UNIT 1 THEORIES OF PERSONALITIES PDF

**[THEORIES OF PERSONALITY]** **UNIT 1** Personality is to a man/woman what perfume is to a flower. - Charles M. Schwab **Definition of Personality** For the layperson, personality is often defined in terms of social attractiveness. The person with a **"good personality"** is one who impresse...

**[THEORIES OF PERSONALITY]** **UNIT 1** Personality is to a man/woman what perfume is to a flower. - Charles M. Schwab **Definition of Personality** For the layperson, personality is often defined in terms of social attractiveness. The person with a **"good personality"** is one who impresses others with his or her ability to get along well with people. Beauty pageant contestants are typically judged not only on their talent and physical attractiveness, but also on their personality, here defined in terms of their popularity with judges and other contestants. Some students also talk about each other in these terms: Catherine is said to have a **"great personality,"** meaning that she behaves in ways that the perceivers find acceptable; John is said to have "no personality," meaning that they find much of John's behaviour highly objectionable. Personality defined in terms of social attractiveness is inadequate in two major respects. First, it limits the number and kinds of behaviour considered as aspects of personality; that is, only those kinds of behaviours that the perceivers select in making judgments about the **attractiveness or unattractiveness of the perceived** are regarded as part of personality. Second, it carries the absurd implication that some individuals, who obviously have unique learning histories and unique, biologically based temperament traits, are devoid of personality. Despite the many definitions of the term, investigators generally agree that **personality is the dynamic and organized set of characteristics** possessed by a person that uniquely influences his or her cognitions, motivations, and behaviours in various situations. It can also be thought of as a **psychological construct**---a complex abstraction that encompasses the person's unique genetic background (except in the case of identical twins) and learning history, and the ways in which these factors influence his or her responses to various environments or situations. Thus, many investigators regard the study of personality **as primarily the scientific analysis** of individual differences that help to account for why and how people react uniquely, and often creatively, to various environmental or situational demands. The primary focus of interest in the discipline is on the creation of theories that offer explanations for each individual's unique ways of responding to his or her physical, social, and cultural environments. These explanations then lead to predictions that are tested and buttressed by **empirical evidence.** Such theories increase our understanding of individuals and help us to predict their actions accurately. **Personality** The word personality has been derived from the Latin word ***'Persona.'*** At first this word was used for the **mask** worn by the actors (Roman and Greek) in ancient times, to indicate to the audiences whether they played the villain's or the hero's role in a drama. Thus the mask gave the actor his characteristic features. The term personality is used by all sections of people on certain occasions, during the courses of their conversations about a person. The concerned person may be young or old, male or female, a person of ordinary type, or person of great eminence. Whether they have known the person very well or known simply from what other say. They attribute some characteristics to the person and admire with some pleasant words that he or she is an **attractive, pleasant, agreeable, uncontroversial, dynamic, friendly, person of outstanding ability and so on**. It may be also stated that he or she have a very good personality. They are attractive or the person is not so good looking, very forceful, adamant, not friendly, and quarrelsome and so on. Thus the person is described in terms of some **traits or characteristics.** This is what we observe in the common sense world in utilizing the concept of personality. But it does not mean that what we hear from others about the description on personality is wrong. We cannot say that the common sense observations are totally wrong or incorrect. This is what the psychologist's state as social attraction. Whatever it is, this is not the all with which the psychologists are satisfied. Personality includes the behaviour patterns, a person shows across situations or the psychological characteristics of the person that lead to those behaviour patterns. Personality is the total quality of an individual behaviour as it is shown in his/her habits, thinking, attitudes, interests, his/her manner of acting and his/her personal philosophy of life. It is the totality of his/her being. It includes his physical, mental, emotional and temperamental make-up and how it shows itself in behaviour. **Personality** is defined as an individual's unique and relatively consistent patterns of thinking, feeling and behaving. **Personality theory** is an attempt to describe and explain how people are **similar**, how they are **different** and why every individual is **unique**. **Definitions of Personality** There are controversies among psychologists to define personality. Among the numerous definitions of personality, the most commonly accepted definition is given by Allport (1937). Allport (1937) stated that originally persona denoted theatrical mask used in Greek drama. During the course of time the word assumed so many shades of meaning. Allport gave **fifty** different definitions derived from the different shades of meaning of the personality. All the meanings can be arranged on a continuum, ranging from external (false, mask life) manner to true self. According to Allport **personal qualities are the most common references point of the define personality**. In accordance with their emphasis all the definitions can be placed into **five** categories. \(1) The first category is **omnibus definitions**. This category of definitions makes use of **a list of personality characteristics**. The list is followed by such expressions as 'sum of total', composite of 'Aggregate of', ensemble of' etc. This kind of definition is illustrated **by Allport** by reproducing **prince's definition.