Personality Psychology Flashcards
1
Q
The Dispositional/Trait Approach
A
- Aims to identify the major components of personality that influence behaviour
∙ Tests/questionnaires
∙ Psychometrics
∙ Statistical techniques e.g. factor analysis
2
Q
What are traits/dispositions?
A
- Descriptive statements about personality ‘core’ characteristics
- The relatively stable and enduring qualities of a person. Typical. Assumed to be durable so that behaviour will be the same whatever the time or situation
- Differences between individuals arise from differences in the strength, amount and number of dispositions each person has
3
Q
Goals of the dispositional approach
A
- Identify the underlying dimensions of personality
∙ Main traits, and number of them, helps to do this - To discover how people differ
∙ how we can measure the differences in traits using personality tests - Influence/predict behaviour
4
Q
Type and trait theories
A
- We use the word ‘type’
- Type theory of personality = Discrete categories view of personality
5
Q
Galen’s type theory
A
- Phlegmatic, Sanguine, Melancholic, Choleric
6
Q
Type theories
A
- Types are useful to make a quick summary
- But:
∙ How valid is it to think of a person as a type?
∙ Is a person always one type rather than another?
∙ Can our judgements be at fault?
✳︎ Stereotypes can be incorrect - Can be at fault
- “A major complaint about ‘type’ theories is that human personality is so varied it won’t fit into a few discrete categories. Most people are a mixture of types, not one or the other, and can’t be assigned to a discrete category” (Hufferman, 1990).
7
Q
Traits – a continuum
A
- The theory that recognises and answers this is the TRAIT approach.
- The continuum approach to personality e.g. height, friendliness
8
Q
Traits v types
A
- In practice the trait v type distinction is often blurred
9
Q
Allport (1897-1967)
A
- Aimed to identify the key traits of personality
- Allport and Odbert (1936)
∙ 18,000 human traits
✳︎ some physical e.g. short, tall, blonde
✳︎ some behavioural e.g. shy, loud
✳︎ some moral e.g. honest, trustworthy
∙ 4,500 main personality traits
∙ 160
10
Q
Allport
A
Allport divided traits into 2 different groups
1. Common traits
shared by members of a culture
2. Individual traits
a person’s unique qualities
∙ Allport said these individual traits take 3 forms
11
Q
Allport: Individual traits - 1. Cardinal traits
A
∙ a dominant, powerful trait that characterises & influences nearly all of a person’s behaviour. Rare.
12
Q
Allport: Individual traits - 2. Central traits
A
∙ core’ behavioural tendencies that are highly characteristic of an individual
∙ influential but don’t dominate behaviour
∙ we each have 5 – 10 central traits
∙ what others see. Guide us to behave consistently.
13
Q
Allport: Individual traits - 3. Secondary traits
A
∙ all other traits in a person.
∙ show in some situations but not others.
14
Q
Idiographic v Nomothetic
A
- Each person’s blend of traits is UNIQUE to them.
- Idiographic - individuals
- Nomothetic – groups
∙ how are people similar or different?
✳︎ Cattell
✳︎ Eysenck
15
Q
Cattell and Eysenck
A
- Both developed their theories based on information about personality such as from questionnaires
- They used a statistical technique called Factor Analysis to help them determine the number of traits and the important ones.
- Each found a different answer.
16
Q
Factor analysis
A
- FA is a mathematical technique, based on correlations that allows you to investigate and determine which particular items tend to be answered in the same way by a particular person.
