lecture 3 - history of personality in psychology Flashcards
what is a personality?
Everyday personality
In evaluating other individuals, often in the context of social attractiveness, we make value judgements about them.
Personality in psychology
“A dynamic organization, inside the person, of psychophysical systems, that create the person’s characteristic patterns of behaviour, thoughts and feelings”
(Allport, 1961, p.11).
‘dynamic’ = somewhat contradictory
stability element is important as means can measure it and use as a desicion making tool
“… the enduring characteristics and behavior that comprise a person’s unique adjustment to life, including major traits, interests, drives, values, self-concept, abilities, and emotional patterns. Various theories explain the structure and development of personality in different ways, but all agree that personality helps determine behavior.”
APA
type A and type B
A = competitive, time urgent, hostile and aggressive
B = relaxed, patient and easy going
why study personality?
Personality theorists seek to:
* Explain the motivational basis of behaviour.
* Provide descriptions or categorizations of how individuals behave.
* Investigate what causes the development of certain personality characteristics.
What contributes more, genes or environment?
what causes personality - Ancient history…
Early attempts at measuring psychological concepts were based on the idea of physiognomy.
Johannes Lavater (1741-1801) wrote extensively about this. - idea persons physical appearance is representative of their character eg shape of nose indicates if sincere or deceitful person
what causes personality - craniometry
idea brain size is related to psychological traits
However, this idea was abandoned following scientific work showing that:
Many miscalculations had been made.
Brain size has little to do with intelligence, or any other human function - white people brains size larger - took that as being more intelligent and could have black people as slaves
what causes personality - phrenology
Franz Joseph Hall (1758-1828) suggested that the shape of the brain was the important factor. and bumps on head
However, phrenology was abandoned because:
Skull shape bore no relation to brain shape.
Many findings emerged showing that psychological attributes have no relationship to bumps on the human scalp.
The Psychoanalytic approach
Created the psychoanalytic approach to personality.
Personality is comprised of 3 structures that we use to gratify our instincts: the id, ego and superego.
Personality develops through psychosexual stages: oral, anal, phallic, latency and genital.
post freud but still freud-y
Alfred Adler. - as babies helpless so Strive for superiority - have superiority or inferiority complex. also birth order - 4 types. social context born into
Carl Jung. - psyche, archetypes, suggested 2 main personality types - extraversion and introversion
Karen Horney - cultural influence
learning theory
Differences in personality are due to differences in learning experiences. - we are shaped from what we learn - we learn personality by copying people around us
Pavlov, Watson and Skinner were the main players.
Donald and Miller
cognitive and humanistic approaches
George kelly - all got a personal construct system built from experience of the world - can be invalid - not a lot of research on it
Albert ellis - rational emotive behavioural therapy
Abraham maslow - concept of self important
Carl rogers - unconditional positive regard, compare current version of ourself to ideal version - want to reduce gap
there is no systematic investigations used to create these theories
Trait approach - quite dominant, atheoretical - no reason for personality
Two assumptions underlie trait theory: personality traits should be stable across time and context.
Early work (1900s) that was consistent with trait theory was conducted by William Sheldon and Sir Francis Galton. - categorises people into different personality types. lexicon. body shape related to characteristics . used factor analysis
However, a turning point in modern personality research happened through Gordon Allport. - 4500 words to do with personality cut them down into categories
Cattell
Cattell was the first to use factor analysis in personality research. - used factor analysis - used a lot in personality testing
He eventually produced 16 factors to represent the basic structure of personality - you score high to low on each characteristic
Eysenck
Eysenck identified 3 types that he suggested make up the basic structure of personality.
He then developed the EPQ to measure these types.- hierarchal model of personality types - suggested personality made up of
introversion – extroversion
stability – neuroticism
self-control – psychotism
score low or high on each one
The big 5
Later work, and especially that by Costa and McCrae (1985, 1989, 1992, 1997), built on Eysenck’s work with the creation of the Big 5. - openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness and neuroticism
And the NEO-PI-R is a popular measure of the Big 5.
Ashton and Lee (2008) and Musek (2007) have made further contributions.
Critical analysis
- Label appropriateness (e.g. Norman, 1963).
- Suitability of questionnaires (Peabody & Goldberg, 1989).
- Atheoretical (Briggs, 1989).
Use in the context of predictive validity (Mischel, 1968).
Questions?
What do you think causes people to have different personalities?
Which theorists do you sit most closely to?
Why does your position on this matter?
Funder et al. (2013) - “Improving the Dependability of Research in Personality and Social Psychology”:
Background & Rationale
- Concerns about replicability and dependability of research findings in psychology have been growing, influenced by issues in various scientific fields (e.g., physics, medicine, and psychology).
- The controversy was amplified by Ioannidis’s (2005) claim that “most published research findings are false” and cases of data fraud in psychology and other sciences.
The Society for Personality and Social Psychology (SPSP) Task Force on Publication and Research Practiceswas created to recommend reforms.
- The controversy was amplified by Ioannidis’s (2005) claim that “most published research findings are false” and cases of data fraud in psychology and other sciences.
Funder et al. (2013) - “Improving the Dependability of Research in Personality and Social Psychology”: Recommendations for Research Practice
- Sample Size and Statistical Power
○ Researchers should justify their sample size based on effect sizes and power calculations.
○ Many studies are underpowered, leading to unreliable findings.- Report Effect Sizes & Confidence Intervals (CIs)
○ Effect sizes (e.g., Cohen’s d, Pearson’s r) should be reported to provide context for statistical significance.