** "Personality is the sum total of all the biological innate dispositions, impulses, tendencies, appetites, and instincts of the individual, and the acquired dispositions and tendencies acquired by experience." \(2) The second category is **integrative definitions**. This category is included those definitions which emphasize the **organizational aspect of personality**. One of the definitions by Allport (1937) to illustrate this category is 'The pervasive super pattern which expresses the integrity and the characteristic behavioral individuality of the organism." (Geseel) \(3) The third category is **Hierarchical definitions**. Such definitions are regard personality as **a pyramid like structure** with innermost self in the commanding position at the center. Thus personality is regarded as 'levels or layers of dispositions with a unifying or integrative principle at the top.' \(4) The fourth category is **terms of adjustment**. Such definitions regard personality as the whole **organism in interaction with the environment** in the interest of survival. Thus, personality becomes equivalent to an individuals' mode of coming to terms with the demands of environment. \(5) The fifth category is definitions in **terms of distinctiveness.** This definition advocates that there will be no personality if all the individuals behave in the same manner. Making of any member of a group from others in terms of his systems of habits, dispositions and sentiments is collectively known as personality. Allport did not find **biosocial formulations and omnibus** definition of personality to be useful. Distinctiveness, adjustment and growth are the elements Allport (1937) found useful in defining personality. He defines personality as; "Personality is the dynamic organization with in the individual of those psychophysical system that determine his unique adjustment to his environment." (Allport-1947) Later on, Allport (1965) revised his definition of personality. The revised definition of personality is **'personality is a dynamic organization within the individual of those psychophysical systems that determine his characteristic behaviour and thought."** (Allport-1965) More formal definitions of personality by psychologists also show little consensus. Influential personality theorists tell us that personality is: "Although no single definition is acceptable to all personality theorists, we can say that personality is a pattern of relatively permanent traits and unique characteristics that give both consistency and individuality to a person's behaviour." "The more or less stable and enduring organization of a person's character, temperament, Intellect, and physique that determines his unique adjustment to his environment." "That which permits a prediction of what a person will do in a given situation." "Each individual's characteristically recurring patterns of behaviour." **Personality** is defined as an individual's unique and relatively consistent patterns of thinking, feeling and behaving. **Personality theory** is an attempt to describe and explain how people are similar, how they are different and why every individual is unique. **Components of Personality** a. **Physical appearance:** It is refers to the physique of an individual. b. **Character**: It is refers to the ethical or moral aspect of a personality which one possesses. The character of an individual is judged by the level of consistency exhibited in his or her behaviour. c. **Temperament :** It is refers to the deep-rooted emotional trends present in an individual. It is result of secretion of endocrine glands as well as habit form. Temperament plays an important role in one's ability to adjust to his or her environment. d. **Interests:** It is refers to felt need. It is connected to three aspects, the need to know feel and perform. e. **Ability:** It is refers to a special natural power to do something well, physical or mental. f. **Sociability:** It is refers to an ability of the individual to socialize him or herself in a social environment and how other perceives his or her presence in the group. g. **Emotionality:** It is refers to the ability of an individual to show mature emotional behaviour in suitable situations. h. **Consistency:** It is generally a recognizable order and regularity to behaviours. Essentially, people act in the same ways or similar ways in a variety of situations. i. **Psychological and Physiological:** Personality is a psychological construct, but study suggests that it is also influenced by biological processes and needs. j. **Multiple expressions:** Personality is displayed in more than just behaviour. It can also be seen in our thoughts, feelings, close relationships and other social interactions. k. **It impacts behaviours and actions:** Personality does not just influence how we move and respond in our environment; it also causes us to act in certain ways.  **Definition of Theory** A theory is an unsubstantiated hypothesis or a speculation concerning reality that is not yet definitely known to be so. When the theory is confirmed, it becomes a fact. There is also an element of disagreement as the commonsense view asserts that a theory will become true or factual when the appropriate confirmatory data have been collected. Theories are never true or false, although their implications or derivations may be either. A theory is a set of conventions created by the theorist. Viewing a theory as a "set of conventions" emphasizes the fact that theories are not "given," or predetermined, by nature, the data or any other determinant process. Because a theory is a conventional choice rather than something that is inevitable or prescribed by known empirical relations, truth and falsity are not attributes to be ascribed to a theory. ==================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================================== Philosophical Assumptions ------------------------- The basic philosophical assumptions are the foundations of the personality theories we know today. In general, there are five categories of philosophical assumptions that have been debated by theorists since the early times. They include: ### 1. Heredity vs. Environment (The Nature Vs Nurture) These assumptions ask the question, "Is personality caused by genes or modelled by the environment?" Some psychologists believe that personality is brought about