Gizmo Notes Weeks 1-12 PDF

FINAL DRAFT NOTES: WEEKS 1-12 2234  Week 1 Social Psychology: The scientific study of how individuals think, feel, and behave in social situations Personality Psychology: Focuses on individual differences in behavior and consistency acro...

FINAL DRAFT NOTES: WEEKS 1-12 2234  Week 1 Social Psychology: The scientific study of how individuals think, feel, and behave in social situations Personality Psychology: Focuses on individual differences in behavior and consistency across situations Why Research is Necessary: Common sense and intuition are often insufficient or misleading Research helps uncover surprising findings and correct errors in judgment Provides empirical evidence to test theories Research Process Steps: 1. Develop research question 2. Generate hypotheses 3. Operationalize variables 4. Design study 5. Collect data 6. Analyze results 7. Draw conclusions Experimental Designs: Between-subjects: Participants randomly assigned to different conditions Within-subjects: Same participants tested in all conditions Example Studies: 1. Moral purity and physical cleansing (between-subjects) 2. Topic importance bias in publishing (within-subjects) Key Points: Importance of random assignment Advantages/disadvantages of different designs Operationalizing abstract concepts Careful interpretation of results The lecture emphasizes the scientific approach of social/personality psychology and walks through concrete examples of experimental research designs. It highlights how research can reveal non-intuitive findings about human behavior and cognition.  Week 2 - 2234 1. Define personality and its importance in psychology 2. Understand the relationship between personality and social psychology 3. Explore personality development (nature vs nurture) 4. Examine scientific approaches to personality research 5. Review methods of personality assessment  Week 2 - (1.) Define personality and its importance in psychology Personality is a complex and multifaceted concept in psychology. It encompasses the unique patterns of thoughts, emotions, and behaviours that distinguish one individual from another. These patterns are relatively stable over time and across different situations, though they can evolve with experience and maturation. Key aspects of personality include: 1. Consistency: Personality traits tend to be relatively stable over time, providing a sense of continuity in an individual's behaviour. 2. Psychological and physiological: Personality is influenced by both mental processes and biological factors. 3. Behaviours and actions: Personality is expressed through a person's behaviours and interactions with the world. 4. Multiple expressions: It impacts various aspects of life, including how we interact with others, handle stress, make decisions, and pursue goals. Importance in psychology: 1. Understanding individual differences: Personality theory helps explain why people react differently to the same situations. 2. Predicting behaviour: Knowledge of personality can help predict how someone might behave in various contexts. 3. Mental health: Personality is crucial in understanding psychological well-being and disorders. Certain personality traits may predispose individuals to specific mental health issues. 4. Therapeutic applications: Understanding personality is essential for effective psychotherapy and counselling. 5. Research and theory development: Personality serves as a framework for integrating various psychological concepts and theories. 6. Real-world applications: Personality research informs areas such as employee selection, education, and criminal justice. Different approaches to personality: 1. Trait theories: Focus on identifying and measuring specific personality characteristics. 2. Psychodynamic theories: Emphasize unconscious processes and early life experiences. 3. Humanistic theories: Stress the importance of free will and self-actualization. 4. Social-cognitive theories: Examine how our thoughts about situations shape our personalities. Week 2 - (2.) Understand the relationship between personality and social psychology The relationship between personality psychology and social psychology is complex and intertwined. Let's delve deeper into this connection: 1. Historical Evolution: 1930s: Personality-centric view dominated, with behavior primarily attributed to internal factors. 1950s-1960s: Situationist perspective emerged, emphasizing environmental influences. 1980s: Interactionist approach gained prominence, recognizing both personal and situational factors. 2000s onwards: Nuanced understanding of complex person-situation interactions. 2. Focal Points: Personality Psychology: Focuses on individual differences, traits, and internal processes. Social Psychology: Examines how social environments and interpersonal interactions shape behaviour. 3. Interactionist Perspective: Emphasises that behaviour results from the interplay between personality traits and situational factors. Example: An extroverted person might be more talkative at a party (situation) but less so in a library. 4. Methodological Overlap: Both fields use similar research methods (e.g., surveys, experiments, observations). Cross-pollination of ideas and methodologies is common. 5. Cultural Considerations: Both fields increasingly recognize culture's role in shaping personality and social behavior. Example: Individualistic vs. collectivistic cultures may foster different personality traits and social norms. Week 2 - (2.) Understand the relationship between personality and social psychology 6. Applied Settings: Both contribute to areas like organizational psychology, clinical psychology, and health psychology. Example: Understanding both personality traits and social influences is crucial in workplace dynamics. 7. Personality in Social Contexts: How do personality traits manifest in different social situations? How do social experiences shape personality development over time? 8. Social Influences on Personality: How do social roles, expectations, and experiences contribute to personality formation? The impact of significant life events and social transitions on personality. 9. Person Perception: How do personality traits influence how we perceive and interact with others? How accurate are our judgments of others' personalities in social contexts? 10. Consistency vs. Variability: ○ Examining how consistent personality traits are across different social situations. ○ Understanding when and why behavior might deviate from typical personality patterns. Week 2 - (3.) Explore personality development (nature vs nurture) Explore personality development (nature vs nurture) Personality development is a complex and ongoing process influenced by both genetic predispositions (nature) and environmental factors (nurture). Let's delve deeper into these influences: Nature (Biological Factors): 1. Genetics: Heritability studies suggest that about 40-60% of personality variation can be attributed to genetic factors. Specific genes have been linked to traits like neuroticism, extraversion, and openness to experience. 2. Biological Needs: Basic physiological needs (e.g., hunger, thirst, sleep) can influence behavior and personality development. Maslow's hierarchy of needs illustrates how these basic needs form the foundation for higher-level personality development. 3. Temperament: Innate behavioral tendencies present from infancy. Includes traits like activity level, emotional reactivity, and sociability. Can be observed in infants and tends to be relatively stable over time. 4. Brain Structure and Function: Neuroimaging studies have linked certain brain structures to personality traits. For example, the size of the amygdala has been associated with emotional reactivity. Nurture (Environmental Factors): 1. Family Environment: Parenting styles significantly impact personality development. Attachment patterns formed in early childhood can influence later relationships and emotional regulation. Week 2 - (3.) Explore personality development (nature vs nurture)  2. Peer Influences: As children grow, peer relationships become increasingly important in shaping personality. Social comparison and peer pressure can influence self-concept and behavior. 3. Cultural Context: Cultural values and norms shape personality traits that are considered desirable or adaptive. For example, individualistic vs. collectivistic cultures may foster different personality traits. 4. Life Experiences: Significant life events (both positive and negative) can shape personality. Trauma, in particular, can have lasting effects on personality development. 5. Education and Socioeconomic Status: Access to education and resources can influence cognitive development and personality traits like openness to experience. Interaction between Nature and Nurture: 1. Epigenetics: Environmental factors can influence gene expression without changing the DNA sequence. This blurs the line between nature and nurture, showing how the environment can "turn on" or "turn off" certain genes. 2. Gene-Environment Interaction: Certain genetic predispositions may only manifest under specific environmental conditions. For example, a genetic predisposition to aggression might only lead to aggressive behavior in certain social contexts. Week 2 - (3.) Explore personality development (nature vs nurture)  3. Plasticity: The brain remains somewhat plastic throughout life, allowing for ongoing personality development and change. This plasticity is influenced by both genetic factors and environmental experiences. Stability and Change: While personality shows some stability over time (especially core traits), it can also change in response to life experiences, maturation, and intentional efforts. The most significant personality changes tend to occur in young adulthood, but change is possible throughout life. Week 2 - (4.) Examine Scientific approaches to personality research Scientific approaches to personality research involve a range of methodologies and considerations aimed at understanding and measuring human personality in a rigorous, systematic way. Let's explore this in more depth: 1. Research Design: Cross-sectional studies: Examine personality across different age groups at a single point in time. Longitudinal studies: Follow the same individuals over an extended period, often years or decades. Twin studies: Compare identical and fraternal twins to understand genetic influences on personality. 2. Data Collection Methods: Self-report measures: Questionnaires and inventories (e.g., Big Five Inventory). Observer ratings: Assessments made by trained observers or people who know the individual well. Behavioral measures: Observing actual behavior in controlled or natural settings. Physiological measures: Using biological markers (e.g., cortisol levels, brain imaging) to study personality. 3. Statistical Techniques: Factor analysis: Used to identify underlying personality traits from large sets of data. Structural equation modeling: Examines relationships between multiple variables. Machine learning: Increasingly used to analyze large datasets and identify patterns. 4. Validity and Reliability: Construct validity: Ensures that a test measures what it claims to measure. Predictive validity: Assesses how well a measure predicts future behavior. Test-retest reliability: Measures consistency of results over time. Inter-rater reliability: Ensures consistency between different raters. 