MA-Psychology-book-PERSONALITY-PSYCHOLOGYPAPSY101-munotes

Page 1

1 1
INTRAPSYCHIC DOMAIN – I
Unit Structure :
1.0 Objectives
1.1 Psychoanalytic Aspects of Personality
1.1.1 Theory of Mind
1.1.2 Structure of Personality
1.1.3 Defense Mechanisms
1.1.4 Stages of Personality Development
1.1.5 Psychoanalytic Techni ques
1.1.6 The process of Psychoanalysis
1.2 Psychodynamic Perspective: Contemporary Issues
1.2.1 Criticisms of Freud's theory
1.2.2 Neo-Analytic Movement/ Approach
1.2.3 Carl Jung
1.2.4 Alfred Adler
1.2.5 Karen Horney
1.3 Summary
1.4 Questions
1.5 References

1.0 OBJECTIVES

 To understand the structure of mind as presented by Freud
 To study the structure of Personality as presented by Freud
 To know about Psychoanalytic techniques of
therapy
 To know a bout Freud’s Theory of Personality Development
 To gain an understanding on Freud's defense mechanisms munotes.in

Page 2

Personality Psychology
2  Study Neo -Analytical Approach
 To know about Alfred Adler's theory on personality
 To study Karen Horney's theory on personality
1.1 PSYCHOANALYTIC ASPECTS OF PERSONALITY
Sigmund Freud was the proponent of the Psychoanalytic school of
thought. In this chapter, we will learn about his theories of Personality
development and theories of mind, but before proceeding further it is
imperative to understand the con cept of Psychoanalysis.
Freud's theory of Psychoanalysis emphasized the unconscious as the
driving force behind Personality. Freud believed that all individuals have a
form of Psychic energy that drives our behaviours. This Psychic energy is
limited and h e said that our lives are governed by two conflicting forces
which are Eros (Life instinct) and Thanatos (Death instinct). He
emphasized that Sex and Aggression were two basic drives that influenced
all our behaviour.
Freud’s theory of Personality is a det erministic theory as it stated that
much of an individual's behaviour is predetermined and an individual has
no choice while responding to an environment.
1.1.1 Theory of Mind :
Freud stated that our mind is made of three parts:
1. Conscious : The smallest part of the mind is known as the Conscious. It
contains thoughts, feelings that are currently in our conscious
awareness.
2. Pre-conscious : The second part of the mind, which is slightly bigger
than the conscious, is known as the pre -conscious. It is made up of
thoughts and feelings that are currently not a part of our conscious
awareness, but can be brought to mind, if the need arises. It includes
memories, thoughts, dreams which can be easily retrieved and brought
into the conscious.
3. Unconscious : The third and the largest part of our mind is known as
the unconscious. It is composed of thoughts, desires, urges, conflicts
and memories which are out of our conscious awareness. The
unconscious contains memories, thoughts, unacceptable urges which
are hidden from awaren ess, the knowledge and experience which is so
troubling that it may cause anxiety to the individual.
1.1.2 Structure of Personality :
According to Freud, Personality was composed of three parts - id, ego, and
superego.
Id is the primitive part of personal ity and is considered to be the reservoir
of energy. According to Freud, it is something we are born with and
contains all primitive urges and drives. Id operates on the ‘Pleasure munotes.in

Page 3

Intrapsychic Domain – I
3 principle’, which demands immediate gratification of wishes. Id is
engaged i n primary process thinking which is thinking devoid of logical
rules. Id may also engage in wish fulfilment wherein when something is
unavailable, one imagines that object/event which leads to temporary
satisfaction of that urge. The Id cannot tolerate any delay in gratification
of urges.
The superego is the part of the personality that develops after id and is the
part of the personality that develops when a child undergoes potty training.
It operates on the ‘Morality principle’. The superego is that part of the
mind that internalizes ideals, values and morals of society. Whenever we
do something wrong, it is the superego which makes us feel guilty,
ashamed or embarrassed. It sets moral standards for individuals and acts as
a source of judgement. It may be referred to as our conscience as it helps
in enforcing and deciding what is wrong and what is right. Superego uses
guilt as a tool to enforce moral standards.
The Ego was the part of the personality that aimed at striking a balance
between the Id’s wishe s and ego's rules. It operates on the ‘Reality
principle’. Ego delays gratification of the id's urges until it is appropriate
to do so. It may be understood as the executive part of our personality.
Ego engages in secondary process thinking which can be un derstood as
the process of development of strategies for problem solving and obtaining
satisfaction. The ego takes into consideration constraints in reality and
then decides the appropriate situation where id’s urges can be satisfied.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS:
 Write a short note on Id, Ego and Superego.
1.1.3 Defense Mechanisms :
Freud posited that whenever material from the unconscious comes into
conscious awareness, it disturbs the individual and causes anxiety. Thus,
individuals may employ various cognitive processes and behaviours that
help keep anxiety at bay. Some of these are:
1. Repression : Pushing down unacceptable thoughts, desires,
uncomfortable memories and experiences into the unconscious without
conscious awareness. For example, a girl who was sexual ly abused as a
child, forgets about that experience and suddenly remembers years later
when she sees a similar scene in a movie.
2. Regression : Going back to an earlier stage of personality/ behaviour
which was secure. For example, curling up while sleeping represents
the position of babies when they are secure in their mother's womb.
3. Displacement : Redirecting a threatening impulse from a more
threatening to less threatening object. For example, when your boss
yells at you, you are frustrated and when you r each home you have an
angry outburst at your sibling when he/she teases you about something
trivial. In the current example, you cannot yell back at your boss as it is munotes.in

Page 4

Personality Psychology
4 a threatening impulse, expressing it would get you fired; hence you
suppress your anger and frustration. This frustration later comes out in
the form of yelling at your sibling. It is important to note that
displacement is not conscious redirection of anger or a threatening
impulse.
4. Projection : Act of externalizing one's own needs/desires/fe elings onto
someone else or something else. For example, a cheating spouse might
suspect their partner is unfaithful.

5. Rationalization : Giving logical, but not real reasons for behaviour,
which sometimes might have been driven by unconscious motives. For
example, Ashwin does not invite Sandeep (a coworker, whom Ashwin
dislikes) for his birthday party but reasons it out to himself saying the
venue would be too far for Sandeep, therefore it is better that he doesn't
have to take the trouble travelling such a long distance.

6. Sublimation : Channeling your unacceptable urges, desires, and
impulses into a desirable, socially acceptable and more productive art
form. For example: Ramesh channeled his traumatic feelings into his
paintings.

7. Reaction Formation : Projecting a completely outward response which
is completely opposite to what one feels inside. It is the process of
pushing away threatening impulses by over -emphasizing the opposite
reaction. This is done to prevent the anxiety that occurs when one
comes in contact when unconscious urges and desires. For example, if a
person has feelings of attraction towards the same gender and
acknowledgement of those feelings causes him anxiety then he/she will
oppose homosexuality in the outside world as the desire for s ame sex
attraction is threatening to the individual.

8. Denial : Refusal to acknowledge anxiety producing stimuli. For
example, a smoker denies that smoking is bad for his or her health.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS:
 What is Defense Mechanism and explain its types.
1.1.4 Stages of Personality Development :
Freud believed that all individuals pass through a set series of stages of
Personality development. Each of these stages is characterized by a
conflict and resolution for that conflict determines one's personality .
Freud's theory of personality development is known as the psychosexual
stages of development as each stage is characterized by sexual
gratification obtained through a particular body part. If at any stage, sexual
gratification remains incomplete then fix ation of libido occurs at that
stage. Fixation is understood as the excessive investment of sexual energy
at a particular stage. munotes.in

Page 5

Intrapsychic Domain – I
5 Oral Stage: The first stage is the oral stage of psychosexual development,
which begins from birth and lasts up to 1 and a hal f years. The mouth is
the center for gratification and babies seek pleasure through thumb
sucking, biting or other activities. Fixation of libido at this stage results in
an oral receptive or oral aggressive personality. Such individuals might
derive pleas ure from biting, sucking, chewing, sucking hard candy and
smoking cigarettes. They may also derive pleasure by talking and
constantly seeking knowledge.
Anal Stage : The second stage of psychosexual development is referred to
as the anal stage and it lasts from 1 and a half to 3 years of stage. This is
the stage where children are exposed to toilet training and are exposed to
societal rules for the first time. Pleasure is obtained through the anus
through the acts of expelling feces or retaining bodily wast e material.
Fixation of libido results in development of an anal -expulsive or anal -
retentive personality. When toilet training has been too harsh and the child
lives in constant fear of punishments, the child may grow up to have an
anal-retentive personali ty. Such individuals may be too stingy and may be
overly concerned with order, neatness and organization. While some
children, who have had very lenient toilet training, may develop an anal
expulsive personality. They may derive pleasure by not following r ules or
regulations that constrain their freedom of action.
Phallic Stage : The third stage of psychosexual development is referred to
as the phallic stage of development. The genitals are the source for
gratification at this stage. This stage roughly corr esponds to when a child
is 3- 6 years old. Children develop feelings of attraction towards parent of
the opposite sex while harboring dislike towards parent of the same sex. In
boys, this attraction towards the mother and rivalry towards the father is
termed as the Oedipal Complex. In the case of girls, these feelings of
sexual attraction towards their father while rivalry towards the mother is
known as the Electra complex. Boys feel that they have to compete with
their father for the love of their mother. They also feel anxious that their
father might punish them for having feelings of attraction towards their
mother and might castrate their penis. This fear held by boys is known as
Castration anxiety. Little girls on the other hand, might realize that they do
not have a penis like boys and might resent their mother for it. This
resentment is understood as Penis envy. These feelings of anxiety are
reduced when children begin to imitate behaviours of parent of the same
sex. This process is known as Identifica tion.
Latency stage: The fourth stage is understood as the latency stage. This is
the stage that begins when a child begins formal schooling. It roughly
corresponds to when a child is 5 or 6 years of age. The child is engrossed
in school activities and sex ual feelings are dormant at this stage. Sexual
energy is channeled into activities conducted in school.
Genital stage: The fifth stage is known as the genital stage. At this stage,
adolescents begin having feelings of sexual attraction towards members of
the opposite sex in their peer group. They are now capable of intense munotes.in

Page 6

Personality Psychology
6 feelings of love and intimacy and might engage in deep relationships with
others. This stage lasts till adulthood.
1.1.5 Psychoanalytic Techniques :
There are three techniques that are m ajorly used by psychoanalysts for
revealing the unconscious. These are:
A. Dream Analysis: In this technique, the content of dreams is analyzed
and interpreted in order to understand unconscious and unacceptable
urges. Often interpretation of dreams leads fo r uncovering of two types
of content namely, manifest content and latent content. Manifest
content are the symbols and images, which are expressed as part of the
dream. Latent content is the content which is hidden, which is not
expressed as part of the dr eam. Often direct contact with one's
unacceptable urges or deep desires may cause distress to the
individual, hence most of the latent content is disguised into forms and
symbols which are then expressed in the dream as manifest
content. For example, an i ndividual may dream that he/she is
complimented by a teacher for their work on a presentation. This
scenario would be understood as the latent content. However, Freud
may interpret this dream as the individual having feelings of attraction
towards that tea cher. This interpretation of what the symbols in the
dream signify is understood is as manifest content.
B. Free Association: This technique involves letting the patient say
whatever comes to his or her mind. This method aids in removing the
censor that freq uently blocks significant information from entering our
conscious awareness.
C. Projective Techniques: These techniques rely on the idea of the
Projective Hypothesis. Projective hypothesis states that when an
individual encounters relatively unstructured, am biguous stimuli,
he/she projects their inner thoughts, desires, urges, conflicts onto that
stimuli.
Some of the common projective techniques include Draw a Person Test,
Draw a House Test, Thematic Apperception Test, Rorschach Inkblot Test
and so on. In Dr aw a Person test, an individual is asked to draw a person
and the drawing helps the therapist to interpret the personality of the
patient. For example, if a patient draws an excessively large head which is
disproportionate to the other parts of the body, t hen one can infer that
person thinks highly of himself. Likewise, other projective Techniques
may be used to understand the conflicts and desires of the patient.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS:
 What are different Psychoanalytic techniques?
1.1.6 The Process of Psy choanalysis :
With the help of dream analysis, free association and projective
techniques, the psychoanalyst is able to uncover material from the munotes.in

Page 7

Intrapsychic Domain – I
7 unconscious which may be the source of the patient's problems. It is
imperative that the patient also begins to understand his or her conflicts
and suppressed urges that contribute to the problem. After conducting a
number of sessions, the analyst offers his or her interpretation of the
situation. The analyst might confront the patient with an explanation of
someth ing she has been keeping away from herself. This understanding
that the patient begins to possess about the unconscious source of the
problem is understood as insight. It may be defined as an intense
emotional experience that accompanies the release of rep ressed material.
At times, the process of gaining insight may be interrupted through the
development of a cognitive process known as resistance. Resistance is the
process where the patient unconsciously sets up obstacles to progress
when material from the unconscious threatens the individual. Thus, the
patient might display behaviours, such as forgetting appointments, not
paying the analyst's bill, arriving late at sessions or spending enormous
amounts of time in sessions talking about trivial matters.
It is important to deal with resistance in a correct manner so that it should
not hamper progress. Another phenomenon that might occur during the
process of psychoanalysis, is the phenomenon of transference.
Transference involves the patient transferring fe elings and thoughts held
towards a significant other in the patient's life into the therapist. For
example, if a person holds feelings of resentment towards his or her father
and begins to see the therapist as a father, he or she might transfer the
feeling s of resentment towards the therapist. Transference is an important
step in the Psychoanalysis process as it may help uncover repressed
feelings and attitudes that may contribute to the patient's problems.
CHECK THE PROGRESS:
 Explain structure of Personali ty.
 What are the techniques used in Psychoanalyses?
1.2 PSYCHODYNAMIC PERSPECTIVE:
CONTEMPORARY ISSUES
1.2.1 Criticisms of Freud's Theory :
One of the major strengths of Freud's Psychoanalytic theory was that it
was one of the earliest and the most comprehe nsive theories of human
nature. His theory had a major impact on Western thought and played a
significant role in sociology, literature, history and other social sciences.
One of the major criticisms of Freud's theory is that it is untestable and
unverifi able. One of the major strengths of any theory is that it can be
tested and can be falsified. Since it is almost impossible to test his theory,
therefore it is impossible to falsify it.
Another major criticism for Freud's theory was that it had no empiric al
basis. Thus, the manner in which observations were made which served as munotes.in

Page 8

Personality Psychology
8 the foundation for theory was challenged by a lot of researchers. Much of
his theory was based on interpretations of observations that he wrote and
not actual observations.
Another major criticism of Freud's theory was that, a small
unrepresentative sample was used as a basis to develop a general theory of
human population. Much of Freud's observations on human nature is
based on Freud's interactions with his patients. Most of these patients were
aristocratic upper -class, middle -aged women who were very verbal in
nature and had a lot of time to spare during their sessions. Hence, his
sample was very limited and the results of which could not be generalized
to the entire population.
Many researchers disagree with Freud's negative view on personality.
Freud suggested that the human nature is violent, self -centered and
impulsive. He stated that in the absence of the superego, humans would
self-destruct. This view was contested by a numb er of other researchers.
Freud through his writings implied that women were inferior to men
(Koffman 1985). He suggested that women's superego was weaker than
men and it was more difficult to cure women.
1.2.2 Neo -Analytical Movement/Approach :
The Neo -Anal ytic Movement/Approach was an approach developed by
followers of Freud who had worked with Freud initially, but later
disagreed with Freud on some major theoretical concepts. These included
Carl Jung, Karen Horney, Alfred Adler, Erik Erikson and others. So me of
the postulates of the Neo -Analytic school of thought were:
 Childhood continued to play an important role in personality
development of an individual.
 Personality development involves not just regulating sexual &
aggressive feelings, but also moving from an immature socially
dependent way of relating to others to a mature independent
relationship style (Westen 1990).
 Reduced focus on sexuality and sexual libido as factors influencing
personality development.
 Unconscious still plays an important role i n Personality.
 Behaviour often reflects compromises between forces of conflicting
nature.
While Classical Psychoanalytic theory believed that unconscious was the
basis of all behaviour, Neo -Analytic approaches distinguished between the
idea of a motivated and cognitive unconscious. Cognitive view of
unconscious believed that thoughts were considered to be unconscious as
they were beyond our conscious awareness and not because they
represented unacceptable urges or because they were repressed.
Researchers li ke Kihlstorm (1999) recognized that information could be munotes.in

