesize that it is especially individual differences in within-person variability
in personality – that is, the variability trait – that can be expected to predict negotia-
tion outcomes, rather than individual differences in average traits. We show in two
empirical studies involving dyads that the variability trait is indeed a better predictor
of economic gains and satisfaction than average traits. Implications for theory, edu-
cation, and practice are discussed.
Keywords Variability trait· Personality· Individual differences· Negotiation
outcomes
* Pinar Celik
pinar.celik@ulb.be
1 Centre Emile Bernheim, Solvay Brussels School ofEconomics andManagement, Université
Libre de Bruxelles, Avenue Franklin Roosevelt 42, 1050Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
2 IESEG School ofManagement, Univ. Lille, CNRS, UMR 9221 - LEM - Lille Economie
Management, 59000Lille, France
3 Department ofPsychology, Pace University, One Pace Plaza, NewYork, NY10038, USA
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
In this article, I show how item response models can be used to capture multiple response processes in psychological applications. Intuitive and analytical responses, agree–disagree answers, response refusals, socially desirable responding, differential item functioning, and choices among multiple options are considered. In each of these cases, I show that the response processes can be measured via pseudoitems derived from the observed responses. The estimation of these models via standard software programs that allow for missing data is also discussed. The article concludes with two detailed applications that illustrate the prevalence of multiple response processes.
Article
Full-text available
The study aimed to investigate the status of within-person state variability in neuroticism and conscientiousness as individual differences constructs by exploring their (a) temporal stability, (b) cross-context consistency, (c) empirical links to selected antecedents, and (d) empirical links to longer-term trait variability. Employing a sample of professionals (N = 346) from Australian organizations, personality state data together with situation appraisals were collected using experience sampling methodology in field and repeatedly in lab-like settings. Data on personality traits, cognitive ability, and motivational mindsets were collected at baseline and after two years. Contingent (situation contingencies) and non-contingent (relative SD) state variability indices were relatively stable over time and across contexts. Only a small number of predictive effects of state variability were observed, and these differed across contexts. Cognitive ability appeared to be associated with state variability under lab-like conditions. There was limited evidence of links between short-term state and long-term trait variability, except for a small effect for neuroticism. Some evidence of positive manifold was found for non-contingent variability. Systematic efforts are required to further elucidate the complex pattern of results regarding the antecedents, correlates and outcomes of individual differences in state variability.
Article
Full-text available
This experimental study examined the effects of conscientiousness and competition on group decision quality. The participants of this study (240 undergraduate students, 175 females, and 65 males) were divided into 40 groups of High-conscientiousness (HC) traits and 40 groups of Low-conscientiousness (LC) traits. Each group consisted of three people. The task was to make a group decision in two different settings, with and without competition. The exact logistic regression showed that HC personality significantly increased the risk of bad group decisions. It is likely that the inability of the HC group to adapt their strategy in problem-solving inhibits their performance in producing the quality group decision. The competition condition does not affect the quality. Nevertheless, there is an interaction effect of conscientiousness and competition in influencing the quality of group decisions.
Article
Full-text available
Several studies have focused on stable personality traits as antecedents of career adaptability, but few have investigated more dynamic aspects of personality in relation to career adaptability. Recent theories on personality such as Whole Trait Theory (Fleeson, 2015) recognize that traits are often aroused in one situation but not in another (Allport, 1937), and that individuals are more or less flexible in responding to different situations. This flexibility is defined as within-person variability in personality. In the present paper we integrate Whole Trait Theory and Career Construction Theory (CCT, Savickas, 2005) – the latter stating that flexibility is a key antecedent of career-adaptability – and hypothesize that career-adaptability can be predicted by within-person variability in personality descriptions (Lang et al., 2019). In a sample of business administration students (N = 452) we found that, over and beyond effects of average trait levels, within-person variability in personality descriptions positively predicted career adaptability. Our findings have important theoretical and practical implications.
Chapter
Full-text available
In employment and education settings, Situational Judgment Tests (SJTs) have made strong inroads. So far, however, they are still underutilized in personality research. The objective of this chapter is to outline how SJTs might be adapted to measure personality traits, shed light onto the person-situation interplay, and stimulate research on it. We start by discussing the traditional simulation-based view on SJTs, including information on their development and research results. Next, we show how more recent versions have started to assess people’s knowledge of relevant behavior related to personality traits. Finally, we specify various strategies as to how SJTs might be further adapted to shed light on the personality-situation interplay. Along these lines, we show how SJTs might be used to assess within-person variability across situations, situation-trait contingencies, proactive transactions, behavioral responses, narratives and goals, and personality disorders.
