PSYC1001 Personality 5.2 PDF

PERSONALITY 5.2 The great debate LECTURER: CAROLINE FIELDEN E m a i l : c a ro l i n e.f i e l d e n @ s y d n e y.e d u. a u Page 01  THE GREAT DEBATE Trait theor...

PERSONALITY 5.2 The great debate LECTURER: CAROLINE FIELDEN E m a i l : c a ro l i n e.f i e l d e n @ s y d n e y.e d u. a u Page 01  THE GREAT DEBATE Trait theory Personality = traits Personality traits revealed in everyday language, but not explained (Allport) Personality = (mainly) within person structures & processes (traits) Traits = biological structures & processes o Eysenck: 1. Extraversion  The Ascending Reticular System 2. Neuroticism  Limbic system o Gray claimed introverts not more sensitive to conditioning than extraverts: 1. Impulsivity  Behaviour approach system 2. Approach  Behaviour withdrawal system 3. Anxiety  Fight, fright, freeze Page 03 4. Avoidance  THE GREAT DEBATE Behaviourism Personality = behavioural patterns Behavioural patterns revealed in what people do Personality = (primarily) between person structures and processes e.g. Skinner > observable behaviours Bandura > Observable behaviours + cognitive processes Mischel > Cognitive affective units Page 03  THE GREAT DEBATE Interactionism Whole trait theory (Fleeson, 2015) A cybernetic big five theory for personality psychology (DeYoung, 2014) Page 03  PERSONALITY 6 LECTURER: CAROLINE FIELDEN E m a i l : c a ro l i n e.f i e l d e n @ s y d n e y.e d u. a u Page 01  LECTURE SERIES OVERVIEW o Lecture 1: Introduction to personality o Lecture 2: Psychoanalytic & psychodynamic approaches o Lecture 3: Cognitive & behavioural approaches o Lecture 4: Humanistic & existential approaches o Lecture 5: Psychobiological & lexical approaches o Lecture 6: Personality assessment Page 02  THE FINAL SUMMARY Approach Level Coverage Cause Bias Focus Psychoanalytic Idiographic- Subjective Partial Determined Negative Psychodynamic Nomothetic (Observer) Non- Subjective Humanistic Idiographic Partial Positive determined (Individual) Non- Subjective Positive- Existential Idiographic Holistic determined (Individual) Negative Behavioural- Minimal- Positive- Nomothetic Determined Objective Sociocognitive Partial Negative Idiographic- Subjective- Positive- Traits Nearly holistic Probable Nomothetic Objective Negative Page 04  LEARNING OUTCOMES 1. Understand the distinction between nomothetic and ideographic approaches to personality assessment 2. Be familiar with general forms of personality assessment 3. Be familiar with psychobiological forms of personality assessment 4. Have a general understanding of validity and reliability 5. Have a general idea of the kinds of answers personality researchers typically seek Page 03  GENERAL TYPES OF PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT o Behaviour observations o Assessment of typical manifestations of an attribute within a specific context o E.g. (Semi- unstructured) Interviews, Participant- observations (ethnography) o The problem of replicability Page 06  GENERAL TYPES OF PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT o Self (peer)-reports o Self-reported assessment of one’s own (or their peers) feelings, attitudes, beliefs, values, motives, etc. E.g. Personality tests, Standardised (clinical) interviews, surveys The problem of dishonesty and response biases Page 07  SCORING (QUANTIFYING) YOUR PERSONALITY Established rules for scoring & obtaining quantitative information (data) from behaviour samples o Nomonological scoring o E.g. Standardised (Nomonological) Questionnaires o https://www.idrlabs.com/short-big-five/test.php o Idiographic scoring (psychologist’s judgement) o Judgement based evaluations Clinical Workplace Research Page 09  PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES: VALIDITY & RELIABILITY Validity o The degree to which a claim is correct or true o Is a given definition of a construct correct? o Does a test measure what it claims to measure (internal validity)? o Can test results be generalised (external validity)? Reliability o The degree of consistent or stable accuracy of measurement outputs across time or context o How well does a measurement assess what it claims it assesses? o How accurate is an individual’s claim/report of their condition? A valid measure always hits the (bullseye of the) target; a reliable measure always hits the same place on the target o Reliability is a necessary but not sufficient condition for validity Page 11  PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES: VALIDITY & RELIABILITY Internal validity & Factor Analysis  CONCERNS: INTERPRETING THE TEST RESULTS Are the observed attributes real? o (Cultural) test biases o Procedural /administrative biases o Faking (dishonesty) o Framing biases Are the observed attributes important? o The difference between statistical and practical (psychological or personal) importance Do tests help or hurt? o The person as a number Page 10 o The issue of labelling  PSYCHOBIOLOGICAL PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT o Psychophysiological assessment o Measuring biological functions that relate to personality o E.g. fMRI scans, EEG data, GSR data, PET scans, blood tests, gene sequencing o The problems of reductionism and practicality Page 08  PSYCHOBIOLOGICAL PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT Page 03  TRAITS – EVERYDAY APPLICATIONS o Personality traits are associated with important life outcomes: Academic performance positively associated with conscientiousness ̶ At least as much as intelligence! Work performance negatively associated with neuroticism Anxiety disorders positively associated with neuroticism Marital success positively associated with agreeableness Openness to experience positively associated with intelligence  ASSOCIATIONS BETWEEN MOTIVATION & ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE IN HIGH CONSCIENTIOUS vs. LOW CONSCIENTIOUS PEOPLE Those who are high in conscientiousness perform better as their motivation increases Those who are lower in conscientiousness perform similarly regardless of their motivation How might you use this information to improve academic performance? De Feyter, Tim, Caers, Ralf, Vigna, Claudia & Berings, Dries. (2012). Unraveling the impact of the Big Five personality traits on academic performance: The moderating and mediating effects of self- efficacy and academic motivation. Learning and Individual Differences, 22(4) 439-448. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2012.03.013  ASSOCIATION BETWEEN LONELINESS AND FREQUENCY OF TOUCH IN HIGH EXTRAVERTED VS LOW EXTRAVERTED PEOPLE Those who are more extraverted score similarly on scores of loneliness regardless of the frequency of touch. Those who are less extraverted score lower on loneliness as the frequency of touch in a relationship increases. How might you use this information to improve relationships? Gray, N.L.T., Roberts, S.C. An investigation of simulated and real touch on feelings of loneliness. Sci Rep 13, 10587 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-37467-5xxxxx` ASSOCIATION BETWEEN NARCISSISM AND EMOTIONAL EATING IN MEN VS WOMEN Men who score higher on narcissism are less likely to engage in emotional eating.. There’s little difference between women who score higher vs. lower on narcissism in terms of emotional eating.. How might you use this information in a clinical setting? Gray, N.L.T., Roberts, S.C. An investigation of simulated and real touch on feelings of loneliness. Sci Rep 13, 10587 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-37467-5xxxxx`  Personality: Overall o Personality understood in many ways: o Return to lecture 1 Multiple theories, models & claims More & better theory & evidence Some better supported than others needed, before we can understand the source/sources of BUT individual differences in Theories once shunned can be found relevant behaviour and experience o So why study personality? o Can we be sure that it even exists? It seems to (it ‘feels’ like it does) Each approach offers some support ̶ More integrative approaches needed?  THANK YOU ALL VERY BEST WISHES FOR THE REST OF YOUR SEMESTER AND FOR YOUR FINAL EXAM!! REMEMBER TO EMAIL ME IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS T A K E C A R E , A N D H A V E F U N S T U D Y I N G P E R S O N A L I T Y, A N D W H O W E A R E ! ! Page 13