Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Personality & Individual Differences > Biological Approaches to Personality > Flashcards

Biological Approaches to Personality Flashcards

1
Q

BIOLOGY & PERSONALITY

A
  • biological approach doesn’t represent cohesive/theoretical approach
  • actually approaches collection seeking human personality/beh origin; looks for links between bio/personality
  • 3 main areas:
    1. EVOLUTIONARY THEORY
    2. GENETICS/PERSONALITY
    3. BIOLOGICAL THEORIES/BRAIN ANATOMY/BIOCHEM
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

EVOLUTIONARY THEORY

A
  • personality dispositions arise from evolutionary history/bio makeup/temperament
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

GENETICS & PERSONALITY

A
  • how much of personality = genetically determined
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

BIOLOGICAL THEORIES, BRAIN ANATOMY & BIOCHEM

A
  • personality dispositions = complex bio system product
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

BIOLOGICAL THEORIES, BRAIN ANATOMY & BIOCHEM

A
  • personality dispositions = complex bio system product
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

EVOLUTIONARY THEORY & PERSONALITY

A
  • bio/environmental/beh/social shaping processes interact w/individual’s genotype; create unique psychological individual’s characteristics
  • provides theoretical platform underlying human personality:
    1. GENOTYPE
    2. PHENOTYPE
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

GENOTYPE

A
  • individual genetic makeup
  • starts unique at birth w/some inbuilt instincts/temperament/pre-wired capacity to learn certain beh kinds
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

PHENOTYPE

A
  • individual’s observable appearance/beh arising from interaction of genotype w/environment
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

EVOLUTIONARY THEORY: FOCUS

A
  • common beh patterns > individual aka. human nature
  • basic assumptions include:
    1. particular behs exist since they were helpful/necessary for survival in human species
    2. the more beh helps us survive/reproduce -> ^ likely it’ll occur in subsequent generations
  • difs observed in human personality understood as consequences of evolution process throwing up personality variations; ^ adaptive survive/procreate
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

EVOLUTIONARY THEORY & THE BIG FIVE

A

BUSS (1991)
- evolutionary theory gives framework for understanding central concepts of Big Five via:
1. providing understanding of major human goals
2. describing psychological mechanisms/strategies that exist for reaching goals/overcoming obstacles
3. identifying individual difs in beh that humans use to reach goals/overcome obstacles to them
- Big Five describes main beh dimensions that humans need to develop to adapt to environment/achieve primary survival/reproduction goals

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

GOSLING & JOHN (1999)

A
  • Big 5 investigated in various animals ie. chimps/cheetahs/hyenas/dogs/cats/pigs
  • E/N/A = most studies
  • O = large majority (chimps = O; monkeys/hyenas/pigs = curiosity)
  • C = ONLY chimps
  • core personality dimensions found among animals = similar to personality dimensions compromising Big 5
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

PADRELL ET AL (2020)

A
  • assessed performance on cognitive task/associations w/motivation/personality range
  • findings showed Eysenck’s PEN = good model to describe chimp personality
  • authors stress importance of considering personality when interpreting cognitive research results in primates
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

EVOLUTIONARY THEORY: EVALUATION

A
  • useful heuristic/rules/principles to link biology/environment links to understand common variability (personality dimensions) in human beh
  • BUT…
  • does not adequately account for individual difs in beh
  • many beh/personality phenomena -> humans flexibly responding to circumstances/social structure > evolutionary process
  • evolutionary theorists speculating backwards across gens; cannot be directly empirically tested
  • nature/society’s goals to ensure survival/reproduction = hard to test
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

GENETICS & PERSONALITY

A
  • beh geneticists examine degree to which phenotype variation (observable traits) attributed to genotype variation (underlying genetic structure) = trait genetics
  • controversial; historical association w/eugenics movement; recent association w/cloning
  • 99% human genes = identical; beh genetics concentrates on 1% varying
  • basic methodology compares personality similarities/difs between individual pops who are/aren’t genetically related
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

GENETICS: 3 PRIMARY RESEARCH METHODS

A

PLOMIN (2004)
- beh geneticists employ 3 primary research methods:
1. FAMILY STUDIES
2. TWIN STUDIES
3. ADOPTION STUDIES

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

GENETICS: BASIC ASSUMPTION

A
  • if personality traits influenced by genes ->
  • traits ^ correlated across closer genetic relatives > ^ distant genetic relatives
  • traits ^ correlated across identical monozygotic (MZ) twins > fraternal dizygotic (DZ) twins
  • adoption studies = no genetic heritability between adoptive parents/kids
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