Article
Full-text available
Three experience-sampling studies explored the distributions of Big-Five-relevant states (behavior) across 2 to 3 weeks of everyday life. Within-person variability was high, such that the typical individual regularly and routinely manifested nearly all levels of all traits in his or her everyday behavior. Second, individual differences in central tendencies of behavioral distributions were almost perfectly stable. Third, amount of behavioral variability (and skew and kurtosis) were revealed as stable individual differences. Finally, amount of within-person variability in extraversion was shown to reflect individual differences in reactivity to extraversion-relevant situational cues. Thus, decontextualized and noncontingent Big-Five content is highly useful for descriptions of individuals' density distributions as wholes. Simultaneously, contextualized and contingent personality units (e.g., conditional traits, goals) are needed for describing the considerable within-person variation.
Article
Full-text available
Personality researchers and clinical psychologists have long been interested in within-person variability in a given personality trait. Two critical methodological challenges that stymie current research on within-person variability are separating meaningful within-person variability from (a) true differences in trait level; and (b) careless responding (or person unreliability). To partly avoid these issues, personality researchers commonly only study within-person variability in personality states over time using the standard deviation (SD) across repeated measurements of the same items (typically across days)-a relatively resource-intensive approach. In this article, we detail an approach that allows researchers to measure another type of within-person variability. The described approach utilizes item-response theory (IRT) on the basis of Böckenholt's (2012) three-process model, and extracts a meaningful variability score from Likert-ratings of personality descriptions that is distinct from directional (trait) responding. Two studies (N = 577; N = 120-235) suggest that IRT variability generalizes across traits, has high split-half reliability, is not highly correlated with established indices of IRT person unreliability for directional trait responding, and correlates with within-person SDs from personality inventories and within-person SDs in a diary study with repeated measurements across days 20 months later. The implications and usefulness of IRT variability from personality descriptions as a conceptually clarified, efficient, and feasible assessment of within-person variability in personality ratings are discussed.
Article
Full-text available
In the last decade, there has been increased recognition that traits refer not only to between-person differences but also to meaningful within-person variability across situations (i.e., whole trait theory). So far, this broader more contemporary trait conceptualization has made few inroads into assessment practices. Therefore, this study focuses on the assessment and predictive power of people’s intraindividual variability across situations. In three studies (either in student or employee samples), both test-takers’ mean trait scores and the variability of their responses across multiple written job-related situations of a situational judgment test (SJT) were assessed. Results revealed that people’s intraindividual variability (a) was related to their self-rated functional flexibility, (b) predicted performance above their mean scores, and (c) predicted their actual personality state variability over 10 days. These results open opportunities for complementing traditional selection procedures with more dynamic indices in assessment.
Article
Full-text available
Organizational scholars have systematically studied the negotiation process to guide the development of general descriptive and prescriptive theory. Descriptive research conducted by scholars from anthropology, law, and international relations converge on the features required for a general theory. This includes a multiphase process comprising planning, bargaining, and implementation, as well as multiparty process between actors organized within a multilevel structure. We examine to what extent negotiation scholars in management have incorporated such complexities into their empirical work. In a survey of empirical studies, we observe concentrated efforts to model and measure dyadic interactions in just one phase—bargaining—and the near exclusive use of experimental methods. By contrast, we survey prescriptive theory generated by specialized experts from various negotiation contexts and find that they place greater focus on the preparation and implementation phases. From this review, we recommend that scholars (a) theorize and measure negotiation as a multiphase process with possibilities for recursion, (b) incorporate a multiparty and multilevel structure in which actors beyond negotiating parties can influence the process, and (c) consider agreements as action commitments separate from actually realizing outcomes. In doing so, we discuss the value of integrating analogous work to furnish negotiation theory. We also provide recommendations for novel empirical approaches that move beyond experimental designs of multi-issue bargaining.
Article
The applied psychology literature has discussed and used a variety of different definitions of dynamic individual differences. Descriptions like dynamic, agile, adaptive, or flexible can refer to a variety of different types of constructs. The present article contributes to the literature by presenting an organizing typology of dynamic constructs. We also conducted a literature review of four major applied journals over the last 15 years to validate the taxonomy and to use it to map what type of dynamic individual differences constructs are typically studied in the applied psychology literature. The typology includes six basic conceptualizations of dynamic individual differences: Variability constructs (inconsistency across situations), skill acquisition constructs (learning new skills), transition constructs (avoiding “loss” in behavior/skill after unforeseen change), reacquisition constructs (relearning after change), acceleration/deceleration constructs (losing or gaining energy by displaying the behavior), and integration/dissolution constructs (behavior becomes more or less uniform). We provide both verbal and statistical definitions for each of these constructs, and demonstrate how these conceptualizations can be operationalized in assessment and criterion measurement using R code and simulated data. We also show how researchers can test different dynamic explanations using likelihood-based R ² statistics.