IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v11y2023i5p1182-d1082904.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Stochastic Model of Personality Differences Based on PSI Theory

Author

Listed:
  • Molly Hoy

    (School of Computer Science and Mathematics (CSM), Liverpool John Moores University (LJMU), James Parsons Building, Byrom Way, Liverpool L3 3AF, UK)

  • Sarah Fritsch

    (Institute for Environmental Systems Research (USF), University of Osnabrück, 49069 Osnabrück, Germany)

  • Thomas Bröcker

    (Department of Physics, University of Osnabrück, 49069 Osnabrück, Germany)

  • Julius Kuhl

    (Institute of Psychology, University of Osnabrück, 49069 Osnabrück, Germany)

  • Ivo Siekmann

    (School of Computer Science and Mathematics (CSM), Liverpool John Moores University (LJMU), James Parsons Building, Byrom Way, Liverpool L3 3AF, UK
    Liverpool Centre for Cardiovascular Science, Liverpool L69 7TX, UK
    Data Science Research Centre, Liverpool John Moores University (LJMU), Liverpool L3 3AF, UK
    PROTECT-eHealth, Liverpool John Moores University (LJMU), Liverpool L3 3AF, UK)

Abstract

Personality Systems Interactions (PSI) theory explains differences in personality based on the properties of four cognitive systems—object recognition (OR), intuitive behaviour (IB), intention memory (IM) and extension memory (EM). Each system is associated with characteristic modes of perception and behaviour, so personality is determined by which systems are primarily active. According to PSI theory, the activities of the cognitive systems are regulated by positive and negative affect (reward and punishment). Thus, differences in personality ultimately emerge from four parameters—the sensitivities of up- or downregulating positive and negative affect. The complex interactions of affect and cognitive systems have been represented in a mathematical model based on a system of differential equations. In this study, the environment of a person represented by the mathematical model is modelled by a time series of perturbations with positive and negative affect that are generated by a stochastic process. Comparing the average activities of the cognitive systems for different parameter sets exposed to the same time series of affect perturbations, we observe that different dominant cognitive systems emerge. This demonstrates that different sensitivities for positive and negative affect lead to different modes of cognition and, thus, to different personality types such as agreeable, conscientious, self-determined or independent . Varying the relative frequencies of negative and positive affect perturbations reveals that the average activities of all cognitive systems respond linearly. This observation enables us to predict that conscientious and independent personalities benefit from increased exposure to positive affect, whereas agreeable and self-determined personalities achieve a better balance of their cognitive systems by increased negative affect.