by biological processes, while others say that it is developed over time as a person grows old. However, modern theorists such as Robert Cloninger claim that personality is formed by both genetics and the environment. ### 2. Freedom vs. Determinism These assumptions attempts to answer: "Is personality controlled by the person (free will) or is it beyond human control (predetermination)?" The idea that one's personality can be changed is due to the belief that man has free will and so he can manage his own personality. On the other hand, some say it goes on until death because personality is brought about by uncontrollable forces. ### 3. Optimistic vs. Pessimistic With regards to personality theories, optimism is when people can alter their own personalities while pessimism is when their personalities remain that way throughout their lifespan. ### 4. Uniqueness vs. Universality Theorists such as Carl Rogers, Abraham Maslow and Gordon Allport believed that humans are unique to each other. On the other hand, behaviourists and cognitive theorists like Erik Erikson and Jean Piaget expressed that all of us are of the same universal nature. ### 5. Active vs. Reactive Humans are deemed to be active doers of actions, according to humanists and cognitive theorists. In contrast, behaviourists believe that people are reactive to outside stimuli, that is, we passively react to various situations. Indeed, personality is a complex subject that branches out to many ideologies and philosophies. **Personality Theory in the history of Psychological Theories** **The Study of Consciousness** The new science of psychology focused on the analysis of conscious experience into its elemental parts. The methods of psychology were modeled on the approach used in the natural sciences. Physics and chemistry appeared to be unlocking the secrets of the physical universe by reducing all matter to its basic elements and analyzing them. If the physical world could be understood by breaking it down into elements, why couldn't the mind or the mental world be studied in the same way? Wundt and other psychologists of his day who were concerned with studying human nature were greatly influenced by the natural science approach, and they proceeded to apply it to the study of the mind. Because these researchers limited themselves to the experimental method, they studied only those mental processes that might be affected by some external stimulus that could be manipulated and controlled by the experimenter. There was no room in this experimental psychology approach for such a complex, multidimensional topic as personality. It was not compatible with either the subject matter or the methods of the new psychology. **The Study of Behaviour** In the early decades of the 20th century, the American psychologist John B. Watson, at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland, sparked a revolution against the work of Wilhelm Wundt. Watson's movement, called behaviourism, opposed Wundt's focus on conscious experience. More devoted than Wundt to a natural science approach, Watson argued that if psychology was to be a science, it had to focus only on the tangible aspects of human nature---that which could be seen, heard, recorded, and measured. Only overt behaviour---not consciousness---could be the legitimate topic of psychology. Consciousness, Watson said, cannot be seen or experimented upon. Therefore, like the philosophers' concept of the soul, consciousness is meaningless for science. Psychologists must deal only with what they can see, manipulate, and measure---that is, external stimuli and the subject's behavioural responses to them. According to Watson, whatever happens inside the person after the stimulus is presented and before the response is made cannot be seen. Because we can only speculate about it, it is of no interest or value to science. Thus, behaviourists reduced personality to what could be seen and observed objectively, and there was no place in their conception for consciousness or for unconscious forces. If Watson and the early behavioural psychologists dismissed all those notions, feelings, and complexities that come to mind when we use the word personality, then where were they? What happened to the consciousness you know you experience every moment you are awake? Where were those unconscious forces that sometimes seem to compel us to act in ways over which we feel we have no control? **The Study of the Unconscious** Freud, a physician in Vienna, Austria, called his system psychoanalysis. Freud was not by training a psychologist but was a physician in private practice, working with persons who suffered from emotional disturbances. Although trained as a scientist, Freud did not use the experimental method. Rather, he developed his theory of personality based on clinical observation of his patients. Inspired by Freud's psychoanalytic approach, a group of personality theorists developed unique conceptions of human nature outside the mainstream of experimental psychology. These theorists, the neopsychoanalysts, focused on the whole person as he or she functions in the real world, not on elements of behaviour or stimulus-response units as studied in the psychology laboratory. The neopsychoanalysts accepted the existence of conscious and unconscious forces, whereas the behaviourists accepted the existence only of that which they could see. As a result, the early personality theorists were speculative in their work, relying more on inferences based on observations of their patients' behaviour than on the quantitative analysis of laboratory data. **The Scientific Study of Personality** We see, then, that experimental psychology and the formal study of personality began in two separate traditions, using different methods and pursuing different aims. We should note that experimental psychology in its formative years did not totally ignore personality---some limited aspects of personality were studied---but there did not exist within psychology a distinct specialty area known as personality as there was child psychology or social psychology. It was not until the **late 1930s** that the study of personality became formalized and systematized in American psychology, primarily through the work of **Gordon Allport at Harvard University.