exam 2 identify Flashcards
Each trait in the B5 is a superfactor and has 6 facets
Each facet has 4? specific habits
Superfactor → facet → specific habit
Extraversion → sociability → smiles at strangers
Traits and their hierarchical organization
Fantasy, aesthetics, feelings, ideas, actions, values
Facets of openness
Self-discipline, dutifulness, competence, order, deliberation, achievement striving
Facets of conscientiousness
Gregariousness, activity level, assertiveness, excitement seeking, positive emotions, warmth
Facets of extraversion
Straightforwardness, trust, altruism, modesty, tendermindedness, compliance
Facets of agreeableness
Anxiety, self-consciousness, depression, vulnerability, impulsiveness, hostility
Facets of neuroticism
Assumes that important personality concepts are in language, so personality reflects the superfactors of adjectives in language
Uses factor analysis
Used by Allport & Odbert
Lexical approach
Creates clusters/groups of similar/correlated traits
Reduces complexity + redundancy among traits to decrease the number of dimensions and create broader factors that summarize individual traits
Simplifies and makes concepts more parsimonious
Factor analysis
Used the lexical approach and found 18,000 person-descriptive English words in the dictionary and divided them into categories traits (5000), states, activities, and other (evaluations, skills, etc)
Father and critic of the B5
Allport & Odbert
Sorted 5000 traits using factor analysis and found 16 personality factors, but they were not replicable
Discredited scientifically, but still a pioneer in personality research
Cattell & the 16PF
Cardinal, central, & unique traits
Allport’s 3 different kinds of traits
Fundamental, overarching trait that is so pervasive that virtually every behavior of an individual can be traced to its influence
Most important trait of a person’s personality (highest/lowest score on B5)
Ex: an extraverted person has many friends and a career in comedy because they like being around people
Studied by Allport
Cardinal trait
General trait that can be found in most people in varying degrees
Not as influential as cardinal traits
Ex: everyone is honest to a degree
Studied by Allport
Central trait
Trait that only 1 person uniquely has
Hard to find for a single person
Ex: drink 3 glasses of water every morning when they wake up
Studied by Allport
Unique trait
Favored by Allport & existentialists because he thought 5 factors were not enough to capture the uniqueness of each individual and shit on factor analysis (garbo in, garbo out)
Idiographic approach
Favored by Cattell, Norman, Goldberg, & Eysenck as they all used factor analysis to capture common traits that could apply to everyone
Nomothetic approach
Giant 3 superfactors
PEN = psychoticism (A- & C-), extraversion, neuroticism
Big butthurt because he thought the B5 stole E & N from him when he stole E from Jung
Argued that O is just IQ
A & C predict different things (likability & school performance, respectively)
Eysenck’s 3-Factor Theory
Openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, neuroticism
OCEAN
O+ : enjoying learning leads to practicing more
C+ : staying focused, taking better notes, planning
School performance is predicted by
A- : don’t get along with peers, manipulative
C- : unmotivated, lazy, careless
Delinquency is predicted by
A+ : cooperative, prosocial, kind, helpful, considerate
Likeability is predicted by
C+ : regularity of healthy habits (ex. Meds, exercise)
Longevity is predicted by
E+ : meet more people by going to more places/events
Number of sex partners is predicted by
C+ : better at keeping up with schedule
Punctuality is predicted by
Are super broad and include about 1000 individual traits per factor
Are the highest level of abstraction/generality in the hierarchical model of personality
Why are the B5 called “big”?
Developed by Costa & McCrae
Measures the B5 using 6 facets for each superfactor
NEO-PI-R
.50
Temporal stability of B5 from age 20 to 40
.70
Temporal stability of B5 from age 40 to 60
.45
Temporal stability of B5 from age 20 to 60
Nicholas Cage effect: ↑ A & C, ↓ N for women
Mean level changes in B5 during adulthood
Intrinsic maturation: biological change (McCrae & Costa)
Environment & experiences change our traits (ex. New roles/responsibilities like job, spouse, parenthood) ↑ A & C
Self-acceptance, confidence, & mastery experience ↓ N for women
Why are there mean level changes in B5?
