The process of analyzing human behavior is heavily dependent on the focus on both dispositional properties and situational factors. Dispositional attributes form the basis for cohesive and durable factors that determine behavior regardless of the situation. While individual factors include personality traits, personal values, attitudes, and knowledge, situational factors are related to various external factors such as the physical environment, the traces of participating in an event, or the effect of cultural beliefs. With the debate of the potent factor that is the environment and the traits of a person open for consideration, the aspect that needs to be answered is how the dispositional attributes and situational factors interact to determine the behavior of individuals. Despite the existing tradeoff between the two elements of human behavior, there remains a dynamic discourse on the paramount influence of dispositional attributes compared to situational factors on conduct, with the theoreticians equally presenting potent arguments on both sides.
Dispositional influence, consequently, is referred to as an intra-personal component of the behavior of an individual. These concerns are classified into four variables: personality, morality, mood, and genetics (Mcleod, 2023). According to proponents of dispositional attributes, the attributes of a person serve as a determinant of an underlying disposition that the individual is carrying. The disposition resists change across many situations regardless of the pressing condition that may necessitate action (Mcleod, 2023). The psychological standpoint focuses on nature’s function in determining an individual’s personal traits or temperament, including genetic propensities. For instance, a case in point is that of an introvert who will strive to acquire an outgoing and friendly disposition no matter the situation at hand (Mcleod, 2023). The believers of this viewpoint commonly reference the studies that discuss character traits in widely accepted personality theories and how the future behavior of people tends to be the outcome of those personality traits.
On the other hand, the situation factors include the factors outside humans that influence them to behave in a specific way. These include peer pressure and the attempt to behave in a particular manner to fit into the societal fabric (Mcleod, 2023). The advocates of situational factors underline the role of external conditions and surroundings in determining conduct. In addition, as per this school of thought, people react to social cues and external stimuli in their immediate environment (Mcleod, 2023). Social psychologists like Stanley Milgram conducted experiments showing the importance of situational factors on behavior. As manifested in Milgram’s obedience studies, participants were ready to deliver what appeared to them as really harmful electric shocks to others when they were ordered to do that by an authority figure, with the experiments showing the importance of situations in relation to personal ethics (Mcleod, 2023). The experiment results in the Stanely case indicate that external influence could be superior in determining individual behavior.
The concept of human behavior implies the examination of different theoretical grounds to comprehend the micro-level processes of the human brain, the macro factors of life situations and the external social forces. For instance, Ajzen (2020 explains that the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) remains one of the influential models that explains the psychology of behavior, considering how people behave different as inbuilt characteristics or through external influence. The Theory of Planned Behavior explains that social views, normative views, and control beliefs are the three critical factors that govern individuals’ unpredictable behaviors. According to the theory, the controllability beliefs remain in individual’s vigilance towards the probability factors that would either promote or deter the execution of a specific behavior (Ajzen, 2020). Whether dispositional attributes or situational factors control individuals, the theory explains that individuals create their ideas, which determine their standings, norms of social life and perceived control of behavioral, which impacts their plans and actions (Ajzen, 2020). The TPB lens provides a background for understanding these elements, and researchers can identify the processes that guide people’s thinking and behavior in the different situations they encounter.
However, adjustments and extensions to the TPB have incorporated additional factors, which, together with the contextual factors, give a more precise prediction of the respondent’s actions. For instance, Willis et al. (2020) investigated the role of social identity in shaping attitudes and the perceived norms of social drinking among the student population. The study reported that gaining group identity and the role of drinking for group identity are proven to be sensational key drivers of attitudes toward binge drinking and perceptions that influence participants for binge drinking (Willis et al., 2020). Also, one essential idea is that people might bear the impact of the organizations they work or live in on their self-images. It implies that an uncertain self-identity becomes the reason for the change in perception and influences others’ standards who are in a campaign of performing a particular style of behavior (Willis et al., 2020). Therefore, concentrating on group-level processes may be worthwhile because it could clarify the behaviors of binge drinkers (Willis et al., 2020). Even more precisely, it has to be all characters, including the affiliations of the people to the specific groups in which they belong, considering if drinking is the necessary condition for the membership, and having the social identification for this group in degrees.