5. Ethical Considerations: Informed consent: Participants must understand and agree to the research procedures. Confidentiality: Protecting participants' personal information. Debriefing: Explaining the true nature of the study after participation. Week 2 - (4.) Examine Scientific approaches to personality research 6. Cross-Cultural Research: Examining how personality traits manifest across different cultures. Developing culturally appropriate assessment tools. Addressing potential biases in Western-centric personality theories. 7. Integrating Multiple Perspectives: Combining insights from different theoretical approaches (e.g., trait, psychodynamic, humanistic). Using mixed methods to gain a more comprehensive understanding. 8. Addressing Biases: Social desirability bias: Tendency for participants to present themselves favorably. Researcher bias: Ensuring objectivity in study design and interpretation. Sampling bias: Ensuring representative samples in research. 9. Technological Advancements: Big data analysis: Using large datasets from social media or other digital sources. Experience sampling methods: Using smartphone apps for real-time personality assessment. Virtual reality: Creating controlled environments for personality research. 10. Replication and Open Science: Pre-registration: Documenting research plans before conducting studies. Data sharing: Making raw data available for other researchers to analyze. Collaborative research: Large-scale projects involving multiple labs. Week 2 - (5.) Review methods of personality assessment Personality assessment involves a variety of techniques to measure and evaluate individual differences in personality traits and characteristics. Let's explore these methods in more detail: 1. Case Studies: Involves an in-depth examination of a single individual Often used in clinical settings or for studying rare phenomena Provides rich, detailed information about a person's life history, behaviors, and experiences Examples: ○ Phineas Gage (1840s): Study of brain injury's impact on personality ○ H.M.: Case study on memory and brain function Pros: ○ Offers deep insights into complex psychological phenomena ○ Useful for generating hypotheses for further research Cons: ○ Limited generalizability ○ Potential for researcher bias in interpretation ○ Time-consuming and resource-intensive 2. Self-report Questionnaires: Individuals answer standardized questions about their own personality Types: ○ True/False formats (e.g., MMPI-2) ○ Likert scales (e.g., NEO Personality Inventory) ○ Forced-choice items Examples: ○ Big Five Inventory (BFI) ○ Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) ○ California Psychological Inventory (CPI) Pros: ○ Efficient for collecting large amounts of data ○ Can be easily quantified and analyzed statistically ○ Good for measuring conscious aspects of personality Cons: ○ Subject to social desirability bias ○ Requires self-awareness and honesty from respondents ○ May not capture unconscious aspects of personality Week 2 - (5.) Review methods of personality assessment 3. Projective Tests:  Use ambiguous stimuli to elicit responses that reveal unconscious aspects of personality Based on the idea that people project their unconscious thoughts and feelings onto ambiguous stimuli Examples: ○ Rorschach Inkblot Test: Interpret abstract inkblot images ○ Thematic Apperception Test (TAT): Create stories about ambiguous scenes ○ Sentence Completion Tests: Complete partial sentences Pros: ○ May reveal unconscious motivations and conflicts ○ Less susceptible to deliberate manipulation by the respondent Cons: ○ Subjective interpretation by the assessor ○ Questions about reliability and validity ○ Time-consuming to administer and interpret 4. Behavioral Assessments: Direct observation of behavior in natural or controlled settings Can include structured tasks or naturalistic observation Examples: ○ Behavioral coding systems ○ Situational judgment tests Pros: ○ Provides objective data on actual behavior ○ Less susceptible to self-report biases Cons: ○ Time-consuming and resource-intensive ○ May not capture internal thoughts and feelings Week 2 - (5.) Review methods of personality assessment 5. Digital Research & Big Data: Analyzing online behavior, social media activity, and digital footprints  Methods: ○ Text analysis of social media posts ○ Analysis of online purchasing behavior ○ Studying patterns of smartphone usage Examples: ○ Using machine learning to predict personality from Facebook likes ○ Analyzing linguistic patterns in tweets to assess personality traits Pros: ○ Access to large, naturalistic datasets ○ Can capture behavior over extended periods Cons: ○ Ethical concerns about privacy and consent ○ Potential sampling bias (not everyone uses social media) ○ Challenges in data interpretation and causal inference 6. Physiological and Neuroimaging Methods: Using biological markers to study personality Techniques: ○ fMRI (functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging) ○ EEG (Electroencephalography) ○ Genetic testing Pros: ○ Provides objective biological data ○ Can reveal unconscious processes Cons: ○ Expensive and requires specialized equipment ○ Challenges in interpreting complex biological data in terms of personality Each of these methods has its strengths and limitations, and researchers often use multiple methods to gain a comprehensive understanding of personality. The choice of method depends on the research question, resources available, and the specific aspects of personality being studied. Week 3 - 2234 1. Psychoanalysis today:  Focus on unconscious processes and defense mechanisms rather than Freudian concepts like id/ego/superego Unconscious mental processes: Mental processes were unaware of Defense mechanisms: Unconscious processes that protect us from negative emotions 2. Unconscious processes research: "New unconscious": Automatic, nonconscious, implicit processes Examples: Blindsight, subliminal perception, mere exposure effect Evidence that unconscious processes influence behavior and decision-making 3. Defense mechanisms research: Dynamic unconscious: Mental content actively prevented from becoming conscious Many types of defenses (e.g. repression, projection, etc.) Historically difficult to study empirically 4. Defensive personality styles: Repressive coping: Ignoring/diverting attention from threatening stimuli Repressors: Self-protective style, avoid anxiety-provoking info Monitors vs Blunters: Hyper-attentive to threats vs ignoring threats 5. Neuropsychoanalysis: Attempts to find neural evidence for psychoanalytic concepts Studies instinctual-emotional brain networks Modifying psychoanalytic theory based on neuroscience findings E.g. Conscious id hypothesis - consciousness generated in brainstem, not cortex 6. Criticisms of neuropsychoanalysis: Seen as reductionist by some psychoanalysts Debate over relevance of neuroscience to psychoanalytic theory and practice The key themes are the empirical study of unconscious processes, defense mechanisms, and attempts to integrate psychoanalytic concepts with neuroscience findings. There's a tension between traditional psychoanalytic approaches and more biologically-oriented neuropsychoanalysis. Week 4 1. Define personality traits and their relationship to physical health 2. Explain Type A personality and its connection to heart disease 3. Describe Type D personality and its link to cardiovascular disease 4. Discuss the concept of a cancer-prone personality 5. Explain repressive coping and its impact on physical health 6. Describe the relationship between personality and dementia 7. Discuss personality traits associated with longevity Week 4 - (1.) Define personality traits and their relationship to physical health Personality traits are stable, enduring patterns of thoughts, feelings, and behaviors that characterize individuals across various situations and over time. These traits are thought to have both genetic and environmental influences. The relationship between personality traits and physical health is complex and multifaceted: 1. Behavioral pathways: Personality traits can influence health-related behaviors. For example, high conscientiousness is associated with healthier lifestyle choices (e.g., regular exercise, balanced diet, avoiding risky behaviors). Conversely, high neuroticism might lead to unhealthy coping mechanisms like substance abuse. 2. Physiological mechanisms: Traits can affect how the body responds to stress. For instance, individuals high in neuroticism may have heightened stress responses, potentially leading to chronic inflammation and cardiovascular issues. 3. Treatment adherence: Certain traits may influence how well people follow medical advice. Conscientious individuals are more likely to adhere to prescribed treatments and attend regular check-ups. 4. Social factors: Personality can affect social relationships, which in turn impact health. Extraverted individuals might have larger social networks, providing more support during health crises. 5. Cognitive processes: Traits can influence how people perceive and interpret health information. Openness to experience might lead to greater health literacy and willingness to try new treatments. 6. Direct biological effects: Some researchers propose that personality traits might have direct effects on biological systems. For example, optimism has been associated with better immune function. Research in this field often uses prospective longitudinal studies to examine how personality traits measured at one point in time predict health outcomes years or decades later, controlling for other known risk factors. Week 4 - (2.) Explain Type A personality and its connection to heart disease Explain Type A personality and its connection to heart disease Type A personality is a psychological concept introduced in the 1950s by cardiologists Meyer Friedman and Ray Rosenman. It describes a set of personality traits and behaviors that were initially thought to be strongly associated with an increased risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). Key characteristics of Type A personality include: 1. Competitiveness: Constantly striving to achieve more in less time 2. Time urgency: Always feeling rushed and impatient 3. Hostility: Easily angered or irritated, especially by delays or perceived incompetence 4. Multitasking: Attempting to do multiple things simultaneously 5. Work-obsessed: Difficulty relaxing without guilt 6. Ambitious: Strong drive to succeed and outperform others The proposed mechanism linking Type A personality to CHD involved: Chronic stress leading to elevated blood pressure Increased levels of stress hormones (e.g., cortisol, adrenaline) These physiological changes potentially damaging the cardiovascular system over time Early research seemed to support this connection: The Western Collaborative Group Study (1960s-1970s) followed over 3,000 men for 8.5 years and found that Type A individuals were twice as likely to develop CHD Contrada's 1989 study showed Type A individuals had higher blood pressure reactivity during stressful tasks However, subsequent research has challenged