Age of rebellion: ↓ A & C, ↑ N for girls
Valley of tears
Mean level changes in B5 during adolescence
Age of rebellion: ↓ A & C, ↑ N for girls
Valley of tears
Mean level changes in B5 during adolescence
Girls more A+ & N+ than boys in adolescence
Gender differences in the B5
Eysenck – Norman & Goldberg – Cattell – Allport
Giant 3 – Big 5 – Middling 16 – Tiny Tots Thousands
Traits are malleable
All B5 dimensions are important in everyday life
Traits can be a risk or buffer against stress
Implications of B5 research
Measures personality using a combo of 4 types
Extraversion – introversion
Sensing – intuition
Thinking – feeling
Perceiving – judging
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) and types
Not empirical (poor test re-test reliability)
No predictive power
No negative affect for any type
Categorical (arbitrary cut-offs) instead of dimensional
Critiques of MBTI
All B5 traits are partially heritable with a genetic contribution of 45% each
Nature-nurture debate
Used to find the heritability estimate of personality (45%)
Twin studies
Allow us to compare the similarities between the child vs. their bio parents, the child vs. their adoptive parents, and the child vs. their sibling (offspring of adoptive parents)
Adoption studies
Smaller (5%)
Shared environment effects
Larger (35%)
Separated twins are more like each other than twins raised together
Ex: different parenting styles, schools, friends, home environment (different SES during childhood)
Unique environment effects
Argued that a person’s genes & their interactions with peers (non-shared environment) are more important than their parents
Parents do influence peer interactions but parental effects on personality is not as direct as believed previously
Judith Harris
Believed that birth order (unique environment) is important in personality development
Frank Sulloway
C+ : act like a surrogate parent → achievement-oriented, responsible, organized
E+ : stronger, dominant, exert leadership
N+ : more blamed for problems → jealous, anxious, fearful, stressed
First-borns
O+ : freer to experiment & less conforming, tradition, close ID with parents
A+ : need to survive → get along with older siblings, cooperative, popular (evidence not as strong)
Later-borns
Extraverts are less sensitive to stimuli so they seek out more intense stimuli to reach same arousal level
Did not replicate (lemon juice)
Eysenck’s optimal arousal theory
Extraverts have a biological basis for positive emotions which is modified by experience, leading them to be more sociable
Positive Emotionality theory
Extraverts have a highly reactive BAS which acts as a “go” system, leading to approach motivation
Correlates with both extraversion & positive emotionality
Behavioral Approach System (BAS)
Engage in rewarding + stimulating behaviors even if they can be risky
Approach motivation
Predicts that because women have a greater in time investment in offspring than men, they have different preferences when looking for a partner
Men prefer women who are more youthful, physically attractive, and have less sex (for paternity reasons)
Women prefer men who can provide more resources
Parental investment theory
Men are more jealous about sexual infidelity (for paternity reasons)
Women get more jealous about emotional attachment becuase of the threat of losing rescources
Gender differences in jealousy
Prominence, respect, influence
3 components of status
More visible, well-known, receive more scrutiny
Prominence
Higher esteem/regard
Respect
More control over group decisions + processes
Influence
Frats, sororities, co-ed dorms
3 groups Anderson et al. studied
They were intact groups, so they could study the naturalistic, long-term effects of personality on status
These groups also spend a lot of time together and have a wide range of interactions
Also able to study gender differences
Why did Anderson et al. study 3 different groups?
Peer ratings of prominence & life-outcome data (number of positions + offices held)
Strong correlation (r = .56, p < .0) demonstrates convergent validity
Controlled for length of membership (improve discriminant validity)
Emotion Facial Action Coding System (EMFACS) to test neuroticism in Study 3 instead of self-report
Code facial expression after eliciting moderate levels of negative emotions (fear, embarrassment, shame, sadness, anger, contempt, disgust)
Data sources for Anderson et al. study
E had a strong correlation even after controlling physical attractiveness (a little stronger for men vs. women and for same-sex vs. mixed-sex)
A had no correlation
N had a strong correlation for men and no correlation for women even after controlling for physical attractiveness (sex differences do not reflect self-report biases)
Physical attractiveness had a strong correlation for men but no correlation for women
Variables that predicted social status
The researchers’ hypotheses were supported as the data reaffirmed past research
Were the hypotheses of Anderson et al. supported?