- This allows you to infer what things go together
17
Q
Different methods of Factor analysis
A
- The ORTHOGONAL METHOD - Results in: ∙ a small number of powerful factors ∙ independent of each other ∙ Used by Eysenck - The OBLIQUE METHOD - Results in: ∙ a large number of less powerful factors ∙ correlated to some extent ∙ Used by Cattell
18
Q
Cattell
A
- 4500 – 171 - 35
- He distinguished between 2 types of trait
- SURFACE TRAITS
∙ visible aspects of personality (35)
∙ did a factor analysis - SOURCE TRAITS
∙ the underlying personality traits from which surface traits are derived
∙ he said there are 16 source traits (the 16PF)
∙ Major personality traits – can predict behaviour
19
Q
Personality information - multivariate
A
- Data about personality gathered from 3 sources:
- Q DATA: questionnaire and interview data
- L DATA: gathered from life records (school report, work history etc)
- T DATA: gathered from objective testing
20
Q
Eysenck
A
- Eysenck’s initial theory was based on 2 principal traits (types) ∙ introversion / extraversion ∙ stable / unstable (neuroticism) - Later added ∙ psychoticism (self-control)
21
Q
Introversion: a type characterised by
A
- prefer solitary activities
- quiet and reserved
- cautious
- reading and study
- has few but close friends
- plans ahead
- reliable
- has high ethical standards
- feelings under control
- deals easily with concepts and ideas
22
Q
Extraversion: a typer characterised by tendencies to be
A
- socially outgoing
- to express feelings and impulses freely
- a high level of activity.
- sociable with many friends
- impulsive
- sensation seeking
- risk taker
- enjoys parties
- carefree
- aggressive
- feelings not under tight control
- unreliable
- needs to have first hand experience of things
23
Q
Neuroticism
A
- Emotional stability / instability
∙ a type characterised by:
✳︎ instability: a nature full of anxiety, worries and guilt
✳︎ stability: refers to a nature that is relaxed and at peace with oneself. - ‘are you inclined to be moody’
- ‘do ideas run through your head so that you cannot sleep?’
24
Q
Normal distribution
A
- “Bell Curve”
25
Q
Psychoticism
A
- Antisocial tendencies: ∙ Solitary, do not care for people ∙ Disregard danger ∙ Troublesome, do not fit in ∙ Like to make fools of others ∙ Cruel, inhumane, lack feeling, are sensitive ∙ Opposes accepted social customs ∙ Sensation seeking, under aroused ∙ Impersonal (sex) ∙ Hostile and aggressive ∙ Like odd or unusual things
26
Q
Skewed distribution
A
- Low - High scores on psychoticism
27
Q
EPQ
A
- Eysenck’s types are measured by the EPQ
- E
- N
- P
- L
- PEN
28
Q
Hierarchical model of personality
A
- Type level → trait level → habitual response level → specific response levels
29
Q
Dispositional approach: Traits
A
- Traits are basic components of personality
- Descriptive terms
- They influence a person’s behaviour
30
Q
The five factor model of personality
A
- Tupes and Christal (1961)
- Norman (1963)
►Analysis of trait terms used by people to describe personality
►Led to 5 factor model - Goldberg (1981)
- Costa and McCrae (1985) arrived at the most common terms used
31
Q
The 5 factor model: factors
A
- Openness
- Conscientiousness
- Extraversion
- Agreeableness
- Neuroticism
32
Q
Openness: (to experience) (Culture, Intellect)
A
- A tendency to enjoy new experiences especially intellectual experiences, the arts, culture and anything that exposes the person to new ideas.
- Closed = insensitive to art, rigid, bored, dogmatic, conventional, down-to-earth
33
Q
Conscientiousness: (Responsibility)
A
- Hardworking, reliable, ambitious, energetic, careful, thorough, responsible, self-disciplined.
- Opposite = irresponsible, careless and undependable.
34
Q
Extraversion
A
- A tendency to seek new experiences.
- Associated with warmth, assertiveness and excitement seeking.
- Enjoy meeting new people and having the company of other people
- A stable positive mood under most circumstances (Williams, 1990).
- Opposite = reserved, sober, quiet.
35
Q
Agreeableness: (Conformity, Likeability)
A
- Sympathetic, co-operative, good-natured, trusting
- A tendency to be compassionate toward others
- A concern for the welfare of other people.
- Opposite = Antagonism (mistrustful, sceptical, stubborn, rude).
