trait approach - shoreline community college 236 ex… · trait approach i. introduction ii. common...

Trait Approach

I. Introduction II. Common Characteristics III. Gordon Allport IV. Henry Murray V. Raymond Cattell VI. The Big Five Model VII. The Interpersonal Circumplex VIII.Modern Applications of the Trait Approach IX. Criticisms & Limitations X. Strengths

I. Introduction

II. Common Characteristics

• Focus on average behavior

• Less concerned with underlying mechanisms

• Less to say about personality change

III. Gordon Allport

• Nomothetic versus ideographic approaches to personality

• Central traits

• Secondary traits

• Cardinal traits

• The proprium

IV. Henry Murray

• Personology

• Psychogenic needs

• Some examples:

– Achievement

– Affiliation

– Dominance

– Nurturance

– Play

V. Raymond Cattell

• Factor analysis

• The 16 Personality Factor Inventory

Factor Contrast

Warmth Cold, selfish Supportive, comforting

Intellect Instinctive, unstable Cerebral, analytical

Emotional Stability Irritable, moody Level headed, calm

Aggressiveness Modest, docile Controlling, tough

Liveliness Somber, restrained Wild, fun-loving

Dutifulness Untraditional, rebellious Conforming, traditional

Social Assertiveness Shy, withdrawn Uninhibited, bold

Sensitivity Coarse, tough Touchy, soft

Paranoia Trusting, easy-going Wary, suspicious

Abstractness Practical, regular Strange, imaginative

Introversion Open friendly Private, quiet

Anxiety Confident, self-assured Fearful, self-doubting

Open-mindedness Set-in-one’s-ways Curious, exploratory

Independence Outgoing, social Loner, craves solitude

Perfectionism Disorganized, messy Orderly, thorough

Tension Relaxed, cool Stressed, unsatisfied

VI. The Big Five Approach

Trait Contrast

Openness Down to earth Conventional, uncreative Prefer routine

Imaginative Original, creative

Prefer variety

Conscientiousness Lazy Aimless Quitting

Hardworking Ambitious

Persevering

Extraversion Reserved Loner Quiet

Affectionate Joiner

Talkative

Agreeableness Antagonistic Ruthless Suspicious

Acquiescent Softhearted

Trusting

Neuroticism (emotional

Stability

Calm Even tempered Hardy

Worrying Temperamental

Vulnerable

VII. The Interpersonal Circumplex

Sample Scatter Plot

Correlation Matrix

Trait 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

1. Forceful 1.00 .77 -.81 -.84 .12 .04 -.08 .01

2. Assertive 1.00 -.77 -.83 .06 .05 .11 -.09

3. Meek 1.00 .79 .02 -.04 .01 .07

4. Timid 1.00 .12 .06 .08 -.09

5. Kind 1.00 .78 -.81 -.90

6. Agreeable 1.00 -.78 -.80

7. Cold 1.00 .77

8. Cruel 1.00

Interpersonal Dimensions Forceful

Assertive

Meek Timid

Kind Agreeable

Cold Cruel Hostile Friendly

Dominant

Submissive

Laws of Complementarity

• Dominance pulls submission

• Submission pulls dominance

• Friendliness pulls friendliness

• Hostility pulls hostility

Interpersonal Circumplex Types

• Hostile-Submissive Types:

– Rebellious Distrustful Personality

– Self-effacing Masochistic Personality

• Friendly-Submissive Types

– Docile Dependent Personality

– Cooperative Overconventional Personality

Interpersonal Circumplex Types

• Friendly-Dominant Types:

– Responsible Hypernormal Personality

– Managerial Autocratic Personality

• Hostile-Dominant Types

– Competitive Narcissistic Personality

– Aggressive Sadistic Personality

VIII. Modern Applications of the Trait Approach

• Type A Behavior

• The MMPI

MMPI

• Example of an “empirically derived” test

• Questions “earn” their way onto the final test by statistically differentiating different groups of people (people with and without depression, people with and without schizophrenia, people with and without alcohol problems, etc…)

Simulated MMPI Items

Simulated MMPI Items

MMPI Clinical Scales

MMPI Clinical Scales

IX. Criticisms & Limitations

X. Strengths

The Biological Perspective

I. Introduction

II. Genetic Factors in Personality

III. Eysenck’s Theory of Personality

IV. Temperament

V. Cerebral Activation Patterns

VI. Evolutionary Personality Theory

I. Introduction

II. Genetic Factors in Personality

Trait Genetic (Heritability)