the strength and consistency of this link: The Kuper et al. (2002) systematic review found inconsistent evidence for the Type A-CHD connection Multiple large-scale studies across different populations failed to replicate the original findings: Sykes et al. (2002) in the UK Nadi et al. (2008) in Iran Ikeda et al. (2008) in Japan Week 4 - (2.) Explain Type A personality and its connection to heart disease Modern perspectives on Type A personality and health: 1. Component analysis: Research now focuses on specific components of Type A behavior (e.g., hostility) rather than the overall pattern 2. Interaction with other factors: The impact of Type A traits may depend on other psychological or environmental factors 3. Cultural considerations: The expression and health impacts of Type A traits may vary across cultures 4. Gender differences: Some studies suggest the Type A-CHD link may be stronger in men than in women While the direct link between Type A personality and CHD is now questioned, the concept has contributed to our understanding of how psychological factors can influence physical health, paving the way for the field of behavioral medicine. Week 4 - (3.) Describe Type D personality and its link to cardiovascular disease Type D personality, also known as the "distressed personality", is characterized by two main traits: 1. Negative affectivity: A tendency to experience negative emotions 2. Social inhibition: A tendency to inhibit the expression of emotions/behaviors in social interactions Type D personality is estimated to occur in about 20% of the general population. Research on Type D personality and cardiovascular disease (CVD) has shown more consistent results compared to Type A: 1. Kupper & Denollet (2018) review: Type D personality was prospectively associated with worse clinical outcomes in cardiovascular patients This includes both objective measures (e.g., mortality) and patient-reported outcomes 2. Matsuishi et al. (2019) study: Found that Type D personality predicts longer acute brain dysfunction (delirium/coma) in cardiovascular patients 3. O'Dell et al. (2011) meta-analysis: Positive association between Type D and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) Negative association between Type D and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) Concluded that Type D acts as a vulnerability factor in the progression of cardiovascular disease Possible mechanisms linking Type D personality to CVD: 1. Psychophysiological: Chronic stress leading to physiological changes 2. Behavioral: Type D associated with unhealthy lifestyle choices (e.g., smoking, alcohol consumption, lack of exercise) 3. Psychological: Pessimism leading to poorer treatment adherence Week 4 - (4). Discuss the concept of a cancer-prone personality Cancer-prone personality is a controversial concept suggesting that certain personality traits might predispose individuals to develop cancer. This idea has been explored in various studies over the years, with mixed and often contradictory results. Early research: 1. Kissin & Eysenck (1962) study: Compared lung cancer patients with controls Found that cancer patients had lower Neuroticism (N) and higher Extraversion (E) compared to controls Suggested that anxiety and neuroticism might protect against cancer (via limbic/endocrine systems) Limitation: Non-prospective, correlational study Later, more rigorous studies: 1. Swedish prospective twin study (Hansen et al, 2005): Follow-up with 29,595 Swedish twins assessed in 1973 with EPQ and physical health Finding: No association between Neuroticism/Extraversion and cancer 2. Swedish/Finnish epidemiological study (Nakaya et al, 2010): 30-year follow-up with 59,548 Swedish/Finnish participants Assessed EPQ and cancer outcomes Results: Neuroticism/Extraversion unrelated to cancer risk or cancer survival Type C personality: Proposed by Temoshok (1987) as a cancer-prone personality type Characteristics: overly cooperative, unassertive, suppresses negative emotions (particularly anger), accepts/complies with external authorities, has attitude of helplessness or hopelessness Theory: Ongoing state of heightened arousal reduces immune system functioning However, subsequent research has not consistently supported the Type C concept: Price et al (2001): No evidence of association between Type C traits and cancer outcomes in a study of 2,224 older women Blatný & Adam (2008): Reported inconsistent findings Recent large-scale studies: Jokela et al. (2014) meta-analysis: 6 prospective studies, N = 42,843 cancer-free participants 5-year follow-up: 2156 incident cancer cases No evidence of association between Five Factor Model (OCEAN) personality traits and cancer risk or cancer mortality  Week 4 (5.) - Explain repressive coping and its impact on physical health Repressive coping is a psychological defense mechanism characterized by: 1. Low self-reported anxiety: Individuals claim to experience little distress 2. High defensiveness: Strong tendency to avoid negative emotions 3. Physiological-subjective discrepancy: Low reported anxiety but high physiological arousal Key research and findings: 1. Identification: Weinberger et al. (1979): Developed method to identify repressors using anxiety and defensiveness scales Typically, repressors score low on anxiety measures but high on social desirability (defensiveness) scales 2. Prevalence: Denollet et al. (2008): Found over 20% of coronary heart disease patients classified as repressors 3. Cancer and repressive coping: McKenna et al. (1999) meta-analysis: ○ Reviewed 46 studies on psychosocial factors and breast cancer ○ Found strong support for denial/repression coping in breast cancer patients ○ Limitation: Couldn't determine if coping style was cause or effect of cancer 4. Coronary Heart Disease (CHD) and repressive coping: Denollet et al. (2008) longitudinal study: ○ 731 CHD patients followed for 5 & 10 years ○ Repressors had two-fold increased risk of death, myocardial infarction, and other cardiac events ○ Risk persisted after controlling for demographic and clinical variables 5. Heart attack outcomes: Frasure-Smith et al. (2002) Montreal Heart Attack Readjustment trial: ○ 1,376 patients followed for 5 years ○ Repressors showed poorer survival outcomes compared to other coping styles ○ Hypothesis: Information overload and over-arousal in medical settings may be detrimental for repressors Week 4 (5.) Explain repressive coping and its impact on physical health 6. General health outcomes:  Mund & Mitte (2012) meta-analysis: ○ 22 studies, 6,775 participants ○ Significant associations between repressive coping and cardiovascular diseases, especially hypertension ○ For cancer, repressive coping appeared to be a consequence rather than a cause Potential mechanisms linking repressive coping to poor health outcomes: 1. Underestimation of stress: Repressors may not recognize or report the full impact of stress on their bodies 2. Non-compliance: May lead to poor adherence to medical advice or treatment plans 3. Physiological stress: Discrepancy between reported and actual stress levels may cause chronic physiological arousal 4. Delayed help-seeking: May ignore or downplay early symptoms of illness 5. Impaired emotional processing: Chronic suppression of negative emotions may have negative health consequences Implications for healthcare: 1. Screening: Identifying repressors in healthcare settings may be important for tailored interventions 2. Patient education: Helping repressors recognize the potential health impacts of their coping style 3. Stress management: Developing interventions that address both psychological and physiological aspects of stress for repressors Week 4 (5.) Explain repressive coping and its impact on physical health Repressive coping is a complex psychological defense mechanism that involves: 1. Cognitive avoidance: Actively avoiding thoughts about threatening or negative information 2. Emotional suppression: Inhibiting the expression of negative emotions 3. Self-deception: Genuinely believing one is not anxious or distressed 4. Autonomic-behavioral dissociation: A disconnect between physiological arousal and self-reported emotional state Key characteristics and identification: Low self-reported anxiety + High defensiveness (measured by social desirability scales) High physiological arousal (e.g., increased heart rate, skin conductance) during stressful tasks Attention bias away from threatening stimuli in experimental settings Impact on physical health across various domains: 1. Cardiovascular health: Increased risk of hypertension and coronary heart disease Poorer outcomes after cardiac events (e.g., myocardial infarction) Possible mechanisms: chronic physiological arousal, delayed help-seeking, poor adherence to treatment 2. Cancer: Mixed findings, but some evidence of poorer outcomes in cancer patients who are repressors May influence delayed diagnosis due to symptom minimisation 3. Immune function: Some studies suggest repressors have altered immune responses Potential for increased susceptibility to infectious diseases Week 4 (5.) Explain repressive coping and its impact on physical health  4. Pain perception and management: Repressors often report less pain but show higher physiological arousal during painful stimuli May lead to undertreatment of pain conditions 5. Stress-related disorders: Increased risk of developing stress-related physical symptoms (e.g., gastrointestinal issues, headaches) Neurobiological aspects: Neuroimaging studies suggest repressors have increased activation in prefrontal cortex areas associated with emotional regulation Altered hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis functioning, potentially leading to dysregulated cortisol responses Long-term health implications: Chronic physiological arousal may lead to wear and tear on bodily systems (allostatic load) Delayed help-seeking behavior can result in more advanced disease states at diagnosis Difficulty in emotional processing may impair social support networks, indirectly affecting health Interventions and clinical considerations: Mindfulness-based therapies to increase emotional awareness Biofeedback training to help repressors recognize physiological arousal Tailored health education approaches that account for repressive coping style Regular health screenings to counteract potential delayed help-seeking Week 4 (6.) Describe the relationship between personality and dementia Dementia is a syndrome characterized by progressive cognitive decline that interferes with daily functioning. It encompasses various neurodegenerative disorders, including Alzheimer's disease, vascular dementia, and Lewy body dementia. The relationship between personality and dementia is complex and multifaceted, involving both personality changes as a result of dementia and personality traits as potential risk factors for developing dementia. 