Suggested Citation

  • Molly Hoy & Sarah Fritsch & Thomas Bröcker & Julius Kuhl & Ivo Siekmann, 2023. "A Stochastic Model of Personality Differences Based on PSI Theory," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-17, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:5:p:1182-:d:1082904
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/5/1182/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/5/1182/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    2. Daniel M. Abrams & Steven H. Strogatz, 2003. "Modelling the dynamics of language death," Nature, Nature, vol. 424(6951), pages 900-900, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Vicky Chuqiao Yang & Tamara van der Does & Henrik Olsson, 2021. "Falling through the cracks: Modeling the formation of social category boundaries," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(3), pages 1-11, March.
    2. Maria Andersson & Ola Eriksson & Chris Von Borgstede, 2012. "The Effects of Environmental Management Systems on Source Separation in the Work and Home Settings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(6), pages 1-17, June.
    3. Tran Huy Phuong & Thanh Trung Hieu, 2015. "Predictors of Entrepreneurial Intentions of Undergraduate Students in Vietnam: An Empirical Study," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 5(8), pages 46-55, August.
    4. Clara Cardone-Riportella & María José Casasola-Martinez & Isabel Feito-Ruiz, 2014. "Do Entrepreneurs Come From Venus Or Mars? Impact Of Postgraduate Studies: Gender And Family Business Background," Working Papers 14.04, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Financial Economics and Accounting (former Department of Business Administration), revised Sep 2014.
    5. Peng Cheng & Zhe Ouyang & Yang Liu, 0. "The effect of information overload on the intention of consumers to adopt electric vehicles," Transportation, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    6. Ruijie Zhu & Guojing Zhao & Zehai Long & Yangjie Huang & Zhaoxin Huang, 2022. "Entrepreneurship or Employment? A Survey of College Students’ Sustainable Entrepreneurial Intentions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-15, May.
    7. Alsalem, Amani & Fry, Marie-Louise & Thaichon, Park, 2020. "To donate or to waste it: Understanding posthumous organ donation attitude," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 87-97.
    8. Pan, Jing Yu & Liu, Dahai, 2022. "Mask-wearing intentions on airplanes during COVID-19 – Application of theory of planned behavior model," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C), pages 32-44.
    9. Benoît Lécureux & Adrien Bonnet & Ouassim Manout & Jaâfar Berrada & Louafi Bouzouina, 2022. "Acceptance of Shared Autonomous Vehicles: A Literature Review of stated choice experiments," Working Papers hal-03814947, HAL.
    10. Jacqueline Ruth & Steffen Willwacher & Oliver Korn, 2022. "Acceptance of Digital Sports: A Study Showing the Rising Acceptance of Digital Health Activities Due to the SARS-CoV-19 Pandemic," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(1), pages 1-16, January.
    11. Jariyasunant, Jerald & Carrel, Andre & Ekambaram, Venkatesan & Gaker, David & Sengupta, Raja & Walker, Joan L., 2012. "The Quantified Traveler: Changing transport behavior with personalized travel data feedback," University of California Transportation Center, Working Papers qt3047k0dw, University of California Transportation Center.
    12. Brown, Philip & Roper, Simon, 2017. "Innovation and networks in New Zealand farming," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 61(3), July.
    13. Teodora Roman, 2009. "Study regarding entrepreneurial intentions among students," THE YEARBOOK OF THE "GH. ZANE" INSTITUTE OF ECONOMIC RESEARCHES, Gheorghe Zane Institute for Economic and Social Research ( from THE ROMANIAN ACADEMY, JASSY BRANCH), vol. 18, pages 87-94.
    14. Messele Kumilachew Aga, 2023. "The mediating role of perceived behavioral control in the relationship between entrepreneurship education and entrepreneurial intentions of university students in Ethiopia," Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Springer, vol. 12(1), pages 1-18, December.
    15. Kristin Thomas & Evalill Nilsson & Karin Festin & Pontus Henriksson & Mats Lowén & Marie Löf & Margareta Kristenson, 2020. "Associations of Psychosocial Factors with Multiple Health Behaviors: A Population-Based Study of Middle-Aged Men and Women," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-17, February.
    16. Andreas Falke & Nadine Schröder & Claudia Hofmann, 2022. "The influence of values in sustainable consumption among millennials," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 92(6), pages 899-928, August.
    17. Kamruzzaman, Md. & Baker, Douglas & Washington, Simon & Turrell, Gavin, 2013. "Residential dissonance and mode choice," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 12-28.
    18. Ficko, Andrej & Boncina, Andrej, 2013. "Probabilistic typology of management decision making in private forest properties," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 34-43.
    19. Muhammad Shahid Qureshi & Saadat Saeed & Syed Waleed Mehmood Wasti, 2016. "The impact of various entrepreneurial interventions during the business plan competition on the entrepreneur identity aspirations of participants," Journal of Global Entrepreneurship Research, Springer;UNESCO Chair in Entrepreneurship, vol. 6(1), pages 1-18, December.
    20. Julie Bayle-Cordier & Loïc Berger & Rayan Elatmani & Massimo Tavoni, 2023. "Breath, Love, Walk? The Impact of Mindfulness Interventions on Climate Policy Support and Environmental Attitudes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-29, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:5:p:1182-:d:1082904. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.