** From the 1930s to the present day, a variety of approaches to the study of personality have emerged. In this book, in addition to the psychoanalytic and behavioristic viewpoints noted above, we discuss several others. These include the following: the life-span approach, which argues that personality continues to develop throughout the course of our life; the trait approach, which contends that much of our personality is inherited; the humanistic approach, which emphasizes human strengths, virtues, aspirations, and the fulfillment of our potential; and the cognitive approach, which deals with conscious mental activities. Finally, we explore the work of theorists who have focused on narrower issues in personality such as the need for achievement, locus of control, sensation-seeking behavior, learned helplessness, and optimism/pessimism. We then examine what each approach can teach us about personality and conclude on a cheerfully positive note with a description of the so-called happy personality. The five Major Perspectives on Personality ------------------------------------------ Psychology is a discipline that asks and answers the fundamental question, why do we behave the way we do and think the way we think?. The best way to characterize the different approaches that are taken to answer the question of psychology is to identify them as major perspectives. The major perspectives represent fundamental assumptions that underlie the research questions and methods that are used in order to answer the questions of psychology. Most all perspectives define psychology as the discipline interested in studying human behaviour and mental processes, but that covers a lot of ground and the causes of behaviour and mental processes are not always clear. Numerous personality theories exist and most of the major ones fall in to one of **five major perspectives**. Each of these perspectives on personality attempts to describe different patterns in personality, including how these patterns form and how people differ on an individual level. Learn more about **the five major perspectives** of personality, the theorist associated with each theory and the core ideas that are central to each perspective. **1. The Psychoanalytic Perspective** The psychoanalytic perspective of personality emphasizes the importance of early childhood experiences and the unconscious mind. This perspective on personality was created by psychiatrist Sigmund Freud who believed that things hidden in the unconscious could be revealed in a number of different ways, including through dreams, free association and slips of the tongue. Neo-Freudian theorists, including Erik Erikson, Carl Jung, Alfred Adler and Karen Horney, believed in the importance of the unconscious, but disagreed with other aspects of Freud\'s theories. Probably the approach that has been most popularly associated with the discipline of psychology for the past century is the psychodynamic, psychoanalytic perspective. Sigmund Freud, who was medically trained in neurology, developed a theory of personality that made the assumption that human motivation was propelled by conflicts between instinctual, mostly unconscious, psychological forces. He called these intrapsychic elements the id, ego and superego. (You know the drill) This psychodynamic theory caught on like wild fire and due to its explanatory power for human behaviour, became very popular over the following century. Freud's therapeutic method, called psychoanalysis, was developed to identify the underlying conflicts between intra-psychic structures and resolve them by bringing them to consciousness. Insight therapy was one term used to describe Freud's treatment approach. Freud also contributed the first developmental theory of human personality. It suggests that human development progresses through psychosexual stages. Each stage is characterized by specific behavioural and psychodynamic developments and challenges. Although Freud thought of himself as a scientist, and he was indeed very thorough in recording his methods and outcomes, he did not practice scientific methods. Psychoanalytic theory was developed through case study analysis, a qualitative, not scientific, method. **Major Theorists** - **Sigmund Freud:** Stressed the importance of early childhood events, the influence of the unconscious and sexual instincts in the development and formation of personality. - - - - **2. Behavioural Perspective:** In an attempt to bring scientific method to bear on the understanding of human behaviour, John B. Watson, using ideas he had gleaned from the likes of Ivan Pavlov and others, decided to declare that psychology should only concern itself with observable behaviour. A science of behaviour was built on only observable behaviour. Assumptions about underlying psychological causes of behaviour were not admitted. The unconscious was declared fictitious and its study, a waste of time. Serious psychology would focus on observable, controllable, behaviour. The behavioural perspective gained great momentum in the 20th century because it was a powerful tool in training, education, and industry. Critics claimed that behaviourism was dehumanizing. **Major Theorists:** John B. Watson and others conducted a thorough explication of Classical Conditioning- dog and B. F. Skinner, responding somewhat to the critics of behaviourisms dehumanization, explained and expertly defended the processes of Operant Conditioning.(+-). ### ### 3. The Humanistic Perspective The humanistic perspective of personality focuses on psychological growth, free will and personal awareness. It takes a more positive outlook on human nature and is centered on how each person can achieve their individual potential. The humanistic perspective arose in reaction to the **deterministic and pessimistic** psychoanalytic view and the mechanistic behavioural perspective, to support more optimistic views that humans are motivated by their potential to be creative and productive in response to their social and environmental conditions. The existential part of the humanist view recognizes the reality of being in a world and the opportunity that we have to choose a path for ourselves. Humanism is hopeful, focuses on subjective, conscious experience, tries to solve human problems and emphasizes the human potential to grow in a positive manner. The humanist philosophy respects diversity and confronts reality as it is, both the painful and pleasurable, the good and the bad. Humanism assumes that people have choices about their behaviour and