(1) Nearly all behavior is learned
(2) There is a need for empirical research
(3) behavior is a function of the situation B = f(S)
3 basic assumptions of Behaviorism
Argued that anything can be learned and environmment plays the largest role in personality development
Can turn your baby into a beggar
Humans are a blank slate (tabula rasa)
John Watson
Studied classical conditioning
Pavlov
Learning by association
Ex: Chloe the cat thinks it’s time to each when Prof John grinds his coffee because he makes coffee and feeds Chloe in the morning
Classical conditioning
Triggers naturally occurring response (before conditioning)
Ex: Chloe’s cat food
Unconditioned stimuli (US)
Previously neutral but now triggers response (after conditioning)
Ex: coffee grinder
Conditioned stimulus (CS)
Naturally occuring response (before conditioning)
Ex: salivation
Unconditioned response (UCR)
Association to similar stimuli
Ex: Chloe comes for food when she hears the can opener
Generalization
Differences in association among different stimuli
Ex: Chloe learns that the coffee grinder indicates food but the can opener doesn’t
Discrimination
Slow unlearning of association
Ex: Chloe learns that she doesn’t get food at night even when the coffee grinder is on
Extinction
Extinction of learned phobias/fears in a step-by-step process
Systematic desensitization
Any negative emotional response, typically fear or anxiety, that becomes associated with a neutral stimulus as a result of classical conditioning
Conditioned emotional response (CER)
Studied operant conditioning
Skinner
Learning based on reinforcement
Relies on token economy
Works well in kindergartens + prisons but not adult populations
Operant conditioning
Reward desired behavior & punish undesired behavior
Reinforcement
Reward works better than punishment as the source of punishment is feared/resented
Reward vs. punishment
Test behavior is a _______ of underlying trait/complex and are used to make strong inferences + interpretations
Used by trait theorists (Allport) & psychoanalysts (Freud)
Sign approach
Test behavior is a _____ of potential interesting behavior and is not used for major inferences
Used by behaviorists (Skinner)
Sample approach
Approach-avoidance, approach-approach, avoidance-avoidance
3 types of conflict in Behaviorism
Conflict between wanting to approach the potential positive benefits and wanting to avoid the potential negative consequences
Ex: want to make friends but afraid of rejection
Approach-avoidance
Conflict that arises when there are too many desirable choices, and it is difficult to choose
Ex: choose 1 cereal in a huge cereal aisle
Approach-approach
Conflict that arises when there are two undesirable alternatives that one must choose between
Ex: have to do homework or clear apartment
Avoidance-avoidance
Genetic predisposition to learn some associations more easily because they are evolutionarily advantageous & can increase chances of survival and reproduction
Biological preparedness
Harder to learn a second language after age 12
One-trial learning (like food aversions)
Hard to learn/unlearn some associations
Examples of biological preparedness
Animals can learn in 1 trial
Rats associated diet pepsi with nausea & lights with electric shocks, but did not cross over learning when pepsi led to shocks and lights led to nausea
Garcia effect
Nah, he totally neglected how biology influences behavior/learning
Was Watson right?