1. Personality changes in dementia: Often one of the earliest signs of dementia, sometimes preceding cognitive symptoms Balsis et al. (2005) longitudinal study findings: 47% of individuals who developed dementia showed personality changes before diagnosis Common changes: increased rigidity, egocentricity, impaired emotional control These changes were observed in only 23% of non-demented subjects Other common personality changes in dementia: Apathy: reduced initiative and interest in activities Disinhibition: socially inappropriate behaviour Agitation: restlessness and anxiety Mood changes: depression or euphoria 2. Personality traits as risk factors for dementia: Neuroticism: Consistently associated with increased dementia risk Cipriani et al. (2015) review: substantial impact on increasing dementia risk Aschwanden et al. (2020): higher neuroticism associated with increased dementia risk in two large longitudinal studies Conscientiousness: Generally considered protective against dementia Cipriani et al. (2015): higher conscientiousness protective against dementia Aschwanden et al. (2020): lower conscientiousness showed non-significant trend towards increased dementia risk Openness: Some evidence suggests it may be protective Possibly due to its association with cognitive engagement and lifelong learning Extraversion and Agreeableness: Less consistent findings, but may play a role through social engagement and stress reduction Week 4 (6.) Describe the relationship between personality and dementia 3. Mechanisms linking personality to dementia risk: Health behaviors: Higher neuroticism and lower conscientiousness associated with less physical activity, poor diet, and substance use These behaviors increase risk for cardiovascular disease and metabolic disorders, which are risk factors for dementia Cognitive reserve: Conscientiousness and openness associated with higher educational attainment and cognitive engagement May contribute to building cognitive reserve, potentially delaying onset of dementia symptoms Stress and inflammation: Neuroticism associated with chronic stress and inflammation Chronic inflammation is a risk factor for neurodegenerative diseases Depression: Higher neuroticism increases risk for depression Depression is both a risk factor for and potential early sign of dementia 4. Implications for prevention and intervention: Early detection: Personality changes may serve as early markers for dementia Targeted interventions: Personality assessments could help identify individuals at higher risk for dementia Lifestyle modifications: Encouraging conscientiousness-related behaviors (e.g., regular exercise, healthy diet) may help reduce dementia risk Stress management: Interventions targeting stress reduction in high-neuroticism individuals might be beneficial 5. Challenges and future directions: Disentangling cause and effect: Determining whether personality changes are risk factors or early symptoms of dementia Cultural considerations: Most research has been conducted in Western populations; need for more diverse studies Longitudinal research: Continued long-term studies to better understand the trajectory of personality changes in relation to dementia onset Neurobiological mechanisms: Further research needed to understand how personality traits influence brain health and cognitive decline Week 4 (7.) - Discuss personality traits associated with longevity Longevity, or the tendency to live a long life, has been linked to various personality traits in psychological research. The most robust and consistent finding in this area is the association between conscientiousness and increased lifespan. 1. Conscientiousness and longevity: Definition: Conscientiousness is characterised by organisation, responsibility, self-control, and achievement-striving. Key findings: ○ Murray & Booth (2015) review: Confirmed conscientiousness as a consistent predictor of longevity across diverse populations and study designs. ○ Bogg & Roberts (2004) meta-analysis of 194 studies: ○ Conscientiousness negatively related to all risky health behaviors (e.g., excessive drinking, drug use, risky sexual behavior, violence, risky driving, suicide) ○ Positively related to all beneficial health behaviors (e.g., exercise, healthy diet, medication adherence) ○ Friedman et al. (1993) landmark study: Found conscientiousness in childhood predicted longevity decades later 2. Mechanisms linking conscientiousness to longevity: Health behaviors: More likely to engage in preventive health care, exercise, maintain healthy diet Risk avoidance: Less likely to smoke, abuse substances, or engage in risky sexual behavior Stress management: Better at planning and problem-solving, reducing chronic stress Social relationships: More likely to maintain stable, supportive relationships Occupational success: Often leads to better socioeconomic status, access to healthcare Physiological pathways: Some evidence of lower inflammation levels in conscientious individuals Week 4 (7.) - Discuss personality traits associated with longevity 3. Other personality traits and longevity: Neuroticism: Generally associated with shorter lifespan, but some studies suggest a protective effect of some aspects of neuroticism (e.g., worry leading to health-vigilance) Extraversion: Mixed findings, but generally positive association with longevity, possibly through increased social support and positive emotions Openness to Experience: Some evidence of positive association with longevity, potentially through cognitive engagement and adaptability Agreeableness: Less consistent findings, but may contribute to longevity through better social relationships and lower stress 4. Stability and change in personality traits: While personality traits are relatively stable, they can change over the lifespan Interventions aimed at increasing conscientiousness or reducing neuroticism might have implications for longevity 5. Cultural and contextual factors: The relationship between personality and longevity may vary across cultures and contexts Importance of considering socioeconomic factors, healthcare access, and cultural norms 6. Implications for public health and clinical practice: Personality assessment could be used to identify individuals at higher risk for shorter lifespan Tailored interventions based on personality profiles to promote healthy behaviors Potential for personality-informed public health campaigns 7. Challenges and future directions: Need for more diverse, global studies on personality and longevity Exploration of potential interventions to modify personality traits associated with longevity Investigation of gene-environment interactions in the personality-longevity relationship Week 5 1. Types of addiction 2. The concept of "addictive personality"  3. Personality traits associated with substance use 4. Personality traits associated with addiction 5. Whether personality predicts addiction 6. Whether addiction can change personality 1. Types of Addiction Addiction is a complex disorder characterized by compulsive engagement in rewarding stimuli despite adverse consequences. It's considered a disorder of the brain reward system, as defined in the DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition). There are two main categories of addiction: 1. Substance addictions: These involve the continued use of a psychoactive substance despite significant substance-related problems. Examples include: ○ Alcohol use disorder ○ Tobacco use disorder ○ Opioid use disorder (e.g., heroin, prescription painkillers) ○ Stimulant use disorder (e.g., cocaine, methamphetamine) ○ Cannabis use disorder Substance addictions are characterized by: ○ Tolerance (needing more of the substance to achieve the same effect) ○ Withdrawal symptoms when not using ○ Using larger amounts or for longer periods than intended ○ Persistent desire or unsuccessful efforts to cut down or control use ○ Spending a lot of time obtaining, using, or recovering from the substance ○ Giving up important activities because of substance use ○ Continued use despite physical or psychological problems caused by the substance 2. Behavioral addictions: These involve the compulsion to continually engage in an activity or behavior despite negative impacts on mental and/or physical health and social functioning. Currently, only gambling disorder is officially recognized in the DSM-5 as a behavioral addiction. Other potential behavioral addictions being researched include: ○ Exercise addiction ○ Shopping addiction ○ Internet addiction ○ Sex addiction Characteristics of behavioral addictions are similar to substance addictions, including:  ○ Preoccupation with the behavior ○ Loss of control ○ Tolerance (needing to engage in the behavior more to achieve the same effect) ○ Withdrawal symptoms when not engaging in the behavior ○ Negative consequences in various life domains In Australia, addiction is a significant public health concern. Approximately 1 in 20 Australians has an addiction or substance abuse problem. Tobacco and alcohol are the most commonly abused substances, likely due to their legal status and widespread availability. 2. The Concept of “addictive personality” The idea of an "addictive personality" has been a topic of debate in psychology and addiction studies for decades. This concept suggests that certain individuals possess a specific set of personality traits that make them more susceptible to developing addictions. However, modern research has largely moved away from this notion. Let's delve deeper into the history and current understanding of this concept: 1. Historical context: 1950s-1960s: Researchers focused on identifying an 'addiction-prone' personality. They believed that psychological weaknesses or specific personality configurations predisposed individuals to addiction. Studies during this period often compared addicts to non-addicts, trying to isolate personality differences. Zimmering (1952) was one of the early proponents of the addiction-prone personality concept. 2. Methodological issues with early research: Sample bias: Many studies used individuals already in treatment, potentially skewing results. Causality problems: It was unclear if observed personality traits preceded addiction or resulted from it. Lack of consideration for environmental and social factors. 3. Pivotal study: Gendreau & Gendreau (1970) conducted a more rigorous investigation into the 'addiction-prone' personality and narcotics use. They found no significant differences between addicts and non-addicts in terms of personality, socioeconomic status, or life history. This study was instrumental in challenging the prevailing notion of an addictive personality. Week 5 - 2. The Concept of “addictive personality” 4. Modern understanding:  There is no single set of personality characteristics that account for all addictions (Amodeo, 2015; Littlefield & Sher, 2016). Instead, research now focuses on how various personality traits might increase risk for specific types of addictive behaviors. The concept of an "addictive personality" is seen as overly simplistic and potentially harmful. 5. Problems with the concept (Amodeo, 2015): Homogenizing: It suggests a one-size-fits-all approach to addiction, which doesn't account for individual differences. False categorizing: It may lead to labeling individuals as "addicts" based on personality traits alone. Hopelessness: It might create a sense of inevitability for those who identify with the "addictive personality" traits. False assurance: Those who don't fit the profile might wrongly assume they're not at risk for addiction. 