possess free will to act and also must assume responsibility for choices and consequences. The humanist perspective differs from the biological perspective in that the assumptions about causes for behaviour lie in human self-efficacy, choice and free will as opposed to the determinism of biological causes. Humanist and existential philosophies are combined because they both emphasize free will and responsibility as central to the nature of being. **Major Theorists:** - - ### ### 4. The Trait Perspective The trait perspective of personality is centered on identifying, describing and measuring the specific traits that make-up human personality. By understanding these traits, researchers believe they can better comprehend the differences between individuals. **Major Theorists:** - **Hans Eysenck:** Suggested that there are three dimensions of personality: 1) extraversion-introversion, 2) emotional stability-neuroticism and 3) Psychoticism. - **Raymond Cattell:** Identified 16 personality traits that he believed could be utilized to understand and measure individual differences in personality. - **Robert McCrae and Paul Costa:** Introduced the big five theory, which identifies five key dimensions of personality: 1) extraversion, 2) neuroticism, 3) openness to experience, 4) conscientiousness and 5) agreeableness. ### ### 5. The Social Cognitive Perspective The social cognitive perspective of personality emphasizes the importance of [observational learning](https://www.verywell.com/what-is-observational-learning-2795402), self-efficacy, situational influences and cognitive processes. In response to the empty organism theory of behaviourism, the cognitive perspective developed explanations for human behaviour that suggest that human behaviour is at times thoughtful and can be controlled by thought processes. Indeed, the cognitive perspective suggests that much of human behaviour is mediated by thought processes like memory and attention, belief systems, attitudes and language. Cognitivists believe that humans bring significant conscious processes into the mix and that much of human behaviour is mediated by conscious processes. Belief systems, value systems, thought processes, reason and intelligence have a significant impact on why we do the things we do and act the way we act. The cognitive perspective suggests that much of human behaviour is significantly influenced by cognitive processes and is thus amenable to our thoughtful control. **Major Theorists:** - [**Albert Bandura**](https://www.verywell.com/albert-bandura-biography-1925-2795537): Emphasized the importance of social learning, or learning through observation. His theory emphasized the role of conscious thoughts including [self-efficacy](https://www.verywell.com/what-is-self-efficacy-2795954), or our own beliefs in our abilities. **Other Trends of Perspectives in Personality** ** ** **1. Bio-psychological Perspective:** The biological perspective is a broad scientific perspective that assumes that human behaviour and thought processes have a biological basis. Biology includes investigations into biochemistry of behaviour associated with neurotransmitters and hormones, genetics and heritability, and the psychophysics of sensation and perception. Physiological psychology, neuroscience, psychoneuroimunology and psychopharmacology are all part of the biological perspective. Because the biological perspective relies on scientific methods, its scope of investigation is limited to variables that can be controlled. Research methods are quantitative and seek to produce findings that can be replicated and that are generalizable across populations. Practical outcomes of biological psychology include the booming trade in psychopharmaceuticals, an understanding of mental illness that provides viable remedies for certain very serious disorders, and diagnostic brain scanning tools that are at the leading edge of neuroscience.  **2. Socio-cultural Perspective:** The social/cultural perspective in psychology suggests that human behaviour is influenced by social context, environmental cues, social pressures and cultural influences. Anyone who has attended a football game will recognize that human behaviour is susceptible to influence of the crowd mentality. We are all shaped by the context of our environment and influenced by the perception of authority in our social order. Social psychologists suggest that these forces are very powerful and explain a great deal about the causes of human behaviour and thought processes. **3. Evolutionary Perspective:** The evolutionary perspective explains human behaviour and thought process as resulting from evolutionary processes. The underlying assumption of biological evolution is survival of the species. Human behaviour is understood in the light of the question: how does this behaviour result from processes that support the survival of the species? **4. Feminist Post-Structural Perspective:** The feminist post-structural perspective arose in response to the observation by postmodern theorists like Michel Foucault, that the creators/owners of a theory enjoy certain advantages that come from organizing knowledge along explanatory lines. Science has traditionally been dominated by men and thus the methods and outcomes of science have benefited men for the most part. But, the feminist perspective goes beyond a critique of andocentric practices and suggests that all organized knowledge has a political agenda that should be examined in the light of all persons\' rights and benefits. The post-structural view helps us understand that knowledge is power and that the holders of the languages that construct knowledge are the ones who will have the choices about how resources are distributed. This political theory of psychology and knowledge construction tries to level the playing field and admit the views and voices of all. The underlying assumption in this view is that diversity is essential for human survival. Incumbent upon adherents to this perspective is a commitment to take a stand on issues they deem important, identify their own **epistemological position** and biases in relation to their views and then engage in a process of **self-interrogation** of their position. These perspectives listed and briefly described above represent at times divergent underlying assumptions about why we behave and think the way we do. Some of these approaches rely on quantitative