684 vI. SELF‑ AND S OCIAL P ROCESSES
acteristics of situations: An optimization of the 
RSQ-8 to the S8*. European Journal of Psycho -
logical Assessment, 32,  155–164.
Rauthmann, J., & Sherman, R. (2019). Toward a 
research agenda for the study of situation per -
ceptions: A variance componential framework. 
Personality and Social Psychology Review, 23, 
238–266.
Rauthmann, J. F., Sherman, R. A., & Funder, D. 
C. (2015). Principles of situation research: To -
wards a better understanding of psychological 
situations. European Journal of Personality, 29, 
363–381.
Rauthmann, J. F., Sherman, R. A., Nave, C. S., & 
Funder, D. C. (2015). Personality-  driven situ -
ation experience, contact, and construal: How 
people’s personality traits predict characteristics 
of their situations in daily life. Journal of Re -
search in Personality, 55, 98–111.
Read, S. J., Monroe, B. M., Brownstein, A. L., 
Yang, Y., Chopra, G., & Miller, L. C. (2010). A 
neural network model of the structure and dy -
namics of human personality. Psychological Re -
view, 117,  61–92.
Roberts, B. W., Kuncel, N. R., Shiner, R., Caspi, 
A., & Goldberg, L. R. (2007). The power of per -
sonality: The comparative validity of personality 
traits, socioeconomic status, and cognitive abil -
ity for predicting important life outcomes. Per-
spectives on Psychological Science, 2, 313–345.
Romero-  Canyas, R., Anderson, V. T., Reddy, K. S., 
& Downey, G. (2009). Rejection sensitivity. In 
M. Leary & R. Hoyle (Eds.), Handbook of indi -
vidual differences in social behavior (pp. 466–
479). New York: Guilford Press.
Ross, L., & Nisbett, R. E. (1991). The person and 
the situation: Perspectives of social psychology. 
New York: McGraw-  Hill.
Sadikaj, G., Rappaport, L. M., Moskowitz, D. S., 
Zuroff, D. C., Koestner, R., & Powers, T. (2015). 
Consequences of interpersonal spin on couple- 
relevant goal progress and relationship satisfac -
tion in romantic relationships. Journal of Per -
sonality and Social Psychology, 109, 722–737.
Scarr, S., & McCartney, K. (1983). How people 
make their own environments: A theory of geno -
type → environment effects. Child Develop -
ment, 54, 424–435.
Sherman, R. A., Nave, C. S., & Funder, D. C. 
(2010). Situational similarity and personality 
predict behavioral consistency. Journal of Per -
sonality and Social Psychology, 99, 330–343.
Sherman, R. A., Rauthmann, J. F., Brown, N. A., 
Serfass, D. G., & Jones, A. B. (2015). The inde -
pendent effects of personality and situations on 
real-time expressions of behavior and emotion. 
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 
109, 872–888.Shoda, Y., Mischel, W., & Wright, J. C. (1994). 
Intraindividual stability in the organization and 
patterning of behavior: Incorporating psycho -
logical situations into the idiographic analysis 
of personality. Journal of Personality and Social 
Psychology, 67, 674 – 687.
Snyder, M., & Ickes, W. (1985). Personality and 
social behavior. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson 
(Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (3rd ed., 
pp. 883–948). New York: Random House.
Soto, C. J. (2019). How replicable are links be -
tween personality traits and consequential life 
outcomes?: The Life Outcomes Of Personality 
Replication Project. Psychological Science, 30, 
711–727.
Taylor, S. E. (2012). Tend and befriend theory. In P. 
Van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins 
(Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychol -
ogy (Vol 1, pp. 32–49). Thousand Oaks, CA: 
SAGE.
Tellegen, A., & Waller, N. G. (2008). Exploring 
personality through test construction: Develop -
ment of the Multidimensional Personality Ques -
tionnaire. In G. J. Boyle, G. Matthews, & D. H. 
Saklofske (Eds.), Handbook of personality theo -
ry and testing: Vol. 2. Personality measurement 
and assessment  (pp. 261–292). Thousand Oaks, 
CA: SAGE.
Ten Berge, M. A., & de Raad, B. (2002). The 
structure of situations from a personality per -
spective. European Journal of Personality, 16,  
81–102.
Todd, E., & Funder, D. (2012, January). Personal -
ity correlates of unique perceptions of brief film 
situations.  Poster presented at the meeting of the 
Society for Personality and Social Psychology, 
San Diego, CA.
Van Heck, G. L. (1984). The construction of a gen -
eral taxonomy of situations. In H. Bonarius, G. 
L. Van Heck, & N. Smid (Eds.), Personality psy -
chology in Europe: Theoretical and empirical 
developments  (pp. 149–164). Lisse, the Nether -
lands: Swets & Zeitlinger.
Van Heck, G. L., Perugini, M., Caprara, G. V., & 
Froeger, J. (1994). The Big Five as tendencies in 
situations. Personality and Individual Differ -
ences, 16,  715–731.
Wagerman, S. A., & Funder, D. C. (2009). Situa -
tions. In P. J. Corr & G. Matthews (Eds.), Cam -
bridge handbook of personality psychology 
(pp. 27–42). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge Univer -
sity Press.
Watson, J. B. (1930). Behaviorism  (rev. ed.). New 
York: Norton.
Wood, D., Gardner, M. H., & Harms, P. D. (2015). 
How functionalist and process approaches to be -
havior can explain trait covariation. Psychologi -
cal Review, 122, 84–111.