Chelsea-personality

Question 1

All ports main ideas

Answer 1

Defined personality as organised system, interaction body and mind, stable, influences a range of experiences. Main traits are OCEAN

Question 2

Types of measuring, self or others

Answer 2

From self: projective tests, implicit measures, self report. Reports of others: observations, known others, perception of faces

Question 3

Projective tests

Answer 3

Given ambiguous stim to interpret, examples are rorschback inkblot, thematic apperception test TAT: Henry Murray, 30 grey pics W dramatic event, asked what’s happening (relationships and feelings). W: not reliable or valid, weak predictive power, lack of link to other tests, no diff for mentally ill but icebreaker on therapy

Question 4

Implicit personality measures

Answer 4

Implicit associations test, if respond faster means part of personality, harder to fake. Emotional strop test: have incong or cong colours and words, testing inhibition, some words anxiety inducing so take longer (mogg for anxiety ps)

Question 5

Self report questionnaires

Answer 5

Items analysed for clusters of items (factor analysis), each cluster is a personality trait. Cheap and quick but impression management, self deception

Question 6

Face perception

Answer 6

Oosterhoff and todorov: described 66 faves to see most from lexical hyp: top 10 were attractive, unhappy, sociable, emotionally stable, mean, bring, aggressive, weird, intelligent, confident. Made two factor model of traits from faces W trustworthiness and dominance and others fall into this. From an evolution standpoint. Sutherland added youthful/attractiveness. W: not accurate, doesn’t match own ratings of self (bigger when gender diff) but could explain own thoughts

Question 7

Culture and personality

Answer 7

Chiu and Hong: culture is shared meanings to provide reference and adapt to environment. Collectivist see personality as changeable. Etic: compare universal personality across cultures (top down) e.g. big 5, western. Emic: personality spec to culture. W: translation issues, response bias bigger in some cultures, social desirability, literacy and tech level

Question 8

Types of equivalence for cultural tests

Answer 8

Ling: Literal meaning conveyed, need to translate back again, may not have trans. Construct: generalisability of trait, chueng found no openness in China (social potency/expansive). Psychometric/scalar: same intensity across couture. Chueng found diffs. E.g. is superstitions

Question 9

Reading (Freud, rogers, diff approaches)

Answer 9

Freud says self destructive, Rogers said benign, positive. Cornbach and meehl says describe, measure and test. Personality comes from Latin persona (mask). Ideographic: focuses on ind, qual, deep. Nomothetic means law, finite variables to describe personality, predictive function, quant but superficial to describe one person. Carver and scheier say can do both

Question 10

Early ideas about personality

Answer 10

Had types and discrete categories and fixed. Then traits on a continuum. Now trait theory assumes characteristics are stable across time and conditions

Question 11

Gordon allport

Answer 11

Examined words used to describe ppl/lexical approach. Found 18000, 4500 traits. Ideographic better for understanding. Categorised by cardinal (signal, Dom traits), central (5-10 describe personality) and secondary (preferences, not core). Dynamic part is secondary

Question 12

Raymond cattell background

Answer 12

One of first to use factor anal to see clusters, interested in how personality predicts behaviour. Role of genetics (constitutional traits) and experience (environmental mould). Ideothetic approach/common traits. Start W source/surface traits seen in behaviour. Used factor analysis to get to 46 surface traits via real life data like school, questionnaires and standardised tests (means something in relation to others like iq)

Question 13

Cattell eval

Answer 13

Created 16 personality factors, not all have same predictive power as outgoing reserved best and tense relaxed worse. Furnham 2013: looked at diffs between students who chose arts and science, found diffs in line W stereotypes. W: internal consistencies of some factors low, not many have been able to replicate the factors (replicability crisis in research), evidence 16 can be reduced to 5

Question 14

Eysenck theory of personality - background

Answer 14

Fundamental traits biological but environment can impact expression. Personality based on character, temperament, intelligence, physique and autonomic NS. Hierarchal model with trait level first like sociable, habitual response is talking to ppl, spec response is body lang.

Question 15

Eysenck supertraits

Answer 15

Extra version, neuroticism and psychoticism (cold, creative, impulsive). Created Eysenck personality questionnaire EPQ W yes no questions. Criminals score high in all 3, creative score high on psychoticism and extroverts more sexual encounters

Question 16

Eysenck’s theory and mental health

Answer 16

He was clinical psych and developed training. Suggested neuroticism linked to autonomic system reactivity, reactive predisp for psych disorder. S: factors shown to be stable over time, cross cultural valid, child version, application to mental health. W: psychot scale has low internal reliability and reductionist as 3

Question 17

5 factor model

Answer 17

Lewis goldberg: concluded trait descriptors relate to 5 features of personality: love, work, affect, power and intellect
Emic approach is personality terms found in native lang (bottom up
Etic approach, translated personality questionnaires
More likely to replicate 5 factor mdel using etic approach

Question 18

Big 5

Answer 18

Costa and mcrae 85. Large samples and questionnaires, factor anal to I’d clusters, data driven hyp. OCEAN. Test is the NEO-PI-R. Hayes and jospeh 2003: high extroversion and low nueo higher happiness. Stoughton: low agreeable more loud on social media. Rentfrow: diffs in regions in the uk e.g. Scotland low nuero but high agreeable. Bleidorn people move to places thier personality fits better in us

Question 19

Why find diffs in location and big 5

Answer 19

social influence as norms affect behaviour, ecological influence, physical area affects (history of illness makes risk averse ppl), selective migration, certain groups are more likely to migrate (openness, extraversion, agreeableness)

Question 20

Dark triad definition and big 5

Answer 20

Overlap but distinct: narcissism (superiority, lack of empathy), mach (cold, manip), psycho (low empathy, remorse) shared are coldness and aggressive. Paulhus and Williams 2002: extra version links to N and P. agreeableness linked neg to all 3. Conscientious neg linked to M and P. Neuroticism neg linked to psych and openness linked to N and P

Question 21

Dark triad and degree subject

Answer 21

Vedel and Thompson 2017: found exon/business scored higher on M than all others. Law and politics higher than psych. Bus higher on N than psych but no diff for law. Bus higher on all 3 than psych, politics higher of psycho than psych. Bus highest, law and politics middle, psych lowest. Students attracted to careers that reward self interest. W: only 4 subjects, don’t know if experience while studying was reason

Question 22

Emotional manipulation

Answer 22

Ppl high in DT rate themselves more able to emotionally manip others- austin 2014. Hyde : 70% of employees report using emotional manip at work. Measures are disingenuous/softer tactics or malicious/harder tactics. Employees did manip willingness, emotional intelligence and dirty dozen. M related to both measures, P linked to malicious, N to both. W: doesn’t measure success in manip

Question 23

Dark tetrad

Answer 23

Sadism: common in clinical and forensic samples, taking pleasure in others suffering. Chabrol 201 found all 4 correlate as clusters were low on all, high on M and S, high on N and P and high on all 4. Antisocial behaviour highest in those W all 4, can target intervention. Cannabis, suicide and depression similar in all. W: data driven, not info on how develops, limited by own cog abilities, subjective judgement and lang restriction