36
Q
Neuroticism
A
- a tendency to experience unpleasant and negative emotions easily.
- Worrying, anxiety, insecure, self-conscious, temperamental. Depression
- Opposite is stability, calm, relaxed, secure, unemotional.
37
Q
The 5 factor model
A
Thought to represent the personality traits that people consider are most important.
38
Q
Fundamental lexical (language) hypothesis (Goldberg (1990)
A
Useful for prediction of behaviour.
39
Q
Measuring the 5 factors
A
- Costa and McCrae (1988)
►The NEO Personality Inventory (Revised 1992)
►NEO-PI-R
►Each of the 5 big factors is subdivided into 6 or more FACETS (specific traits that make up the larger factor)
40
Q
Evaluation of the 5 factor model
A
- It’s good if we want a practical way to describe a lot of the variation in personality in a small number of terms.
- But if we want a complete theoretical understanding of personality; then 5 factors is probably not a good enough ‘theory‘.
41
Q
Why do we have the traits we have? - A criticism of trait theories
A
- Descriptive
- No explanation of what might influence development of traits/where they come from.
- Criticism meant some explanation for existence of traits was needed.
42
Q
Eysenck’s biological theory of personality - YES there is a biological basis for personality, personality is inherited
A
- Need a system
- Inherited differences due to differences in physiological functioning
- Looked for support for biological differences
43
Q
Biological basis of personality
A
- Personality differences due to differences in the Central Nervous System
- Different circuits of neurons in the brain are responsible for controlling behaviour.
44
Q
Biological basis for extraversion/introversion
A
- Whether I/E is due to the balance between excitation and inhibition processes in the CNS, specifically those in the ARAS (the ascending
reticular activating
system)
45
Q
The ARAS
A
- Main function is to maintain an optimum level of alertness or ‘arousal’
- Enhancing incoming stimuli
by excitation of neural impulses - Dampening incoming stimuli
by inhibition of neural impulses
46
Q
Biological basis for extraversion/introversion: Extraverts
A
- a ‘strong nervous system’
- ARAS is biased towards the inhibition of impulses
- reduces intensity of sensory stimulation reaching cortex
- they are chronically under aroused
- as less aroused they must seek stimulation to maintain their brain activity levels and avoid boredom
47
Q
Biological basis for extraversion/introversion: Introverts
A
- Weaker nervous system
- ARAS is biased towards excitation of impulses
- Increases intensity of sensory stimulation reaching cortex
- They are chronically over aroused
- Therefore keep away from stimulation
48
Q
Evidence for cortical arousal and personality (I/E) (1)
A
A. Behavioural and physiological studies:
1. Vigilance tasks
►Introverts with higher levels of cortical arousal perform better than extraverts, who do poorly because they become bored
2. In life
►E tend to change lots of areas more often
►E look for stimulation . . .
3. Like/dislike of strong stimuli
►E can’t stand sensory deprivation
49
Q
Cortical arousal theory
A
- Everyone has an optimum level of arousal but this is lower for the more highly aroused introvert
a) When given same amount of stimulation I become more physiologically aroused than E (Geen, 1984)
b) I and E seem to require different levels of stimulation to achieve the same optimum degree of arousal
c) When given choice, I choose lower levels of stimulation but reach same optimum performance
✳︎But . . .Not all supported:
- Claridge (1967)
- Hampson (1995)
50
Q
Evidence for cortical arousal and personality (I/E) (2)
A
B. Personality and conditionability:
- I should be more easily conditioned than E
∙ e.g. eyeblink conditioned response - Eysenck and Levey (1972)
✳︎ However, not all studies have
supported this.