GENETICS: HERITABILITY COEFFICIENT

A
  • computed to reflect genetic influence on traits
  • twin studies = heritability estimates for most personality traits = 40-50%
  • non-twin/adoption studies = heritability estimates for most traits = 20-30%
  • most likely explanation -> gene effects = interactive/multiplicative > addictive
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

HERITABILITY OF BROAD TRAITS

A
  • numerous large studies taken place/still taking place using data from twin registries in various countries:
    PEDERSON ET AL (1988)
  • twin sample; 95 MZ/220 DZ reared apart
  • results suggest strong genetic component for extraversion-introversion
    POWER & PLEUSS (2014)
  • provide heritability estimates of Big 5 personality traits based on common genetic variants
  • found for N (15%)/O (20%) BUT not for others
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

BIG 5 HERITABILITY & BIG 3 PERSONALITY FACTORS

A

RIEMANN ET AL (1997)
- several studies compared correlations between MZ/DZ twins for 5/3 factor personality models
- if MZ twins = ^ similar > DZ -> heritability evidence
- typically correlations between MZ twins for Big 5 = ^ > correlations for DZ twins
- heritability estimates derived by doubling dif in correlations between MZ/DZ twins

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

BIG 5 HERITABILITY & BIG 3 PERSONALITY FACTORS: RESULTS

A
  • personality influenced by genetic factors/environmental factors; multiple genes involved BUT none have specifically identified
    LOEHLIN & MARTIN (2001)
  • moderate personality heritability from genetic factors accounting between 20-50% phenotypic variance
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

GENETICS: HERITABILITY ESTIMATE

A
  • doesn’t indicate extent to which characteristic determined by heritability
  • accept overall heritability estimate (.4 personality) DOESN’T mean 40% personality = inherited
  • heritability estimate = pop stat; varies w/pop characteristics investigated/data used (ie. twin/adoption data)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

GENETICS: HERITABILITY INDEX

A
  • estimate of variance proportion in characteristic measured in particular way in specific pop; can be attributed to genetic variance
  • considerable variation around such estimates
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

GENETICS: EVALUATION

A
  • tells us that genes/environment matter in personality development
  • provides window into how early environment does/doesn’t influence later personality
  • BUT these estimates considered unreliable; additive model value widely challenged
  • shift away from genetics/environment (additive) -> genetics x environment (integrative)
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

GENETIC VARIANCE ASPECT

A
  • genes interact/suppress other genes
  • genetic influence isn’t 1 aspect (aka. additive genetic variance); made of 3 aspects all contributing to total variance:
    1. ADDITIVE
  • total of individual’s genes inherited from parents
    2. DOMINANT
  • dominant/recessive genes
    3. EPISTATIC
  • interactive/genes
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

ENVIRONMENTS & GENE-ENVIRONMENT INTERACTIONS

A
  • beh genetics provide evidence concerning importance of both genes/environment
    LOEHLIN (1992)
  • when estimating proportion of pop variance of personality trait due to heredity, researchers also estimating prop due to dif environment kinds
  • if personality traits show heritability in 30-50% range = same traits show substantial degrees of environmental influence (ie. 50-70%)
25
Q

PLOMIN & DANIELS (1987)

A
  • environments shared by siblings important in some domains BUT…
  • for some personality traits (ie. E/N) it’s unique/non-shared environments experienced by siblings inside/outside family; appear to be critical influence on personality dif
  • adulthood personality difs related to extent experiences of siblings in childhoods dif
  • findings led to research area considering how non-shared environmental factors develop:
    1. IN FAMILY
    2. OUTSIDE FAMILY
26
Q

SHARED ENVIRONMENTS

A
  • consist of environments shared by siblings via growing up in same family; ie:
  • socioeconomic family status
  • having same parents
  • book number in house
  • TV/computer availability
  • attending same school
27
Q

NON-SHARED ENVIRONMENTS

A
  • environments not shared by siblings growing up in same family; ie:
  • siblings treated dif in same family due to sex/birth order/temperament/school/peer group/friend/activities/sports difs
28
Q

THE FAMILY ENVIRONMENT

A

ADLER (1870-1937)
- parents may treat 1 child dif; might reflect dif bio temperaments
- 2 parenting styles influencing personality:
1. pampering (overprotecting; ill equipped for reality)
2. neglect (unprotected/fearful/mistrust)

29
Q

THE PARENTING STYLES

A

AUTHORITATIVE
AUTHORITARIAN
PERMISSIVE
NEGLECTFUL

30
Q

THE DIRECTIONALITY ISSUE

A
  • conventional understanding; influence = bio-directional (parent -> child & vice versa)
  • child’s temperament can have impact on parental beh which in turn impacts child development
31
Q