6. Current research directions: Focus on specific personality traits (e.g., impulsivity, neuroticism) and their relationship to different types of addictions. Exploration of how personality interacts with environmental, genetic, and neurobiological factors in addiction development. Investigation of personality differences between substance and behavioral addictions. 7. Implications for treatment: Moving away from the "addictive personality" concept allows for more personalized treatment approaches. Recognition that addiction is a complex interplay of genetic, environmental, and personal factors. Week 5 - 3. Personality traits associated with substance use Personality traits associated with substance use Let's delve deeper into the relationship between personality traits and substance use, focusing on tobacco and alcohol: 1. Tobacco use and personality: Terracciano & Costa (2004) study: Sample: 1,638 US participants (mean age 60 years) Method: Cross-sectional study using self-report measures Compared: Never smokers, former smokers, and current smokers Used: Five-Factor Model of personality (Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness) Malouff et al. (2006) meta-analysis: Sample: 4,730 participants across multiple studies Examined: Personality traits associated with smoking behaviors (ever used, frequency, quantity, abuse) Findings: ↑ Neuroticism: Tendency towards anxiety, moodiness, and emotional instability ↓ Agreeableness: Less cooperative, more competitive and sometimes antagonistic ↓ Conscientiousness: Less organized, less dependable, more impulsive 2. Alcohol use and personality: Malouff et al. (2007) meta-analysis: Sample: 7,886 participants across multiple studies Examined: Personality traits associated with alcohol involvement (ever used, frequency, quantity, abuse) Findings: Similar to tobacco use ↑ Neuroticism ↓ Agreeableness ↓ Conscientiousness  Week 5 - 3. Personality traits associated with substance use 3. Interpretation of findings: Consistency: The similar pattern across tobacco and alcohol suggests common personality-related risk factors for substance use. Neuroticism: Higher levels may lead to substance use as a form of self-medication for negative emotions. Agreeableness: Lower levels might relate to less concern about social norms against substance use. Conscientiousness: Lower levels could lead to less self-control and more impulsive substance use. 4. Strengths and limitations: Strengths: Large sample sizes, meta-analytic approach combines multiple studies Limitations: Most studies are correlational, so causation can't be inferred. Personality could influence substance use, or substance use could affect personality, or both could be influenced by other factors. 5. Implications for prevention and treatment: Screening: Personality assessments could help identify individuals at higher risk for substance use. Tailored interventions: Treatment approaches could be customized based on personality profiles. Early intervention: Targeting high-risk personality traits in youth could potentially prevent later substance use issues. 6. Future research directions: Longitudinal studies to better understand the causal relationship between personality and substance use Investigation of how personality interacts with environmental and genetic factors in substance use Exploration of how these findings apply to other substances beyond tobacco and alcohol Week 5 - 4. Personality traits associated with addiction Let's delve deeper into the relationship between personality traits and addiction, focusing on the comprehensive study by Zilberman et al. (2018): 1. Study details: Participants: Total N = 299 ○ Drug addiction (n = 58) ○ Alcohol addiction (n = 50) ○ Gambling addiction (n = 48) ○ Sex addiction (n = 65) ○ Control group (n = 78) Measures: ○ Impulsiveness: Likely measured using a standardized scale like the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS-11) ○ Big Five personality traits: Probably assessed using a measure like the NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) 2. Detailed findings: Alcohol addiction: ○ ↑ Neuroticism: Tendency towards anxiety, mood swings, and emotional instability ○ ↑ Impulsivity: Difficulty controlling impulses and delaying gratification ○ ↓ Extraversion: Less outgoing and sociable ○ ↓ Agreeableness: Less cooperative and more antagonistic ○ ↓ Openness: Less open to new experiences and ideas Drug addiction and compulsive sexual behavior: ○ ↑ Neuroticism: Similar to alcohol addiction ○ ↑ Impulsivity: Possibly even higher than in alcohol addiction ○ Lowest on agreeableness: Most antagonistic and least cooperative group ○ Lowest on conscientiousness: Least organized and dependable group Gambling addiction: ○ ↑ Neuroticism: Similar to other addictions ○ ↑ Impulsivity: Particularly relevant for the quick decision-making in gambling ○ Socioeconomic factors: Higher income was relevant, possibly due to increased access to gambling opportunities Week 5 - 4. Personality traits associated with addiction 3. Common factors across addictions: High Neuroticism: Suggests emotional instability as a general risk factor for addiction High Impulsivity: Indicates difficulty in controlling urges as a key factor in addictive behaviors 4. Implications: Distinct profiles: Different addictions show unique combinations of personality traits, suggesting tailored approaches may be necessary for treatment Common risk factors: The consistency of high neuroticism and impulsivity across addictions suggests these could be key targets for prevention and intervention Socioeconomic considerations: The relevance of income for gambling addiction highlights the importance of considering environmental factors alongside personality 5. Limitations and future directions: Cross-sectional design: Cannot determine if personality traits cause addiction or vice versa Sample size: Relatively small groups for each addiction type Future research could explore: ○ Longitudinal studies to examine how personality traits change with addiction progression and recovery ○ Larger, more diverse samples to increase generalizability ○ Interaction between personality traits and environmental factors in addiction development Week 5 - 5. Whether personality predicts addiction Let's dive deeper into these prospective studies that examine whether personality traits can predict future addiction: 1. Elkins et al. (2006) study: Sample: Minnesota Twin Family Study (n=1001; 569 females, 432 males) Design: Longitudinal study Method: ○ Assessed personality at age 17 ○ Followed up 3 years later (around age 20) Measures: ○ Personality: Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ) ○ Focuses on three higher-order traits: Positive Emotionality (PE), Negative Emotionality (NE), and Constraint (CN) ○ Addiction: Diagnosed nicotine, alcohol, and illicit drug disorders Detailed Findings: Nicotine dependence: ○ ↑ Negative Emotionality (NE): More prone to stress, alienation, aggression ○ ↓ Constraint (CN): Higher impulsivity, risk-taking, lower self-control Alcohol dependence: ○ ↑ NE & ↓ CN ○ Being male was an additional risk factor Illicit drug dependence: ○ ↑ NE & ↓ CN ○ Being male was an additional risk factor 2. Slutske et al. (2005) study: Sample: Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health & Development Study (N=939; 475 males, 464 females) Design: Longitudinal, population-based study Method: ○ Assessed personality at age 18 ○ Followed up 3 years later (age 21) Measures: ○ Personality: Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (same as Elkins et al.) ○ Addiction: Onset of gambling, nicotine, alcohol, and cannabis addictions Week 5 - 5. Whether personality predicts addiction Detailed Findings (compared to controls): Gambling: ○ ↑ Negative Emotionality (NE) ○ ↓ Constraint (CN) Alcohol, Nicotine, Cannabis dependence: ○ ↑ NE ○ ↓ CN Key Implications: 1. Consistency across addictions: Both substance and behavioral (gambling) addictions show similar personality predictors. 2. Negative Emotionality: High NE might lead to using substances or engaging in addictive behaviors as a coping mechanism for negative emotions. 3. Low Constraint: This suggests that poor impulse control and high risk-taking tendencies increase vulnerability to addiction. 4. Gender differences: The Elkins study found being male was an additional risk factor for alcohol and illicit drug dependence, suggesting possible interactions between personality and gender. 5. Age of assessment: Both studies assessed personality in late adolescence (17-18), suggesting this might be a critical period for identifying at-risk individuals. 6. Predictive power: These studies demonstrate that personality traits can predict future addiction risk, potentially allowing for early intervention. Limitations: While these studies show prediction, they don't prove causation. Other factors could influence both personality and addiction risk. The follow-up period was relatively short (3 years). Longer-term studies might reveal different patterns. Cultural factors weren't extensively explored, limiting generalizability to other populations. Week 5 - 6. Whether addiction can change personality Let's delve deeper into the research examining how addiction might alter personality traits over time: 1. Brain changes and addiction (Goldstein & Volkow, 2011): Chronic substance abuse is associated with significant changes in brain structure and function, particularly in the prefrontal cortex (PFC). The PFC is crucial for: ○ Executive functions (planning, decision-making) ○ Attention regulation ○ Emotional control ○ Impulse inhibition Addiction-related changes in the PFC may lead to: ○ ↑ impulsivity: difficulty resisting urges ○ ↑ stress reactivity: heightened response to stressors ○ ↓ self-monitoring: reduced ability to assess one's own behavior ○ ↓ emotional regulation: trouble managing emotions These changes can manifest as personality shifts, particularly in traits related to conscientiousness and neuroticism. 2. Östland et al. (2007) study: Design: Prospective longitudinal study of women and alcohol in Göteborg, Sweden Sample: n = 539 women Follow-up period: 5 years Methodology: Assessed personality traits and alcohol use at baseline and follow-up Findings for women who developed alcohol dependence/abuse: ○ ↑ impulsiveness: more prone to act without thinking ○ ↑ verbal aggression: increased tendency to get into arguments Recovery-related changes: ○ ↓ irritability: less prone to anger and frustration ○ ↓ monotony avoidance (novelty seeking): less need for new and exciting experiences This suggests that both the development of addiction and the recovery process can influence personality traits. Week 5 - 6. Whether addiction can change personality 3. Quinn et al. (2011) study: Design: Prospective study of high school/university students Sample: N = 6,391 Timeline: Initial assessment at age 18, follow-ups at 3 and 4 years Measures: Assessed personality traits (focusing on sensation seeking and impulsivity) and alcohol usage Findings: ○ At Time 1: Higher levels of sensation seeking and impulsivity predicted increased alcohol consumption ○ At Follow-up: Heavier drinking during university years predicted subsequent increases in both sensation seeking and impulsivity traits This study demonstrates a bidirectional relationship between personality and alcohol use: ○ Personality traits can predict future alcohol use ○ Alcohol use can lead to changes in personality traits over time 4. Implications and Interpretations: Neuroplasticity: These findings highlight the brain's ability to change in response to repeated behaviors and substances. Reinforcement cycles: Addiction may create a feedback loop where substance use alters personality, which in turn may increase vulnerability to further substance use. Treatment considerations: Understanding these personality changes could inform more effective interventions, potentially targeting both substance use and associated personality shifts. Individual differences: Not all individuals with addictions will show the same personality changes, emphasizing the need for personalized approaches to treatment. 