51
Q
Biological basis for neuroticism
A
- Due to the reactivity of the autonomic nervous system (ANS)
- High N
►an ANS which reacts strongly
and quickly to stressful situations
►a slower decrease in the stress response once the danger has passed
►they have an over reactive or hyper responsive system
52
Q
Biological basis for psychoticism
A
Male hormone androgen and / or other hormones
53
Q
Heredity and personality
A
- Eysenck: heredity estimates suggested that genetic factors account for between 56% to 72% of the variation in traits
54
Q
Evidence for and against Eysenck (1)
A
- Twin studies
►Bouchard et al (1990)
►Tellegen et al (1988)
= found that MZ apart are often as similar as MZ together - therefore genetic links - Parents - biological children - adopted children.
- Siblings / unrelated children in same family. - Stability over life regardless of environment.
55
Q
Heritability depends upon traits
A
- Overall 40% of differences due to inheritance but the degree varies from trait to trait
- More evidence for E and N. Less for P
- Openness 0.40
- Conscientiousness 0.29
- Agreeableness 0.12
56
Q
Evidence for and against Eysenck (2)
A
- Environmental influences
►Family environment often different for family members– shared – therefore not same Personality
►Experiences outside the family important – people from same family are different
✳︎ Also an interaction
57
Q
Influences on personality - Dunn and Plomin, 1990
A
- Nonshared environment - 35%
- Error - 20%
- Shared environment - 5%
- Genetic - 40%
58
Q
Behaviourism
A
- J B Watson
1. Psychology should only study observable behaviour
2. The environment influences behaviour - Personality is learnt
from the environment
59
Q
B.F. Skinner
A
- A blank slate
- We learn by operant conditioning (rewards and punishment)
- Personality is a collection of ‘learned behaviour patterns’
- E.g. behaviour at a party
- Learn to be shy, kind, aggressive
- PERSONALITY = BEHAVIOUR
60
Q
Learning personality
A
- Predictor of behaviour: Likelihood of rewards and punishments at any given moment are the best predictors of an individual’s behaviour and personality.
- Motivation of personality/behaviour: Desire to be rewarded / avoid punishment.
- Development of personality: Continually facing new experiences, so personality is changing throughout life.
61
Q
B.F. Skinner (2)
A
- BUT If the environment is responsible for personality:
1. Why can 2 people act differently in the same situation?
∙ because of their unique histories of operant conditioning
2. Why do we see stability in individual behaviour?
∙ If the environment is relatively the same then behaviour will be the same
∙ We develop stable response tendencies that are tied to certain stimulus situations.
62
Q
B.F Skinner (3)
A
- Big changes in the environment can lead to changes in personality
- Conclusion:
∙ Environment influences personality
∙ But - Non-cognitive stance challenged
63
Q
Social Learning Theory
A
- Personality is learned from environmental experiences and situations
- BUT also emphasises and accepts the role of cognitive activity (thoughts, feelings etc)
- the Social Cognitive perspective
- Basic tenet of the theory is that cognitive approaches greatly influence personality by mediating between external environmental events and behaviour
64
Q
Albert Bandura
A
- 2 major aspects to theory:
1. Personality develops through observational learning (modelling)
2. Reciprocal determinism
65
Q
Bandura
A
1. Personality develops through observational learning (imitation of behaviour of a model) - We learn by: ∙ observing the actions of others ∙ observing the consequences ►what happens to them
66
Q
Imitation and models: Modelling
A
- Two types of model:
►live modelling
►symbolic modelling - Perceiving what others (models) do
67
Q
Bandura (2)
A
- Important:
∙ the person does not actually have to do the behaviour and
∙ does not have to actually be reinforced to learn - Vicarious learning
- Vicarious reinforcement
68
Q
3 studies demonstrated the effects of social learning on children’s behaviour
A
- The BoBo doll study:
- demonstrated the role of observation in learning a response (Bandura, Ross & Ross, 1963), and the role of reinforcement in determining whether the child performed the action (Bandura & Walters, 1963; Bandura, 1965)
69
Q
The BoBo doll study
A
- An adult attacked BoBo
- One group witnessed the attack in person
- One group saw it on TV
- Control group watched adult engage in innocuous behaviours
- Child then left to play in room where BoBo was
70
Q
The BoBo doll study: Results
A
- The children’s aggressive behaviour was modelled on that of the adult
- BUT their behaviour also depended on whether model was rewarded or punished for aggressive behaviour towards BoBo
71
Q
Grusec et al (1979) Time to tempt
A
- Study to demonstrate effects of observing others’ behaviour
- ‘Time to tempt’ experiment
- Time playing with forbidden toy
72
Q
Bandura and Mischel (1965) Changing behaviour
A
- Showed how to modify whether children preferred immediate or delayed gratification by exposing them to adult models
- First found out what each child preferred
73
Q
Changing behaviour
A
- Then assigned to one of 3 conditions:
∙ an adult model doing opposite to child’s preference
∙ written information opposite to child’s preference
∙ no model
74
Q
Bandura and Mischel (1965)
A
- Examined child’s preferences 1 month later
- Both live and symbolic models were effective in causing children to change their preferences
75
Q
How does observing others influence behaviour?