Shift from behaviorism to cognition due to tech advancement in the early 70’s
Cognitive revolution
Used to need to go through an S-R connections/operator to talk on the phone (behaviorism goes through behavior to testing learning)
Now use computers (social cognition studies how information is encoded, stored, and retrieved in the brain)
Metaphor for behaviorism & social cognition
Like computers, humans encode, store, and retrieve information
Studies how this works in humans
Cognitive approach
Antecedent-focused regulation strategy that changes the meaning of an event to change the experience of the emotion
Decreases negative emotions and increases positive emotions
Reappraisal
Response-focused strategy that inhibits behavioral expression of an emotional response (ex. Facial, verbal, gestural)
Decreases positive and negative emotions
Suppression
Suppression is more encouraged in EA cultures due to importance of adjusting individual behavior to maintain interpersonal harmony
Suppression is less encouraged in W cultures due to importance of autonomy and expressing one’s true self BFFR
Cultural differences in use of emotion regulation strategies
Suppression is associated with lower subjective authenticity and positive emotion expression, but not relationship satisfaction in the Chinese sample
Cultural differences in effects of suppression
Suppression → less positive emotion expression → indicates indifference, withdrawal → bad for wellbeing & relationships
Reappraisal → more positive emotion expression → indicates approachability, affiliation → good for wellbeing & relationships
Direct mediator for suppression & reappraisal
Suppression → subjective inauthenticity → indicates misunderstanding, distance → bad for wellbeing & relationships
Reappraisal → subjective authenticity → indicates trust, honesty, openness → good for wellbeing & relationships
Indirect mediator for suppression & reappraisal
Suppression was a stronger predictor for less positive emotion expression than subjective inauthenticity
Subjective authenticity was a better predictor of relationship satisfaction than positive emotion expression
Suppression and relationship satisfaction is not correlated when controlled for subjective authenticity
Effect of suppression on well-being and relationship satisfaction
Developed personal construct theory which is a cognitive theory
Kelly
efforts to construe and interpret events to make sense of them & there are many constructions available to choose between
Constructive alternativism
People are like scientists trying to understand their environment and predict future outcomes B = f(P[S])
Does not see people as rats (a product of their environment) B = f(S)
Kelly’s view of the person
Used to describe, understand, predict, and control events
Construct system
Used to elicit an individual’s construct system
Columns = role figures
Rows = constructs & contrast poles
Pick 3 role figures and indicate how 2 of them are similar and different from the 3rd
Role construct repertory (REP) test
Opposite of a construct
Many constructs have this
Bipolar/contrast pole
Contrast pole that cannot be verbalized
Not many constructs have this
Submerged contrast pole
Constructs develop before children are able to speak
Seen in sign language
Preverbal construct
Thinking about how to organize and construe information
Personal construct theory
Stable, cross-situational
Basic to a person’s construct system and cannot be altered without serious consequences for the whole system
Core construct
Construct that is not basic to the construct system and can be altered without serious consequences for the whole system
Peripheral construct
Broad categories that cover the whole domain but are not specific enough
Superordinate
Broad enough for utility
Compromise between superordinate and subordinate
Basic
Help you predict but too specific to be generalizable
Subordinate
Fruit – apple – granny smith
Mammal – cat – siamese
Good – kind – charitable
B5 dimension – facet – specific habit/behavior
Extraverted – sociable – talkative
Superordinate – basic – subordinate examples
People are motivated by external reinforcers, rewards, and punishments
What they are drawn to
Behaviorists (Skinner) believe this
Pull theory (carrot theory)
Internal drives/motives, instinctual forces push/propel the person forward
They are driven to do X
Psychodynamic theorists, psychoanalysts (Freud), & humanists (Rogers incongruence of actual-ideal self)) believe this
Push theory
People are motivated by cognition and are always cognitively active and processing information even if it looks like they are doing nothing
Cognitive theorists (Kelly) believe this
Jackass theory
Proof for Jackass theory
Train system transported rats through a maze, and rats make cognitive maps of maze with latent learning
Rats only demonstrated learning when there was an incentive
Tolman’s tourist rats
Learning without reinforcement
Latent learning