research methods entirely and others rely on qualitative methods almost exclusively. Many perspectives rely upon data resulting from both qualitative and quantitative research. **Each perspective asks and answers the questions of psychology in a different way**. The unique methods of research and practice that arise from the different perspectives create a **landscape that represents the complexity of human behaviour** and thinking. This diversity of views allows the **discipline of psychology** to more adequately explain human behaviour and mental processes. **Pitfalls in Theories of Personality** There are quite a few things that can go wrong with a theory, and you should keep your eyes open for them. This applies, of course, even to the theories created by the great minds we\'ll be looking at. Even Sigmund Freud put his pants on one leg at a time! On the other hand, it is even more important when we develop our own theories about people and their personalities. Here are a few things to look out for: **1. Ethnocentrism**. Everyone grows up in a culture that existed before their birth. It influences us so subtly and so thoroughly that we grow up thinking "this is the way things are," rather than "this is the way things are in this particular society." Erich Fromm calls this the **social unconscious**, and it is very powerful. The peculiarities of a culture can sometimes be most easily seen by asking "what does everybody talk about?" and "what does nobody talk about?" In Europe, during the last half of the 1800\'s, especially in the middle and upper classes, people just didn't talk about sex much. It was, more or less "taboo". Freud has to be commended, by the way, on his ability to rise above his culture in certain instance. He saw how strange it was to pretend that people (especially women) were not sexual creatures. Much of our present openness about sex (for better or for worse) derives from Freud's original insights. Today, most people aren't mortified by their sexual natures. In fact, we have a tendency to talk about our sexuality all the time, to anyone who will listen! Sex is plastered on our billboards, broadcast on our televisions, a part of the lyrics of our favourite songs, in our movies, our magazines, our books, and, of course, here on the internet! This is something peculiar about our culture, and we are so used to it, we hardly notice anymore. On the other hand, Freud was mislead by his culture into thinking that neurosis always has a sexual root. In our society, we have more problems with feeling useless and fearing aging and death. Freud's society took death for granted, considered aging a sign of maturity, and had a place for nearly everybody. **2. Egocentrism**. Another potential pitfall in theorizing is the peculiarities of the theorist as an individual. Each of us, beyond our culture, has specific details to his or her life-genetics, family structure and dynamics, special experiences, education, and so on - that affect the way we think and feel and, ultimately, the way we interpret personality. Freud, for example, was the first of seven children (though he had two half brothers who had kids of their own before Sigmund was born). His mother was a strong personality and 20 years younger than his father, and she was particularly attached to her "Siggie." Freud was a genius (we can't all make that claim!). He was Jewish, although neither he nor his father ever practiced their religion. It is quite likely that the patriarchal family structure he experienced as well as the close ties he had with his mother directed his attention to those kinds of issues when it came time for him to formulate his theory. His pessimistic nature and atheistic beliefs led him to view human life as rather survivalistic and requiring strong social control. You, too, have your peculiarities, and they will colour your interests and understanding, often without your awareness. **3. Dogmatism**. A third pitfall is dogmatism. We as human beings seem to have a natural conservative tendency: We stick to what has worked in the past. And if we devote our lives to developing a personality theory, if we have poured our heart into it, you can bet we will be very defensive (to use Freud's term) about it. Dogmatic people don't allow for questions, doubts, new information, and so on. You can tell when you are dealing with dogmatic people by looking at how they deal with their critics: They will tend to make use of what is called the circular argument. A circular argument is one where you "prove" your point by assuming things that would only be true if your point were true in the first place. There are tons of examples of circular arguments because everyone seems to use them. A simple example: "I know everything!" Why should I believe you? "Because I know everything!" Another example, "You have to believe in God because the Holy Scripture says so, and the Holy Scripture is the word of God!" Now understand that there is nothing intrinsically wrong with saying that God exists, and neither is there anything intrinsically wrong with believing that the Holy Scripture is the word of God. Where this person goes wrong is using the point "the Holy Scripture is the word of God" to support the contention that "you have to believe in God," since the non-believer is hardly going to be impressed with the one if he/she doesn't believe in the other! Well, this kind of thing happens all the time in psychology, an in personality theories in particular. To pick on Freud again, it is not unusual to hear Freudians argue that people who don't accept Freud\'s ideas are repressing the evidence they would need to believe in Freud - when the idea of repression is in fact a Freudian concept to begin with. What you need, they might suggest, is a few years of Freudian analysis to understand that Freud was right- when, of course, you would hardly spend all that time on something you don't believe in to begin with! **4. Misunderstandings**. Another problem, or set of problems, is unintended implications: It seems that every time you say something, you let loose words that are susceptible to 100\'s of different interpretations. To put it simply, people will often misunderstand you. There are several things that make misunderstandings more likely. **4.1 Translation**. Freud, Jung, Binswanger, and several others, wrote in German. When they were translated, some of their concepts were "twisted" a little \-- something quite natural, since every language has its own peculiarities. Freud's **id, ego, and superego**, which you've all heard of, are words used by his translators. The original terms were *es*, *ich*, and *überich*, which are German for **it,** **I, and over-I**. They are, in other words, ordinary words, simple words. In translation, they were turned into Latin words, words that sounded vaguely scientific, because the translators felt that American readers would be more accepting of Freud if he sounded a little more scientific, instead of poetic (which is what he sounds like in German!). Of course that means we "hear" Freud as making scientific statements, cutting up the psyche into clear compartments, when in fact he was speaking more metaphorically, and was suggesting that they shade into each other. **4.2 Neologisms**. Neologisms means new words. When we develop a theory, we may have concepts that have not had names before, and we find or create words to name them. Sometimes we use Greek or Latin, sometimes we use combinations of old words (as in German), sometimes we use phrases (as in French), sometimes we just take an old word and use it in a new way: anticathexis, Gemeinschaftsgefühl, être-en-soi, and self, for examples. It doesn't take much explaining to see how a word like self or anxiety or ego has hundreds of different meanings, depending on the theorist! **4.3 Metaphors**. Metaphors (or similes, more exactly) are words or phrases that, while not literally true, somehow capture some aspect of the truth. Every theorist uses models of the human personality in one form or another, but it would be a mistake to confuse the model- the metaphor- for the real thing! A good example is the common present-day use of the computer and information-processing in general as a metaphor for human functioning. Do we work something like computers? Yes, in fact, several aspects of our functioning work like that. Are we computers? No, of course not. The metaphor fails in the long run. But it is useful, and that's how we have to view them. It\'s like a map: It helps you find your way, but you'd hardly confuse it with the territory itself! **5. Evidence**. Evidence, or rather the lack of evidence, is of course another problem. What kind of support do you have for your theory? Or was it something you dreamed up while on a hallucinogenic?  There are several kinds of evidence: Anecdotal, clinical, phenomenological, correlational, and experimental. **5.1 Anecdotal Evidence** is the casual kind of evidence, usually given in story form: For example "I remember when\...," and "I heard that\...," It is, of course, notoriously inaccurate. It is best to use this kind of evidence only as a motivation for further research. **5.2 Clinical Evidence** is evidence gathered from therapy sessions. It is more carefully recorded by people with considerable training. Its major weakness is that it tends to be highly individual and even unusual, because you are describing a person who is almost by definition an unusual individual! Clinical evidence does provide the foundation of most of the theories we will look at, although most follow up with further research. **5.3 Phenomenological Evidence** is the result of careful observation of people in various circumstances, as well as introspection involving one's own psychological processes. Many of the theorists we will look at have done phenomenological research, either formally or informally. It requires considerable training as well as a certain natural ability. Its weakness is that we have a hard time telling whether the researcher has done a good job. **5.4 Correlational research** in personality usually involves the creation and use of personality tests. The scores from these tests are compared with other measurable aspects of life, as well as with other tests. So we might create a test for shyness (introversion), and compare it with the scores on intelligence tests or with ratings of job satisfaction. Unfortunately, measuring things doesn't tell you how they work or even if they are real, and many things resist measurement altogether. **5.5 Experimental Research** is the most controlled and precise form of research, and, if the issues you are concerned with are amenable to experimentation, it is the preferred method. Experimentation, as you know, involves random selection of subjects, careful control of conditions, great concern to avoid undue influence, and usually measurement and statistics. Its weakness is that it has a hard time getting at many of the issues personality theorists are most interested in. How do you control or measure things like love, anger, or awareness?  **Ethnic and Gender Issues in Personality** Most early views by personality theorists share the defining characteristics of their being all white, of European or American heritage and almost all were men. The study of ethnic minorities was limited. And yet, the personality theorists would imply that their scientific findings concerning personality were valid for all people, regardless of gender, race, or ethnic origin. Today, research, observations and our own experiences tell us that culture and ethnic issues really impact personality. Many researchers have attempted to generate theories to explain how these various characteristics influence individual and group behaviour. In psychology, particularly, there has always been pressure for parsimony in the development of theoretical analysis. The pressure for "elegant" or "clean" results, at times coupled with political concerns (Scarf, 1988), has often led psychologists to examine one trait at a time. Observations of multiple characteristics have been infrequent especially when those characteristics deal with socially sensitive issues, such as gender and race. On an intellectual level, most investigators recognize that status characteristics are not easily isolated in real people. In practice, however, theories rely heavily on data constrained by the assumptions of majority dominance and universality. In other words, most researchers focus their investigations on Whites. Further, they freely extrapolate from their data to other groups with minimal consideration about the appropriateness of generalizations. Scarf (1988) suggests that avoiding issues of race and gender serves neither the development of accurate information, nor the best interests of the groups