Page 9

Intrapsychic Domain – I
9 part of our memories without us being aware of that information. This was
evident in the case of subliminal perception, where information presented
at sub -optimal levels of sensory perception, could still be recorded in our
perception without conscious awareness.
The phenomenon of priming where subliminal perception made material
more accessible in our brain was a prime example of cognitive
unconscious. Thus, the cognitive view of the unconscious wa s very
different from the view of the unconscious put forth by Freud who
regarded it as a reservoir of primitive and irrational urges that had an
overarching impact on behaviour and personality development.
1.2.3 Carl Jung :
Carl Jung theorized that the mi nd has four functions namely, thinking,
feeling, sensing and intuiting. Thinking refers to reasoning. Sensing refers
to gaining knowledge through senses. Feeling refers to trusting one's
emotions. And, intuition refers to trusting one's instincts. Jung sta ted that
people tend to view the view using one of the four functions which serves
as the primary or superior function.
Jung also spoke about two attitudes in personality development. These
were Extroversion and Introversion. Extroverts focus their psych ic energy
into the outside world while introverts focus their psychic energy
inwards. The four functions along with the two attitudes played a major
role in determining behaviour patterns of an individual.
Jung made a distinction between ‘personal unconsc ious’ and ‘collective
unconscious’. Personal unconscious consists of deep hidden thoughts,
memories and urges, while the collective unconscious consists of
experiences and symbols that are shared collectively by others. The
collective unconscious consists of archetypes which are emotional
symbols and ideas that are shared by people which exist from the
beginning of time. For example, the archetype of a mother is a person who
is caring, nurturing, loving towards the offspring. He also explained some
of the i mportant archetypes part of our unconscious.
Jung also spoke about the concepts of the persona and the shadow. The
persona is the part of personality which is seen by others, while the
shadow is the part of personality which is hidden from others.
Anothe r set of important archetypes explained by Jung were the concepts
of anima and animus. Anima referred to the unconscious feminine side of
males, while animus referred to the unconscious masculine side of
females.
1.2.4 Alfred Adler :
Alfred Adler believed that one of the major driving forces for our
personality and interaction pattern is the idea of "Striving for superiority".
He theorized that when individuals encounter events that leave them
powerless, they are overcome with an overwhelming sense of help lessness munotes.in

Page 10

Personality Psychology
10 and a sense of inferiority. Inability to overcome these feelings of
inferiority over a long period of time results in an inferiority complex for
that individual. Thus, the individual may feel that it is impossible to
achieve goals. For example, A Sportsperson who is consistently unable to
perform at sports events may believe he or she is inferior to others and
may not try to put in efforts to improve his or her performance.
Sometimes individuals may try to overcompensate these feelings of
inferio rity by having an inflated sense of self -worth. These inflated
feelings of self -worth are understood to be part of a Superiority complex.
Adler emphasized that birth order, that is, the position in which one is
born in the family also plays an important r ole in determining personality
characteristics. First -borne children receive special treatment, are given
independence, learn responsibility, and must adjust to losing their status as
the favourite kid. Children who are second -borne are born into a hostile
and competitive environment. Last -borne children are frequently treated
better and may continue to be treated as the family's infant. Only children
may develop independence and may face problems in sharing resources.
1.2.5 Karen Horney :
Karen Horney was one of Freud's followers that disagreed with the
concept of ‘penis envy’. She was one of the first researchers who
recognized the importance of culture and society in determining
Personality. She stated that women are not envious of the penis, but rather
are envious of the power and status that men hold in society and are
denied to women. She also stated that societal restrictions imposed on
women and lead women to envy the status and power men hold in
society.
She theorized that men experience the feelin gs of womb envy. Womb
envy refers to the phenomenon that men are envious of women's ability to
give birth. Thus, men seek to control women in order to compensate for
their lack of ability to bring life into this world.
Horney noted that many women also ex perience a cognitive process
known as ‘fear of success’. Many women believe that if they were to be
successful, they would lose their friends and hence may unconsciously
prepare themselves for failure.
She theorized that since children have to rely on adu lts to get their basic
needs met, they might experience powerlessness and may fear being left
alone. This fear of the child of being abandoned, helpless and insecure is
understood as basic anxiety. Individuals may try to deal with basic anxiety
by adopting one of three ways of behaviour namely moving towards
people, moving away from people by becoming aggressive and moving
against others. People who move towards others adopt a passive approach
and are people pleasers while those who move against others adop t an
aggressive approach and those who move away from others adopt a
withdrawn style and feel it is best to not engage emotionally with others. munotes.in

Page 11

Intrapsychic Domain – I
11
CHECK THE PROGRESS:
 Explain the contribution of Karen Horney, Alfred Adler and Carl
Yung in Neo - Analytical ap proach.
1.3 SUMMARY
This unit focused on Freud's contributions to Psychology. The theory of
mind with reference to preconscious, conscious and unconscious was
discussed. Conscious is the part of the mind that contains thoughts, ideas
in our conscious aware ness. Preconscious is the part of the mind that
contains memories and thoughts that are currently not in conscious
awareness but can be brought back to mind easily. The unconscious is the
largest part of our mind which stores our memories, unacceptable des ires,
primitive urges, conflicts that are hidden from our awareness.
The structure of personality with reference to id, ego, and superego was
discussed. Id was the primitive part of personality which worked on the
pleasure principle. Superego was the part that developed next and worked
on the morality principle. Ego was the executive part of personality which
worked on the reality principle.
We talked about Freud’s theory of psychosexual stages of personality
development and emphasis was laid on oral, ana l, phallic, latency and
genital stages. The techniques of dream analysis, free association and
projective techniques were focused on. Dream analysis is a process
wherein a patient's dreams are analyzed to understand the unconscious
conflicts troubling him/ her. Free association is the process of allowing the
patient to say whatever comes to his or her mind.
A critical review of Freud’s contributions was given followed by emphasis
on the Neo -Analytic Movement. The second half of the unit focused on
the Neo -Analytic Movement and theories given by Karen Horney, Alfred
Adler and Carl Jung. Carl Jung's typology of personality with reference to
introverts and extroverts along with Anima (feminine side of male
personality) and Animus (masculine side of female pers onality) were
elaborated. Adler's theory of personality with reference to inferiority
complex, striving for perfection and superiority complex were discussed.
Karen Horney's work on culture and feminism was described with
reference to the concept of womb e nvy and fear of success. Horney's
concept of basic anxiety which referred to a child's fear of being
abandoned, helpless and powerless was described in the unit.
1.4 QUESTIONS
Long answers :
 Write a detailed answer on theory of mind and theory of personality
given by Freud.

 Describe in detail Freud’s theory on personality development and
write a critical review of Freud’s psychoanalytic perspective munotes.in

Page 12

Personality Psychology
12  Describe in detail the techniques and process of Freudian
psychoanalysis

Short notes :

 Write a short not e on Alfred Adler’s view of personality
 Write a short note on Karen Horney
1.5 REFERENCES
 Buss D. M. & Larsen R. J. (2009). Personality Psychology: Domains
of Knowledge About Human Nature. NJ: McGraw Hill
Humanities.

 Corr, P. J. & Gerald Matthews, G . (2009). The Cambridge Handbook
of Personality Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.



munotes.in

Page 13

13 2
INTRAPSYCHIC DOMAIN – II
Unit Structure :
2.0 Objectives
2.1 Psychodynamic Perspective: Contemporary Issues
2.1.1 Erik Erikson
2.1.2 Object Relations Theory
2.2 Motives and Personality
2.2.1 Basic Concepts
2.2.2 Big Three Motives
2.3 Humanis tic Tradition
2.3.1 Maslow's hierarchy of needs
2.3.2 Characteristics of Self -actualizing persons
2.3.3 Roger’s Contributions to Humanistic Psychology
2.4 Summary
2.5 Questions
2.6 References
2.0 OBJECTIVES
 To study Erik Erikson's stages of persona lity development
 To know about Object Relations Theorists
 To understand what is the need for achievement
 To gain knowledge about the need for power
 To understand Maslow's hierarchy of needs
 To know about the core conditions of Client -Centred therapy
 To gai n an understanding of Rogers's contributions to therapy

munotes.in

Page 14

Personality Psychology
14 2.1 PSYCHODYNAMIC PERSPECTIVE:
CONTEMPORARY ISSUES
In the previous chapter, we studied about Freudian psychoanalytic
perspective and the theories of Carl Jung, Alfred Adler and Karen Horney.
In th is chapter, we will discuss the rest of Neo - Analytic scholars: Erik
Erikson and Object Relation Theorists. We will focus on Erik Erikson's
stages of Identity development. We will also learn about the big three
motives namely the need for achievement, the need for power and the
need for intimacy. We will focus on Humanistic Psychology with
reference to Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of needs and Carl Rogers’
contribution to Humanistic Psychology.
2.1.1 Erik Erikson :
Erik Erikson postulated a theory of personal ity development, which is
known as the psychosocial theory of personality development. He stated
that individuals pass through a series of eight stages of personality
development, where each stage represents a conflict between two
behaviours. Successful co mpletion of each stage leads to the development
of virtue at the end of each stage. These stages are as follows:
1. Trust v/s Mistrust: This stage represents a conflict between whether
an infant can trust and depend on their environment and caregivers or
not. If the infant is well taken care of and is provided love and
affection, the infant develops the value of trust. If the infant is not
provided with care or love, they may develop the idea of mistrust, that
is, others can never be trusted. Successful naviga tion of this stage
results in the experience of hope as a virtue.
2. Autonomy v/s Self -Shame and Doubt: This stage corresponds with
what is referred to as the Terrible Twos. Children might begin
exploring their environment and their skills and abilities. If the child
develops a sense of control and mastery over things, he or she develops
autonomy and the virtue of confidence. If the parents of the child are
restrictive and the child is not allowed to be independent, the child may
develop shame. If all goes we ll, the infant develops the virtue of will.
3. Initiative v/s Guilt: During this stage, children enter preschool and
would play together, organize goals and work with a leader. If all goes
well, children develop a sense of initiative and purpose, while if th ey
do not succeed at tasks; they may develop a sense of guilt and may
become resigned to failure.
4. Industry v/s Inferiority: At around age four, children may begin
trying out new activities and comparing themselves to their peers. If
they achieve success i n their activities, they develop a sense of
competence and achievement. If the child is unable to succeed in a task
or find an area in which he or she excels, they may develop a sense of
inferiority. munotes.in

Page 15

Intrapsychic Domain – II
15 5. Identity v/s Role Confusion: This stage occurs during ad olescence.
Adolescents experience an identity crisis at this stage and are often
trying to find answers to the question “Who am I?” They may try out
various activities and various roles to find an answer about their
identity. Some individuals might have th eir identity pre -decided and
would not like to explore alternatives. Such individuals might
experience identity foreclosure. While some individuals might take
time in exploring options and making a commitment to any Identity.
This process is known as ident ity moratorium. Successful navigation of
this stage results in the ego developing the skill of loyalty.
6. Intimacy v/s Isolation: This stage involves developing friendships and
intimate relationships with people. If the individual is able to make
relationsh ips that are nurturing, caring and mutually satisfying, he or
she develops the virtue of love. If the individual is unable to develop
meaningful friendships or relationships with people, he or she may
experience isolation. Successful navigation of this sta ge results in
experiencing the virtue of love.
7. Generativity v/s Stagnation: This stage occurs during adulthood.
During this stage, individuals may think about whether they have
created something that they really care about. Sometimes this may be in
the fo rm of a career or may be in the form of a family that an individual
has. On the other hand, some individuals when they look back at their
life may experience stagnation, where they are no longer experiencing
growth in terms of personal or professional life . Successful completion
of this stage leads to the development of the virtue of care.
8. Integrity v/s Despair: This is the last stage of life often coinciding
with late adulthood. In this stage, individuals look back at their life
thinking over whether they led a coherent happy life without regrets or
whether they are unhappy with the decisions they made in their life. If
they lead a happy life, they experience ego integrity; otherwise, they
lead a life of despair. Successful navigation of this stage results in
developing the virtue of wisdom.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS:
 Explain Erik Erikson’s theory of personality.
2.1.2 Object Relations Theory :
Object Relations theorists focus on an individual's relations with
significant others. Thus, mental representations of significant others play
an important role in determining an individual's personality. Otto
Kernberg and Heinz Kohut were prominent researchers in this paradigm.
According to Kernberg, the self is socially produced as a result of certain
interpersonal expe riences with other people. Some individuals may
constantly try to appear more powerful, more independent and more liked
than others. This style of inflated self -esteem is referred to as narcissism. munotes.in

Page 16

Personality Psychology
16 John Bowlby was another prominent Object Relations theor ist. Bowlby
studied the infant's attachment relationship with the mother and
determined whether the infant's needs for protection, nurturance and
support were met by the mother. He introduced the concept of separation
anxiety, which refers to the distress and agitation experienced by an infant
when the mother leaves.
Mary Ainsworth and her colleagues used a technique known as the
'strange situation procedure' to study separation anxiety in infants. This
strange situation procedure was a 20 -minute procedu re in which the
mother left the infant alone for a few minutes and the infant’s reactions to
this act were recorded. In this procedure, the infant and the mother enter a
room with a lot of toys. After some time, a stranger enters the room in the
presence of the mother. Shortly after, the mother leaves the infant alone in
the room with the stranger. After a few minutes are passed, the mother
returns to the room. Upon examining the patterns of behaviour of the
infants in the strange situation procedure, infa nts were categorized as
having three types of attachment styles.
1. Securely attached: These infants explored the new environment,
approached the stranger at times wanting to be held by them then, and
when the mother returned, they sought contact with the mo ther and
finally went on to explore the environment. These were calm in the
absence of the mother.
2. Avoidantly attached: These infants were unbothered by the mother's
departure and continued to remain unbothered even after the mother
returned. They avoided contact with the mother and continued to be
engrossed in their own world.
3. Ambivalently attached: These infants expressed distress in the
absence of the mother. When the mother returned, they first sought
contact with the mother and then expressed their a nger by avoiding
their mother.
Later research on mothers of these three groups of infants revealed that
there was a difference in behaviour among mothers of infants of the three
groups. Mothers of securely attached infants provided more stimulation
and aff ection to their babies and responded to their babies much more as
compared to mothers of infants from the other two groups. Mothers of
both avoidantly attached babies and ambivalently attached babies paid
lesser attention and were less responsive to their babies.
According to Bowlby, the infant's early experiences and responses to the
parents served as the basis for subsequent adult interactions. Thus, these
experiences subconsciously influenced expectations for later relationships.
Therefore, if an infant had their needs for love and care met by their
parents, they were likely to feel that they could trust others and their needs
for love and affection would be met by other individuals. However, if an
infant felt that they are unwanted or they cannot trust their parents to take
care of them, they might come to believe that no one else would want
them either. munotes.in

Page 17

Intrapsychic Domain – II
17 Research has also shown that parent -infant attachment style was positively
associated with relationship style developed later during adulthood.
CHECK Y OUR PROGRESS:
 Explain 3 types of attachment styles.
2.2 MOTIVES AND PERSONALITY
2.2.1 Basic Concepts :
What is a Need?
Before we delve into the big three motives, it is important to understand
the concepts of motives, needs and the difference between t he two.
Motives are “internal states that arouse and direct behaviour towards a
specific object or goal". These may be caused by a deficit or lack of
something.
While needs can be understood as states of tension within the individual.
Motives are based on needs. As a need is satisfied, the state of tension is
reduced. For example, the need to drink water creates the motive for thirst.
Thus, a thirsty person might see an oasis in the middle of a desert as he or
she wants to reduce the state of tension cause d by thirst. Motives force
people to perceive, think and act in specific ways that fulfil a need. Thus,
the motive for hunger might prompt individuals to work in exchange for
food.
Apperception and TAT
The Thematic Apperception Test is a projective techn ique, which involves
presenting a few cards with images on them to individuals and noting
down the individual's responses to the cards. Apperception refers to the
process in which an individual attaches meaning to stimuli he or she
perceives. This test was developed by Henry Murray and Cristina Morgan
in 1935. The client is presented with 30 cards and for each card, the client
has to narrate a story about what is happening in the picture, what led to
this event and what will happen in the future. Through th e responses, the
clinician is able to identify the needs and presses of the environment.
Presses are need -relevant aspects of the environment. Murray postulated
that there is a so -called real environment and a perceived environment.
There are two types of presses, namely Alpha Press and Beta Press. The
alpha press is understood as the objective reality, which is the so -called
real environment. The beta press is understood as reality as perceived by
the individual.
TAT can also be used to determine both sta te levels and trait levels of a
need. State levels of a need refer to the "Momentary amount of a specific
need, which can fluctuate under specific circumstances." Trait levels of a
need refer to "measuring a person's average tendency on a specific trait."
munotes.in

