My research falls into two distinct yet related domains. It is related in that I am investigating the antecedents and consequences of the person x environment fit. The divergence occurs primarily in how I measure and conceptualize personality. Testosterone as a Marker for Status Strivings Typically there is a divide between biological and social-personality psychology. In my research, however, I take an integrative approach treating the hormone testosterone as a marker for individual differences in dominance strivings. Testosterone has profound impacts on behavior, but only under certain situations. In a recent paper, my colleagues Bob Josephs, Matt Newman, Pranj Mehta and I have shown that when high testosterone individuals are placed into low status positions, they show evidence of being motivated to regain dominance; they show greater emotional arousal, an increase in heart rate, evidence of cognitive distraction and an implicit, or unconscious, attention to status. However, when placed into a position of dominance, low testosterone individuals show motivation to return to a low status position. These individuals protested. They demonstrated increased emotional arousal, an increase in heart rate, evidence of cognitive distraction and an implicit attention to status. When status was not up for grabs, however, testosterone had no impact on behavior. Currently, I am investigating the interplay between testosterone and explicit measures of dominance on the types of status positions that people select. Why people enter unsatisfying relationships In my second line of research, I am interested in the reasons why people enter into unsatisfying intimate relationships. It appears that people may be drawn into certain types of relationships for the very same reasons that prove disastrous in the long run. The “precarious couple effect” may represent one example of this phenomenon. Bill Swann and colleagues have found that relationships suffer when verbally inhibited men pair with verbally disinhibited women who also happen to be critical (i.e., precarious couples). In collaboration with Bill Swann and Katie McClarty, we have discovered that although the communication styles of members of precarious couples may be symbiotic during initial encounters as it is easy for people to enter into these relationships, later, when encountering stress, these same communication styles lead to discord. In a recent collaboration with an honors student, we have found that outside perceivers hold negative stereotypes about precarious couples that may serve to add further stress to these already stressed pairs.
