472 v. AFFECTI vE PROCESSES
fare worse in terms of typical measures of 
relational strength (e.g., Impett et al., 2010).
Scholars working within different tra -
ditions have long argued that emotional 
tendencies lie at the heart of individual 
identity—  the unique motifs, meanings, and 
recurring events that make up the individ -
ual’s life trajectory (Malatesta, 1990; Oat -
ley, 2009). Here we build on this assertion 
to point to two general processes—  appraisal 
biases and action tendencies—  by which 
emotions might lie at the heart of individual 
identity and influence a wide array of long-
term outcomes. Tendencies toward specific 
emotions function like scripts, setting the 
course for each individual’s life.
Conclusion
The human capacity for emotion is univer -
sal, yet individuals differ emotionally in 
profound ways. In this review we have sum -
marized advances in the scientific study of 
emotion that have powerful implications for 
the study of personality and individual dif -
ferences, highlighting the ways in which uni -
versal aspects and mechanisms of emotion 
can nonetheless vary from person to person. 
Moving beyond the study of broad affective 
states and their relation to the Big Five, our 
review highlighted four emerging themes in 
the science of emotion: the social functions 
of emotion; the growing number of distinct 
emotion states that constitute our subjective 
lives; the cognitive and neural mechanisms 
of emotional experience; and the complex -
ity and dynamics of individuals’ emotional 
experience over time. Each of these four as -pects of emotion is ripe for exploitation in 
personality psychology.
What new directions do these insights sug -
gest in terms of future research on individual 
differences in emotion? We concluded our 
review by highlighting two broad concep -
tual approaches exemplifying our broader 
claim that emotions mediate the relationship 
between the person and the environment. 
We detailed how emotions mediate trait to 
life outcome relations and relational dynam -
ics. The study of individual differences in 
emotion was a central interest of founding 
figures in the field—  Darwin and James most 
notably. We are only beginning to realize the 
promise of this area of inquiry.
REFERENCES
Anderson, C., Brion, S., Moore, D. A., & Kennedy, 
J. A. (2012). A status-  enhancement account of 
overconfidence. Journal of Personality and So -
cial Psychology, 103 (4), 718–735.
Anderson, C., Hildreth, J. A. D., & Howland, L. 
(2015). Is the desire for status a fundamental 
human motive?: A review of the empirical litera -
ture. Psychological Bulletin, 141 (3), 574–601.
Anderson, C., John, O. P., Keltner, D., & Kring, A. 
M. (2001). Who attains social status?: Effects of 
personality and physical attractiveness in social 
groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psy -
chology, 81 (1), 116–132.
Anderson, C., & Kilduff, G. J. (2009). Why do 
dominant personalities attain influence in face-
to-face groups?: The competence-  signaling ef -
fects of trait dominance. Journal of Personality 
and Social Psychology, 96 (2), 491–503.
Anderson, C. L., Monroy, M., & Keltner, D. (2018). 
Emotion in the wilds of nature: The coherence 
and contagion of fear during threatening group-Neuroticism  Apprai sal 
Tenden cies 
uncertainty, 
attunement to 
threats; 
anticip ation of 
rejection Emotional 
Experi ence 
fear, anxiety , 
ange r, low 
enjoyment  Action 
Tenden cies 
critici sm, 
clingi ng, 
withdrawal, 
accu sation, 
avoidan ce Life 
Outc omes  
low 
relation ship 
satisfaction, 
stability  
FIGURE 21.2. Emotions mediate dynamics between individuals in close relationships.