Getting on the Same Page: Why Australia Needs a National Maternity Early Warning System (MEWS) Chart.

Social interactions play a central role in human well-being, contributing to emotional health and overall life satisfaction [–]. However, individuals differ markedly in how they engage with, experience, and evaluate these interactions. Theories of social interaction emphasize that interpersonal experiences are shaped by a dynamic interplay between stable personality characteristics and situational factors [–]. Broader person–situation frameworks such as the cumulative continuity principle [] and the TESSERA sequence (Triggering situation, Expectancy, State/State expression, and Reaction;[]) provide a process-oriented account of how people select, interpret, and modify situations over time, thereby linking momentary states with long-term personality development. The continuity principle highlights that individuals actively create environments consistent with their traits (e.g., a sociable person who repeatedly seeks out group activities and, in doing so, reinforces their own outgoing disposition), whereas TESSERA specifies micro-level feedback loops through which repeated state–situation couplings consolidate or change traits (e.g., a socially anxious person who, on entering a gathering, anticipates rejection, feels tense, and withdraws; across many such episodes these repeated state expressions gradually consolidate into a more avoidant trait pattern). Importantly, both frameworks align with interpersonal theory and whole trait theory [,] in proposing that traits manifest in momentary social states, which in turn shape perceptions and reactions during social encounters. While positive social engagement in social situations generally fosters psychological well-being, individuals with maladaptive personality traits frequently encounter social situations as sources of stress, misunderstanding, or withdrawal, patterns that contribute to chronic interpersonal difficulties and reduced social functioning [–]. This contrast mirrors the dual role of approach–avoidance motivational systems: adaptive engagement vs. maladaptive rigidity, depending on the individual’s vulnerabilities and interpersonal skill. One concept for understanding individual differences in social interactions is the approach-avoidance temperament []. This conceptualization posits that behavior is guided by two fundamental motivations at the trait-level: the tendency to approach rewarding stimuli and the tendency to avoid threatening or aversive situations. These motivational tendencies have been associated with social outcomes such as levels of social engagement, relationship satisfaction, and susceptibility to interpersonal difficulties [,]. Within broader models of personality, approach- avoidance temperament has been shown to overlap substantially with, yet remain distinct from, Big Five traits (e.g., extraversion, neuroticism; see 14) and it can be meaningfully situated alongside interpersonal circumplex (agency–communion) dimensions that are widely used in EMA research to describe interpersonal behavior in daily life [–]. On this circumplex, the agency dimension captures the extent to which behavior is dominant versus submissive, whereas the communion dimension captures the extent to which it is warm versus cold or hostile. Approach motivation maps most closely onto agentic and communal (i.e., engaged, warm) behavior, whereas avoidance motivation maps onto cold and withdrawn behavior, which is why the agency-communion framework provides a useful descriptive language for the motivational states examined here. While these motivations operate across the full spectrum of functioning in the general population, extreme or inflexible patterns can signal maladaptive personality organization, extending even into clinical personality disorders. For example, persistent social avoidance may lead to chronic isolation, whereas dysregulated approach can precipitate interpersonal conflicts and boundary violations [,]. These directional temperaments, however, do not tell us how skillfully people pursue their social goals. This is where the construct of interpersonal functioning is relevant, defined as the capacity to initiate, maintain, and repair relationships []. It indexes the skill and flexibility with which social behavior is enacted and is therefore conceptually distinct from approach–avoidance temperament. Deficits in interpersonal functioning can magnify motivational effects by heightening threat perception and narrowing behavioral repertoires, a process the TESSERA sequence characterizes as repeated maladaptive loops that ultimately consolidate into trait-level dysfunction.