Measuring the experience of social connection within specific social interactions: The Connection During Conversations Scale (CDCS).

Decades of research have demonstrated that social connection is fundamental to health and well-being. The benefits of connection are observed with both close and distant others, within both new and established relationships, and even with exchanges that unfold over a relatively short timeframe. Because social connection is fundamental to well-being, many existing measures in the literature aim to assess either a global sense of connection or partner-specific (relationship-specific) connection. What is missing are measures of connection felt in specific social interactions or conversations. In three studies (Study 1: N = 351; Study 2: Time 1 N = 397, Time 2 N = 336, Time 3 N = 299; Study 3: N = 235), we developed the Connection During Conversations Scale (CDCS), a 14-item measure of conversation-specific social connection that assesses connection experienced during a social interaction (or conversation). Confirmatory factor analyses demonstrated that a four-factor model fit our samples well, which resulted in four subscales: Shared Reality, Partner Responsiveness, Participant Interest, and Affective Experience. The overall CDCS measure, along with its four subscales, was significantly correlated with established measures of loneliness, partner responsiveness, relatedness, positivity resonance, and shared reality. Because of the importance of frequent interactions-whether with family, friends, coworkers, or strangers-our new scale will allow researchers to better understand how, when, and where such conversations may contribute to social connection and well-being. (225 words).

What is Unique About Kindness? Exploring the Proximal Experience of Prosocial Acts Relative to Other Positive Behaviors.

Previous research has identified a robust connection between prosociality and happiness, suggesting that kindness has both hedonic and eudaimonic benefits-in the short term and in the long term. By contrast, our experiment aimed to examine people's momentary eudaimonic feelings while engaging in kind acts for others. To that end, we randomly assigned participants to one of four positively valenced conditions that varied in their inclusion of potential "active ingredients" of prosocial behavior. Namely, engaging in kind acts for others was compared to engaging in kind acts for oneself (social element removed), extraverted behavior (kindness element removed), and open-minded behavior (both social and kindness elements removed). Participants were assessed five times over 2 weeks, each time reporting on how they felt during their assigned activities. Multilevel models revealed that relative to all other conditions, participants assigned to do kind acts for others reported a greater sense of competence, self-confidence, and meaning while engaging in those acts across the intervention period. Engaging in acts of kindness for others also led to stronger feelings of connection relative to engaging in open-minded behavior or acts of kindness for oneself but did not differ from engaging in extraverted behavior. These results illuminate the experience of positive eudaimonic feelings while one commits kind acts for others and highlight the unique benefits of prosociality compared to other positive behaviors. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s42761-022-00143-4.

Assessment of self-related problems in functioning: Intrapersonal Problems Rating Scales.

This article describes the development and validation of the Intrapersonal Problems Rating Scales (IPRS), a multidimensional measure of self-related problems in personality functioning. Results from a series of factor analyses performed on self-ratings of over 200 problems revealed seven distinct but interrelated domains of intrapersonal problems: Emotion Dysregulation, Internalizing, Lack of Will, Externalizing, Scrupulousness, Fantasy Proneness, and Apathy. Items were selected and scales built for an efficient assessment of each problem area. The psychometric properties of the resulting scales were then evaluated in an independent sample. Convergent and discriminant validity support for the IPRS was obtained via correlations with respect to three measures of social, emotional, and behavioral problems. The scales associated with a range of personal styles and dispositions and predicted diverse self-reported attitudinal and behavioral criteria even after the effects of normal and maladaptive-range personality traits were removed. Two scoring systems (normative and ipsative, or person-centered, scoring) revealed a differential pattern of associations both internally and with external measures. Interpretive differences between the two scoring procedures are highlighted and potential practical applications of the IPRS are discussed. The instrument can provide additional information not fully accounted for by measures of traits or social functioning and be useful to researchers and practitioners alike to identify, understand, and track changes in a range of intrapersonal problems. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

A New Measure of Life Satisfaction: The Riverside Life Satisfaction Scale.

The Satisfaction With Life Scale (Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985) has been the dominant measure of life satisfaction since its creation more than 30 years ago. We sought to develop an improved measure that includes indirect indicators of life satisfaction (e.g., wishing to change one's life) to increase the bandwidth of the measure and account for acquiescence bias. In 3 studies, we developed a 6-item measure of life satisfaction, the Riverside Life Satisfaction Scale, and obtained reliability and validity evidence. Importantly, the Riverside Life Satisfaction Scale retained the high internal consistency, test-retest stability, and unidimensionality of the Satisfaction With Life Scale. In addition, the Riverside Life Satisfaction Scale correlated with other well-being measures, Big Five personality traits, values, and demographic information in expected ways. Although the Riverside Life Satisfaction Scale correlated highly with the Satisfaction With Life Scale, we believe it improves the Satisfaction With Life Scale by appropriately increasing construct breadth and reducing the potential for bias.

Development of the Broad Learning Adult Questionnaire.

Infants and children experience an intense form of intellectual engagement associated with learning a variety of new skills. A recent theory proposes that such broad learning experiences may be the key to maximal cognitive development not just during infancy and childhood but also during adulthood. To begin investigating this possibility, the present questionnaire on broad learning in adulthood builds on prior research on need for cognition, intellectual engagement, personal growth, and leisure activities. After several rounds with preliminary versions of the questionnaire, the final version consists of 28 items. Responses were gathered from two mTurk samples to measure scale reliability and to assess model fit. In the end, we obtained a satisfactory measure of broad learning that consists of six separate reliable scales. Once this questionnaire is validated in future studies, perhaps it could be used as a predictor for cognitive development during adulthood and for interventions inducing broad learning.

Development and validation of the Circumplex Scales of Interpersonal Problems.

The interpersonal circumplex (IPC) is a well-established model of social behavior that spans basic personality and clinical science. Although several measures are available to assess interpersonal functioning (e.g., motives, traits) within an IPC framework, researchers studying interpersonal difficulties have relied primarily on a single measure, the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems-Circumplex Scales (IIP-C; Horowitz, Alden, Wiggins, & Pincus, 2000). Although the IIP-C is a widely used measure, it is currently the only measure specifically designed to assess maladaptive interpersonal behavior using the IPC framework. The purpose of the current study is to describe a new 64-item measure of interpersonal problems, called the Circumplex Scales of Interpersonal Problems (CSIP). Interpersonal problems derived from a pool of 400 personality-related problems were assessed in two large university samples. In the scale development sample (N = 1,197), items that best characterized each sector of the IPC were identified, and a set of eight 8-item circumplex scales was developed. Psychometric properties of the resulting measure were then examined in the validation sample (N = 757). Results from confirmatory circumplex structural analyses indicated that the CSIP fit well to a quasi-circumplex model. The CSIP converged with the IIP-C and the Revised Interpersonal Adjective Scales (Wiggins, 1995), and associated in theoretically expected ways with broader assessments of adaptive- and maladaptive-range personality traits and symptoms of psychological distress. The CSIP augments the IIP-C with additional content, thereby helping to extend the underlying constructs, and provides an alternative means for studying the interpersonal consequences of personality and psychopathology. (PsycINFO Database Record

Identifying personality-related problems in living: the multi-context problems checklist.

The Multi-Context Problems Checklist (MCPC) is a new measure of personality-related problems designed for a young adult population. Previously published problem checklists either have little supporting empirical documentation to support their validity or focus on specific kinds of difficulties in specific contexts (e.g., interpersonal, close relationships). The MCPC is a straightforward and easy-to-use instrument covering 6 domains of functioning, takes about 5 minutes to complete, and is intended for young adults ages 18 to 29. Psychometric data are presented in 3 studies. In Study 1, correlations with self- and observer ratings showed scores on the MCPC to be consensually valid, and associations with measures of well-being and personality provided evidence of construct validity. Study 2 added to these findings by identifying specific personality-related problems associated with each pole of each trait of the five-factor model of personality, demonstrating moderate to high test-retest reliability of problem endorsements, and showing strong associations with measures of psychological distress. Study 3 indicated that the MCPC is sufficiently sensitive to capture more frequent problem reporting among individuals undergoing counseling. Problem-trait associations are related to a broader literature on global personality dimensions and psychosocial outcomes at the individual, interpersonal, and social and institutional levels. The MCPC deserves attention from both researchers and clinicians who are interested in assessing personality-related problems in living.

Personality and the prediction of consequential outcomes.

Personality has consequences. Measures of personality have contemporaneous and predictive relations to a variety of important outcomes. Using the Big Five factors as heuristics for organizing the research literature, numerous consequential relations are identified. Personality dispositions are associated with happiness, physical and psychological health, spirituality, and identity at an individual level; associated with the quality of relationships with peers, family, and romantic others at an interpersonal level; and associated with occupational choice, satisfaction, and performance, as well as community involvement, criminal activity, and political ideology at a social institutional level.

Personality out of proportion?

The field of personality assessment has evolved the normative practice of centering scores on their means, evaluating associations among measures with Pearson correlations, and using factor analytic methods to reduce redundancy and provide putative explanatory variables. At least some of these explanatory variables, or factors, have become well-known elements in trait theories of personality structure (e.g., the Five-factor model). Hofstee and Ten Berge (2004/this issue) suggest an alternative set of procedures arising from treating the midpoints of bipolar rating scales as true zero points. These procedures lead to a very different view of personality structure in which one factor provides a nearly sufficient summary of personality judgments. I scrutinize the methodological choices implied by these procedures here. This evaluation leads to the conclusion that Hofstee and Ten Berge provide methods and results that cannot serve to replace normative practice and well-known findings but do provide insight into important questions not typically addressed by personality assessors.

Complementarity of interpersonal behaviors in dyadic interactions.

An important assumption of interpersonal theory is that during social interactions the behavior of one person tends to invite complementary behavior from the other person. Past research examining complementarity has usually used either confederates or fictitious interaction partners in their designs and has produced inconsistent results. The current study used observational ratings of behaviors of 158 participants as they interacted with partners across three different dyadic social situations. Randomization tests of hypothesized order relations found that the behaviors exhibited during these interactions tended to occur in a circular pattern predicted by the interpersonal circumplex. These tests also indicated support for Leary's (1957) orientation of the control and affiliation dimensions of the interpersonal circumplex and Carson's (1969) notion that dominant behavior induces submissive responses and friendly behavior encourages friendly responses.