○ Confidence intervals offer more information than p-values alone and should be routinely included. - Avoid “Questionable Research Practices” (QRPs)
○ Practices such as p-hacking, data peeking, selective reporting, and post hoc hypothesis adjustmentsinflate Type I error rates.
○ Researchers should pre-register hypotheses and report all data transparently. - Full Reporting of Materials & Methods
○ Appendices should include verbatim materials (e.g., surveys, manipulations) to facilitate replication. - Adhere to Open Data Standards
○ SPSP’s data sharing policy encourages researchers to make raw data available for verification and reanalysis. - Encourage and Publish Replication Studies
○ High-quality replications should be valued as much as novel studies.
○ Journals should prioritize replication studies rather than relegating them to lower-impact outlets. - Maintain Flexibility in Standards
Reforms should not be overly rigid—different research contexts may require different methodologies and statistical approaches.
- Report Effect Sizes & Confidence Intervals (CIs)
Funder et al. (2013) - “Improving the Dependability of Research in Personality and Social Psychology”: Recommendations for Education & Training
- Promote a Culture of “Getting It Right”
○ Prioritize accuracy and reliability over just finding “significant” results.- Teach Transparency & Ethical Research Practices
○ Encourage full data reporting, including null results. - Improve Methodological Training
○ Statistics courses should emphasize effect sizes, confidence intervals, and power analysis.
○ Researchers should understand the consequences of questionable research practices. - Support Junior Researchers Committed to Rigorous Science
Hiring and promotion decisions should reward transparency and high-quality research, not just publication quantity.
- Teach Transparency & Ethical Research Practices
Funder et al. (2013) - “Improving the Dependability of Research in Personality and Social Psychology”: conclusion
- Psychology should foster a culture of mutual criticism and open replication to strengthen scientific reliability.
Encouraging replication, transparency, and better statistical practices will improve the credibility and impactof research in personality and social psychology
Gurven et al. (2013) - “How Universal Is the Big Five? Testing the Five-Factor Model of Personality Variation Among Forager–Farmers in the Bolivian Amazon”:
Background & Research Question
- The Five-Factor Model (FFM) of personality (Big Five: Extraversion, Openness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, and Agreeableness) is widely accepted as a universal model.
- However, most studies have focused on literate, urban, industrialized societies, raising concerns about its applicability to indigenous, small-scale societies.
This study tests the FFM in the Tsimane, a forager–horticulturalist group in Bolivia, to examine whether the model holds across diverse cultural settings.
- However, most studies have focused on literate, urban, industrialized societies, raising concerns about its applicability to indigenous, small-scale societies.
Gurven et al. (2013) - “How Universal Is the Big Five? Testing the Five-Factor Model of Personality Variation Among Forager–Farmers in the Bolivian Amazon”: methods
- Participants: 632 Tsimane adults (48% female) from 28 villages.
- Survey Tool: Spanish-translated Big Five Inventory (BFI), adapted to the Tsimane language.
- Data Collection: Face-to-face interviews; spouse-reported personality assessments (n=430).
- Analyses:
○ Internal reliability (Cronbach’s alpha).
○ Factor structure via Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) and Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA).
○ Cross-cultural comparison with U.S. samples using Procrustes rotation.
Gurven et al. (2013) - “How Universal Is the Big Five? Testing the Five-Factor Model of Personality Variation Among Forager–Farmers in the Bolivian Amazon”: findings
- Poor Fit to the Big Five Model
○ The FFM was not strongly supported among the Tsimane.
○ Low internal consistency for Neuroticism (α = 0.31) and Openness (α = 0.54).
○ Exploratory factor analysis failed to replicate the Big Five structure.
○ Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) showed poor model fit.
○ Procrustes analysis indicated low congruence with U.S. personality structures.- Evidence for a “Big Two” Model
○ Instead of the Big Five, personality variation among the Tsimane clustered into two primary factors:
§ Prosociality (Extraversion + Agreeableness + aspects of Openness)
§ Industriousness (Conscientiousness + some traits from other factors)
○ These traits align with the socioecological demands of Tsimane life, where cooperation and work ethic are crucial for survival. - Minimal Influence of Education & Language
○ The Big Five model did not fit better among Tsimane with schooling or Spanish fluency, suggesting literacy and exposure to Western culture did not drive personality structure. - Spouse Ratings Did Not Improve Fit
○ Peer (spouse) assessments of personality did not replicate the Big Five either.
○ Reliability remained low even with external evaluations. - Possible Explanations for Divergence
○ Different socioecological pressures in small-scale societies shape personality differently.
○ Tsimane success depends on food production and social cooperation, which may not align with the five-factor model.
○ Greater emphasis on social harmony may blend Extraversion and Agreeableness into one trait.
Small, kin-based societies provide fewer social niches, possibly leading to less differentiation among personality traits.
- Evidence for a “Big Two” Model
Gurven et al. (2013) - “How Universal Is the Big Five? Testing the Five-Factor Model of Personality Variation Among Forager–Farmers in the Bolivian Amazon”: conclusions and implications
- The study challenges the universality of the Big Five model.
- Personality structure may be context-dependent, varying based on socioeconomic, cultural, and ecological factors.
Calls for a broader, more flexible approach to personality research that accounts for variation beyond WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic) societies
- Personality structure may be context-dependent, varying based on socioeconomic, cultural, and ecological factors.