Page 18

Personality Psychology
18 2.2.2 Big Three Motives :
1. Need for Achievement :
Major research on the need for achievement was done by David
McClelland. People who are high on this need, tend to be competitive,
have the desire to do better, to be successful. Challenges and a variety of
tasks seem to energize this need. This need is associated with curiosity,
interest and exploration. People with high trait levels of Need for
Achievement prefer tasks with moderate levels of difficulty. This is
because an easy task poses no challenge a s everybody else can accomplish
the task and an impossible task will not provide an opportunity to do better
as there is fear of failure. People with high trait levels of Need for
Achievement prefer situations in which they are responsible for an
outcome a nd prefer tasks in which feedback is provided.
Sex Differences in Need for Achievement: Research has found that
differences might exist between the sexes in terms of life outcomes among
those with a high need for achievement. A high need for Achievement i n
men is usually associated with successful business outcomes, while for
women, outcomes associated with a high need for Achievement may
depend on whether the woman values family life, career or both. With
respect to women, who valued family more, the need for Achievement
was observed in women's investment in activities of dating and courtship
such as talking to their friends about their boyfriends more frequently and
being more concerned about the one's physical appearance. While for
women, who valued both family and career, the need for achievement was
associated with getting higher grades, completing college, marrying and
starting a family life later. (Kostner and McClelland, 1990)
It has been found that the women with high levels of need for
achievemen t had mothers, who were always critical, demanding and
unsupportive of their daughter's achievements, while men with high levels
of need for Achievement had come from families that provided high
emotional support and motivation to them.
Promoting the Need for Achievement in Children: Research has found
that setting challenging tasks/standards for children can foster a need for
achievement in children. Such tasks need to have moderate difficulty
levels, such that they are not too easy, while at the same tim e, successful
completion of the task results in a feeling of accomplishment in children.
Parenting practices that encourage independence training in children also
help foster a high need for achievement in children. Independence training
refers to a parent ing practice that allows autonomy and independence to
children. For example, giving a child the freedom to choose their own
outfit would give them a sense of independence.
Research has also shown that individuals who are securely attached
develop a higher need for achievement as compared to those with an
ambivalent or avoidant attachment style. munotes.in

Page 19

Intrapsychic Domain – II
19 2. Need for Power:
Research on the need for power was done by David Winter. Winter (1973)
defines the need for power as a ' readiness or preference for having an
impact on other people'. This need is exerted when people are in situations
or positions that present an opportunity for exerting power. Research
on the need for power has found that people with a high need for power
tend to behave assertively in small grou p situations, take big gambling
risks, are likely to assume office in college, acquire more prestige
possessions such as sports cars, credit cards, etc. (McAdams 1990).
While research has found that there are no sex differences in average
levels of need fo r power, men with a high need for power may perform a
wide array of impulsive and aggressive behaviours. Men with a high need
for power have more dissatisfying dating relationships, arguments with
others, higher divorce rates and are more likely to engage in the sexual
exploitation of women. They may have sex at an earlier age than their
counterparts and may have more frequent sex partners compared to men
with a low need for power.
Impulsive behaviours such as drinking, aggression and sexual exploitation
can be avoided, if individuals are given responsibility training. For
example, taking care of a sibling may constitute part of responsibility
training.
It has been observed that when people with a high need for power face
challenges to their authority or ar e unlikely to get their way, then they are
likely to show a stress response. This stress response is understood as
power stress and it makes them more vulnerable to disease and illnesses.
3. Need for Intimacy :
Dan McAdams is the researcher, who is associat ed with the work on the
need for intimacy. This need refers to an individual's repeated preference
for warmth, close and communicative interaction with others (McAdams
1990).
Research has found that people with a high need for intimacy:
1. Spend more time d uring the day thinking about relationships,
2. Report more pleasant emotions when they are around people,
3. Smile, laugh more and make more eye contact,
4. Start up conversations more frequently and write more letters.
When asked to describe a typical time with a friend, people high on the
need for intimacy, report more one -on-one interactions instead of group
interactions. They are likely to listen to their peers and discuss intimate
personal topics such as feelings, hopes, and beliefs with them. This may
lead t hem to be rated as “sincere”, “not self -centred”, “loving” and “not
dominant by their peers” (McAdams, 1990).
Research has shown that the need for intimacy has been correlated with
positive life outcomes for both men and women. Among women, the need munotes.in

Page 20

Personality Psychology
20 for in timacy is correlated with higher life satisfaction and happiness while
among men need for intimacy has been associated with less strain in life.
With respect to the sex differences in the need for intimacy, it has been
observed that on average, women have a higher need for intimacy than
men.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS:
What are the three big motives?
2.3 HUMANISTIC TRADITION
Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow were the main proponents of
Humanistic Psychology. This field/ perspective of psychology believed
that h umans are innately good and know what is best for themselves. If
left to their own free will, humans will choose a path which is best for
themselves. Humanistic psychology was one of the first theories to
emphasize the idea of the free choice of an individ ual. This theory was not
deterministic in nature.
2.3.1 Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs :
Abraham Maslow developed a theory on personality and motivation,
which was known as the hierarchy of needs. In this theory, he postulated
that our needs are arranged at f ive different levels. The needs at the first
level are known as the physiological or biological needs and include
needs, such as hunger, thirst, sex, etc. These needs have a biological basis
as they help maintain homeostasis and are necessary for survival. Thus,
the need for food, air, water, and sleep are part of physiological needs.
Once an individual is able to fulfil physiological needs, he or she moves
on to fulfil the next level of needs. The needs at the second level are
known as the safety needs and include needs, such as the need for security
and shelter. The needs at the third level are known as love and
belongingness needs and include needs, such as the need for friendship,
family, social connection, etc. The needs at the fourth level are known as
esteem needs and include needs, such as the desire for strength,
confidence, achievement, recognition, etc. The needs at the fifth level are
self-actualizing needs or needs for self -actualization. Self -actualization
refers to the process of fulfilling on e’s highest potential. Maslow believed
that lower -order needs must be fulfilled before the higher -order needs.
Therefore, only if a person is able to fulfil all other needs, he or she will be
able to concentrate on the need for self -actualization.




munotes.in

Page 21

Intrapsychic Domain – II
21 Figure 2.1 Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

2.3.2 Characteristics of Self -Actualizing People :
Maslow highlighted a list of characteristics that are common to people
who have attained self -actualization. They include an affinity for solitude,
an efficient perception of re ality, spontaneity, deep ties with relatively
few people, a genuine desire to help the human race, acceptance of others,
themselves and fate, the continued freshness of appreciation, more
frequent peak experiences, democratic values, an ability to discri minate
between means and end, philosophical sense of humour, creativity,
independence from culture and environment, problem -focused.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS:
 Explain the characteristics of a self -actualizing person.
2.3.3 Roger’s Contributions to Humanistic Psychology :
Rogers believed that humans are innately good and basic human nature is
benevolent and positive. Thus, each individual if left to his or her own will
and would follow a path that is conducive to his growth and would do
what is best for him or h er. He introduced the idea of a fully -functioning
person, which is an individual who is on the path of self -actualization.
Fully -functioning persons are a) centred in the present, b) do not dwell
upon the past, c) trust themselves, their feelings and judge ments, and d)
when faced with decision -making, such individuals are less likely to look
for guidance from others and are more likely to trust their own thoughts
and instincts
Carl Rogers spoke about all children wanting to be accepted and loved by
parents and others. This inborn need for acceptance is known as the need
for positive regard. Parents often put conditions in front of children that
must be fulfilled by children in order to obtain love and affection from the
parents. These conditions are known as conditions of worth.
Positive regard, when earned by meeting specific conditions, is known as
conditional positive regard. Often these conditions of worth prove as
obstacles to the growth of an individual. Individuals become preoccupied munotes.in

Page 22

Personality Psychology
22 with what others want and may lose touch with their own desires and
wants. They may behave in ways that ensure others’ approval and not out
of their wishes or desires. This may lead to problems for their individual.
This outcome may be avoided if the individual is given un conditional
positive regard. Unconditional positive regard refers to loving and valuing
an individual for who he or she is without conditions or contingencies. By
providing unconditional positive regard, the therapist can allow the client
to be aware and a ccepting of his or her own true self.
Rogers viewed anxiety as a process which resulted from having an
experience that did not fit with one's self -perception. He also spoke about
the defence mechanism of distortion, whereby an individual modifies their
experience rather than their self -image to reduce the threat. For example,
if a person got a low grade in a subject, he or she would say that the
professors are unfair or may take an easy class next semester to modify his
or her experience.
Another importan t concept given by Rogers is the concept of
unconditional positive self -regard. Such individuals are able to trust
themselves and their feelings, are able to accept themselves for who they
really are, follow their own interests and therefore are able to gi ve
themselves Unconditional positive regard.
His approach to therapy is designed to let a person back on the path of
self-actualization. Rogers' style of therapy also known as client -centred
therapy, is a form of therapy in which the client directs the co urse of the
therapy and no guidance or interpretation is given to the client and no
actions are made to change the client directly. Rogers gave three core
conditions for therapy. These include:
a) Unconditional positive regard from the therapist where the th erapist
says everything the client says without passing judgement on the
client.
b) Genuine acceptance of the client by the therapist
c) Empathetic understanding: the client must feel that the therapist
understands him or her. According to Rogers, empathy is u nderstanding
the other person from his or her point of view. The therapist is able to
display empathy by restating the client's thoughts and feelings.
2.4 SUMMARY
In this unit, we learnt about motives and needs. The big three motives
namely, the need for achievement, the need for intimacy, and the need for
power were discussed in detail. The need for achievement refers to the
need to be successful and competitive in tasks. The need for power refers
to the tendency to use power as a way to influence people when they are in
certain positions. The need for intimacy refers to the preference or
readiness for warmth and close and deep relationships with others.
The latter half of the unit focused on humanistic psychology and the
contributions of Maslow and Rogers to the humanistic tradition. We
gained an understanding of Maslow's hierarchy of needs and learnt about munotes.in

Page 23

Intrapsychic Domain – II
23 self-actualization and the characteristics of self -actualizing persons.
Maslow's theory on motivation stated that needs can be organized at five
levels namely, physiological needs, safety needs, love and belongingness
needs, esteem needs and self -actualization needs. Maslow said that lower -
order needs need to be fulfilled before higher -order needs are fulfilled. We
learnt about Rogers's ideas about condi tions of worth, positive conditional
regard and unconditional positive regard. Roger's concept of a fully -
functioning person was also elaborated upon. Conditions of worth are
conditions set by family and friends in front of individuals in order to gain
their acceptance and love. Positive regard refers to love and acceptance
provided to an individual by family and friends.
Finally, Carl Rogers' three core conditions of client -centred therapy,
namely, genuine acceptance, empathetic understanding and uncondit ional
positive regard were discussed.
2.5 QUESTIONS
Long answers :
 Write a detailed answer on humanistic Tradition in psychology.
 Describe in detail the need for achievement and need for intimacy.
 Elaborate on Erik Erikson's stages of personality developm ent.
Short notes :
 Need for power
 Object Relation Theorists
 Characteristics of people with Self -Actualization
2.6 REFERENCES
1. Buss D. M. and Larsen R. J. (2009). Personality Psychology:
Domains of Knowledge About Human Nature. NJ: McGraw Hill
Humanities.
2. Corr, P. J. and Gerald Matthews, G. (2009). The Cambridge
Handbook of Personality Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
3. Maslow, A.H. (1943) Theory of Human Motivation. Originally
Published in Psychological Review, 50, pp 3 70-396.

munotes.in

Page 24

24 3
BIOLOGICAL AND COGNITIVE -
BEHAVIOURAL DOMAIN - I
Unit structure :
3.0 Objectives
3.1 Genetics and Personality
3.1.1 The Human Genome
3.1.2 What is Heritability?
3.1.3 Behavioural Genetic Methods
3.1.4 Major Findings from Behavioural Genetic Research
3.1.5 Shared versus Non -Shared Environmental Influences
3.1.6 Genes and Environment
3.1.7 Molecular Genetics
3.2 Evolutionary Approach to Personality
3.2.1 Evolution and Natural Selecti on
3.2.2 Evolutionary Psychology
3.2.3 Human Nature
3.2.4 Sex Differences
3.2.5 Individual Differences
3.2.6 The Big 5, Motivation, and Evolutionarily Relevant Adaptive
Problems
3.3 Physiological Approaches to Personality
3.3.1 Physiological Measures Commonly Used in Personality
Research
3.3.2 Physiologically -Based Theories of Personality
3.4 Check Your Progress
3.5 Summary
3.6 Questions
3.7 References munotes.in

Page 25

Biological And Cognitive -
Behavioural Domain - I
25 3.0 OBJECTIVES
 To explain the physi ological approaches to studying personality
 To study the association between genetics and personality
 To familiarise the learner with the evolutionary approach of
personality psychology.
3.1 GENETICS AND PERSONALITY
3.1.1 The Human Genome :
Genes are inheri ted by human beings in the form of sets, known as
chromosomes, one from our biological mother and one from the biological
father. The complete set of genes a human contains is called the human
genome , which has about 20,000 to 30,000 genes. We have about 1 00
trillion copies of the genome in our bodies. The decoding of these genes
led researchers to a couple of premises:
1. Despite having a similar number of genes as mice and worms, the
decoding of genes for humans varies significantly compared to any
other spe cies. This decoding creates a variety of proteins which
explains the complex differences between humans and other species
(Plomin, 2002).
2. These protein -coding genes only make up about 2 per cent of the total
genome, while the rest of the 98 per cent is hu man chromosomes.
These chromosomes used to be called “ Genetic Junk ” because
scientists did not think they were useful. But now we know that these
can affect everything from a person’s physic to their personality
(Gibbs, 2003; Plomin, 2002).
The 98% of the genome that is not protein -coded genes is the same for all
human beings (e.g. having two legs, two eyes, etc.). Phenotype variations
may still occur, for example, not all humans have one common eye colour.
These individual differences then influence the ch aracteristics of
behaviours of a person which then defines personality.
3.1.2 What is Heritability?
A proportion of observed variance can be attributed to a genetic variance
for a group of individuals (Plomin et al., 2001). Phenotypic variance is the
observed individual differences like height or weight. Meanwhile,
genotypic variance is the individual differences in total genes. A
heritability score of 0.70 tells us that 70 per cent of phenotypic variation is
attributed to genotypic variation, where the r emaining 0.30 or 30 per cent
is a component, which is not attributed to genetic variance, known as the
environmental component or environmentalism. This suggests that there is
no correlation or interaction between environmental components and
genetic facto rs. munotes.in

