Distinguishing simple and residual consistencies in functionally equivalent and non-equivalent situations: Evidence from experimental and observational longitudinal data

Abstract

The current work examines consistencies of personality state scores across functionally equivalent and non-equivalent situations. We argue that simple consistency, defined as the correlation between state scores without taking people’s straits into account, needs to be distinguished from residual consistency that does account for traits. The existence of residual consistency reflects systematic interindividual differences in how people respond to situations, above and beyond what is expected from their traits. We examine the level and individual differences in all of these forms of consistency. In four micro-longitudinal studies (total N = 671), participants first provided trait self-ratings and then state ratings, either in response to two situation vignettes presented at separate testing occasions (Studies 1 and 2) or during experience sampling in daily life (Studies 3 and 4). In all studies, simple consistency was substantial, and the level of residual consistency varied with the level of functional equivalence of the situations. Further, individual differences in both simple and residual consistencies were only weakly correlated, suggesting no underlying general factor but only trait-specific consistencies. We conclude that there are consistent individual differences in how people respond to equivalent situations, even when their personality trait scores have been taken into account.