A neural network model of the structure and dynamics of human personality.

By Stephen J. Read, Brian Monroe, Aaron Brownstein, Yu Yang, Gurveen Chopra, Lynn C. Miller. 2010

235 citations recorded by the source corpus.

We present a neural network model that aims to bridge the historical gap between dynamic and structural approaches to personality. The model integrates work on the structure of the trait lexicon, the neurobiology of personality, temperament, goal-based models of personality, and an evolutionary analysis of motives. It is organized in terms of two overarching motivational systems, an approach and an avoidance system, as well as a general disinhibition and constraint system. Each overarching motivational system influences more specific motives. Traits are modeled in terms of differences in the sensitivities of the motivational systems, the baseline activation of specific motives, and inhibitory strength. The result is a motive-based neural network model of personality based on research about the structure and neurobiology of human personality. The model provides an account of personality dynamics and person-situation interactions and suggests how dynamic processing approaches and dispositional, structural approaches can be integrated in a common framework.

Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Clinical Psychology

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Principles of Situation Research: Towards a Better Understanding of Psychological Situations (2015, background): “…Cues are frequently assumed to be uniformly powerful in social, cognitive and experimental paradigms where ‘stimuli’ or ‘settings’ are manipulated within or between groups and differences in affective, cognitive, motivational and behavioural responses tracked as functions of those manipulations.”
Whole Trait Theory (2014, background): “Fortunately, Whole Trait Theory is joined in this endeavor by theories engaged in at least partially overlapping activities (Baumert & Schmitt, 2012; Bleidorn, 2009; Cramer et al., 2012; Denissen, van Aken, Penke, & Wood, 2013; DeYoung, this volume; Little & Joseph, 2007; Perunovic, Heller, Ross, & ”
A Psychometric Network Perspective on the Validity and Validation of Personality Trait Questionnaires (2019, background): “Moreover, other explanations could be that external causes such as situational factors (Cramer et al., 2012a; Rauthmann and Sherman, 2018) or goals and motivations (Read et al., 2010) could lead to personality dimensions.”
Integrating Personality Structure, Personality Process, and Personality Development (2017, background): “This in turn will result in greater trait covariation at the population level (Read et al., 2010).”
What Have We Learned That Is Critical in Understanding Leadership Perceptions and Leader-Performance Relations? (2014, background): “For example, the variability that is observed in individual behavior (Fleeson, 2001) can be modeled by connectionist networks (Read et al., 2010).”
Dimensions of Normal Personality as Networks in Search of Equilibrium: You Can't like Parties if you Don't like People (2012, background): “Similar ideas have been manifested in the writings of personality theorists, almost since the inception of the discipline; recent theorists such as Mischel & Shoda (1995) and Cervone (2005), as well as Read et al. (2010), have argued along very similar lines.”
Cybernetic Big Five Theory. (2015, background): “, McAdams & Pals, 2006; Pervin, 1994), whereas many others have argued that motivation is central to personality traits (e.g., Austin & Vancouver, 1996; Corr et al., 2013; Funder, 1991; Ortony, Norman, & Revelle, 2005; Pickering & Gray, 1999; Read et al., 2010; Sheldon, 2004).”