Page 26

Personality Psychology
26 1. Misco nceptions :
 One of the misconceptions of heritability is that it can be applied to a
single individual. While you can say that individual differences in
height are 80 per cent heritable, you cannot say that 80 per cent of
XYZ's are due to genes an d 20 per cent due to the environment. This
is because their contribution to height cannot be separated.
 Another one is that heritability is constant. If an environment changes,
then heritability can change too. It can also vary across time.
 The third mis conception is that an absolutely precise statistic or
measurement in error can distort it. The value is mostly calculated as
a correlation and since it changes from population to population, it
can cause problems in precision due to the fluctuations. Hence , it is
better to call it an estimate of the percentage of phenotype differences
attributed towards genotype differences.
2. Nature -Nurture debate :
The argument on genes or environmental factors is more important
considering personality determinants. This can be clarified on a population
level, where we can try to differentiate between the influence of genes and
the influence of environmental factors. To better understand, questions
like “which factor contributes more to X trait, genes or environment?” can
be asked. At a population level, it is possible to identify these differences
in genes and differences in environment. At a given moment, we can also
make statements about which attribute is more important in the given
context. Individual differences in heigh t are said to have 0.90 heritability
which is around 90% which suggests that 90% of individual differences in
height contribute to genes/heredity, more than environmental differences.
3.1.3 Behavioural Genetic Methods :
1. Selective Breeding :
It is a process o f breeding which is done to identify the desired
characteristics of an animal and have them mate with other animals
possessing the same desired characteristics. If dogs are used for selective
breeding, the observable hereditary qualities that often come up are size,
ear length, wrinkled skin, coat of hair etc.
Other than this, selective breeding can also be used to identify behavioural
characteristics (Gosling, Kwan, and John, 2003). For example, Pitbull
seems more aggressive than other dogs. If such chara cteristics have zero
heritability, then selective breeding will fail. Whereas if heritability is very
high, then selective breeding has a very high chance of success.
For ethical reasons, selective breeding studies are not permitted with
human participant s. However, there are other ways of doing studies using
other behavioural genetic models, which are discussed below. munotes.in

Page 27

Biological And Cognitive -
Behavioural Domain - I
27 2. Family Studies :
These are studied by doing a correlation of genetic -relatedness with family
members to the degree of personality similarit ies. Parents do not share any
genetic relatedness, but they share 0.50 genes with their offspring.
Similarly, their offspring share 0.25 per cent of genes with their
grandparents, which is similar to aunts and uncles to their nieces and
nephews.
Members, w ho have a close genetic -relatedness, would share highly
heritable personality characteristics, but not the characteristics that have
low heritability.
A limitation of this approach is that genetically close families also
typically share the same environmen t. So, it is not always necessary that
all the characteristics were inherited, but some can be similar due to the
shared environment.
3. Twin Studies :
Monozygotic (MZ) twins, also called identical twins, come from a single
fertilised egg, while dizygotic (DZ) twins, also called fraternal twins, are
born when two eggs are fertilised, hence there is only 50% genetic
relatedness.
Twin studies are a method used to estimate the heritability of a trait by
comparing the degree of similarity shared by monozygotic and dizygotic
twins on the trait. If the trait is heritable, the monozygotic (identical) twins
would be more similar to each other than the dizygotic (fraternal) twins.
If fraternal twins are as similar as identical twins when it comes to a
particular persona lity characteristic, then we can assume that the
characteristic in question is not heritable. On the other hand, if there is a
substantial difference between them for a characteristic, then it can be said
that this particular characteristic is heritable. F or example, twin studies
have been conducted on eating disorders where the influence of genes and
environment on the disorders are estimated. Results showed more
environmental contribution along with genes, however, the magnitude of it
is still unclear. Th e genetic contribution was also observed, which
suggests some sort of difference in MZ and DZ twins when it comes to
eating disorders (Bulik et. al., 2000).
4. Adoption Studies :
In adoption studies, a correlation between adopted children and their
adoptive p arents is studied, where there is no genetic relatedness, and if
there is a positive correlation between a characteristic, then it can be
attributed to environmental influence. Similarly, a correlation between
adopted children and their genetic parents can be done to find what
characteristics can be attributed to genes. It is especially useful since their
genetic parents have zero influence on their environment. So, if a zero
correlation is found then a particular characteristic can be fully attributed munotes.in

Page 28

Personality Psychology
28 to environmental influence. And if a positive correlation is found with
zero environmental influence, then it indicates a high heritability of a
particular characteristic.
Unlike twin studies, where it is difficult to remove the aspect of
environmental influe nce because the parents typically provide a similar
type of environment, and that is why their influence can be difficult to
differentiate. However, that is not the case with adopted children, because
both influences get separated. One of the problems face d with adoption
studies is their assumption of representativeness. They assume that the
adopted children, their adoptive parents and genetic parents are
representatives of the general population. For example, assuming couples
who adopt children and those w ho do not adopt children are the same.
Selective placement is another problem of adoption studies. If adopted
children are placed with parents who are similar to their genetic parents,
then there will be some change in the correlation. However, such select ive
placement is not something that is commonly encountered and hence can
be neglected in studies (Plomin et al., 2008).
3.1.4 Major Findings From Behavioural Genetic Research
1. Personality Traits
The majority of research done on behavioural genetics is for the traits of
extraversion and neuroticism. Research on 25,000 pairs of twins was
reviewed, which showed that extraversion had around 0.60 heritability
(Henderson, 1982). The same kind of results was found for neuroticism,
which suggests that both extrave rsion and neuroticism are responsible for
approximately 0.50 heredity due to genes.
Traits, such as openness, extraversion, agreeableness, neuroticism, and
conscientiousness have also shown a 50% of heredity (Caspi et al., 2005).
It should be noted that he redity of personality factors is highly possible,
since they remain stable over time.
Activity level is another trait, which has a behavioural aspect to it, which
has shown heritability. A study conducted in Poland showed a 50% of
heredity of activity lev el (Oniszczenko et al., 2003), whereas a study
conducted in Dutch found values ranging from 51 to 72% (Hudziak et al.,
2003). Both of these were twin studies.
One of the classic twins studies is Minnesota (Tellegen et al., 1988),
which studied twins that were reared apart, 46 sets were identical while 26
sets were fraternal. Correlation between the twins was studied on different
personality factors. Traits that one normally thinks come from learning
and environment (traditionalism, self -esteem, for example ) showed a high
heritability. Many such unusual results were found in this study, which
challenged many popular pre -suppositions in the field of personality. munotes.in

Page 29

Biological And Cognitive -
Behavioural Domain - I
29 2. Attitude and Preferences :
A longitudinal study conducted on a group of adopted and non -adopted
children from Colorado showed the influence of genetics on conservative
attitudes (Abrahamson, Baker, and Caspi, 2002). Attitude markers were
“gay rights”, “censorship”, “death penalty”, and “Republicans”. This
influence was seen right from the young age of 12. Some twin studies
about political ideologies show a heritability of between 0.30 to 0.60
(Hatemi, 2014).
The influence of genes on occupational preference has been studied as
well. For example, A study was conducted by Ellis and Bonin (2003) in
the US and Canada between adopted children and genetic offspring.
Fourteen different aspects of jobs were answered by the participants. Then
these aspects were correlated with different aspects of their life, such as
parental social status, their jobs and educati on level, income, etc. Out of
them, 71% of the correlations were significant for genetic offspring and
3% for adopted ones. The research concluded that the results do not
necessarily mean that the occupational preferences are entirely influenced
by their f amilies - genes only have a partial influence on them.
However, genetics does not always have some type of influence on
attitudes and beliefs. A study was conducted on 400 twins and it showed
that there is zero heritability of religious beliefs (Loehlin & Nichols,
1976). Another study between adopted and non -adopted children
confirmed that there is no evidence of religious beliefs being hereditary
(Abrahamson et al., 2002). In contrast, studies from adolescence and
adulthood suggest that with an increase i n age, belief in religion does
increase (Button et al., 2011).
All things considered, there is still little that is known about the
heritability of attitudes and the explanation of its influence on attitudes
due to lack of research. More research is neede d on this.
3. Drinking and Smoking :
Drinking habit is said to have come from the sensation -seeking
characteristic of personality, extraversion and neuroticism (Eysenck,
1981).
Individuals differ widely, when it comes to drinking and smoking, though,
some he ritable characteristics contribute to them as well. One twin study
conducted on Australian twins showed that an MZ twin who smokes, is 16
times more likely to have a twin, who smokes than a twin who doesn’t
smoke. For DZ twins it is only a seven times incr ease which suggests that
there is a heritable factor that influences drinking and smoking (Hooper et
al., 1992).
For drinking alcohol, the studies are mixed for both males and females
when it comes to heritability. The studies of alcoholism show a stronge r
heritability than daily drinking habits (Kendler et al., 1992). munotes.in

Page 30

Personality Psychology
30 4. Marriage :
A study by Johnson and colleagues (2004) revealed that genes can
influence the decision of getting married or stay single. Men who were
married, compared to their peers who stayed single, were higher on
mobility, success in career and financial achievement, which are some of
the characteristics that women look for when it comes to prospective
marriage partners (Buss, 2016).
Genes also play a role in marriage satisfaction. A woman’s personality
characteristics lead to their as well as their husband’s marital satisfaction
(Spotts et al., 2005). The personality traits that contribute to this are
optimism, warmth, and low aggressiveness, which have partial attribution
to heredity.
Following heritable personality characteristics play a partial role in
marriage satisfaction - having a sense of purpose, personal growth, control
over your life, and positive social relationships are predictors of life
satisfaction (Archontaki et al., 2013).
3.1.5 Shared versus Non -Shared Environmental Influences :
Behavioural genetics makes a critical distinction between shared and non -
shared environmental influences. In a family, siblings share most of their
environment: the number of books in the house, the types of TV shows,
that they watch, food at home, parents’ values and attitudes, the religious
places parents send their children to, schools that they are enrolled in, and
so on ( shared environment ). However, these same siblings will have
features which a re not shared by the other one, which is known as a non-
shared environment . Some siblings may get different treatments from
their parents, they may have different groups of friends and so on. Their
interests may differ as well. These two influences may hav e a differential
impact on personality.
Adoption studies have proved that a shared environment has little to no
influence on personality. The correlation is only 0.5 between the
personality variables of adopted siblings, who do not share any genes.
This su ggests that whatever is happening in their environment is not
contributing much to their personality. Most differences between siblings
come from the difference in experience that they have with the
environment they are in.
Non-shared environments are rel atively new when being studied and one
possibility of why a non -shared environment works could be an
environmental variable was overlooked peer influences (Harris, 2006).
Another possibility is that there might be multiple environmental variables
that may be influencing personality together as a mix and not separately
(Willerman, 1979). Studies on shared environments also have revealed
their importance in influencing attitudes, religious beliefs, political
orientation and to some degree, and even intelligen ce (Segal, 1999). munotes.in

Page 31

Biological And Cognitive -
Behavioural Domain - I
31 3.1.6 Genes and Environment :
1. Genotype -Environment Interaction :
Gene -Environment interaction is observed as an effect that occurs when
environmental risks are accounted for by a person’s genotype and vice
versa (Caspi et al., 2003). An exa mple of this can be Extroverts -Introverts
(genotype) and how they react to the environment.
Depending on the environment, there is a difference between how an
introvert and an extrovert will react to it. The differences that exist
between these genotypes will determine the way their interaction with the
environment will affect their behaviour. For example, at a party, an
extrovert is more likely to be one of the most social people in the room
whereas an introvert is more likely to keep to themselves or jus t be around
a few people.
The very first study of gene -environment interaction was conducted to
study adolescence and how likely they are to show aggressive behaviour.
The variation in a monoamine oxidase (MAO -A) shows its relationship
with early childhoo d maltreatment (environment). This relationship was
seen to be stronger when the gene variation has low activity than those
with high -activity -variant, which shows the interaction effect (Caspi et al.,
2003). But one difficulty with such studies is its env ironmental effects. It
is possible to accurately measure a genotype, but the environmental effects
are reported by self or parent reports, and constructs can become vague
because of their subjective nature.
2. Genotype -Environment Correlation :
Genotype -enviro nment correlation is studied when different genotypes get
exposed to different environments. For example, if a child has great
Mathematical ability, then their parents will help provide an environment,
which is helpful to increase this ability. On the othe r hand, a child who is
not particularly good at maths, their parents may not do the same.
Three Genotype -Environment correlations included here are:
1. Passive Genotype –Environment Correlation : Parents provide both
genotype and environment and the offspri ng have not done anything to
obtain the environment. For example, if parents are in academics who
study literature, they pass on their genes to their children, which makes
them inclined towards a similar interest. Because of that, the parents create
an env ironment that provides the child with more books. Hence, there is a
correlation between genotype and environment, but it is passive because
the child has not done anything for the environment to be modified
according to their abilities.
2. Reactive Genotyp e–Environment Correlation : Parents (or others)
react to the child differently depending on the child’s genotype. For
example, there are two children in the house. One is more into athletics,
while the other is fond of reading. At first, the parents might t ry to get munotes.in

Page 32

Personality Psychology
32 both children to do one of these two activities. But once they realise what
each of their children likes, they will not try to get the other child to
participate in sports or read books; and will modify each child’s
environment according to their needs. This shows a correlation between
the genotype and environment as a response to the child’s needs.
3. Active Genotype –Environment Correlation : A person who possesses
a genotype will look for a particular environment for themselves. For
example, tho se who are more likely to be high -sensation seekers will look
for any opportunity to do so; such as participating in adventure sports like
scuba diving, bungee jumping, skydiving, etc. Since the person takes all
the actions by themselves, the process becom es active.
These correlations can be both positive and negative. In the case of
positive correlation, the expression of genotype is encouraged, while in the
case of negative correlation, it is discouraged. An example of a negative
correlation is - when a parent tries to get their introverted child to socialise
and play more, and an extroverted, highly active child is told to sit quietly,
which leads to a negative genotype -environment correlation (Buss, 1981).
One possible research path for the genotype -environment correlation is
peer studies . For example, a study on the correlation between alcohol
consumption and socialisation in the teenage years (Loehlin, 2010).
3.1.7 Molecular Genetics :
Molecular genetics involves the study of genetics to identify speci fic
genes, which are related to personality traits. Once the heritability of
personality traits was established, researchers shifted their attention to
identifying the functions of specific genes. Molecular genetics has helped
with the diagnosis and progno sis of chronic illnesses (Guan et al., 2017;
Kunkel et al., 1989; DiNardo & Cortes, 2016) In order to study the
specific genes linked to psychological traits, researchers most commonly
use the association method, which identifies whether individuals with a
particular gene (or allele) have higher or lower scores on a particular trait
measure (Larsen et al., 2020, p.GL -15). Among the most frequently
studied protein -coding genes, using the association method is the
dopamine receptor DRD4. Its association with the novelty -seeking trait,
especially regarding risky behaviours, has widely been studied, but not
always replicated. Benjamin et al. (1996) estimated that only 4% of the
variance in novelty -seeking behaviour would be explained by DRD4.
Many other genes an d alleles like the A1 allele of the gene DRD2
(Berman et al., 2002) could also account for the variances.
Researchers have also found that the gene 5 -HTTLPR is associated with
the Five -Factor Model construct of neuroticism. Since the associations of
the s ame gene were not significant for other variables, it was concluded
that neuroticism is separate from other related measures, like Eysenck’s
neuroticism, and anxiety -related personality traits.
Other methods like Genome -wide linkage studies, Genome -wide c omplex
trait analysis (GCTA) and Genome -wide association studies (GWAS) munotes.in

Page 33

Biological And Cognitive -
Behavioural Domain - I
33 have also been used in the effort to unravel the link between genetics and
personality (de Moor, 2021).
Due to the onset of molecular genetics in relation to psychological traits,
much is yet to be learnt regarding the roles of specific genes as well as the
gene -environment interaction that takes place. Findings regarding specific
genes and their role to play in human psychology must not be considered
the final verdict without replicat ion and thorough exploration in different
samples.
3.2 EVOLUTIONARY APPROACH TO PERSONALITY
3.2.1 Evolution and Natural Selection :
Introduction to evolution or the evolutionary perspective is incomplete
without mentioning Charles Darwin, and his formulati on of “survival of
the fittest." So, to produce variations or to evolve into current personality
traits, survival is the very basic requirement. Survival here refers to
overcoming hardships, and evolution refers to change over time. Darwin
refers to as ‘ho stile forces of nature" which is the physical environment,
struggles with other species, and struggles with conspecifics (members of
the same species).
Charles Darwin proposed the Theory of Natural Selection in his book
Origin of Species, back in 1895. To reinforce the importance of his role in
evolutionary psychology, most contemporary evolutionary personality
psychologists have concluded that individual differences in personality
traits are evolutionarily adaptive mechanisms and the result of Darwin’s
selection, that is natural and sexual selection. Darwin rationalised that
evolutionary changes or variations allow an organism to reproduce more
and hence have more heirs. These heirs would then inherit those traits that
helped their previous generations or a ncestors to survive, and the chain of
passing down traits most helpful for survival goes on. These survival -
inducing traits or genes passed down are natural selection. And adaptation
is simply a trait or pattern resulting from long -term repeated processes of
natural selection. But it must be noted that natural selection is not the only
cause of evolutionary change. Also, natural selection is not strategic or
intentional.
Darwin’s theory on natural selection gave the scientific community and
general humankin d a strong foundational explanation for many aspects of
life, which kept baffling scholars. Larger questions, like the origin of new
species, the difference between similar species, and the similarity between
totally different species were all accounted fo r with the introduction of his
theory. The theory of natural selection is dependent on the modification of
organic structures over time. And these structures of change are intended
to serve a purpose for the species. And in evolutionary terms, the two most
crucial purposes of the entire existence of any organism depend on
survival and reproduction. These two terms can be referred to as the pillars
of the evolutionary perspective. And to those philosophical minds of his
times, Darwin’s theory of natural sele ction explained the munotes.in

