Environments influence behavior only through individual mediation.

Evidence

The E→P→R formula provides a convenient way of visualizing the fallacy in the claim that behavior is so much a function of environments that individuals’ predispositions need not be studied (reservation two). In fact, environments are always mediated by the individuals on whom they act; environments cannot shape behavior directly, and much politically important action is not reactive to immediate stimuli. Indeed, the capacity to be proactive (Murray, 1968) and transcend existing perceptions of what the environment dictates is at the core of effective leadership. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1137

The E→P→R formula provides a convenient way of visualizing the fallacy in the claim that behavior is so much a function of environments that individuals’ predispositions need not be studied (reservation two). In fact, environments are always mediated by the individuals on whom they act; environments cannot shape behavior directly, and much politically important action is not reactive to immediate stimuli. Indeed, the capacity to be proactive (Murray, 1968) and transcend existing perceptions of what the environment dictates is at the core of effective leadership. But the debate about whether environments determine political behavior is a reminder of the endless interplay of individuals and the political contexts in which they find or place themselves. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1137

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the person-situation debate in social psychology (Mischel) and to trait-vs-context discussions the reader already has in their knowledge base. — connects to: Environment acts on the subject only as comprehended and transformed into situation
• DEEPTHINKING: The claim that environments cannot shape behavior directly, plus proactivity as the core of leadership, inverts the common situationalist reading and is worth sitting with.
• corroborated: 3 independent passages support this claim — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology, 1137; John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology: Key Readings, 1137