All events in which the construct system is useful
Range of convenience
Recognition that an event lies outside the range of convenience in a construct system
Anxiety
Awareness of imminent comprehensive change in core constructs (massive reorganization of constructs)
Threat
Malfunctioning and thought disorders of the construct system where people do not create proper constructs
Psychopathology in personal construct/cognitive theory
Challenges clients by encouraging them to represent themselves in new ways, through new roles
Involves homework in that the client must act like their new role for a period of time
Client collects data, tries new constructs + ways of thinking/behaving, and tests hypotheses (reality testing)
Fixed role therapy
(1) Experimentation of constructs/thinking/behaving
(2) New elements: objects, experiences, people
(3) collect validational data (reality testing)
3 conditions of change
Argued that irrational beliefs make us unhappy/sad
Developed CBT & rational-emotive therapy (RET)
Beck & Ellis
Studied incremental & entity beliefs
Borrowed stable-variable attributions from Weiner
Dweck
Growth mindset
Belief you can change your attributes
Incremental beliefs
Fixed mindset
Belief you can’t change your attributes
Entity beliefs
(1) Rogers (Kelly; active contruers)
(2) Kelly
(3) Behaviorists (& post-Freudians)
(4) Behaviorists (anti-trait theorists)
(5) Post-behaviorists: Tolman (Rogers: personal growth)
(6) Behaviorists, Rogers, trait theorists
6 basic assumptions of social cognitive theory:
(1) People as active agents (doers)
=People choose their friends who influence their behavior
(2) Cognitive processes exist (thinking)
=Your perception of a situation influences behavior
(3) Social origins of behavior
=Society/societal expectations influence behavior
(4) Behavior as situation-specific
=Only nice in front of authority figures
(5) Learning complex behavior without reward
=Latent learning (language), one-time learning (food aversion, fear of snakes)
(6) Emphasize empirical research
=We love the scientific method
Studied delay of gratification (Marshmallow test), aggression in summer youth camps (behavioral signature), & cognitive-affective processing systems (CAPS)
Mischel
Individually distinctive profiles (stable patterns) of situation-behavior relationships
If… then
Not about average behavior tendencies
Studied by Mischel
Behavioral signature
Personality functions as a system of highly interconnected cognitive and emotional processes
Cognitive-affective processing system (CAPS)
Studied observational learning/modeling (bobo dolls), reciprocal determinism, and self-efficacy
Bandura
Studied observational learning and behavior modeling
Children watched a model act aggressively toward the Bobo doll
Children had acquired the knowledge of behavior after watching someone perform, but it does not necessarily cause them to perform the behavior
Bobo dolls
Learn new behaviors
Independent on reinforcement
Acquisition
Produce learned behavior
Dependent on reinforcement
Performance
Behavior is a function of how perception influences the situation and vice versa B = f(P↔S)
Reciprocal determinism
Person perceives + reacts to situation
Studied by Caspi & Bem
Reactive PxS interaction
Person actively selects their environment, and thus the situations they experience
Proactive PxS interaction
Person’s attributes elicit certain reactions from others, which reinforces behavior
Studied by Caspi & Bem
Evocative PxS interaction
Self-perceived ability to cope with specific situations & influence and reach goals
Domain-specific
Self-efficacy
More likely to attempt & persist in difficult tasks
Have less anxiety & depression when approaching situations
Cope better with stress & disappointment
Effects of self-efficacy on an individual
Helps establish goal hierarchies & long-term goals + motivation
Studied by Mischel
Delay of gratification
Watches a model perform behaviors and helps perform behaviors themselves
Guided mastery
Pre-existing mental structures that organize stimuli/world around us
Schemas
motivation to obtain information that is consistent with one’s self-concept
Self-verification
Motive to maintain/enhance positive views of self
Self-enhancement
Representation of who one may become, want to become, and are afraid of becoming
Help understand why people experience difficulties in self-control/willpower
Possible selves
Studied actual self – ought self
Higgins
Not reaching ideal self makes us feel sad/depressed because of loss of potential positive outcomes
Not reaching ought self makes us feel anxious/agitated because not achieving obligations is an impending threat
Difference between ideal self vs. ought self
Studied attributions (causal explanations) on 2 dimensions:
Internal – external
Stable – variable
Weiner
Internal & stable: traits, ability
Internal & variable: effort, (self-efficacy)
External & stable: task difficulty
External & variable: luck, chance
Weiner’s attribution model