Page 34

Personality Psychology
34 interconnectedness of every living species. Natural selection, as proposed
by Darwin, brought all species together into a single, expansive family
tree. The same selective cause -and-effect connection must persist across a
wide region an d for many generations for a change to be adapted into a
function or structure.
Nonetheless, the theory of natural selection was met with its share of
rejections, objections and controversies. The connection made by Darwin
that human beings descended from apes itself was enough to hurt the pride
of many. Objections like lack of solid theory of heredity (Darwin initially
preferred blending theory of heredity, that is, red and white parents may
have pink offspring, but this understanding was later rejected), or the
evolutionary ladder shows partial structures formed before adaptive
features got evolved as partial wing developed before wing as an adaptive
structure was evolved. But Darwin’s theory also focused on the
importance of having a survival value for ea ch variation in this species,
which these partial structures mostly did not follow. And the loudest
objection was raised from religious communities as Darwin stated that the
emergence of new species is a result of an unplanned, cumulative process
of select ion, which contrasted with religious beliefs that every species is
part of God’s grand plan.
In response to these flaws or projected objections in the theory of natural
selection, Darwin developed another evolutionary theory: the theory of
sexual selection . In contrast to the theory of natural selection, which
focuses on adaptations that have arisen as a result of successful survival,
the theory of sexual selection concentrates on adaptations that arose as a
result of successful mating or sexual reproductio n. Sexual reproduction
concentrates on two forms:
1) intrasexual mating: where competition among same -sex within a
species is seen, and whichever qualities help one of the contenders to win
the competition gets to mate, and ultimately those qualities or t raits are
passed down to subsequent generations.
2) intersexual mating: in this type, whoever possesses the desired
qualities gets to mate. Mating in this is based on a partner’s preference for
particular types of qualities over other qualities, and whoev er tends to
have these preferred qualities would get to sexually mate and pass down
their traits to further generations.
Thus, the lesser preferred quality (in intersexual mating) or the losing
competition’s qualities (intrasexual mating) gets eliminated from the
world with time.
Even though controversies around Darwin’s theories still exist, one cannot
disagree that Darwin’s theories of evolution are the unifying and globally
acknowledged theory of the explanation of our origin. Sociologically
speaking, the single most significant factor in triggering the renewed
efforts to apply evolution to behaviour was the selectionist’s revolution in
evolutionary biology, which subsequently became known as socio -biology
(Wilson, 1975). munotes.in

Page 35

Biological And Cognitive -
Behavioural Domain - I
35 3.2.2 Evolutionary Psychology :
In the twentieth century, a few critical thinkers, moving away from the
common psychology norms, started exploring the theories of Darwin and
how the theories of natural or sexual selection could provide us with
insights into applied behaviour and this beg an a new school of thought.
This could be traced to the origin story of evolutionary psychology. A
major goal of evolutionary psychology is to understand the nature of
psychological adaptations. A genuine, detailed specification of the circuit
logic of hum an nature and its evolutionary understanding is gaining more
theoretical popularity as one of the central explanations for the current set
of social sciences. The strain of theoretical evolutionary biology that
began in the late 1950s and early 1960s, part icularly with the work of
George Williams (Williams, 1966), William D. Hamilton (1964), and John
Maynard (1982), was the first building block of evolutionary psychology .
Evolutionary psychology involves three key premises: Domain
Specificity, Numerousness and Functionality.
1. Domain Specificity :
As the term indicates, here we focus on very specific precise domains and
understand how the interchange of features with that domain plays.
Adaptive features that we discussed previously under natural selection are
such features that are evolved to address a particular domain. More
extensive studies on domain specificity can be seen in cognitive sciences
and how the human brain has different allocations for different domains.
One of the logical explanations of domain specificity is that each
environmental situation calls for different solutions and thus there cannot
be a generalised pattern of adaptation.
2. Numerousness :
To put it simply, the more the number the greater the chances of survival.
It is common to see herds of sheep, goats and such animals that have a
greater risk of being prey. This very mechanism works within us and our
behavioural psychology too. Numerousness is the mechanism of
expectation that there exist multiple and varied forms of psychological
adapta tions, which are essentially required to solve different adaptive
problems and hence increase the chances of survival and reproduction.
The likelihood of continuing increases with the numerousness. And it is
frequently referred to in evolutionary psycholog y as the numerous
mechanisms we have developed that have guided our path throughout.
Biologically, we have the heart to pump blood and lungs to circulate air
within us, allowing us to be terrestrial organisms. Similarly,
psychologically, evolutionary proce sses have also done their work, and as
a result, many different types of phobias exist, the most common of which
is fear of snakes or reptiles. These fears most likely evolved as a result of
the threat -signalling effect that snakes have on us.

munotes.in

Page 36

Personality Psychology
36 3. Functiona lity:
Functionality is as simple and direct as the word. It simply refers to the
notion that psychological mechanisms have developed to accomplish an
adaptive goal just like their physiological counterparts. Advanced
cognitions, affect mechanisms and behav ioural responses all have been
crucial for the functionality of humans.
Evolutionary psychology suggests that variations of human psychology or
even different personalities in existence are a source of meaningful human
diversity. This is achieved through different combinations of heritable
personality traits passed down generations to prepare us as individuals
(our personality) to utilise the social habitat we accommodate to ensure
our survival and that of our heritable personality trait. These personality
traits can either be adaptive to current social existence or even a harmful
dysfunctional trait with current trends. Evolutionary psychology, like all
philosophies, has limitations too. Human adaptations are the result of
millions of years of adversity, a nd we find it difficult to trace back and
state in absolute terms the reasons and explanations they provide. Second,
it only scratches the surface.
3.2.3 Human Nature :
Evolutionary psychologists argue that human nature is not a collection of
universal huma n behavioural repertoires, but rather the universal
psychological mechanisms underlying these behaviours (Tooby &
Cosmides, 1990). Sigmund Freud developed grand theories to define
personality universally in terms of sexual desires and instinctive motives.
Alternatively, behaviourist theories concentrate on the outward
manifestations of behaviours. Evolutionary psychologists attempt to
incorporate a viewpoint that emphasises the process of evolution.
Personality, according to them, is the result of evolution ary processes.
Human nature can be understood through the help of different
characteristics popularly seen:
1. Need to belong :
The hypothesis argues that one of the basic needs of humans is to be
accepted by the group. We, humans, tend to imitate the clothing styles of
celebrities or socially considered high -status members of their local
groups or the groups to which they aspire to belong. These cultural
phenomena are examples of transmitted culture. The aim is to establish
positive contact with others, which could be established through
cooperation, helping, or altruistic behaviours. The need to belong leads to
kinship, and throughout history, we have studied the benefits of social
cooperation as one of the strongest suits towards the survival of species.
2. Kins hip:
Kinship is one of the first areas that fundamentally challenge the theories
of natural and sexual selection. And this is where evolutionary psychology
becomes interesting as it supports these theories, yet perfectly explains the munotes.in

Page 37

Biological And Cognitive -
Behavioural Domain - I
37 concept of kinship. Ma ny of the adaptive problems that each species has
faced throughout evolution are unique to that species, but different species
can arrive at similar solutions to common adaptive problems. An
individual would prefer good health, vigour, intelligence, genero sity,
dependability, and loyalty in a partner. Different preference mechanism
suites are expected to have evolved in response to various adaptive
problems and the stimuli associated with them.
Even though natural selection is competitive, it is selfish, it is a
mechanism made to surpass counterparts to increase the chance of
individual survival, yet we see the earliest traces of kinship or social
alliance formed among various organisms. One explanation for this was
the need to protect and partner with your genetic relatives to ensure the
transmission of your factors. But then our friends are not just our relatives,
and this puzzling dilemma is answered through the theory of reciprocal
altruism (Trivers, 1987) and social exchange theory (Homans, 1961).
Accor ding to the theory of reciprocal altruism, adaptations for providing
benefits to nonrelatives can evolve as long as such benefits are
reciprocated in the future. The beauty of reciprocal altruism is that it
benefits both parties. Social exchange theory exp lains social cooperation
across different cultures, and groups and this can be found in the hunter -
gather community where the hunter community forms a cooperative
alliance with the gatherer community. Individual difference in personality
and characteristic s tells us that every individual may have different special
abilities and in such a case, kinship ensures each party can avail benefits
from each other and this adds to the individual chances of survival.
3.2.4 Sex Differences :
Biological sex differences c an be credited to adaptation to changes present
in the environment from an evolutionary perspective. As clarified
previously, evolutionary psychology focuses on the reproduction of
further generations. From an evolutionary standpoint, human sex
differences reflect the pressures of differing physical and social
environments in primitive times between females and males. It is thought
that each sex faced different pressures and that the different reproductive
status was the most important aspect of life at the time. Hence, evolved
mechanism, specific to sex differences, causes sex -differentiated
behaviours. To ensure their survival and reproductive success, the sexes
devised distinct strategies. This is a possible explanation for different
psychological charact eristics among men and women. Meanwhile, when
we talk about genders, it is a socially driven difference rather than
biological. Environmental situations faced by each sex differ with
different cultures and societies across varied historical periods. Men wi th
great socially powerful roles exhibit more dominant behaviour than
women. In other words, the one who is considered socially lesser
powerful will have subordinate behaviour. This hierarchy is related to the
evolutionary prioritising of survival and com petition, which is favoured by
men’s physical characteristics of stronger and bigger built.
munotes.in

Page 38

Personality Psychology
38 1. Mate Preferences :
Sex difference in mating preference is one of the adaptive features of
sexual selection itself. Displayed mating preferences ensure a filter to
promote healthy and more survival increasing traits. The evolutionary
psychology of mating preference observed across the two sexes shows a
definite pattern of differences. Women’s mating preference primarily
revolves around the need to receive resources an d protection to ensure
child -rearing. Meanwhile, men’s mating preference also involves the
scope of paternal non -conformity hence seeking multiple sexual partners
is a trait observed in historical studies.
Women's preference includes men with strong physic al structures like
muscular build, denser beards (an indication of higher levels of
testosterone), and clear skin as a sign of healthier individuals for higher
success of fertility. Apart from these physiological characteristics, men
with greater resources like intellectual, financial, and social skills with the
assurance of long -term commitments are among the preferences of
women. Women's preference also shows a higher preference for older men
which could be possibly an indicator of more pooled resources, more
intellectual understanding with experiences, or even the hunting skills tend
to peak around the late twenties or early thirties.
The mating preference of men starts with a women’s reproductive value
that can indicated by her age as a sign of youthfuln ess. The reproductive
value of a woman is higher with younger age (the frequency of children
one is likely to have in future based on their given age). The preference of
men for younger women ensures a higher probability of having multiple
offspring with h er which is one of the primary motives of men. Features of
physical appearance were another indicator of women’s reproductive
value like full lips, clear skin, a certain body fat distribution and length
and quality of hair.
One of the most widespread argum ents against mating preference is that
these theories merely provide explanations of existing conditions, but are
insufficient to predict differences. Furthermore, from a moral perspective,
these deterministic evolutionary theories are often criticised for justifying
male dominance and abuse of females, and therefore sexual inequality.
2. Aggression :
Aggressive traits have been traditionally found to have higher occurrence
in males than females. There is agreement that on average, males are more
likely to dis play aggression than females, and possible explanations for
this can be traced to evolutionary explanations. Women’s preference for
mating men with higher social status and resources also may have
increased intra -sex competition among males to ascertain an d dominate
over others and one of the commonly used techniques to involved
aggressive confrontations and physical fights. This extended to defending
self against threats, causing damage on potential mating rivals, negotiating
hierarchies, discouraging riva ls from potential violence, and discouraging
contemporaries from sexual infidelity to ensure paternity. Hence, the munotes.in

Page 39

Biological And Cognitive -
Behavioural Domain - I
39 theory of sexual selection can be considered as the one reason for a sex
difference in aggression.
3. Emotion :
Men's and women's emotional diffe rences can be classified into three
categories: expression, recognition, and experience. Women perform
better than men in emotional interpretation (recognition), such as facial
expression recognition as an adaptation to mate preference or conflict
avoidanc e. In terms of emotional expression, women are better than men
at suppressing potentially maladaptive emotional, social, and sexual
responses. There are also significant differences in the types of emotions
associated with men and women in society. Some th eorists propose that
the importance of emotion differed for men and women in understanding
some of these emotional differences from an evolutionary perspective.
Understanding, tracking, and reading the emotional states of others was
especially important fo r women in child rearing and caring.
3.2.5 Individual Differences :
The Evolutionary perspective and its persistence in explanations give us a
logical link to why any given traits are in existence and how they could
have been diversified to an adaptive feat ure. The evolutionary psychology
of personality suggests that existing human personality variation is a
source of meaningful human diversity. This is achieved through different
combinations of heritable personality traits passed down generations.
These pre pare us as individuals to utilise the social habitat we
accommodate to ensure the survival of the species and its heritable
personality traits. These personality traits can be either adaptive to current
social existence or even a harmful dysfunctional trai t with current trends.
The individual difference found in personality traits is established as
adaptive and also a result of natural and sexual selection.
Individual differences can be accounted for by gene -environment
interaction. At a certain level of ab straction, all species consist of a
universal, species specific evolved structure of architecture like all humans
have a heart, two kidneys, a liver, and so on. All intestines have the same
primary design of functioning: they are connected to the stomach, they
receive the same chemicals required for digestion, they are made of the
same cell types, and so on. When humans are described from this
perspective, differences tend to fade in light of their complex adaptations,
and a universal architecture emerges. But this similarity is limited to much
of the physiology only like the structure of the brain but in the case of
behavioural adaptation, it displays a common pattern, yet varied
differences from individual to individual. A major reason for individual
diffe rences seen within the personalities is a possible adaptation of
different social group dynamics established along the ancestral history,
like individuals with higher cognitive intelligence, academic motivation
and conscientiousness may be good professiona ls in neurosurgery or
aeronautical science. Also, individuals who possess individual traits like
empathy, patience, and compassion may be good professionals in nursing, munotes.in

Page 40

Personality Psychology
40 psychology, or social work. Both these clusters of professions are highly
skilled and p ersistent -based yet they require different personality
characteristics and different individuals. The evolution of a spectrum of
individual traits incorporating a range of different social functions may be
one of the frequency dependent selection. When a p articular trait’s fitness
value is dependent on its occurrence in the population, then it can also lead
to frequency -dependence. Social competition motivates individuals
towards different social functions, and compensating these alternative
functions gives some relief from the social competition.
Individual differences psychology is primarily concerned with group
differences. This study categorises people based on their age, traits,
gender, race, social class, and so on, and examines the differences within
and between those groups. Individual differences include physical, mental,
social, and cultural differences, among others. Individual differences can
also be found in physical and mental abilities, knowledge, habits,
personality, and character traits. Ther e are different personalities. Based
on personality differences, individuals are classified into many groups.
Carl Jung proposes three groups of personality, which are among the most
commonly used introvert, extrovert and ambivert. Wilfred Trotter
proposed two groups of personalities which were stable -minded and
unstable -minded (individuals who can cause potential harm to the state).
3.2.6 The Big 5, Motivation, and Evolutionarily -Relevant Adaptive
Problems
1. The Big 5 :
Individual differences in personal ity traits are adaptive in nature,
according to most evolutionary personality psychologists, and thus the
result of natural and sexual selection. People within human social groups
differ in the effectiveness with which they can play different roles within
human societies due to differences in personality traits. The tradition of
studying traits or personality characters was started by Odbert and Allport
in the by 1930s, sustained by Cattell in the decade of 1940s. The
dispositional tendencies to understand personality through behaviour
patterns has led us to one of the most commonly accepted theories of big
five personality traits. The widely accepted theory of personality which
itself has evolved from a 3 factor model to a five factor structure, which is
credited to Robert McCrae and Paul Costa and known as The Big Five.
These big five traits include the following factors, often remembered with
the acronym of OCEAN.
1. Openness (O): People with a greater score of openness tend to have
multiple interests se ts. They are curious for exploring the world and other
people, and eager to acquire new experiences. They also tend to be more
adventurous and creative.
2. Conscientiousness (C): It is characterised by thoughtfulness, good
impulse control, and goal -directe d behaviour. They plan ahead of time,
consider how their actions and behaviours affect others, and keep
deadlines in mind. munotes.in

