Abstract

Abstract Corr’s (2000) commentary on the Matthews and Gilliland (1999) review article provides a useful account of the current status of Gray’s personality theory, and the prospects for theory development. In this reply, we find some common ground with Corr (2000) . We agree that it is important to articulate and test biological models of personality. Likewise, the moderator effects of reinforcement factors, which may be controlled by brain motivation systems, are an important focus for empirical study. We differ from Corr (2000) , at least in emphasis, in two respects. First, Gray’s Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory does not seem to have accommodated the multiplicity of brain systems which may relate to personality, including attentional systems which may modulate motivation. Second, the evidence from studies of personality and performance, suggests that cognitive models of trait action are often more successful in explaining behavioral data than theories of Gray and Eysenck. Cognitive and biological approaches may be integrated within a cognitive science framework which distinguishes multiple, complementary levels of explanation.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.