5. Limitations and Future Directions: Most studies focus on alcohol; more research is needed on other substances and behavioral addictions. Long-term studies (beyond 5 years) could provide insight into the permanence of these personality changes. Research on how different treatment approaches might influence personality recovery could be valuable. Week 6 Here's a summary of the key concepts from the lecture notes on psychopathy and the Dark Triad/Tetrad: 1. Psychopathy: Personality pathology involving predatory behavior, emotional detachment, callousness, impulsivity, and antisocial behavior Prevalence: 1.2-4.5% in general population, 20-40% in prison population Primary psychopathy: Low anxiety, narcissism, possibly genetic Secondary psychopathy: High anxiety, possibly acquired 2. Assessment: Gold standard: Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R) Assesses interpersonal, affective, lifestyle, and antisocial dimensions 3. Causes: Secondary psychopathy linked to adverse childhood experiences Primary psychopathy may have neurobiological basis (e.g. amygdala dysfunction) Associated with diminished emotional responsiveness and fearless dominance 4. Treatment: Limited evidence for effective treatment Some studies show treatment may increase aggression in some psychopaths 5. Dark Triad: Constellation of Psychopathy, Narcissism, and Machiavellianism Traits are intercorrelated but not equivalent Associated with unethical behavior, selfishness, and antisocial tendencies 6. Dark Tetrad: Adds Everyday Sadism as a fourth trait Sadism linked to enjoying cruelty and inflicting suffering 7. Light Triad: Proposed as opposite of Dark Triad Consists of Kantianism, Humanism, and Faith in Humanity Associated with more positive traits and outcomes The notes highlight the complex nature of psychopathy and related "dark" personality traits, as well as emerging research on contrasting "light" traits. Key themes include the assessment, causes, and societal impacts of these personality constructs. Week 7 - 2234 To summarize the key concepts from the lecture notes on Personality & Wellbeing and Personality Assessment & Theory, I'll break it down into the following steps: 1. Overview of Humanistic and Positive Psychology 2. Self-Determination Theory and Basic Psychological Needs 3. Personality Variables and Subjective Well Being 4. McAdams's Personality Triad 5. Personality Assessment Methods 6. Future Directions in Personality Assessment Week 7 - 1. Overview of Humanistic and Positive Psychology Humanistic Psychology emerged in the mid-20th century as a reaction to the dominant schools of psychoanalysis and behaviorism. Key features include: Focus on human potential, growth, and self-actualization Emphasis on free will, personal responsibility, and subjective experience Key figures: Carl Rogers (client-centered therapy, fully-functioning person) and Abraham Maslow (hierarchy of needs, self-actualization) Criticized for poor scientific methodology and potentially encouraging self-centeredness Positive Psychology, developed later, shares some similarities but with a more empirical approach: Founded by Martin Seligman and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi in the late 1990s Aims to study positive human functioning and flourishing Focuses on strengths, virtues, and factors that allow individuals and communities to thrive Emphasizes scientific rigor in studying wellbeing and happiness Wellbeing Approaches: 1. Hedonic Well Being: Focuses on happiness and the presence of positive affect Emphasizes pleasure attainment and pain avoidance Often measured through subjective well being (SWB): life satisfaction and positive/negative affect 2. Eudaimonic Well Being: Focuses on meaning, purpose, and self-realization Emphasizes personal growth, autonomy, and reaching one's full potential Often measured through psychological well being scales that assess factors like personal growth, purpose in life, and positive relationships Research has shown that both approaches contribute to overall wellbeing, with meaning in life being a particularly strong predictor of subjective well being across cultures and age groups. Week 7 - 2. Self-Determination Theory and Basic Psychological Needs Self-Determination Theory (SDT), developed by Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan, is a comprehensive framework for understanding human motivation, personality development, and well-being. It's based on the premise that people are inherently proactive with their potential and have innate psychological needs. Key components of SDT: 1. Intrinsic vs. Extrinsic Motivation: Intrinsic motivation: Engaging in activities for inherent satisfaction or enjoyment. For example, reading a book because you find it interesting. Extrinsic motivation: Performing activities for external rewards or to avoid punishments. For example, studying to get good grades or avoid parental disapproval. SDT proposes that intrinsic motivation is more beneficial for well-being and performance quality. 2. Basic Psychological Needs: SDT identifies three universal, innate psychological needs: Autonomy: The need to feel that one's actions are self-determined rather than controlled by others. Competence: The need to feel effective and capable in one's actions and interactions with the environment. Relatedness: The need to feel connected to others, to care for and be cared for by others. These needs are considered essential for psychological growth, integrity, and well-being. 3. Organismic Integration Theory (OIT): A sub-theory within SDT that details different forms of extrinsic motivation and the contextual factors that either promote or hinder internalization and integration of the regulation for these behaviors. 4. Cognitive Evaluation Theory (CET): Addresses the effects of external consequences on internal motivation. 5. Causality Orientations Theory (COT): Describes individual differences in people's tendencies to orient toward environments and regulate behavior in various ways. Research applications: Education: SDT principles have been applied to enhance student engagement and learning outcomes. Work: Used to improve employee motivation and job satisfaction. Healthcare: Applied to increase patient adherence to treatment plans. Sports and exercise: Used to enhance athletic performance and exercise adherence. Meta-analyses have consistently shown that satisfaction of the basic psychological needs is associated with higher well-being across cultures, and that intrinsic motivation is a stronger predictor of performance quality than extrinsic motivation. Week 7 - 3. Personality Variables and Subjective Well Being Subjective Well Being (SWB) is a multifaceted concept that encompasses how people evaluate their lives cognitively (life satisfaction) and affectively (positive and negative emotions). Research in personality psychology has extensively explored the relationship between various personality traits and SWB. Here's a more detailed breakdown: 1. Five-Factor Model (FFM) traits and SWB: Neuroticism: The strongest negative predictor (r = -.27). People high in neuroticism tend to experience more negative emotions and lower life satisfaction. Extraversion: Positive predictor (r =.17). Extraverts tend to experience more positive emotions and higher life satisfaction. Agreeableness: Positive predictor (r =.17). Agreeable individuals often have better social relationships, contributing to higher SWB. Conscientiousness: Also associated with SWB, likely due to goal achievement and better life management. Openness: Has shown mixed results in relation to SWB. 2. Other important predictors: Lack of Control (r = -.34): Feeling a lack of control over one's life is strongly associated with lower SWB. Trust (r =.37): Higher levels of interpersonal trust are associated with higher SWB. Emotional stability (r =.36): Similar to low neuroticism, emotional stability is linked to higher SWB. Repressive defensiveness (r = -.40): This coping style involves avoiding negative thoughts and emotions, and is paradoxically associated with lower SWB. Week 7 - 3. Personality Variables and Subjective Well Being  3. Repressive defensiveness and SWB: Mixed findings: Some studies show repressors report higher life satisfaction (e.g., Furnham et al., 2002). Short-term vs. long-term effects: Repressive coping may be temporarily advantageous but could have negative long-term effects on physical and mental health (Shadlow et al., 2018). Denial of negative emotions: Repressors tend to deny or minimize negative emotions, which might affect the accuracy of their self-reported SWB. 4. Mechanisms linking personality to SWB: Instrumental pathways: Certain traits (e.g., extraversion) may lead to behaviors or life circumstances that promote wellbeing. Temperamental pathways: Some traits may directly influence emotional experiences. Cognitive pathways: Personality traits can affect how individuals interpret and remember life events. 5. Cultural considerations: The relationship between personality traits and SWB may vary across cultures. For example, the link between extraversion and SWB might be stronger in individualistic cultures compared to collectivistic ones. 6. Stability and change: Both personality traits and SWB show some stability over time, but can also change. Life events and intentional interventions may influence both personality and SWB. This research underscores the complex interplay between personality traits and subjective well being, highlighting the importance of considering multiple factors when studying or trying to enhance wellbeing. Week 7 4. McAdams's Personality Triad Dan P. McAdams proposed this comprehensive framework for understanding personality, arguing that a full description of an individual's personality requires examining three distinct levels: 1. Dispositional Traits: These are broad, decontextualized, and relatively stable dimensions of personality. Often assessed using the Five-Factor Model (OCEAN): ○ Openness to Experience: curiosity, creativity, and preference for novelty ○ Conscientiousness: organisation, dependability, and self-discipline ○ Extraversion: sociability, assertiveness, and energy ○ Agreeableness: compassion, cooperativeness, and trust ○ Neuroticism: emotional instability, anxiety, and vulnerability Traits provide a "psychology of the stranger" - general information about a person that might be apparent even in brief encounters. While useful for comparing individuals, traits alone don't capture the full complexity of personality. 