Page 41

Biological And Cognitive -
Behavioural Domain - I
41 3. Extraversion (E): Excitability, sociability, talkativeness, assertiveness,
and a high level of emotional expressiveness are charac teristics of
extraversion. Introverted people possess less energy to spend in social
situations, and gets exhausted in social gatherings.
4. Agreeableness (A): People with high levels of agreeableness are more
cooperative. Trust, altruism, kindness, affect ion, and prosocial behaviours
are examples of this personality trait.
5. Neuroticism (N) : It is a personality trait characterised by sadness,
moodiness, and emotional instability.
The recent focus of personality studies on non -human animals have led to
evolutionary questions about the role of individual differences within
evolution. One set asks the range of behaviours and traits that reliably vary
across individuals within any species. Evolutionary psychology separates
actual behaviour from evolved mechani sms, thus further clarifying the role
of personality. We see highly complex social patterns in mammals, and
even more so in primates. The introduction of mammals into the primate
world adds a self -other relational dimension. These creatures must
specifical ly navigate the interests of the self in relation to the interests of
the other. Neuroticism, extraversion, and agreeableness can be easily
identified in social mammals, such as monkeys; but conscientiousness and
openness, on the other hand, are much more difficult to detect in these
creatures. However, we can recognise them as distinct dispositional
tendencies in humans.
2. Motivation :
Motivation addresses to something that drives you to keep going ahead or
initiate a new mechanism. And when we talk of evo lutionary perspective
of motivation, we talk about the ‘how’ and ‘what’ of human behaviour.
Evolutionary approach to human motivation is underlined by motivation
for natural selection, which can be credited to survival of species and
sexual selection can b e credited to genetic reproduction.
Successful reproduction was achieved by solving distinct environmental
problems by our ancestors, which included defending themselves against
predators and parasites, resource collection and maintaining social status.
The psychological mechanisms evolved to solve such kinds of problems,
which were earlier referred to as instincts. In modern psychology, these
instincts are known as motivational systems that tend to solve the purpose
of regulating functionality by evolution ary process. These motivational
systems are adapted to regulate behavioural exchanges with environment
as well as other organisms. The evolutionary perspective distinguishes and
complements other perspectives that define motivation in terms of human
goals or needs by characterising motivation through evolved behaviour
regulatory systems. Motivational systems that seems to be functionally
specific are suited to different ranges of stimuli that, when perceived,
trigger various types of emotional, cognitive, a nd behavioural responses. munotes.in

Page 42

Personality Psychology
42 There may be functional adaptive linkages between various motivational
systems and other systems of regulation, typically outside the scope of
psychological analysis. For example, disease avoidance motivational
psychology has imp lications for immune responses to infection, and vice
versa.
3. Evolutionarily Relevant Adaptive Problems :
Although most humans have functionally similar ears, limbs, and organs,
but there are heritable individual differences in the structural forms these
adaptations take. This variation is largely neutral in terms of selection.
However, there may be cases where genetic variants co -occur to cause
adaptation failures. These variants do not harm when present alone, but
they are dysfunctional in rare combinati ons. Some studies believe that
certain types of schizophrenia may be caused by rare gene couplings.
Mutations are source of variation too. Although mutations ensure
variations required for facilitating natural selection, isolated individual
mutations rarel y improve any adaptive functioning and can be harmful,
resulting in adaptation failures. Some psychological phenomena may
appear maladaptive, disordered, expensive, maladjusted or subjectively
distressing, but they are not dysfunctions. They are not caused by the
inability of evolved adaptations to function as they were intended.
Also, we need to consider the difference between ancestral environment
and current environments; our current environment differs in many ways,
sometimes dramatically, from the env ironments that existed for most of
human evolution. An evolved adaptation may be performing exactly as
intended, but since the environment also varies, the outcome may seem
non-adaptive in nature. Similarly, perceiving a dangerous animal behind a
tree when none exists is an error, but it is not necessarily dysfunctional,
and such errors occur because adaptive features evolved on an average
needs basis and the scope of exceptions remains. The reasoning behind
mental disorders, where even normal functioning o f adaptations still tends
to produce distress to levels, which collapses the entire being for whom
the function was evolved in the first place, may be the last major adaptive
concern.
3.3 PHYSIOLOGICAL APPROACHES TO
PERSONALITY
Ever wondered why when w e are hungry or sleepy, we tend to lose all
sense of self -control? Researchers have come to think that blood glucose
levels might be a part of the answer! Not only do activities requiring self -
control (for example attention regulation, stress management) r educe
blood glucose, but lower levels of glucose were also associated with
lowered self -control seen in terms of reduced attentiveness among school
children, and compromised performance levels under stressful conditions
(Gailliot and Baumeister, 2007).
The physiological approach to personality operates on the assumption that
changes in a specific physiological factor would be associated with, or munotes.in

Page 43

Biological And Cognitive -
Behavioural Domain - I
43 cause a change in specific elements of personality. It is a fine example of
how the mind and body work in harmony to affect each other. This
approach, as Larsen et al. (2020) put it, is characterised by:
 Highly reliable measures of assessing physiological characteristics; and
 A parsimonious understanding of psychological traits
This often implies that a personality t rait or state can be explained
sufficiently by relatively simple, concrete and specific physiological
factors - for example, consider the case of low glucose levels (a
physiological factor) affecting the self -control of individuals (a personality
component ). However, few psychologists will claim that a singular
physiological phenomenon is a sole reason for the expression of a trait in a
given situation. Primarily, the question asked in research using the
physiological approach is – “will (some people) exhib it more or less of a
specific physiological response than others under certain conditions?
(Larsen et al., 2020, p.195).” Carrying forward the example of
associations between glucose and self -control, we may ask, will
participants’ blood glucose levels aff ect their risk -taking tendencies in a
gambling task?
The physiological approach to personality has come a long way since the
attempts of the Sankhya tradition, Hippocrates, Kretschmer Ernst and
William Sheldon to classify personalities into types using bod y fluids and
physical build. The methods to study the biological underpinnings have
become notably more precise and touched with advancements in the field
of medical technology. The next section will contain an overview and use
cases of some of the most us ed physiological measures in personality
research.
3.3.1 Physiological Measures Commonly Used in Personality
Research :
Empirical research to study physiological correlates of psychological
constructs mostly falls into one of the following three categories –
i) Electro -dermal activity/galvanic skin response,
ii) Cardiovascular activity,
iii) Brain activity.
1. Electrodermal Activity :
Before an important competition, exam, theatre performance, or in any
nerve -wracking situation, most of us have sweaty palms that we keep
brushing off. What causes this, is the sympathetic nervous system (SNS) -
the branch of the autonomic nervous system responsible for our fight -or-
flight mechanism.
However, things are set in motion before we experience sweaty palms.
With the activation of the SNS, the sweat glands below our skin start to
fill up with salty water - which is a good conductor of electricity! In munotes.in

Page 44

Personality Psychology
44 simple words, the greater the amount of sweat in the glands, the higher
would be the resulting electrodermal activity (E DA) when an electrical
current pass through the skin. This bioelectrical reaction is also known
variously as the galvanic skin response (GSR), psychogalvanic reflex
(PGR), Skin conductance and sympathetic skin response (SSR).
To measure electrodermal activ ity, two electrodes are placed on one of the
palms and a low -voltage electric current is then sent through one electrode
into the skin. EDA is measured as the difference between the current
passed in the first electrode and the current received in the seco nd. Smaller
the difference, the better the conduction of electricity through the skin,
which is in turn associated with the activation of the sympathetic nervous
system.
A review of research regarding liability (ease of change/alteration) in EDA
was condu cted by Crider (2008). It was found that although EDA lability
in non -provoking situations is considered to be evidence for trait anxiety,
correlations between EDA results and self -report measures are
inconsistent, and therefore by large inconclusive. More over, a change in
perspective reflected that greater EDA lability is a correlate of
agreeableness. On the other hand, EDA stability can be a marker of
expressiveness and antagonistic behaviour, which is also associated with
antisocial tendencies.
2. Cardiova scular Activity :
Another physiological response that occurs with the activation of the
sympathetic nervous system is a change in one’s cardiovascular activity.
Researchers are primarily interested in blood pressure and heart rate as
records of cardiac acti vity.
An important variable studied about personality is cardiovascular
reactivity (CVR), which is defined as the degree of change in
cardiovascular responses (e.g., blood pressure, heart rate) to a
psychological or physiological challenge or stressor (APA Dictionary of
Psychology). It has been an important variable in studying differences
between personality types. For example, Fichera and Andreassi (2000)
experimented to study the difference in CVR as a response to real -life
stressors based on (a) gender , (b) trait hostility and (c) personality type (A
and B). It was found that when asked to speak in public, the CVR (heart
rate, systolic and diastolic BP and mean arterial pressure) of all
participants was high from the baseline. While hostile men had a mu ch
greater CVR than non -hostile men, contrary to expectations, the CVR of
Type A personalities was not significantly greater than those with a Type
B personality. Previous research upholds the association between hostility
and a greater risk of cardiac fai lure (Larsen et al., 2020).
Research has also found that high neuroticism and low conscientiousness
have a significant association with high blood pressure in older adults, and
this relationship is mediated by state anxiety (Stone et. al., 2020).
Activati on of the autonomic nervous system, as reflected in electrodermal munotes.in

Page 45

Biological And Cognitive -
Behavioural Domain - I
45 and cardiovascular activity, thus provides useful insights into the field of
personality research and needs to be explored further.
3. Brain Activity :
Due to the advancements made in brain ima ging, personality neuroscience
is progressing accordingly. Techniques used to study brain activity include
fMRI, EEG and PET scan among others.
The inquiry explores structural differences in the brain correlated with
personality, as well as activation patt erns that emerge in response to
stimuli, or while completing tasks. Several studies conducted after the year
2000 have reported results that point towards the existence of a
neurobiological basis for the big five traits (Pedrero -Pérez et al., 2015).
In la ndmark research, Canli et al. (2001) employed FMRI to scan
participants' brains. Participants were asked to look at 20 negative images
(spiders, crying people), and 20 positive images (cute puppies, flowers). It
was discovered that the responses to both ne gative and positive pictures
activated different regions of the brain. Additionally, a significant
relationship between personality and the emotional reaction was found.
Particularly, higher frontal brain activity in reaction to unfavourable
imagery was co rrelated with neuroticism. Extroverted individuals, on the
other hand, had higher frontal brain activity in reaction to the positive
imagery.
Studies, conducted using such physiological methods, are often criticised
for some critical points including i) q uestionable representativeness due to
limited sample size; and ii) lack of compatibility of laboratory and
external conditions. Studies like the ones conducted by De Young et al.,
(2012) overcome these challenges by testing their predictions on a
relativel y large sample. However, they focussed on structure instead of a
function, and this came with its limitations - i) there is no evidence that
structure and function are related; or that they occur in the same region; ii)
the size of the region is uncorrelat ed with the level of functioning.
For an emerging field that has plenty of scope for growth and refinement,
current neuroscientific advances are providing unprecedented insight into
the foundations of human personality.
3.3.2 Physiologically -Based Theori es of Personality :
The knowledge gathered from personality research methods in the
physiology was used to arrive at theories that received the most attention
in personality psychology over the years. We shall discuss six of them
here, namely i) Extraversi on-Introversion, ii) Reinforcement theory, iii)
Sensation seeking, iv) Colinger's Tri -dimensional Personality theory, v)
Morningness -Eveningness and vi) Affective styles.
1. Extraversion -Introversion
If you would answer a ‘yes’ to being a talkative, lively pe rson who likes
going out then according to Eysenck's Personality Questionnaire, you are munotes.in

Page 46

Personality Psychology
46 an Extrovert person. But, on the other hand, when you could be labelled as
someone who likes to read more than meet new people, it would add a
point towards the Introve rsion dimension. Eysenck's theory proposed a
biological basis for these expressed traits of Extraversion and Introversion.
In his book, A biological basis for Personality (1967), he explained the
ascending reticular activation system or ARAS that is seen t o be higher in
introverts as compared to extroverts. The ARAS is a brain region that acts
as a gateway for nervous stimulation entering the cortical areas of the
brain. An opening in the gateway would result in a higher arousal in the
resting state. A clos ed gateway would lead to a lower level of cortical
arousal as the ARAS has a weak stimulation. The baseline arousal of
introverts is always more as compared to extraverts, they engage in
introverted behaviours to keep their heightened arousal levels low
(Claridge et al., 1981).
Here according to Hebb (1955), and later on even Eysenck, (1967, 2012),
(following the Yerkes - Dodson law) an optimum level of arousal is
important for the efficient functioning of the body. Depending on the
opening of the gateway, the stimulation reaches an ‘ optimal level ’ to
arouse the individual. An over -aroused state can lead to anxiety and an
under -aroused person leading to feeling lethargic. The theory states that
introverts have a baseline arousal that is already high during t heir resting
period, therefore continued inhibition over outside activities or more
restrained behaviours are expressed as it might overstimulate them.
This can be understood with the help of EEG studies on participants who
were given mild forms of stimul ation. They observed an enhanced
physiological reaction in the introverted participants as compared to the
extraverted in presence of a mild stimulus (Gale, 1987).
2. Reinforcement Theory (Sensitivity to Reward and Punishment)
A few important theories propose d by Jeffery Gray (1975) are linked to
the way we show physiological sensitivity to reward and punishment, one
of which is the Reinforcement theory.
i) Just by hearing the sound of the recess bell, we would immediately get
the urge to open our tiffin. ii) To avoid failing a test, we would try to
reduce our tendency to get distracted.
The Reinforcement theory makes note of two biological systems in the
brain (through animal studies). They are the Behavioural Activation
System (or BAS) and the Behavioural In hibition system ( or BIS). Both
these systems react to the incentives presented. The BAS regulates
approach behaviour (opening a tiffin) towards cues of rewards and
incentives present around (recess bell ringing). On the other hand, the BIS
regulates behavi our in the presence of cues of punishment or a negative
experience. It acts as a behaviour inhibitor. For example, to avoid the
negative experience (failing a test), the BIS would inhibit you from being
too distracted. munotes.in

Page 47

Biological And Cognitive -
Behavioural Domain - I
47 Both the BAS and the BIS lie on the dimension of relative sensitivity. A
person high on BAS would experience positive emotions and approach the
stimulus (like a cute dog) and a person high on BIS would like to run
away from the stimulus (e. g., an angry teacher). This theory also
accounted f or the personality dimensions of impulsivity and anxiety. Here
the inability to inhibit would lead to impulsivity and a very high BIS
would result in anxiety, the experience of negative emotions, frustrations,
etc. On the lower end of both impulsivity and anxiety lie emotionally
stable personalities and on the other end when both impulsivity and
anxiety are high, a person can be labelled as Neurotic.
3. Sensation seeking
Have you ever wondered why some of your friends love to ride a free -fall
or a rollercoast er ride again and again but some of them don’t wish to even
step a foot close to it? These individuals could be high on their need for
sensation seeking. Hebb’s (1955) experiments engaged with sensory
deprivation and developed a theory of Optimal Arousal . This concept of
optimal arousal was also incorporated by Eysenck in the explanation of
the physiological basis of extraversion. In their experiments, Zuckerman
and Hebb (1965) realised that some people were more likely to feel
distressed in the absence of sensation. They would ask for more reading
materials or tapes to look out for some sort of sensations.
They then theorised that the ones who are high on sensation -seeking tend
to seek out more and more thrilling experiences, adventure, etc.
Zuckerman deve loped a scale called the SSS or The sensation -seeking
scale (1964) to assess and predict toleration of sensory deprivation. Here
the physiological basis of this theory emphasises the role of
neurotransmitters. Zuckerman (1991) accounted for a balance of
neurotransmitters in the brain. Enzymes like Monoamine Oxidase or
MAO keep this balance intact, however, a reduced level of MAO would
lead to the transmission of more neurotransmitters and a behavioural result
of it would be jitteriness and wanting to do mor e and feeling more. When
MAO is high, it would inhibit the transmission of the optimal level of
neurotransmitters and eventually, the person may become down and feel
dull and would not wish to engage in any sensations.
4. Neurotransmitters and Personality
MAO is not the only neurotransmitter that may be related to, or cause
differences in personalities. Dopamine also has a lot of relevance in
explaining the feeling of pleasure through the mesolimbic pathway which
runs from the ventral tegmental area to the fo rebrain. Drugs like cocaine
also produce an effect similar to dopamine and produce pleasure, however,
when it wears down, the body experiences displeasure. This is the major
reason behind the recurring urge for using the drug.
Serotonin is another neurotr ansmitter which induces happiness. It plays a
major role in depression, which is a negative state of mind. Mood
disorders like depression are associated with either an increase or a
decrease in serotonin. Another important neurotransmitter is munotes.in