Correspondingly, Canova and Manganelli (2020) explains various factors that strongly contribute to different behaviors. The research highlighted that cognitive attitude, subjective norm, and perceived behavioral control habits help predict intentions and behavior, increasing predictive power (Canova & Manganelli, 2020). Notably, cognitive attitude, subjective norm, perceived behavioral control and habit portray a significant relationship with intentions, and perceived behavioral (Canova and Manganelli, 2020). Additionally, the duo explain that the Theory of Planned Behavior constructs shows a complicated effect of routine on behavior (Canova & Manganelli, 2020). The experimental evidence shows the involvement of trait variables such as habit formation with environmental factors determine behaviors and decision outcomes. It suggests that human decision-making processes within organizational systems are not single factor-oriented but a combination of different factors.
Furthermore, La Barbera and Ajzen’s (2020) research investigated the mediating process of the relationship between attitude and subjective norms involving the perceived behavioral control. The findings in the research offer more profound insights, explaining that fact that someone might have higher perceived behavioral control offer a guarantee to positive correlation between their attitude and intention to engage in different variants of that action (La Barbera and Ajzen, 2020). In effect, personal beliefs and a sense of control are more influential than the social pressure from the environment (La Barbera, Ajzen, 2020). The specific insight that individual sense control and social status depend on different situations adds considerably to the knowledge of decision making. The findings confirms that one should always consider individual attributes and the surrounding social influence in calculating the behavior.
Notwithstanding the tradeoff between the two views, it is evident that resolution of human behavior is complex and thus based on the multidimensional figure between the two extremes. As La Barbera and Ajzen (2020) explain, although dispositional characteristics no doubt contribute to how individuals behave, it is vital to be reminded that situational factors have a more dominant role in influencing individual decisions. In considering the question of nature versus nurture, it should be borne in mind that situational characteristics might sometimes hold more weight than inherent relations, illustrating the sensitivity of the environment and the interaction of these to behavior (Mcleod, 2023). In addition, social psychology has affirmed how people’s characters and situations contribute to behavior changes. Indeed, although dispositional characteristics can offer hints regarding individual inclinations, situational determinants often have an even more substantial influence on behavior under given circumstances, y surpassing the significance of dispositional attributes.
Conclusion
Generally, from the findings, it is ideal to say that human behavior is the cumulative influence of dispositional qualities and situational factors acting as one. Although dispositional attributes point to the constancy of individual characteristics, situational factors considerably impact how someone behaves in particular circumstances. Instead of considering behavioral factors as individual entities, a holistic understanding of behavior implies acknowledging their mutual complexity. Therefore, the judgement for the behavior should endeavor to include a thorough analysis of both external and internal factors and their possible interactions where a simple explanation by attributing the behavior to a specific factor is not applicable.
References
Canova, L., & Manganelli, A. M. (2020). Energy-saving behaviours in workplaces: Application of an extended model of the theory of planned behaviour. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 16(3), 384. DOI:10.5964%2Fejop.v16i3.1893
Willis, L., Lee, E., Reynolds, K. J., & Klik, K. A. (2020). The theory of planned behavior and the social identity approach: A new look at group processes and social norms in the context of student binge drinking. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 16(3), 357. DOI: 10.5964%2Fejop.v16i3.1900
Mcleod S. (2023). Stanley Milgram Shock Experiment: Summary, Results, & Ethics. Simply Psychology.https://www.simplypsychology.org/milgram.html
Ajzen, I. (2020). The theory of planned behavior: Frequently asked questions. Human behavior and emerging technologies, 2(4), 314-324. DOI: 10.1016/0749-5978(91)90020-T
Canova L., Manganelli A. M. (2020). Energy-saving behaviours in workplaces: Application of an extended model of the theory of planned behaviour. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 16(3), 384-400. DOI: 10.5964/ejop.v16i3.1893
La Barbera, F., & Ajzen, I. (2020). Control interactions in the theory of planned behavior: Rethinking the role of subjective norm. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 16(3), 401. DOI: 10.5964%2Fejop.v16i3.2056
Mcleod S. (2023). Attribution Theory in Psychology: Definition & Examples. https://www.simplypsychology.org/attribution-theory.html
write