1a -did Flashcards

1
Q

what is personality - funder

A

Funder: ‘an individual’s characteristic pattern of thought, emotion, and behavior, together with the psychological mechansims - hidden or not - behind those patterns.’

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

nomothetic vs idiographic

A

Nomothetic: individual diff can be described and explained in terms of predefined attributes
idiographic: Individuals are so unique that two different people cannot be described using the same concepts. E.g. Freud’s psychodynamic theory.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

dispositional vs situational

A

Dispositional: persoanlity seen as consistent, internal dispositions to think/act/feel in similar ways independent of situation
Situational: Personality is a series of largely unrelated states, primarily determined by situational factors. No core essence, just distinct behavioural signatures made of ‘if A then B’ rules.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Dispositions in Diferent Situations

A

Dispositional theorists do not deny a role of context/situation in moderating behaviour.
There is a significant correlation between traits and behaviour
Traits also influence the types of situations encountered.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Early Models of Personality:

A

Four temperaments - Balance of bodily fluids determines balance of temperaments
Hippocrates (460-377 BC): described physical illnesses as arising from the balance of bodily fluids (‘humours’)
Galen (AD 130-200): Applied theory to describe temperament.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

he Four Temperaments - Contributions

A

Notion of personality ‘types’
Temperament descriptors have influenced modern theories of personality
Specifies links between biology and temperament.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

lexical H

A

The lexical hypothesis is a major foundation of the Big Five personality traits, the HEXACO model of personality structure[10] and the 16PF Questionnaire

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Biological Approaches:Eysenck’s PEN theory

A

Two dimensions of personality: extraversion and neuroticism
Dimensions on which everyone can be placed.
independent to one another.
Normal distribution for each dimension.
‘Super traits’ that provide complete description.
Biological underpinning

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Biological Approaches:Eysenck’s PEN theory: the 3rd dimension

A

Eysenck observed individuals who were:
emotionally unstable (neuroticicsm) , but with lower levels of fear and anxiety, lack of remorse or conscience, and lack of appreciation of consequences of actions -> psychopaths
‘Psychoticism’ dimension added by Eysenck & Eysenck
Not normally distributed
Not independent of N

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Eysenck’s PEN theory: the biology of extraversion/introversion

A

Extraversion – Introversion explained by differential activity levels in the reticulo-cortical system.
Ascending Reticular Activation System (ARAS) in brain stem modulates the amount of electrical activity in the cortex
Moderate levels of cortical arousal are preferred.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

extraverts/introverts - corticol arousal

A

Extraverts
Lower levels of cortical arousal
Seek out external stimulation

Introverts
Higher levels of cortical arousal
Avoid external stimulation

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Gale (1983) reviewed studies that tested corticol arousal in extraverts/introverts

A

Mixed evidence – the majority support theory.
Very high/low arousal level of task will cause Extraverts or Introverts to adapt to preferred level of cortical arousal – obscures differences.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Tran, Craig & McIsaac (2001): - EEG

A

Activity measured from frontal regions of the brain
Compared mean amplitude of EEG activity between extraverts and introverts
found sig different between EEG:
introvert: 4.5mv
extrabverts: 6.8mv
inline w Eysenck’s

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

the limbic system - neuroticism + psychoticsim

A

Neuroticism-Stability explained by differential activity levels in the reticulo-limbic system.
Limbic system: involved with emotional processing
Eysenck proposed that:
Neuroticism due to greater arousal in the reticulo-limbic system
Psychoticism linked to male hormones or dopamine levels

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Biological Approaches:Eysenck’s PEN theory: Evaluation

A

Good (cross-cultural) evidence for E and N factors
Major contribution to trait and biological theories of personality
Development of several personality questionnaires, including:

BUT
P factor less accepted – not featured in other models.
Neurobiology of emotional processing more complex than originally thought.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

BAS/BIS (Reinforcement Sensitivity) Theory

A

Jeffrey Gray (1934-2004): development of/alternative to Eysenck
Based on work with non-human animals (applied to all mammals).
Individual differences lie in strengths of BAS and BIS

17
Q

Behavioural Activation System (BAS)

A
  • Activates ‘approach’ behaviour toward goal.
  • Motivated to seek reward.
  • Based on conditioned responses associated with positive events.
18
Q

Behavioural Inhibition System (BIS)

A
  • Focuses attention on potential costs.
  • Inhibits behaviours associated with negative events.
  • Motivated to avoid harm and punishment.
19
Q

BAS / BIS Personality Dimensions (traits)

A

introversion
extroversion
neuroticism
impulsivity
anxiety

20
Q

Theory revised (r-RST) in line with advances in neuroscience:
Walker et al. (2017):

A

Walker et al. (2017): Development of additional ‘Fight/Flight/Freezing System’ (FFFS); and BIS as an evaluative comparator of response conflicts: whether to approach or avoid based on strengths of inhibition signals