A
- Involves processes of see, evaluate, interpret consequences, apply to yourself
- Since we imitate others’ behaviour, children need ‘good’ role models
76
Q
Bandura’s reciprocal determinism
A
- People influence/alter the environment and the environment influences people
- Cognitive factors important
- A “triadic” reciprocal determinism
77
Q
Mischel’s theory - How influential is the situation on behaviour? - Person - Situation Controversy
A
- Theory of personality examining:
∙ the extent to which situational factors govern behaviour
∙ Is behaviour consistent over different situations - Questioned trait theory because:
∙ Often noted a lack of consistency in behaviour
∙ Trait theory should, but often couldn’t, predict behaviour e.g. honesty
78
Q
Greene and Saxe (1990)
A
- Scored highly on an ‘honesty’ questionnaire
- Given tasks to do
- Honesty was greatly influenced by circumstances
- Situation important
79
Q
Situation influences behaviour
A
- ‘Situation’ and not ‘personality’ that predicted behaviour (Mischel, 1968)
- Behaviour changes according to the situation.
- Small correlation between personality (trait) and behaviour.
80
Q
Person - situation debate
A
- To what degree is a person’s behaviour caused by personality (traits)?
- To what degree is a person’s behaviour caused by situational factors?
►The trait versus situationism debate
►Person-situation controversy
►The consistency paradox
81
Q
Person - situation debate (2)
A
- Response to criticisms of traits
►Epstein (1977): traits are evident and stable
►Epstein and O’Brian (1985): strong indications of consistency over time
82
Q
Mischel’s (1984) response
A
- Behaviour can be consistent over time but not over situations
- Therefore 2 aspects to the debate
1. Cross-situational consistency
2. Cross-temporal consistency - Mischel: inconsistency across situations
83
Q
Response to time v situations
A
- Small et al (1983) refuted Mischel’s claims
- Epstein (1983)
∙ MEAN sociability over many different situations is more stable
✳︎ Events 1-40
84
Q
Accepted that
A
- The importance of personality traits depends upon the variability of the situation
∙ Powerful v weak situations
∙ Powerful v weak traits
85
Q
Personality x situation
A
- Personality and situation are not independent
- Personality traits INTERACT with situations
- We often choose the situations we enter (Bem & Allen, 1974)
86
Q
Conclusion
A
- How the specific characteristics of a situation will influence the behaviour of an individual with a specific type of personality (Magnusson and Endler, 1977)
- Behaviour may change depending on the situation we are in, but there is some underlying consistency.
87
Q
Humanistic theories
A
- Emerged as a backlash against other theories
- Focus on human qualities: a positive image of what it means to be human.
- Humanistic theories believe that human nature is basically good.
- What makes us human?
-Personality is the positive drive toward self-fulfilment
-perfect our skills,
-find peace and happiness
= for that’s what influences our behaviour
88
Q
EXISTENTIALISM
A
- The roots of humanistic theories lie in existentialism
1. Emphasis on personal responsibilities and free will.
People can make choices about behaviour.
