fei75766_ch18_569-609.indd 593  02/24/20 10:50 AM
Chapter 18     Rotter and Mischel: Cognitive Social Learning Theory593
outgoing, extraverted manner when heiswithmenorwitholder women. Isthisyoung 
manshyorisheextraverted? Mischel would saythatheisboth—depending onthe
conditions affecting theyoung manduring aparticular situation.
Theconditional viewholds thatbehavior isshaped bypersonal dispositions plus
aperson’s specific cognitive andaffective processes. Whereas traittheory would sug-
gestthatglobal dispositions predict behavior, Mischel argues thataperson’s beliefs, 
values, goals, cognitions, andfeelings interact withthose dispositions toshape behav -
ior.Forexample, traditional traittheory suggests thatpeople withthetraitofconsci -
entiousness willusually behave inaconscientious manner. However, Mischel points 
outthatinavariety ofsituations, aconscientious person mayuseconscientiousness 
along withother cognitive-affective processes toaccomplish aspecific outcome.
Inanexploratory study totestthismodel, JackWright andMischel (1988) 
interviewed 8-and12-year-old children aswellasadults andasked them toreport 
everything theyknew about “target” groups ofchildren. Both adults andchildren 
recognized thevariability ofother people’s behavior, butadults weremore certain 
about theconditions under which particular behaviors would occur. Whereas chil-
drenwould hedge theirdescriptions insuchterms as“Carlo sometimes hitsother 
kids,” adults would bemore specific: forexample, “Carlo hitswhen provoked.” These 
findings suggest thatpeople readily recognize theinterrelationship between situations 
andbehavior andthattheyintuitively follow aconditional viewofdispositions.
Neither thesituation alone norstable personality traits alone determine behav -
ior.Rather, behavior isaproduct ofboth. Therefore, Mischel andShoda havepro-
posed acognitive-affective personality system thatattempts toreconcile these two
approaches topredicting human behaviors. 
Cognitive-Affective Personality System
Tosolve theclassical consistency paradox, Mischel andShoda (Mischel, 2004; 
Mischel &Shoda, 1995, 1998, 1999; Shoda &Mischel, 1996, 1998) proposed a
cognitive-affective personality system (CAPS; alsocalled acognitive-affective pro-
cessing system) thataccounts forvariability across situations aswellasstability of
behavior within aperson. Apparent inconsistencies inaperson’s behavior aredue
neither torandom error norsolely tothesituation. Rather, theyarepotentially 
predictable behaviors thatreflect stable patterns of variation within aperson. The
cognitive-affective personality system predicts thataperson’s behavior willchange 
from situation tosituation butinameaningful manner. 
Mischel andShoda (Mischel, 1999, 2004; Mischel &Ayduk, 2002; Shoda, 
LeeTiernan, &Mischel, 2002) believe thatvariations inbehavior canbeconceptual -
izedinthisframework: If A, then X; but if B, then Y .Forexample, ifMark isprovoked 
byhiswife,thenhewillreact withaggression. However, when the“if”changes, so
doesthe“then.” IfMark isprovoked byhisboss, thenhewillreact withsubmission. 
Mark’s behavior mayseem inconsistent because heapparently reacts differently to
thesame stimulus. Mischel andShoda, however, would argue thatbeing provoked 
bytwodifferent people doesnotconstitute thesame stimulus. Mark’s behavior is
notinconsistent andmaywellreflect astable lifetime pattern ofreacting. Such an
interpretation, Mischel andShoda believe, solves theconsistency paradox bytaking Final PDF to printer