involved. For example researchers examined personality at the level of the 10 aspects of the Big Five, and demonstrated that gender differences in personality traits were even more pervasive than had typically been reported. In every one of the 10 traits assessed, significant gender differences were evident. For some Big Five domains, the aspect level traits showed gender differences in opposite directions, which helped to explain why gender differences were not typically evident for the Big Five domains of **Conscientiousness and Openness/Intellect**, and why the gender difference for **Extraversion** was typically very small. Clearly the average personalities of men and women were systematically different. Did this mean that Bill Cosby's metaphor, that men and women were from "different species," was apt? Researchers cautioned against adopting such a dramatic interpretation of the pervasive gender differences in personality that they reported in the study. All of the mean differences they found (and all of the differences that had been found in the past -- e.g., Feingold, 1994; Costa et al., 2001) were small to moderate. This means that the distributions of traits for men and women were largely overlapping. Although the mean differences in personality between genders may be important in shaping human experience and human culture, they were probably not so large as to preclude effective communication between men and women. Unlike Bill Cosby, it was optimistic that any difficulties in communication between men and women were due to primarily cultural norms that were amenable to change, rather than to differences in basic personality traits, which were much more difficult to change. Assessment in the Study of Personality -------------------------------------- ### Assessment measures are vital in our attempt to understand personality, by differentiating between normal and abnormal behaviours and feelings. Clinicians are able to diagnose disorders and determine the best course of therapy. School psychologists assess a student's learning problems, counseling psychologists measure job applicants for certain employment requirements. Psychologists doing research assess the participants to account for their behaviour in an experiment or to correlate their personality traits with other measurements. ### ### *a)* Standardization involves the consistency or uniformity of conditions and procedures for administering a test. Everyone taking a test must take the test under the same conditions and in the same or similar environment as others. [*Reliability*] involves the consistency of response to an assessment device. There are several methods to determine the reliability of a test before use. The *[test-retest] method* involves giving a subject the same test twice over a period of time to see if the two sets of scores on the tests are highly correlated. Reliability is further measured by the use of the *[equivalent-forms method]*, which consists of two comparable forms of a test. The *[split-halves] method* is where a test is administered once and then the scores of half the test are compared with the scores of the other half. *Validity* refers to whether the assessment device measures what it is intended to measure. A good test must first have good validity and good reliability. [*Predictive validity* i]s a prediction, (before the test is given); on how well we can predict future behaviour by the test scores. *[Content validity]* refers to the test's individual items or questions, and whether they describe behaviour accurately like we want them to do. *Construct validity* relates to a test's ability to measure a construct, such as a question concerning behaviour, like a trait or motive. ### ### b) The *Self-Report Inventory* approach involves a paper-and-pencil type test which subjects complete by themselves about their own behaviour and feelings. The *Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI*) is the most widely used psychological test. A true-false test consisting of 567 statements for assessing personality issues; this test is a valid measure which can discriminate between neurotics and psychotics and between emotionally healthy and emotionally disturbed persons. The *California Psychological Inventory* provides 17 personality dimensions. These self-report measures are objective in their scoring and have led to the widespread use of automated personality assessment programs on a computer. ### ### c) Projective techniques were developed to probe into the unconscious and were inspired by Freud's work. The tests present a stimulus, such as an inkblot or a picture which can then be interpreted, especially with those who may be emotionally disturbed. Projectives are subjective and are not high in reliability or validity. The *Rorschach Inkblot Technique* is a test with 10 cards of black and sometimes colored ink. The subject is asked what they perceive in the inkblots. Responses are interpreted by the examiner. Several interpretation systems are available for scoring the Rorshach but it is a less valid test than MMPI. The *Thematic Apperception Test (TAT)* consists of 20 vague pictures. The subject is asked to make up a story about what they perceive in the pictures. The interpreter subjectively scores the TAT and this is used to measure specific aspects of personality, such as the needs for achievement, affiliation, and power. ### ### d) Behaviour assessments are given with the use of questionnaires, while positive and negative experiences are observed in the use of Thought Sampling. This procedure is typically used with groups. ### According to the authors, the assessment of personality can be influenced by a person's gender. For example, women score higher in depression, anxiety, and related disorders than men. More women are seen in therapy and for longer periods of time than men. Some personality tests have been translated for use in other cultures, however there might be potential problems with "westernizing" important personality characteristics such as close family orientation, emphasizing harmony with others, and showing frugality in everyday lives. These values are important to Asian cultures, but not as valued in western cultures. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ "Always be yourself, express yourself, have faith in yourself, do not go out and look for a successful personality and duplicate it". **Bruce Lee**