CHILD-DRIVEN EFFECTS

A
  • difs in children eliciting parenting beh
  • positive/negative feedback loop
  • can enhance similarities/difs between siblings/confound genetic heritability estimates
32
Q

POSITIVE FEEDBACK LOOP

A
  • parents reinforce child’s natural beh (ie. shouting/aggression)
33
Q

NEGATIVE FEEDBACK LOOP

A
  • parents stop child beh according to natural tendencies (ie. disapprove shouting/”calm down”)
34
Q

WITHIN-FAMILY EFFECTS

A
  • issues when considering genetic heritability
  • child/parent effects lead over/under heritability estimations
  • parent behs encourage similarity between siblings esp. twins
  • similarity estimations in personality caused by genetic heritability = overestimation
  • kids’ within-fam situations play important role in shaping personality/estimating genetic heritability
35
Q

NON-SHARED ENVIRONMENTS: GROUP SOCIALISATION THEORY

A

HARRIS (1995)
- social identity/categorisation theory
- identity based to some extent on social/in-groups and out-groups we reject
- personalities might reflect group characteristics (ie. adopting group norms)
- social groups form non-shared environment part; influence personality

36
Q

WITHIN/OUTSIDE-FAMILY EFFECTS

A
  • important influences on personality development
    HARRIS (1995)
  • NOT arguing that beh genetics = wrong/environmental influence = ^ important
  • beh geneticists may have oversimplified fam influences -> over/under estimated genetic heritability effects
37
Q

TEMPERAMENT & PERSONALITY

A
  • temperament = stable individual emotional reactivity difs; observable at birth; determine how baby reacts to situations; express/regulate emotions
  • temperaments = broad dispositions > specific personality traits
38
Q

TEMPERAMENT CHARACTERISTICS

A

ACTIVITY
DISTRACTABILITY
ADAPTABILITY
EMOTIONALITY
MOOD QUALITY

39
Q

TEMPERAMENT: 3 MAIN ASPECTS

A

BUSS & PLOMIN (1984)
- dif temp models BUT generally 3 main aspects agreed:
1. ACTIVITY LEVEL
- some kids = always moving; others = passive
2. SOCIABILITY
- attention/responsiveness/stimulation desire
- part of social interaction
- values interacting w/each other
3. EMOTIONALITY
- some kids become ^ easily/intensely psychologically aroused in situations that may cause distress/anger/fear

40
Q

TEMPERAMENT: LONGITUDINAL STUDIES

A
  • indicate temperament aspects remain stable over time; influence personality traits development through life
  • how broad dispositions/temperaments develop -> stable personality traits depends on complex genetic predispositions/environment interplay
  • child’s general emotionality/activity lvl points their developing personality in certain direction; development influenced by kids’ experiences
  • kid’s disposition (cuddly/calm/fussy/crying) affects how parents/others react
  • BUT how temp -> personality traits = unclear
41
Q

TEMPERAMENT: EYSENCK’S AROUSAL THEORY

A
  • PEN model
  • temperament = emotional/motivational/non-ability related cognitive beh aspects
  • original neural model hypothesised human brain = excitatory/inhibitory neural mechanisms
  • various experiments disproved it; revision -> placed emphasis on excitation > inhibition
  • linked arousal personality theory -> conditionability
42
Q

TEMPERAMENT: EYSENCK’S SCIENTIFIC PERSONALITY MODEL

A
  • tried to link personality w/temperament/bio aspects of human development
  • drew from bio/historical personality typologies/learning theory/factor analysis/experimental studies; developed model coherent w/bio humans
  • accepted that environment contributes to overall beh patterns BUT argued PEN = bio based/genetically determined
  • scientific model defined PEN; related to hypothetical neural arousal system
43
Q

EYSENCK: ASCENDING RETICULAR ACTIVATING SYSTEM (ARAS)

A
  • brainstem structure controlling overall cortical arousal
  • connects to various brain areas ie. thalamus/hypothalamus/cortex
  • ARAS uses 2 circuits to manage arousal lvl:
    1. RETICULO-CORTICAL CIRCUIT
    2. RETICULO-LIMBIC CIRCUIT
44
Q

ARAS: RETICULO-CORTICAL CIRCUIT

A
  • controls cortical arousal generated by incoming stimuli
  • related to extraversion
45
Q

ARAS: RETICULO-LIMBIC CIRCUIT

A
  • controls arousal to emotional stimuli
  • related to neuroticism
46
Q

ARAS: INTROVERT

A
  • ARAS shows enhanced reactivity to moderate stimulation
  • causes over arousal
  • person = introverted as they will avoid stimulation/exciting simulations
47
Q