Familial Environment

Non-shared Environment

Well-being .48 .13 .39

Social Potency .54 .10 .39

Achievement .39 .11 .50

Social Closeness .40 .19 .41

Stress Reaction .53 .00 .47

Alienation .45 .11 .54

Aggression .44 .00 .56

Control .44 .00 .56

Harm Avoidance .55 .00 .45

Traditionalism .45 .12 .43

Absorption .50 .03 .47

Positive Emotionality .40 .22 .38

Negative Emotionality .55 .02 .43

Constraint .58 .00 .42

(Tellegen et al., 1988)

III. Eysenck’s Theory of Personality

Eysenck’s Supertraits or Types

• Extraversion

• Neuroticism

• Psychoticism

Eysenck’s Hierarchical Model

Extraversion

Impulsiveness Sociability

HR1 HR2 HR3

SR1 SR2 SR3 SR4

Activity Liveliness Excitability

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Eysenck’s Two-Factor Model

Extraversion & Mood

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Mon Tue Wed Thur Fri Sat Sun

Introverts

Extraverts

Positive Mood Score

IV. Temperament

Buss & Plomin’s Temperament Factors

• Activity

– Vigor, tempo

• Emotionality

– Fear, anger, distress

• Sociability

– Attention of others, share activities, interaction

• (Impulsivity)

Temperament and Genetics

-0.2

-0.1

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Emotionality Activity Sociability

Identical Twins

Fraternal Twins

Degree of Correlation

V. Cerebral Activation Patterns

VI. Evolutionary Personality Theory

What if Charles Darwin had been a psychologist?

“So, tell me about your mother…”

The Humanistic Approach

I. Introduction

II. The Personality Theory of Carl Rogers

III. Modern Humanistic Concepts

I. Introduction

Roots of the Humanistic Movement

• Existential philosophy

• The ideas of Carl Rogers & Abraham Maslow

Common Characteristics of Humanistic Theories

• An emphasis on personal responsibility

• Here and now focus

• Phenomenology

• Growth

II. The Personality Theory of Carl Rogers

Rogers’ Fully-Functioning Person

• Trust their feelings/Intuitions

• Experience feelings intensely & deeply

• Accept and express all feelings

• Less likely to conform to social roles

• Present focused

• Honest & open

• Open to and learn from experience

• Constantly developing & growing

• Oriented towards fully living life

• Show care and concern for others

• Creative

Key Definitions

• Self-Concept: An organized set of beliefs that you hold about yourself. (Who are you? Describe yourself.)

• Self-Esteem: One’s feelings of high or low self-worth (How do you feel about your self-concept?)

Basic Needs

• Self-consistency: The absence of major conflict between self-perceptions

• Congruence: Consistency between self-perceptions and experience

Anxiety & Defense

• Subception: the unconscious perception of incongruence

• Triggers defenses of distortion & denial

Self-Concept

Incongruence

Experience

Self-Concept

Congruence & the Fully Functioning Person

Experience

Conditional & Unconditional Positive Regard

• Additional needs:

– Positive regard

– Positive self-regard

• Conditional positive regard from parents creates “conditions of worth”

Conditions of Worth

• Personal standards that dictate when a person can feel OK about him/herself.

Sample Q-Sort Statements

• I am optimistic. • I often feel guilty. • I am intelligent. • I express my emotions

freely. • I understand myself. • I am lazy. • I am generally happy. • I am moody.

• I am ambitious • I am an impulsive person. • I get anxious easily. • I make strong demands

on myself. • I get along easily with

others. • I often feel driven. • I am self-reliant. • I am responsible for my

troubles.

The Q-Sort & Psychotherapeutic Change

III. Modern Humanistic Concepts

Self-Esteem & Failure (Brockner et al., 1987)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Did Well on FirstTest

Did Poorly on FirstTest

High Self-Esteem

Low Self-Esteem

Grade on Second Test

Social Attribute Ratings & Self-Esteem (Brown & Smart, 1991)

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

High Self-Esteem Low Self-Esteem

Success

Failure

Rating of Social Attributes

Do you want to compare your exam to another student’s?

High Low

worse than

you.

better than

you.

Self-esteem Told this

student did…

“Sure!”

“NO WAY!” “Let’s do it.”

“Why Not.”

Self-Esteem & Western Culture Exposure in Asian-Canadians

(APA, 1999)

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45

Never Been Abroad

Been Abroad

Recent Immigrants

Long-Term Immigrants

2nd Generation

3rd Generation

Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale Score