Page 48

Personality Psychology
48 norepinephrin e. When we see a snake, the sympathetic nervous system is
activated and starts a fight -or-flight response within us. Norepinephrine is
involved in the activation of the Sympathetic nervous system.
Based on these three NTs (dopamine, serotonin and norepine phrine),
Cloninger (1986) developed a Tri-dimensional Personality theory that
expresses three different traits.
The First is Novelty seeking . a lower level of dopamine increases the urge
to want more experiences or substances. this urge to experience more thrill
and novelty leads to a balance that is left by the reduced level of
dopamine. harm avoidance is the second trait discussed in the theory. it is
associated with abnormalities in the level of serotonin metabolism. these
abnormalities do not have a li near relation with harm avoidance but when
the principal serotonin metabolite 5 -hiaa is found at a lower level in the
cerebrospinal fluid it is associated with a propensity to depression. the
Third trait is called Reward dependence . A lower level of norepi nephrine
is associated with wanting to behave in a manner that produces rewards.
Workaholism may be a way in which individuals try to put in more effort
as compared to others to express their reward dependence.
5. Morningness -Eveningness
A clear preference for a time of the day may indicate the morningness -
eveningness dimension of personality. For example, a morning type of
person is someone who likes to wake up early and finish most chores then.
An evening type person is someone who likes to stay up for lon g in the
night and has difficulty waking up in the morning. Horne and Ostberg
(1976) talk about differences in underlying circadian rhythms, body
temperature, and endocrine secretion throughout this 24 to 25 -hour sleep -
wake cycle. Some may have a shorter Circadian rhythm of 22 hours and
wake up earlier in the morning feeling fresh. But when a person with a
larger circadian rhythm of 26 hours is forced to wake up at the same time,
two hours before their sleep cycle is complete, they would not like it and
have a groggy start to their day.
Researchers make use of this ‘ Free running ’ process where they allow
participants to sleep whenever they want to and wake up when they wish
to. No external influence would determine their sleep schedule. Here, their
temperat ure would be taken every hour of the day. In these experiments,
they found a pattern of a rise in body temperature when the participants
were about to wake up and a fall in temperature when they were about to
sleep. Horne and Ostenberg also developed a sel f-report questionnaire
(MEQ, 1991) that helps determine morningness -eveningness in human
circadian rhythms.
6. Brain Asymmetry and Affective styles.
Brain Asymmetry is a neuropsychological concept that means a
neuroanatomical difference between the left and right hemispheres of the
brain. The brain divides its load between both parts laterally to help
enhance its functioning. This asymmetry affects the release of munotes.in

Page 49

Biological And Cognitive -
Behavioural Domain - I
49 neurotransmitters, electrodermal activities, and cognitive activities.
Essentially, an asymmetry in the brain can help us understand how a
personality would express itself (Zaidel, 2001).
Individuals' differences in personality can also be associated with alpha
waves from an EEG measurement and levels of cortisol . Researchers
have found a lot of evide nce of the effect of brain asymmetry on the
affective styles of people. An affective style is a manner in which they
choose to regulate their emotions. A study by Hagemann and colleagues in
1998 demonstrated an accurate prediction of a negative or a positi ve
reactivity with the help of an EEG that showed asymmetry in the frontal
regions of the brain. Another study in 1995 by Davidson showed the
association of anterior asymmetry with the phasic arousal of emotions. In
an interesting study by Fox and Davidson in 1987, 10 -month -old infants
were given a taste of either a bitter or sweet -tasting solution. The affective
reaction to the sweet solution was a feeling of pleasantness and showed
more reaction in the left brain as compared to the unpleasant feeling that
arose after they were given the bitter solution which showed more activity
in the right part of the brain (Fox and Davison, 1987).
These psychophysical theories of personality then paved the way for
understanding the interface between genes and Personalit y Psychology.
3.4 CHECK YOUR PROGRESS
Write short notes on:
1. Brain activity
2. Extraversion – Introversion
3. Neurotransmitter and personality
4. Twin studies and adoption studies
5. Personality traits
6. Molecular genetics
7. Selective breeding
8. Natural selection and sexual selection
9. Need to belong
10. Individual differences
3.5 SUMMARY
A physiological variable contributes to providing the physiological
substrate for the personality characteristic. The six personalities covered
are extraversion, sensation seeking, tri -dimension al personality, sensitivity
to cause rewards and punishments, morningness -eveningness and affective
styles. Electrodermal activity lability in non -provoking situations is munotes.in

Page 50

Personality Psychology
50 considered to be evidence for trait anxiety. EDA stability can be a marker
of express iveness and antagonistic behaviour, also greater EDA lability is
a correlate of agreeableness. High neuroticism and low conscientiousness
have a significant association with high blood pressure in older adults, and
this relationship is mediated by state an xiety. Physiological methods -based
studies are criticised for limited sample space, limited representativeness,
compatibility of laboratory and external conditions. ascending reticular
activation system or ARAS (gateway for cortical arousal) is seen to be
higher in introverts as compared to extroverts. An over -aroused state can
lead to anxiety and an under -aroused person leading to feeling lethargic.
Reinforcement theory – Behavioural Activation System (BAS) and
Behavioural Inhibition System (BIS) accounted for personality dimensions
of impulsivity and anxiety.
Neurotransmitters like MAO, Dopamine, serotonin and norepinephrine
can also cause differences in personality. Individuals' differences in
personality can also be associated with alpha waves from an E EG
measurement and levels of cortisol. Genes are inherited by human beings
in the form of sets, known as chromosomes. Phenotypic variance includes
observed differences like height, weight that varies from one person to
another. Genotypic variance includes individual differences seen in
totality of their genes. Drinking habit is said to have come from the
sensation -seeking characteristic of personality, extraversion and
neuroticism Adoption studies have given proof that a shared environment
gives little to n o influence on personality. The very first study of gene x
environment interaction was done to study adolescence and how likely
they are to show aggressive behaviour. Genotype -environment correlation
is studied when different genotypes get exposed to diffe rent environments
– active genotype environment correlation, reactive genotype environment
correlation, and passive genotype environment correlation. Gene 5 -
HTTLPR is associated with the Five Factor Model construct of
neuroticism. Darwin proposed the theor y of natural selection and the
theory of sexual selection in 1859. Darwin rationalised that evolutionary
changes or variations allow an organism to survive and reproduce more.
An adaptation is simply a trait or pattern resulting from long -term repeated
processes of natural selection. Sexual selection is done through two forms
– Intrasexual mating and intersexual mating.
Sex differences can be observed in patterns of mating preference,
aggression and emotion. Kinship challenges the theory of natural selecti on
but the model of reciprocal altruism and social exchange theory explains
the co -occurrence of alliance and competition within a species for
survival. Personality variations account for individual differences because
of gene environment interactions, whi ch includes physical and mental
abilities, knowledge, habits, personality, and character traits.The big five
traits or OCEAN personality include: Openness to experience,
Neuroticism, Extraversion, Conscientiousness and Agreeableness. Isolated
mutations rar ely improve functioning and can be harmful, resulting in
adaptation failures. munotes.in

Page 51

Biological And Cognitive -
Behavioural Domain - I
51 3.6 QUESTIONS
 Explain the physiological measures used in personality research.
 Discuss physiologically based theories of personality in detail.
 What is the human genome?
 Elaborat e upon the behavioural genetic methods.
 Write a note on ‘genes and environment’.
 Explain evolution and natural selection.
 Describe the relevance of evolutionary psychology to personality.
 Discuss sex differences in aggression and jealousy.
 Elucidate sex d ifferences in mate preferences and desire for sexual
variety.
 Write a detailed note on ‘human nature’.
 Clarify individual differences in detail.
3.7 REFERENCES
1. Abrams, D. (1946). Biological Determinants of Personality. Journal of
Education, 129(9), 306 –308.
2. Abrahamson, A. C., Baker, L. A., and Caspi, A. (2002). Rebellious
teens? Genetic and environmental influences on the social attitudes of
adolescents. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 6,
1392 –1408
3. American Psychological Association. (n .d.). Cardiovascular
Reactivity. Retrieved November 15, 2022, from
https://dictionary.apa.org/cardiovascular -reactivity
4. Archontaki, D., Lewis, G. J., and Bates, T. C. (2013). Genetic
Influences on Psychological Well -Being: A Nationally Representative
Twin Study. Journal of Personality, 81(2), 221 –230.
5. Archontaki, D., Lewis, G. J., and Bates, T. C. (2013). Genetic
Influences on Psychological Well Being: A Nationally
Representative Twin Study. Journal of personality, 81(2), 221 -230.
6. Bulik, C. M., Sullivan, P. F., Wade, T. D., and Kendler, K. S. (2000).
Twin studies of eating disorders: a review. International Journal of
Eating Disorders, 27(1), 1 -20.
7. Buss, D. M. (1995). Psychological sex differences: Origins through
sexual selection. American Psychologist, 50(3), 164 -168.
8. Darwin, C. (1871/2004). The descent of man. London, England:
Penguin Classics. munotes.in

Page 52

Personality Psychology
52 9. Buss, D. M. (1995). Psychological sex differences: Origins through
sexual selection. Ame rican Psychologist, 50(3), 164 –168.
10. Buss, D. M. (2005). The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology. New
York: John Wiley .
11. Buss, A., and Plomin, R. (2008). Temperament: Early developing
personality traits. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum.
12. Buss, D. M. (2012). Evol utionary Psychology : The New Science of
the Mind. Pearson Education Limited.
13. Buss, D. M. (2016). The evolution of desire: Strategies of human
mating. London: Basic books.
14. Cattell, R. B. (1943). The description of personality. I. Foundations of
trait measurement. Psychologic al review, 50(6), 559.
15. Claridge, G., Donald, J., and Birchall, P. (1981). Drug tolerance and
personality: Some implications for Eysenck’s theory. Personality and
Individual Differences, 2(2), 153 –166.
16. Crider, A. (2008). Personality and Electrodermal Respo nse Lability:
An Interpretation. Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, 33(3),
141–148.
17. de Moor, M. H. M. (2021). Molecular Genetics of Personality. In O.
P. John and R. W. Robins (Eds.), Handbook of Personality: Theory
and Research (4th ed., pp. 242 –256). Guilford Press.
18. Del Giudice, M., Gangestad, S. W., and Kaplan, H. S. (2016). Life
history theory and evolutionary psychology. In D. M. Buss (Ed.), The
handbook of evolutionary psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 1) (pp. 88 –114).
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
19. Denisiuk, J. (2004). Evolutionary Versus Social Structural
Explanations for Sex Differences in Mate Preferences, Jealousy, and
Aggression. Rochester Institute of Technology, SAPA Project Test.
20. DiNardo, C. D., and Cortes, J. E. (2016). Mutations in AML:
prognostic and therapeutic implications. Haematology, 2016(1), 348 –
355.
21. Evolutionary Personality Theories (2022) - IResearchNet.Psychology.
http://psychology.iresearchnet.com/counseling -
psychology/personality -theories/evolutionary -personality -theories/
22. Eysenck, H. J. (1981). General features of the model. In A model for
personality (pp. 1 -37). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
23. Fichera, L., and Andre assi, J. L. (2000). Cardiovascular reactivity
during public speaking as a function of personality variables.
International Journal of Psychophysiology, 37(3), 267 –273.
24. Gailliot, M. T., and Baumeister, R. F. (2007). The Physiology of
Willpower: Linking Blo od Glucose to Self -Control. Personality and
Social Psychology Review, 11(4), 303 –327. munotes.in

Page 53

Biological And Cognitive -
Behavioural Domain - I
53 25. Gibbs, W. W. (2003). The unseen genome: beyond DNA. Scientific
American, 289(6), 106 -113.
26. Gosling, S. D., Kwan, V. S., and John, O. P. (2003). A dog's got
personality: a cross -species comparative approach to personality
judgments in dogs and humans. Journal of personality and social
psychology, 85(6), 1161.
27. Hamilton, W. D. (1964). The genetic evolution of social behaviour. II.
Journal of theoretical biology, 7(1), 17 -52.
28. Hamilton, W. D. (1966). The moulding of senescence by natural
selection. Journal of theoretical biology, 12(1), 12 -45.
29. Harris, C. C., Weston, A., Willey, J. C., Trivers, G. E., and Mann, D.
L. (1987). Biochemical and molecular epidemiology of human cancer:
indicators of carcinogen exposure, DNA damage, and genetic
predisposition. Environmental Health Perspectives, 75, 109 -119.
30. Harris, J. R. (2006). No two alike: Human nature and human
individuality. New York: Norton.
31. Hatemi, P. K., Medland, S. E., Klemmense n, R., Oskarsson, S.,
Littvay, L., Dawes, C. T., . . . and Christensen, K. (2014). Genetic
influences on political ideologies: Twin analyses of 19 measures of
political ideologies from five democracies and genome -wide findings
from three populations. Behav iour genetics, 44(3), 282 –294.
32. Henderson, N. D. (1982). Human behaviour genetics. Annual review
of psychology, 33(1), 403 -440.
33. Homans, G. C. (1961). The humanities and the social sciences.
American Behavioural Scientist, 4(8), 3 -6.
34. Hooper, J. L., White, V. M., Macaskill, G. T., Hill, D. J., and Clifford,
C. A. (1992). Alcohol use, smoking habits and the Junior Eysenck
Personality Questionnaire in adolescent Australian twins. Acta
Genetica Med. Gemellol. 41, 311 –324
35. Johnson, W., McGue, M., Krueger, R. F., and Bouchard Jr, T. J.
(2004). Marriage and personality: a genetic analysis. Journal of
personality and social psychology, 86(2), 285.
36. Jung, C. G. (1971). Personality types. The portable Jung, 178 -272.
37. Kendler, R. S., Heath, A. C., Neale, M. C., Kessler, R . C., and Eaves,
L. J. (1992). A population -based twin study of alcoholism in women.
Journal of the American Medical Association, 268, 1877 –1882.



munotes.in

Page 54

54 4
BIOLOGICAL DOMAIN AND
COGNITIVE -BEHAVIOURAL DOMAIN - II

Unit structure :
4.0 Objectives
4.1 Behaviourist and learning aspects of Personality
4.1.1 The Classical conditioning of Personality
4.1.2 The Origin of Behaviourist approaches
4.1.3 The Radical behaviourism of B. F. Skinner
4.2 Cognitive and Cognitive -experiential aspects of Personality
4.2.1 Personality revealed through Perception
4.2.2 Personality revealed through interpretation
4.2.3 Personality revealed through goals
4.3 Summary
4.4 Questi ons
4.5 References
4.0 OBJECTIVES
 Understanding how personality gets influenced by classical
conditioning.
 Understanding how personality can be studied by the means of
Perception, Interpretation, and Goals.
4.1 BEHAVIOURIST AND LEARNING ASPECTS OF
PERSONA LITY
4.1.1 The Classical Conditioning of Personality
 Conditioning a Response to a Stimulus
Evan Pavlov (1927), the Nobel Prize winner, was a Russian physiologist
who was interested in the digestive system. However, his experiments on
digestion coincidently led him to a discovery of, what is known today as
classical conditioning, which has a far -reaching influence on the field of
psychology. In simple words, classical conditioning is a form of learning
in which a neutral stimulus acquires the power to elicit a response that munotes.in