2. Characteristic Adaptations: These are more context-specific aspects of personality that reflect how individuals adapt to their environment and life circumstances. Include: ○ Personal goals and strivings ○ Values and beliefs ○ Coping strategies ○ Defense mechanisms ○ Skills and talents Characteristic adaptations are more flexible and can change over time or in response to life events. They provide insight into how an individual navigates their specific life context. 3. Narrative Identity: This is the internalized, evolving story of the self that people construct to make sense of their lives. It integrates the reconstructed past, perceived present, and anticipated future into a coherent life story. Key components include: ○ Life chapters ○ Key scenes (high points, low points, turning points) ○ Future script ○ Thematic lines ○ Ideological setting Narrative identity provides unity, purpose, and meaning to an individual's life. It's heavily influenced by culture and personal experiences. McAdams argues that these three levels are distinct but interrelated. For example, traits might influence the kinds of goals a person sets (characteristic adaptations), which in turn shapes their life story (narrative identity). Conversely, how people narrate their lives can reinforce certain traits and adaptations. This framework combines the nomothetic approach of trait psychology (studying general patterns across individuals) with the idiographic approach of studying individual life stories. It suggests that to fully understand a person's personality, we need to consider all three levels, moving from general traits to specific adaptations and finally to the unique life narrative that gives a person's life its particular meaning and purpose. Week 7 5. Personality Assessment Methods Personality assessment is a crucial aspect of psychological research and practice, involving various techniques to measure and evaluate an individual's personality traits, characteristics, and patterns of behavior. Let's delve deeper into the main methods: 1. Self-report inventories: These are standardized questionnaires where individuals rate themselves on various traits or behaviors. Types: Likert scales (e.g., "Strongly Disagree" to "Strongly Agree") True/False questions Forced-choice formats Examples: Big Five Inventory (BFI) Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI) Advantages: Easy to administer and score Good for large-scale comparisons Can cover a wide range of traits quickly Limitations: Subject to biases like social desirability and self-deception Requires self-awareness and honesty from respondents May not capture unconscious aspects of personality 2. Performance-based assessments: These are indirect measures of personality through tasks or ambiguous stimuli. Types: Projective tests Situational judgement tests Examples: Rorschach Inkblot Test  Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) Sentence Completion Tests Advantages: Less susceptible to conscious manipulation May reveal unconscious processes or hidden aspects of personality Can be engaging for participants Limitations: Scoring can be subjective and time-consuming Questions about reliability and validity Requires skilled administrators and interpreters 3. Interviews: These involve conversations to gather personality information. Types: Structured: Fixed questions in a set order Semi-structured: Predetermined topics with flexibility in questioning Unstructured: Open-ended, conversational approach Example: McAdams's Life Story Interview Advantages: Rich, detailed information Flexibility to explore unique aspects of personality Can build rapport and gather observational data Limitations: Time-consuming to conduct and analyze Potential for interviewer bias Difficult to standardize for comparisons across individuals 4. Behavioural Observations: Systematic observation of an individual's behaviour in natural or controlled settings. Can be used to complement other assessment methods. Advantages: Provides real-world data; less susceptible to self-report biases. Limitations: Time-consuming; may not capture internal states or motivations. 5. Informant Reports: Ratings or descriptions of an individual's personality by others who know them well. Can provide different perspectives and potentially more objective data. Limitations: May be influenced by the nature of the relationship and personal biases. Each method has its strengths and weaknesses, and often a combination of methods is used for a comprehensive assessment of personality. The choice of method depends on the specific research question, practical constraints, and the population being studied. Week 7 - 6. Future Directions in Personality Assessment The field of personality assessment is evolving rapidly, with new approaches and technologies emerging to address limitations of traditional methods and provide more comprehensive, dynamic, and culturally sensitive assessments. Let's explore these future directions in more detail: 1. Personality X Situation Assessment: This approach recognizes that personality traits may manifest differently across various situations. Experience Sampling Methods (ESM) are increasingly used, where individuals report on their thoughts, feelings, and behaviours multiple times a day in their natural environments. Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) uses mobile devices to capture real-time data, providing a more accurate picture of personality in context. This approach helps to understand both the stability of traits and the variability in their expression across different contexts. 2. Mixed-Methods Assessment: Combines quantitative measures (e.g., personality inventories) with qualitative data (e.g., interviews, open-ended responses). Triangulation of data from multiple sources provides a more comprehensive view of personality. For example, combining self-report measures with peer ratings and behavioural observations. This approach helps to overcome limitations of single-method assessments and provides a richer, more nuanced understanding of personality. 3. Big Data Assessment: Utilises large datasets from various sources like social media, online behaviour, health records, and wearable devices. Machine learning and AI algorithms are used to identify patterns and predict behaviour based on these vast datasets. Digital footprints (e.g., Facebook likes, Twitter posts) have been shown to predict personality traits with surprising accuracy. This approach offers potential for more ecologically valid and less obtrusive personality assessment. 4. Cross-Cultural Considerations: There's increasing recognition of the need for culturally appropriate measures of personality. Researchers are questioning the universality of Western personality models like the Big Five.  Emic approaches (culture-specific) are being developed alongside etic approaches (universal). This includes exploring how culture shapes not only personality expression but also the very concept of personality itself. 5. Neuroscientific Approaches: Integrating personality assessment with neuroscience techniques like fMRI and EEG. Exploring the biological bases of personality traits and their expression. This could lead to more objective measures of personality and better understanding of the interplay between biology and environment in shaping personality. 6. Lifespan Developmental Approaches: Focusing on how personality develops and changes across the entire lifespan. Longitudinal studies tracking personality from childhood to old age. This helps understand both stability and change in personality over time. 7. Virtual Reality (VR) and Gamification: Using VR environments to assess personality in simulated real-world situations. Gamified personality assessments to increase engagement and potentially capture more natural responses. These new directions aim to provide a more comprehensive, context-sensitive, and culturally aware understanding of personality. They also seek to address limitations of traditional assessment methods, such as self-report biases and lack of ecological validity. Week 8  1. Define personality disorders and their importance 2. Understand the categorical approach to personality disorder diagnosis 3. Understand the dimensional approach to personality disorder diagnosis 4. Apply both approaches to a case study 5. Compare strengths and weaknesses of both approaches 6. Discuss clinical implications of different diagnostic approaches Week 8 - 1. Define personality disorders and their importance Personality disorders (PDs) are complex mental health conditions characterised by: 1. Enduring patterns of inner experience and behaviour 2. Significant deviation from cultural expectations 3. Inflexibility and pervasiveness across various situations 4. Onset in adolescence or early adulthood 5. Stability over time 6. Causing significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning PDs are important in psychology and psychiatry for several reasons: 1. Prevalence: They affect approximately 10% of the general population and are even more common in clinical settings. 2. Impact: They significantly influence an individual's thoughts, emotions, interpersonal functioning, and behaviour, often leading to substantial difficulties in various life domains. 3. Comorbidity: PDs frequently co-occur with other mental health disorders, complicating diagnosis and treatment. 4. Treatment challenges: They are often considered difficult to treat, requiring specialised therapeutic approaches. 5. Societal cost: PDs can lead to increased healthcare utilisation, legal issues, and reduced productivity. 6. Ongoing debate: There's continuous discussion in the field about how to best conceptualise, diagnose, and treat PDs. Historically, PDs have been treated as distinct categories, but this approach has faced criticism. The main issues include: High rates of comorbidity between different PDs Arbitrary diagnostic thresholds Heterogeneity within categories Limited empirical support for discrete categories As a result, an alternative model is currently being tested, which takes a more dimensional approach to PD diagnosis. This model aims to address some of the limitations of the categorical approach by focusing on: Levels of personality functioning Specific maladaptive personality traits Understanding these different approaches to PD conceptualization and diagnosis is crucial for clinicians, researchers, and students in the field of psychology and psychiatry. Week 8 - 2. Understand the categorical approach to personality disorder diagnosis The categorical approach to personality disorder diagnosis is the traditional method used in clinical practice and research. It's based on the medical model of disease classification and is the primary approach used in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). Key features of the categorical approach: 1. Distinct categories: It views personality disorders as discrete, qualitatively distinct clinical syndromes. 2. 10 specific PDs: The DSM-5 recognizes 10 distinct personality disorders, grouped into three clusters: Cluster A (odd or eccentric): Paranoid, Schizoid, Schizotypal Cluster B (dramatic, emotional, or erratic): Antisocial, Borderline, Histrionic, Narcissistic Cluster C (anxious or fearful): Avoidant, Dependent, Obsessive-Compulsive 3. Diagnostic criteria: Each PD has a specific set of criteria that must be met for diagnosis. 