94 I. THEORETICAL  PERSPECTI vES AND  CONCEPT uAL uNITS
ling one’s world to gain acceptance and self- 
esteem/status (see Depue & Collins, 1999). 
Given this belief, how would people pursue 
their need-  fulfilling social goals? The an -
swer is likely to be through the online acts 
that characterize extraversion, such as socia -
bility and assertiveness (John & Srivastava, 
1999; Soto & John, 2009).
Finally, for people high in neuroticism,  
I propose that the key underlying BEATs 
guiding goal pursuit are negative beliefs 
about both goodness and control—  the belief 
that one’s world is unsafe, combined with a 
lack of confidence in one’s ability to wield 
control and meet important social needs in 
that world (see Costa & McCrae, 1988, for 
evidence of expected adversity, dependency, 
and low autonomy). Given negative beliefs 
about goodness and control, what would 
characterize the pursuit of need-  fulfilling 
goals?
The answer is likely to be the online acts 
and experiences that characterize neuroti -
cism. However, unlike the other two traits 
I have considered, neuroticism is assessed 
through reports of recurrent internal ex -
periences (e.g., anxiety or depressed affect) 
rather than reports of recurrent online acts. 
Nonetheless, the literature also speaks to on -
line acts. In line with negative beliefs about 
the world and one’s control, the literature 
shows that many of the online acts of people 
high in neuroticism involve preventing or re -
lieving harm to the self: vigilance for harm 
(Wilson, Kumari, Gray, & Corr, 2000), 
harm-  avoidance and failure-  avoidance (e.g., 
Elliot & Thrash, 2002; Lommen, Engel -
hard, & van den Hout, 2010), and avoidant 
coping, that is, coping by soothing oneself 
(e.g., with alcohol) rather than addressing 
the problem itself (M. Cooper, Agocha, & 
Sheldon, 2000). In addition, with an unsafe 
world and a low sense of control, it is not 
surprising that the online experiences that 
define neuroticism (e.g., anxiety, depressed 
mood; John & Soto, 2009; John, Chapter 
2, this volume) reflect concerns about not  
meeting one’s social needs.
On a more general level, it is interesting to 
consider whether people might focus on cer -
tain needs and need-  fulfilling goals as a way 
of seeking self-  coherence. For example, peo -
ple high on extraversion may feel a strength -
ened sense of self-  coherence when they are 
active and assertive in social situations.In this section, I have very tentatively sug -
gested how focal needs and strong BEATs 
can plausibly set the stage for common traits.
Recurrent Online Acts as  Styles of  Fulfilling 
Needs,  Continued
Going beyond the Big Five traits, I propose 
that other recurrent online acts may also 
be seen as styles of pursuing need-  fulfilling 
goals (cf. McCabe & Fleeson, 2012, 2016) 
within the constraints of particular BEATs. 
For example, aside from the Big Five traits, 
people may have characteristic styles of ful -
filling acceptance needs (see, e.g., the attach -
ment literature: Ainsworth, 1979; Miku -
lincer & Shaver, 2007) or competence needs 
(see, e.g., the implicit theories or mindset lit -
erature; Dweck, 1999). In both cases, differ -
ent patterns of goal pursuit are underpinned 
by particular BEATs (e.g., attachment sche -
mas, intelligence mindsets). Thus, the cur -
rent model may allow us to understand a 
variety of online acts within the same con -
ceptual framework.
What Do We Gain from This Approach?
What does this approach contribute to trait 
theories? The current theory places traits in 
a motivational framework (involving needs 
and goals) and in the context of their un -
derlying dynamics (involving experience- 
based BEATs). Building the current theory 
around experience-  based representations 
allows us to capitalize on the cardinal vir -
tues of Mischel and Shoda’s (1995) dynamic 
CAPS model, with the representations serv -
ing at the same time as (1) a foundation of 
behavior (BEATs underlie behavior), (2) a 
vehicle for contextual variation in behavior 
(different BEATs can be activated in differ -
ent situations), (3) the object of development 
(BEATs are formed from experiences over 
time), and (4) the target of change through 
direct intervention (changing BEATs/beliefs 
can change behavior). In these ways, the 
theory can help us understand the processes 
through which traits develop and come to 
life in relevant settings.
What would the current approach con -
tribute to social-  cognitive theories such as 
Mischel and Shoda’s (1995) CAPS model? 
First, it places the CAPS model in a more 
explicitly motivational framework. Second, 