Not determined.
2. Importance on the here and now rather than the past.
3. Theme of personal growth and fulfilment.
4. We can understand ourselves by focusing on our own conscious experiences (not unconscious).
5. Believe in the value of phenomenology – subjective impt.
89
Q
Maslow (1908-1970)
A
- We have more needs/drives than what Freud suggested.
- Development of theory of personality based on theory of motivation to meet those needs.
- His ideas:
- Some people live ‘unusually effective lives’
- How do they differ from the general population?
90
Q
What is Self-actualisation?
A
- “It is an innate drive towards growth and to develop all of one’s talents and capacities”.
- Understanding one’s own potential, accepting oneself and others as unique individuals” (Maslow, 1970).
- It motivates all human behaviour and results in the full realisation of a person’s highest potential.
91
Q
What leads to self-actualisation?
A
- We are motivated by a HIERARCHY OF NEEDS
- Theory of ‘motivation for needs’ explains personality and behaviour
92
Q
Self-actualisation: Hierarchy of needs
A
- Physiological needs
- Safety
- Love
- Esteem
- Cognitive
- Aesthetic needs
- Self-actualisation
93
Q
How does the hierarchy explain personality?
A
- Once basic needs are met we are motivated to the next needs - therefore influences our behaviour and personality
- When gratified we move on
- If not gratified unable to grow
- Lower needs must be met before we can grow
- At the top is self-actualisation
94
Q
Self-actualisation
A
- is an ongoing process of growth and development of one’s personal potential rather than reaching an end point
- Only a few people reach it, but it is on everyone’s hierarchy of needs.
95
Q
A self-actualised person is:
A
- Tuned into reality
- At peace with themselves
- Sensitive to other’s needs
- Enjoying rewarding interpersonal relations
- Not dependent upon others for approval
- Not uncomfortable with solitude
- Thriving on work
- More likely to report peak experiences
- Have a ‘mission’ in life
96
Q
What can be done to promote self-actualisation?
A
- Be willing to change
- Take responsibility – don’t blame others
- Examine your motives
- Be honest. Admit faults.
- Make use of positive/peak experiences
- Be prepared to be different
- Get involved – have a mission
- Assess your progress.
97
Q
Carl Rogers (1902 - 1987)
A
- Driving force: to be self-fulfilled /self-actualised
- All aspects in harmony
- This will occur when a person receives love and acceptance from others
98
Q
Rogers - SELF
A
- Key structure of his theory of personality
- The concept of SELF (or self-concept).
- glues the elements of our personality together.
- the central, organising structure
- your personal identity
99
Q
Theory of Self
A
- Self: A self-concept is a “collection of beliefs about one’s own nature, unique qualities and typical behaviour” (Weitan, 1998).
- an ongoing sense of who and what you are
- a mental picture of yourself, how you see yourself
- your values are part of your self
- judgements about your abilities, accomplishments, attractiveness and relationships with other people.
- SELF guides behaviour and personality
100
Q
The Self
A
- Rogers sees the self as made up of 3 basic aspects:
1. actual self (how you see yourself)
2. real self (behaviour, how others see you)
3. ideal self (how you would like to be)
101
Q
Congruence / incongruence
A
- A ‘fit’ or ‘match’ between our
self-concept and our behaviour
= congruence. High self-worth - A gap = incongruence
102
Q
A healthy personality
A
- Key to healthy personality = congruence
- If a poor fit, actual self, real self or ideal self need to change or = poor mental health
- Don’t expect a ‘perfect’ fit.
- Should be a gap to have something to aim for
- Too big a gap = anxiety and problems
103
Q
Development of the self
A
- Congruence / incongruence depends upon childhood experiences
- Self-esteem and positive regard from others
- A basic need for positive regard from others – loved, respected, valued, trusted, accepted
104
Q
Positive regard may be
A
- Conditional
- Unconditional
- Unconditional positive regard
leads to congruence - Conditional positive regard
leads to incongruence
