Open Peer Commentary and Authors' Response

We focus on three of the Rauthmann et al. assertions with which we agree: (i) psychology needs guiding principles of what situations are and how they operate, (ii) we should tailor different situational taxonomies to our research needs and (iii) psychological experiences of situations matter. These assertions are embodied in the ‘interpersonal situation’, a fundamental orienting construct of interpersonal theory, providing an interactional-dynamic perspective on the situation that is variable-centred and dimensional, focuses on characteristics of situations, synthesizes objective and subjective perspectives, and is applicable to multi-method, multi-informant, multi-timescale assessment. Copyright © 2015 European Association of Personality Psychology Rauthmann, Sherman, and Funder (2015) synthesize a comprehensive general framework for conceptualizing and studying situations that integrates objective and subjective perspectives and accounts for inter-individual and intraindividual differences in situation perception. There are many points of entry, and limited space to comment. We focus on three key assertions, with which we agree: (i) psychology needs guiding principles of what situations are and how they operate, (ii) we should tailor different situational taxonomies to our research needs and (iii) psychological experiences of situations matter. Traditional conceptualizations of personality traits have emphasized stability and cross-situational generality; thus, research has prioritized studying the structure of betweenperson differences (Fleeson, 2012). In contrast, clinical theories of personality functioning and intervention often describe dynamic within-person processes (Beck, Freeman, & Davis, 2004; Clarkin, Yeomans, & Kernberg, 2006; Pincus & Wright, 2011) that involve transactions between people and the situational contexts within which their behaviours/symptoms emerge (Pincus, Lukowitsky, Wright, & Eichler, 2009). We suggest that the DIAMOND taxonomy (Rauthmann et al., 2014) could be fruitfully buttressed by contemporary interpersonal theory and assessment (Pincus, 2005; Pincus & Ansell, 2013; Wiggins, 2003). Interpersonal theory asserts that (i) situations involving two or more people (proximal or mentally represented) are among the strongest situations we experience and (ii) the important psychological characteristics of these situations are the perception of others’ agentic (dominant–submissive) and communal (warm–cold) behaviours in relation to the self within and across social interactions. This framework can be used empirically to contextualize cognitive, behavioural and affective dynamics across a variety of timescales unfolding in daily life and across the lifespan (Ram et al., 2014; Roche, Pincus, Rebar, Conroy, & Ram, 2014). Moreover, this interpersonal lens on situations embodies many of the Rauthmann et al. recommendations. It is an interactional-dynamic perspective (see their Table 2) that is variable-centred and dimensional (Wiggins, 1979, 1991), focuses on characteristics (i.e. perceived cues) of situations (Roche, Pincus, Hyde, Conroy, & Ram, 2013), synthesizes objective and subjective perspectives (Hopwood, Wright, Ansell, & Pincus, 2013; Lukowitsky & Pincus, 2011), and is applicable to multimethod, multi-informant, multi-timescale assessment in situ, juxta situm or ex situ (Pincus et al., 2014). The interpersonal situation is a fundamental orienting construct in interpersonal theory (Hopwood, Pincus, & Wright, in press; Sullivan, 1953). Pincus and Ansell (2003) summarized the interpersonal situation as ‘the experience of a pattern of relating self with other associated with varying levels of anxiety (or security) in which learning takes place that influences the development of self-concept and social behavior’ (p. 210). Therefore, it is the dynamically unfolding context in which social learning takes place across the lifespan, promoting personality organization, development and adjustment. Interactions with others develop into increasingly complex patterns of interpersonal experience that are encoded in memory, giving rise to mental representations Discussion 407 Copyright © 2015 European Association of Personality Psychology Eur. J. Pers. 29: 382–432 (2015)