ARAS: EXTRAVERT

A
  • ARAS relatively less reactive to moderate stimulation causes under arousal
    GALE (1987)
  • when presented w/moderate stimulation lvls introverts show ^ physiological reactivity > extraverts
  • extravert performance on tasks = ^ w/^ stimulation lvls (louder music) BUT…
  • introvert task performance = ^ w/lower stimulation lvls (quieter music)
  • general arousal theory of criminality = dangerous to have nervous system that needs extra stim
48
Q

EYSENCK’S BIOLOGICAL PERSONALITY THEORY

A
  • oldest comprehensive attempt at personality model based on bio process
  • delineated causal connection between bio brain functions/basic personality dimensions of emotional stability-neuroticism/introversion-extraversion
  • enormous research growth over past decades on brain biochem/functions/associations w/personality factors
49
Q

ARAS: RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

A

YEO ET AL (2014)
- action of ARAS on cerebral cortex = responsible for consciousness achievement
- 26 patients w/TBI; 13 controls
- detected close relation between consciousness at chronic TBI stage/lower dorsal/upper ARAS injuries in onset TBI patients
- useful during therapeutic strategies development for patients w/impaired consciousness

50
Q

EYSENCK: INSPIRATIONS

A
  • theories converge on E/impulsivity/novelty seeking/beh approach VS N/harm avoidance/beh inhibition importance
  • pushed theories ie:
    GRAY (1987)
  • BAS/BIS Theory (approach/avoid)
    CLONINGER (1987)
  • bio personality model (reward/punishment)
    ZUCKERMAN (1984)
  • alternative 5 factor model
51
Q

COMPARING BIO MODELS

A
  • links between Cloninger/Eysenck/Gray/Zuckerman:
    1. novelty seeking mirrors Eysenck’s E/Gray’s beh approach/Zuckerman’s I
    2. harm avoidance mirrors Gray’s beh inhibition/Eysenck’s N
    3. Cloninger’s reward dependence mirrors Gray’s beh approach
52
Q

MATTHEWS & GILLILAND (1999)

A
  • review physiological evidence for Eysenck/Gray’s bio personality theories
  • evidence supporting theories BUT weak/inconsistent
  • relationships between personality/bio = ^ complex > any single theory
53
Q

BRAIN ANATOMY & PERSONALITY

A
  • human beh = complex bio system product
  • relationship knowledge between brain anatomy/personality comes from studying:
    1. brain injury/surgery from imaging techniques ie. PET/fMRI scans
    2. chemical beh/personality bases ie. neurotransmitters/hormones
    3. dif neurotransmitters/hormones associated w/dif neural subsystems; dif effects on personality/beh
54
Q

BIOCHEMISTRY & PERSONALITY

A
  • links = cause/effect:
    SEROTONIN
    CORTISOL
    EPINEPHRINE/NOREPINEPHRINE
55
Q

BIOCHEMISTRY: SEROTONIN

A

WRIGHT (1995)
- ^/low serotonin lvls associated w/aggression

56
Q

BIOCHEMISTRY: CORTISOL

A
  • implicated in personality
    BORN ET AL (1988)
  • severe stress/anxiety/depression associated w/^ cortisol lvls BUT result of stress/depression > cause
57
Q

BIOCHEMISTRY: EPINEPHRINE/NOREPINEPHRINE

A
  • ^ dramatically/suddenly post stress aka. fight VS flight response
    ZUCKERMAN ET AL (1987)
  • ^ norepinephrine associated w/anxiety-proneness/dependency/sociability
  • low lvls = disinhibition/impulsivity
58
Q

BIO/EVOLUTIONARY APPROACHES: STRENGTHS

A
  • bridges personality psych/biology
  • helps explain individual difs not easily accounted for by environmental explanations
  • identified realistic limitations on “blank slate” personality development model
  • empirical research strong emphasis
59
Q

BIO/EVOLUTIONARY APPROACHES: WEAKNESSES

A
  • social/political undertones may provide justifications for unfair social conditions/prejudices
  • from evolutionary/genetic perspective beh change strategies = limitied
  • bio approaches to personality study remain fragmented
60
Q

! SUMMARY !

A
  • bio approach = important to personality understanding; bio/genetic inheritance = building blocks for human personality development
  • bio approach won’t supersede other approaches; not gonna show how personality = “caused” by bio mechanisms
  • bio approach will show how bio interacts w/social processes to determine what people do/who they are in future

Personality & Individual Differences (17 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions