Latent Profiles of Personality and Decision Making Regulation Styles

153

Abstract

Decision making (DM) generally assumes that the person is performing a choice between a multitude of alternatives under uncertainty and possible risk. According to the concept of dynamic regulative systems (Kornilova, 2016), preferred or most relied on DM strategies are linked in an integrative way with a variety of personality traits that can be at the top of the hierarchy. These include risk readiness, rationality, and Dark Triad traits as reflective of a generally unstable personality core. Decision-Making Tendency Inventory (DMTI; Misuraca et al., 2015) defined DM characteristics via maximization, satisficing and minimization. However, the relationships between DM characteristics captured by DMTI and the listed personality traits have not been explored before. The goal of the current study was establishing latent personality profiles in a person-centered approach that integrates DM “tendencies” and the listed personality traits by identifying relatively homogenous subgroups of individuals with similar profiles. Methods. 625 individuals in the age from 17 to 39 years (М = 20,17, SD = 3,02; 84% females) participated in the study. We used DMTI, Dirty Dozen, and LFR questionnaires to measure DM tendencies, Dark Triad traits, and risk readiness/rationality, respectively. Latent profile analysis was performed in VarSelLCM for R. Results. The results indicated the presence of three latent profiles in the data after adjustments for age and sex. Risk readiness and Dark Triad traits were positively related with maximizing and satisficing, forming one latent class. In another class lower rationality, on the other hand, was linked with minimization. In the third class higher rationality accompanied lower Dark Triad traits. Conclusions. The results provide evidence in favor of the general hypothesis that latent profiles of personality traits are associated with distinct preferences for specific DM tendencies. Higher levels of maximizing, satisficing, and minimizing were not related to subclinical psychopathy or Machiavellianism. Higher narcissism and risk readiness, generally unrelated, are nonetheless characteristic of the latent class that prefers maximizing and satisficing. Preference for minimization of effort during DM was associated with lower rationality. Latent class or latent profile analysis is a powerful technique that sheds new light on the relationships between personality and DM, beyond the contributions of variable-centered approaches such as correlational analysis.

General Information

Keywords: Decision-Making Tendency Inventory — DMTI, maximizing, minimizing, satisficing, risk readiness, Dark Triad traits (Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and narcissism)

Journal rubric: Empirical Researches

Article type: scientific article

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17759/cpp.2022300208

Funding. This work was supported by the Russian Foundation for Basic Research (project no. 19-29-07069)

Received: 02.03.2022

Accepted:

For citation: Kornilova T.V. Latent Profiles of Personality and Decision Making Regulation Styles. Konsul'tativnaya psikhologiya i psikhoterapiya = Counseling Psychology and Psychotherapy, 2022. Vol. 30, no. 2, pp. 126–145. DOI: 10.17759/cpp.2022300208. (In Russ., аbstr. in Engl.)

References

  1. Kozielecki J. Psikhologicheskaya teoriya reshenii [Psychological Decision Theory]. Moscow: Progress, 1979. 504 p. (In Russ.)
  2. Kornilova T.V. Intellektual’no-lichnostnyi potentsial cheloveka v usloviyakh neopredelennosti i riska [Intellectual and personal potential of a person under uncertainty and risk]. Saint Petersburg: Nestor-Istoriya, 2016. 344 p.
  3. Kornilova T.V., Kornilov S.A. Latentnye profili lichnostnykh svoistv, svyazannykh s prinyatiem reshenii o sotsial’nom distantsirovanii (na primere rossiiskoi i azerbaidzhanskoi vyborok) [Latent profiles of personality traits related to decision making about social distancing (in Russia and Azerbaijan)]. Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal, 2021. Vol. 42 (3), pp. 36—47. DOI:10.31857/S020595920015189-3
  4. Kornilova T.V., Kornilov S.A., Chumakova M.A., et al. Metodika diagnostiki lichnostnykh chert “Temnoi Triady”: aprobatsiya oprosnika “Temnaya Dyuzhina” [The Dark Triad personality traits measure: Approbation of the Dirty Dozen questionnaire]. Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal, 2015. Vol. 36 (2), pp. 99—112.
  5. Kornilova T.V., Razvalyaeva A.Yu. Aprobatsiya russkoyazychnogo varianta polnogo oprosnika S. Epstaina “Ratsional’nyi-Opytnyi” (Rational-Experiential inventory) [The rationality and intuition scales in S. Epstein’’s questionnaire REI (Russian approbation of the full version)]. Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal, 2017. Vol. 38 (3), pp. 92—107. DOI:10.7868/S0205959217030084
  6. Kornilova T.V., Chumakova M.A., Kornilov S.A., et al. Psikhologiya neopredelennosti: edinstvo intellektual’no-lichnostnogo potentsiala cheloveka [The psychology of uncertainty: The unity of the intellectual and personal potential of a person]. Moscow: Smysl, 2010. 334 p.
  7. Krasavtseva Yu.V., Kornilova T.V. Nartsissizm kak svetlyi aspekt v Temnoi triade [Narcissism as a “Light” Trait in the Dark Triad]. Konsul’tativnaya psikhologiya i psikhoterapiya = Counseling Psychology and Psychotherapy, 2019. Vol. 27 (4), pp. 65—80. DOI:10.17759/cpp.2019270405 (In Russ., abstr. in Engl.).
  8. Krasavtseva Yu.V., Kornilova T.V. Emotsional’nyi i akademicheskii intellekt kak prediktory strategii v igrovoi zadache Aiova (IGT) [Emotional and academic intelligence as strategy predictors in the Iowa gambling task (IGT)]. Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal, 2018. Vol. 39 (3), pp. 29—43. DOI:10.7868/S0205959218030030
  9. Plous S. Psikhologiya otsenki i prinyatiya reshenii [The Psychology of Judgment and Decision Making]. Moscow: Filin”, 1998. 368 p. (In Russ.)
  10. Razvaliaeva A.Yu. Aprobatsiya oprosnika «Tendentsii v prinyatii reshenii» na russkoyazychnoi vyborke [Approbation of the Decision Making Tendency Inventory in the Russian Sample]. Konsul’tativnaya psikhologiya i psikhoterapiya = Counseling Psychology and Psychotherapy, 2018. Vol. 26 (3), pp. 146—163. DOI:10.17759/cpp.2018260308
  11. Bandyopadhyay D., Pammi V.S., Srinivasan N. Role of affect in decision making. Progress in Brain Research, 2013. Vol. 202, pp. 37—53. DOI:10.1016/B978-0-444-62604-2.00003-4
  12. Bortolotti A., Dohmen T., Lehmann H., et al. Patience, cognitive abilities, and cognitive effort: Survey and experimental evidence from a developing country. American Behavioral Scientist, 2021. Vol. 65 (11), pp. 1512—1530. DOI:10.1177/0002764221996744
  13. Carrillat F.A., Ladik D.M., Legoux R. When the decision ball keeps rolling: An investigation of the Sisyphus effect among maximizing consumers. Marketing Letters, 2011. Vol. 22, pp. 283—296. DOI:10.1007/s11002-010-9125-y
  14. Chiu Y.C., Huang J.T., Duann J.-R., et al. Editorial: Twenty years after the Iowa Gambling Task: Rationality, emotion, and decision-making [Elektronnyi resurs]. Frontiers in Psychology, 2018. Vol. 8. Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02353/full (Accessed 24.01.2022). DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02353
  15. Cheek N.N., Schwartz B. On the meaning and measurement of maximization. Judgment and Decision Making, 2016. Vol. 11 (2), pp. 126—146.
  16. Ding Н., Li А.М. A study on maximization paradox and its psychological origin. Psychology, 2018. Vol. 9 (4), pp. 785—796. DOI:10.4236/psych.2018.94050
  17. Epstein S. Cognitive-experiential self-theory of personality. In Millon T., Lerner M.J. (eds.) Comprehensive Handbook of Psychology. Vol. 5: Personality and Social Psychology. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley & Sons, 2003, pp. 159—184.
  18. Gigerenzer G. Simply rational: Decision making in the real world. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. 312 p. DOI:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199390076.001.0001
  19. Hastie R.K., Dawes R.M. Rational choice in an uncertain world: The psychology of judgment and decision making. 2nd ed. London: Sage Publications, 2010. 386 p.
  20. Heym N., Kibowski F., Claire A.J., et al. The Dark Empath: Characterising dark traits in the presence of empathy. Personality and Individual Differences, 2021. Vol. 169 (1), p. 110172. DOI:10.1016/j.paid.2020.110172
