ever, E’s response needs—tasks for P—have been studied much
more than E’s reinforcer needs. Redressing this imbalance is an ur-
gent research task.
Personality Structure
In the development and application of PEC theory, the emphasis
has shifted from skills and needs to abilities and values. Personality
structure is described more parsimoniously in terms of abilities and
values than in terms of skills and needs. (Nonetheless, description
in terms of the latter may be necessary when the skills and needs
involved are not well described when using known abilities and val-
ues.) Also, because of their derivation as reference dimensions, abil-
ities and values are much more stable than skills and needs. P’s skills
and needs may change without any change showing up in P’s abili-
ties and values. This robustness of abilities and values makes it more
compelling to use them as the variables with which to describe per-
sonality structure.
Personality Style
The measurement of personality style has not progressed as much
as the measurement of personality structure (abilities and values,
skills and needs). Some style dimensions (for example, flexibility,
perseverance, activeness, reactiveness) may be indirectly measured
by scales in existing self-report personality inventories. However,
such scales were developed with other intentions in mind, not as
measures of PEC theory’s personality style, and so they usually wind
up as unsatisfactory substitutes.
Attempts have been made to develop self-report scales accord-
ing to PEC theory, but these scales (in Ph.D. dissertations) have not
been developed further for use in professional practice. Probably as
good a method as any now available is that old reliable—an impro-
vised self-rating on a 10-point scale, with the ends of the scale
anchored by descriptive phrases. Another alternative might be to
PERSON-ENVIRONMENT-CORRESPONDENCE THEORY 447