4. Threshold-based diagnosis: A certain number of criteria must be met to receive a diagnosis (e.g., 5 out of 9 for Borderline PD). 5. Present/absent dichotomy: The approach assumes that a person either has or does not have a particular PD. 6. Polythetic criteria: Not all criteria need to be met for a diagnosis, allowing for heterogeneity within categories. 7. Multi-axial system: In previous versions of the DSM, PDs were placed on a separate axis (Axis II) from other mental disorders. 8. Clinical utility: The categorical approach is designed to facilitate clear communication among clinicians and guide treatment decisions. 9. Research basis: Diagnostic categories are based on clinical observation and research findings. 10. Cultural considerations: The DSM-5 includes cultural formulations to help clinicians consider cultural factors in diagnosis. While this approach has been widely used, it has faced several criticisms: High rates of comorbidity between different PDs Arbitrary diagnostic thresholds Heterogeneity within categories Limited empirical support for discrete categories Difficulty capturing subthreshold personality pathology Despite these limitations, the categorical approach remains the primary method for diagnosing PDs in clinical practice, largely due to its familiarity, simplicity, and alignment with how many clinicians conceptualise mental disorders. Week 8 - 3. Understand the dimensional approach to personality disorder diagnosis The dimensional approach, also known as the Alternative Model of Personality Disorders (AMPD), represents a significant shift in how we conceptualise and diagnose personality disorders. This model is included in Section III of DSM-5 as an emerging approach for further study. Key features of the dimensional approach: 1. Continuous rather than categorical: It views personality pathology as existing on a continuum, rather than as discrete categories. 2. Two main criteria: a) Criterion A: Levels of Personality Functioning b) Criterion B: Pathological Personality Traits 3. Criterion A: Levels of Personality Functioning: Assesses impairment in four domains: Identity, Self-direction, Empathy, and Intimacy Uses a scale from 0 (no impairment) to 4 (extreme impairment) Moderate or greater impairment is required for a PD diagnosis 4. Criterion B: Pathological Personality Traits: Assesses five broad trait domains: Negative Affectivity, Detachment, Antagonism, Disinhibition, and Psychoticism Each domain includes several more specific trait facets Traits are rated on a 4-point scale 5. Specific PD diagnoses: The model retains six specific PD diagnoses (Antisocial, Avoidant, Borderline, Narcissistic, Obsessive-Compulsive, and Schizotypal), defined by particular combinations of impairment and traits 6. Personality Disorder-Trait Specified (PD-TS): A diagnosis for individuals who meet general criteria for a PD but don't fit one of the specific types 7. Assessment tools: Uses specific measures like the Level of Personality Functioning Scale (LPFS) and the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) 8. Flexibility: Allows for a more nuanced description of personality pathology, capturing subthreshold cases and unique presentations  9. Severity focus: Emphasises the severity of impairment, which can guide treatment planning and prognosis 10. Empirical basis: Aligns more closely with empirical findings from personality research This approach aims to address many of the limitations of the categorical model, including high comorbidity rates, arbitrary thresholds, and within-category heterogeneity. It provides a more comprehensive and individualised picture of personality functioning and pathology. Week 8 - 4. Apply both approaches to a case study Let's dive deeper into applying both the categorical and dimensional approaches to Lia's case: Case study: Lia Lia is a 28-year-old woman with a complex presentation of symptoms and behaviours. Her history includes: Unstable relationships Frequent conflict with the law Impulsive and self-destructive behaviour Evidence of conduct disorder before age 15 Intense mood swings Feelings of emptiness and disconnection Fear of abandonment Deceitfulness and manipulative behaviour Little regard for others' feelings or rights Physical altercations and reckless behaviour Difficulty controlling anger Little remorse for her actions Categorical Approach: 1. Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD): Unstable relationships Fear of abandonment Intense mood swings Chronic feelings of emptiness Impulsive, self-destructive behaviour Difficulty controlling anger 2. Antisocial Personality Disorder (ASPD): Conduct disorder before age 15 Frequent legal conflicts Deceitfulness and manipulation  Disregard for others' rights Lack of remorse Impulsivity and aggressiveness Under this approach, Lia would likely be diagnosed with both BPD and ASPD, highlighting the issue of comorbidity in the categorical model. Dimensional Approach: 1. Criterion A: Levels of Personality Functioning a) Identity (Severe impairment): ○ Fragmented sense of self ○ Intense, unstable self-image b) Self-Direction (Severe to extreme impairment): ○ Impulsive, criminal behaviours ○ Inability to set and pursue goals c) Empathy (Severe impairment): ○ Little regard for others' feelings ○ Difficulty understanding impact of behaviour on others d) Intimacy (Severe impairment): ○ Intense, unstable, and conflictual relationships ○ Fear of abandonment 2. Criterion B: Pathological Personality Traits a) Negative Affectivity (High): ○ Emotional lability: intense mood swings ○ Anxiousness: fear of abandonment ○ Separation insecurity ○ Depressivity: feelings of emptiness b) Antagonism (High): ○ Manipulativeness ○ Deceitfulness ○ Callousness: disregard for others' feelings ○ Hostility: difficulty controlling anger c) Disinhibition (High):  ○ Impulsivity ○ Risk-taking: reckless behaviour ○ Irresponsibility: legal conflicts This dimensional approach provides a more nuanced picture of Lia's personality functioning and pathological traits, allowing for a more individualised understanding of her difficulties without forcing her into discrete categories. - How does the dimensional approach differ from the categorical approach in describing Lia's personality pathology? - It provides a more nuanced description of her personality functioning across various domains without necessarily assigning her to specific disorder categories - Explanation: Correct! The key difference between the categorical and dimensional approaches in Lia's case is that the dimensional approach provides a more nuanced and comprehensive description of her personality functioning and pathological traits, without necessarily assigning her to specific disorder categories. - The dimensional model assesses Lia's level of impairment across various domains (identity, self-direction, empathy, intimacy) and identifies her elevated traits in areas like negative affectivity, antagonism, and disinhibition. This allows for a more individualised understanding of her personality pathology, rather than forcing her into the discrete categories of Borderline PD and Antisocial PD as the categorical approach does. - The dimensional approach aims to capture the complexity and heterogeneity of Lia's presentation, rather than relying on a binary diagnosis. Week 8 - 5. Compare strengths and weaknesses of both approaches Let's delve deeper into the strengths and weaknesses of both the categorical and dimensional approaches to personality disorder diagnosis: Categorical Approach Strengths: 1. Simplicity: Easy to understand and apply in clinical settings Aligns with how many people naturally think about mental health issues 2. Familiarity: Consistent with the medical model of disease classification Well-established in clinical practice and research 3. Clinical decision-making: Clear-cut present/absent diagnosis aids treatment decisions Facilitates insurance reimbursement and legal proceedings  4. Communication: Provides a common language among mental health professionals Aids in quick communication of complex clinical information 5. Treatment guidance: Many evidence-based treatments are developed for specific PD categories Helps in selecting appropriate interventions Weaknesses: 1. Oversimplification: Fails to capture the complexity and heterogeneity within PD categories May not accurately represent an individual's unique presentation 2. Comorbidity: High rates of overlap between different PD diagnoses Challenges the validity of distinct PD categories 3. Stigma: Diagnostic labels can lead to negative stereotypes and discrimination May impact self-perception and treatment expectations 4. Limited severity focus: Doesn't adequately capture varying degrees of impairment May overlook subthreshold cases that still cause significant distress 5. Arbitrary thresholds: Cutoff points between normal and disordered personality often lack empirical support Can lead to misclassification of cases near diagnostic thresholds Dimensional Approach Strengths: 1. Nuanced description: Provides a more comprehensive picture of an individual's personality functioning Better captures the complexity and variability in personality pathology 2. Severity assessment: Allows for a more precise evaluation of the degree of impairment Can track changes in functioning over time or with treatment 3. Flexibility: Better describes atypical or subthreshold cases Allows for recognition of personality pathology that doesn't fit neatly into existing categories 4. Individualised treatment: Can guide more tailored interventions based on specific areas of impairment or maladaptive traits Potentially leads to more personalised and effective treatment plans 5. Empirical support: Aligns better with research findings on the nature of personality and its disorders  More consistent with how personality is conceptualised in non-clinical settings Weaknesses: 1. Complexity: More time-consuming to assess and interpret Requires more extensive training for clinicians 2. Unfamiliarity: Represents a significant shift from traditional diagnostic practices May be met with resistance from clinicians accustomed to the categorical approach 3. Communication challenges: Less straightforward than categorical labels when communicating with other professionals or patients May be more difficult to use in legal or insurance contexts 4. Lack of clear guidelines: Treatment recommendations may be less clear-cut without specific diagnostic categories Research on interventions based on dimensional models is still developing 5. Limited research: Still being tested and validated in various clinical settings Long-term implications and outcomes are not yet fully understood This comparison highlights the ongoing debate in the field about how to best conceptualise and diagnose personality disorders, with each approach offering distinct advantages and challenges. Week 8 - 6. Discuss clinical implications of different diagnostic approaches Let's explore the clinical implications of using different diagnostic approaches for personality disorders in more depth: 1. Treatment selection: Categorical approach: ○ Often guides clinicians to specific evidence-based treatments for each PD ○ For example,