  21. Jonason P.K., Lyons M., Bethell E.J., et al. Different routes to limited empathy in the sexes: Examining the links between the Dark Triad and empathy. Personality and Individual Differences, 2013. Vol. 54 (5), pp. 572—576. DOI:10.1016/j.paid.2012.11.009
  22. Jonason P.K., Webster G.D. The Dirty Dozen: A concise measure of the Dark Triad. Psychological Assessment, 2010. Vol. 22, pp. 420—432. DOI:10.1037/a0019265
  23. Jonason P.K., Piotrowski J., Sedikides C., et al. Country-level correlates of the Dark Triad traits in 49 countries. Journal of Personality, 2020. Vol. 88 (6), pp. 1252—1267. DOI:10.1111/jopy.12569
  24. Kaporcic N., Nietola M., Nicholson J. IMP: It’s time to get emotional! Understanding the role of negative emotions in dynamic decision making processes. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 2020. Vol. 35 (12), pp. 2151—2163. DOI:10.1108/JBIM-12-2019-0520
  25. Kokkoris M.D. Maximizing Without Borders: Evidence that maximizing transcends decision domains [Elektronnyi resurs]. Frontiers in Psychology, 2019. Vol. 9. Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02664/full (Accessed 24.01.2022). DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02664
  26. Lai L. Maximizing without difficulty: A modified maximizing scale and its correlates. Judgment and Decision Making, 2010. Vol. 5 (3), pp. 164—175.
  27. Lauriola M., Weller J. Beyond daredevils: Risk taking from a temperament perspective. In Raue M., Lermer E., Streicher B. (eds.) Psychological aspects of risk and risk analysis: Theory, models, and applications. New York: Springer, 2018, pp. 3—36. DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-92478-6_1
  28. Liu Y.L., Keeling K.A., Papamichail K.N. Should retail trade companies avoid recruiting maximisers? Management Decision, 2015. Vol. 53 (3), pp. 730—750. DOI:10.1108/MD-06-2014-0402
  29. Miao Ch., Ronald H. Humphrey R.H., et al. The relationship between emotional intelligence and the dark triad personality traits: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Research in Personality, 2019. Vol. 78, pp. 189—197. DOI:10.1016/j.jrp.2018.12.004
  30. Mikkelson A.C., Ray C.D. Development of the Revised Relational Maximization Scale and explorations of how relational maximization relates to personal and relational outcomes. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 2020. Vol. 34 (8—9), pp. 2482—2509. DOI:10.1177/0265407520928122
  31. Misuraca R., Faraci P., Gangemi A., et al. The Decision Making Tendency Inventory: A new measure to assess maximizing, satisficing, and minimizing. Personality and Individual Differences, 2015. Vol. 85, pp. 111—116. DOI:10.1016/j.paid.2015.04.043
  32. Moyano-Díaz,E., Mendoza-Llanos R. Yes! Maximizers maximize almost everything: The decision-making style is consistent in different decision domains [Elektronnyi resurs]. Frontiers In Psychology, 2021. Vol. 12. Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.663064/full (Accessed 24.01.2022). DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2021.663064
  33. Parker A.M., De Bruin W.B., Fischhoff B. Maximizers versus satisficers: Decision-making styles, competence, and outcomes. Judgment and Decision Making, 2007. Vol. 2 (6), pp. 342—350.
  34. Paulhus D.L., Williams K.M. The Dark Triad of personality: Narcissism, Machiavellianism and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Personality, 2002. Vol. 36 (6), pp. 556—563. DOI:10.1016/S0092-6566 (02) 00505-6
  35. Sari E. The relations between decision making in social relationships and decision making styles. World Applied Sciences Journal, 2008. Vol. 3 (3), pp. 369—381.
  36. Schwartz B., Ward A., Monterosso J., et al. Maximizing versus satisficing: Happiness is a matter of choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2002. Vol. 83 (5), pp. 1178—1197. DOI:10.1037//0022-3514.83.5.1178 25
  37. Slovic P., Peters E. Risk perception and affect. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 2006. Vol. 15 (6), pp. 322—325. DOI:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2006.00461.x
  38. Tversky A., Kahneman D. Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 1992. Vol. 5 (4), pp. 297—323. DOI:10.1007/BF00122574
  39. Turner B.M., Rim H.B., Betz N.E., et al. The maximization inventory. Judgment and Decision Making, 2012. Vol. 7 (1), pp. 48—60. DOI:10.1037/t45865-000
  40. Vize C.E., Lynam D.R., Collision K.L., et al. Differences among Dark Triad components: A meta-analytic investigation. Personality Disorders: Theory, Research, and Treatment, 2018. Vol. 9, pp. 101—111. DOI:10.1037/per0000222
  41. Volz K.G., Gigerenzer G. Cognitive processes in decisions under risk are not the same as in decisions under uncertainty [Elektronnyi resurs]. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 2012. Vol. 6. Available at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnins.2012.00105/full (Accessed 10.08.2020). DOI:10.3389/fnins.2012.00105
  42. Wake S., Wormwood J., Satpute A.B. The influence of fear on risk taking: A meta-analysis. Cognition & Emotion, 2020. Vol. 34 (6), pp. 1143—1159. DOI:10.1080/02699931.2020.1731428

Information About the Authors

Tatyana V. Kornilova, Doctor of Psychology, Professor, Department of General Psychology, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5065-3793, e-mail: tvkornilova@mail.ru