Page 55

Biological Domain and
Cognitive -Behavioural Domain - II
55 normally does not elicit that kind of response. In one of his experiments on
a dog, Pavlov paired the sound of bell with meat powder so that after
hearing that sound just after some time dog received food. After some
trials, he found that a dog started giving a response of salivation to the
sound of the bell as well. There are four important concepts in classical
conditioning: i) neutral stimulus which is not able to produce any response
before conditioning; ii) unconditioned stimulus which brings forth a
response without any learning like the food; iii) unconditioned stimulus
which is a previously neutral stimulus (like a sound of the bell) which
acquires the power to bring forth the response caused before by the
unconditioned stimulus by b eing repeatedly paired with it, and iv)
conditioned response, which is a response that follows a previously neutral
stimulus (salivation at the sound of the bell) after conditioning.
Let us take an everyday example. Small kids, initially, do not give a
response to a doctor, but to the injection. However, after the repeated
experience of the association of a doctor and the injection, the kids start
giving a response (i.e., crying) just after seeing the doctor.
Further, the following two are important princ iples in classical
conditioning:
1) Stimulus generalisation: It is a process through which a conditioned
response follows a stimulus that is similar to the original conditioned
stimulus. The more there is a similarity, the more generalisation. In the
above e xample, the small kids may start giving the response to a clinic,
to the nurse, or smell of the clinic.
2) Stimulus discrimination: Through stimulus discrimination,
individuals learn to differentiate among various stimuli and to limit
response to one stimulu s to others. For example, the kids learn to give a
different response to the sight of a garden.
 Behavioural Patterns as a Result of Conditioning:
In this section, we will see how behavioural patterns can be caused and
explained by classical conditioning. When neutral stimuli are repeatedly
paired or associated with enjoyable and positive incidences or situations,
they become ‘likes’ of the person. On the other hand, when they are paired
or associated with negative events, the person will dislike them. In o ther
words, the stimuli which had been originally neutral in nature, get liked or
disliked. For example, a teenager learns to associate or pair drinking with
having fun or a teenage girl harassed by boys outside during the night may
become afraid of going out at night and develop a ‘personality’ that fears
boys. In this manner, Pavlov’s constructs help us explain aspects of
personality which are emotional in nature, such as why certain people
have some kind of phobia or fear and others do not. Usually, such phobias
have their origin in classical conditioning. Such as drinking milk and then
having a very upset stomach in childhood can make that person aversive to
milk.
munotes.in

Page 56

Personality Psychology
56  Extinction process
Extinction occurs when the pairing of the unconditioned and conditioned
stimulus stops. It simply means that the conditioned response (CR)
becomes rare or uncommon. This means that the association is weakened
and it keeps weakening over time until it vanishes or disappears. In a sense
then, the personality changes (as a resul t of changes in the pattern of
response). Continuing the example of the teenage girl who is afraid of
going out at night with boys, her personality could change if she
repetitively experienced going out at night with elders, who are
supportive. Sadly, when people develop some kind of fear, they avoid it
and refuse to face it due to which they never overcome their fear.
Conditioning of neurotic behaviour
Pavlov was able to explain the personality dimension of neuroticism with
the help of behaviourism. He con ditioned a response which was identical
to neurotic behaviour in a dog. He paired or associated the presentation of
food with a circle and not with an ellipse (oval) due to which the dog
started having a conditioned response to the circle and not an ellips e,
which also meant that it could discriminate between the circle and the
ellipse. Slowly and over time, Pavlov started to increase the roundness of
the ellipse so that it almost looked like a circle. When the dog was unable
to discriminate the ellipse fro m the circle, it started showing neurotic
behaviours (Pavlov, 1927). “This suggests that neuroticism may be a
conditioned response, fostered by an environment that needs the individual
to discriminate between events under conditions in which that judgment is
almost impossible” (Wolpe & Plaud, 1997, p. 966). For example, it is
impossible for some children to foresee how their unsteady parents are
going to react. They may feel depressed, frustrated or angry if they cannot
guess what they are going to receive - punishment or praise.
4.1.2 The Origin of Behaviourist Approaches :
 Conditioned Fear and Systematic Desensitization
Watson applied Pavlov’s theory (which, as we saw, developed by studying
animals) to show how emotional responses are conditioned. He did thi s by
conditioning Little Albert, an 11 -month -old boy (Watson & Rayner,
1920). Little Albert was accustomed to fearing a rat; he was initially not
afraid of them. They did this by repetitively making a loud and sudden
noise (which made him extremely afraid) , making the baby startle,
whenever he was in the presence of a rat. Soon, he started crying just by
seeing the rat.
Little Albert’s case also showed generalization as he started getting afraid
of other ‘furry’ objects similar to a rat, such as a dog, a ra bbit and a fur
coat. He even started fearing the Santa Claus mask. This study shows us
that an emotional response which was conditioned to a stimulus can be
generalized and can become an emotional reaction to different stimuli. It
shows how any neutral sti mulus can evoke an emotion. Watson believed munotes.in

Page 57

Biological Domain and
Cognitive -Behavioural Domain - II
57 that this was how the majority of personality was formed (Larsen & Buss,
2010).
The approach by Watson and Rayner was also used to counter condition
the fear of rabbits, rats, fur and such things in a boy named P eter (Jones,
1924). Peter played with 3 children when a fear -provoking rabbit was
present. Slowly and over time, as the rabbit was brought closer and closer
while keeping Peter happy, his fear disappeared. This was one of the first
documented cases of what has come to be called systematic
desensitization (Larsen & Buss, 2010).
The principles of conditioning were also applied to treat bedwetting
(Mowrer & Mowrer, 1938). When even a little amount of bedwetting was
detected, an electrical device (like a loud b ell) would wake up the child. In
a short period of time, the child learns to respond to the sensations before
getting wet. The application of behaviourist conditioning techniques to
therapy developed into a sub -field that is sometimes referred to as
behavi our modification or applied behaviour analysis.
4.1.3 The Radical Behaviourism of B. F. Skinner :
Burrhus Frederick (“Fred”) Skinner (1904 -1990) emphasised that who he
was, and his personality was clearly the result of his reinforcement history
as a child - the rewards and punishments he experienced. According to
him, environmental events controlled and determined his personality and
life.
 Operant Conditioning as an Alternative Description of Personality
Skinner developed some principles under operant condit ioning and by
using those, he became somewhat like an animal trainer. In operant
conditioning , behaviour is transformed or changed by its consequences;
Skinner manipulated or controlled the environment in such a manner
which enabled him to train animals to do things, which did not come
naturally to them (He trained pigeons to play badminton!). He did this by
gradually shaping consecutive (back -to-back) approximations to the actual
desired behaviour. His theory of operant conditioning gave more
importance to the function of behaviour (what it does) instead of what the
structure of personality is. It is also a deterministic theory , in which there
is no free will.
Skinner thought that the internal components of personality such as traits,
instincts, needs, and psychical structures (id, ego, superego) were of no
importance and only observable behaviours were important. Such refusal
of cognitive processes and advocacy of behaviours that we can observe
directly has been one of the crucial issues of contestation bet ween
behaviourism and other schools of thought in psychology (Uttal, 2000).
Skinner was able to analyse a superstitious person’s behaviour without the
help of internal aspects of personality. For example, to understand why a
girl might wear only a purple coloured dress on an exam, Skinner
explained that if wearing that dress (a person’s experience) coincides with munotes.in

Page 58

Personality Psychology
58 scoring high marks, specifically on a few random occasions, then she will
continue wearing that colour as the reinforcement strengthens the
perfo rmance of the behaviour without any cause -effect relationship.
Skinner found that any animal’s learning and behaviour did not look like
the typical or average animal’s behaviour, emphasising the individuality of
environmental conditions and responses. Ther efore, he emphasized that
we should apply the principles of learning individually to each organism.
Accordingly, his approach was idiographic rather than nomothetic.
 Controlling the Reinforcement
Like Watson, Skinner also believed that just like a pigeon, a child was also
a function of the environment. So he started making designs regarding the
best ways for child -rearing and even building entire communities. His
studies led to the creation of the Skinner box. In the operant or
experimental chamber, an anim al was kept separated and detached from
the outside world so that the chamber was under the control of the
experimenter and all other environmental influences could be kept at bay.
The chamber was controlled by the experimenter in the sense that the
chambe r included something like a lever or a key, which when used
(pressing the lever or pecking the key) would release a food pellet
intended to provide positive reinforcement or to stop some kind of harmful
stimulus, such as a shock, thereby providing negative reinforcement.
The rate of reinforcement or the frequency of how often the reinforcement
would be provided was controlled and regulated. When the rewards are
given irregularly, they are called partial reinforcement schedules and it
was found that these ty pes of schedules were most efficient at shaping
behaviour patterns. Later on, self -paced teaching regimes and teaching
machines started applying these techniques in which as the students
become better at something or some skill, they receive rewards. Skinn er
(1938) also discusses at length the applications of reinforcement principles
to a wide variety of life domains.
 Skinner’s Behaviourist Utopia
Skinner (1948) wrote a novel called ‘Walden Two’ that systematically
demonstrates the application of his theory of learning to build an idealistic
community. Precisely, socially appropriate and positive behaviours of the
citizens in such a community are reinforced as the government bestows
rewards for the same. In this book, only positive reinforcement is used.
Citizens are not given negative reinforcement or punishments. The
question of freedom doesn’t arise as Skinner believes that free will is only
an illusion. As a result, in this book, there is no freedom, only perceived
freedom, as the community engineers ever yone’s behaviour.
 What About Maladaptive Behaviours?
According to Skinner, psychopathy is learned just like all other
behaviours. Irrespective of whether the personality is adaptive or
maladaptive, it is learned by the environment. Either people have not
learned the correct response or have learned the wrong one. It may also munotes.in

Page 59

Biological Domain and
Cognitive -Behavioural Domain - II
59 happen that some people may have been punished for adaptive or good
behaviours. So, setting up environmental likelihoods that provide rewards
for desirable and appropriate behaviour can treat mental illnesses. For
Skinner neuroticism is also the outcome of one’s reinforcement history in
life.
4.2 COGNITIVE AND COGNITIVE -EXPERIENTIAL
ASPECTS OF PERSONALITY
Cognition refers to awareness and thinking, and specific mental acts, such
as perc eiving, attending to, interpreting, remembering, believing, judging,
deciding, and anticipating. All these mental behaviours add up to what is
called information processing , or the transformation of sensory input into
mental representations and the manipul ation of such representations
(Larsen & Buss, 2010. p. 369).” In this section, we will study about three
levels of cognition in which personality psychologists are interested. The
first level is “ perception or the process of imposing order on the
informati on our sense organs take in; the second level is interpretation ,
or the making sense of, or explaining, various events in the world;
(interpretation concerns giving meaning to events) and the third level is
people's conscious goals , the standards that peop le develop for evaluating
themselves and others” (Larsen & Buss, 2010. p. 369, 370).”
4.2.1 Personality Revealed through Perception :
 Field Dependence
On the basis of his innovative tool, the Red and Frame Test (RFT), Witkin
(1973) was able to demonstrate t wo types of cognitive styles which
individuals can be categorized into. The two cognitive styles he mentioned
included field dependency and field independency. People who are able to
perceive the object independently from the visual world or cues present
are known as field independent. And those who always require to rely on
the background or external cues are known as field dependent.
 Field Dependence/Independence and Life Choices
People who are field -dependent rely usually on social information and
keep asking others for their opinions. Their orientation is towards others
which is very evident as they mingle easily with others, like to be
surrounded by others, and need continued social interactions with others.
On the contrary, people who are field -indepe ndent are more autonomous,
have an indifferent orientation towards others, are not bothered much
about what other people think and like to be alone (Goodenough &,
Witkin 1977).
 Current Research on Field Dependence/Independence
Studies have found that compa red to field -dependent people, field -
independent people make greater progress in second language acquisition
(learning a second language). Field -independent people are more skilful at
evaluating complex situations and filtering information from the mess of munotes.in

Page 60

Personality Psychology
60 background distractions. They are also more creative (Miller, 2007).
However, they like to remain alone and away from others and have very
few social skills. In contrast, field -dependent people possess good social
skills, are attracted towards others, and pay more attention to the social
context (Tamir & Nadler, 2007). Both these styles have their own
advantages and disadvantages and hence are adaptive in certain settings,
which makes it next to impossible to say which one is more beneficial
(Collins, 1994 ).
Pain Tolerance And Sensation Reducing/Augmenting.
People differ regarding how much pain they can tolerate. “In pain
tolerance , people undergo the same physical stimulus (e.g., to get an
injection from the doctor) but react quite differently from each ot her in
terms of the pain they report experiencing” (Larsen & Buss, 2010. p. 375).
 Petrie’s Research
In order to measure how much pain could a participant tolerate, Petrie
studied people who were in hospitals going through hurtful operations and
normal peop le in whom pain was induced by employing heat or putting
heavy weights on the middle joint of people’s fingers. Her theory says that
people who have low pain tolerance have a nervous system which enlarges
or amplifies the individual effect of sensation. On the other hand, people
who have high pain tolerance have a nervous system which reduces or
dulls the sensory stimulation effects. As a result, this theory is called the
reducer/augmenter theory which “refers to the dimension along which
people differ in t heir reaction to sensory stimulation; some appear to
reduce sensory stimulation, whereas some appear to augment stimulation
(Larsen & Buss, 2010. p. 375).”
4.2.2 Personality Revealed through Interpretation :
 Kelly’s Personal Construct Theory
George Kelly (1 955) was a psychologist who believed that people are able
to make sense of or understand their situations and circumstances and they
are also able to predict what is going to happen to them in the future.
According to him, psychoanalysis was effective beca use it helps people to
explain psychological problems. For example, you are addicted to
smoking because you are fixated on your oral stage. He believed that as
long as people believed and used the explanations to make sense of their
circumstances, the cont ent of explanations was not that important. “Kelly
felt that a primary motivation for every person was to find meaning in
their life circumstances, and to use this meaning to predict their own
future, to anticipate what is likely to happen next (Larsen & B uss, 2010. p.
377).” Kelly viewed human nature as ‘humans -as-scientists’. People try to
understand, predict, and control their lives just like scientists do in their
respective fields.
Scientists make use of constructs to understand the world. But a constr uct
does not exist physically, it only exists in our mind. “It is a word that munotes.in

Page 61

Biological Domain and
Cognitive -Behavioural Domain - II
61 summarizes a set of observations and conveys the meaning of those
observations (Larsen & Buss, 2010. p. 378).” For example, gravity is a
construct. It cannot be seen but can be v erified. Constructs are also applied
to people, such as shy, smart, short -tempered, etc. “In Kelly's theory, the
constructs a person routinely uses to interpret and predict events are called
personal constructs ” (Larsen & Buss, 2010. p. 378).” Each individ ual has
a different personal construct system. That is why their interpretation of
the world is also different and unique. All constructs are bipolar in the
sense that every construct has its opposite. For example, introvert –
extravert, boring – interesti ng, etc.
 Locus of Control
Locus of control (LOC) refers to where a person locates responsibility for
things that happen in his life. Does he or she locate responsibility within
himself - internally or to other factors like destiny, luck and fate –
external ly? During the 1950s, when Julian Rotter was examining social
foundations of learning, that was the time when the research for the locus
of control started. Rotter extended traditional learning theory (learning
through reinforcement) and advised that learn ing also depends on how
much a particular reinforcer is valued – its reinforcement value. For
example, some people may value praise and appreciation and hence it will
aid their learning but other people may not value it much resulting in them
not being mot ivated by it. The expectations for reinforcements are also
different among people. One may expect that a certain kind of behaviour
will help them get a reinforcer. In simple words, they believe that they can
control events in their life. Whereas, other peo ple cannot understand the
connection between their behaviour and reinforcement. This portrays
Rotter's “expectancy model” of learning behaviour.
As cited in Larsen & Buss (2010. p. 380) “Rotter stressed that a person's
expectations for reinforcement held a cross a variety of situations, what he
called generalized expectancies ”. When encountering a new situation,
people’s expectancies about what is going to happen will be based on their
general expectancies of whether they can or cannot influence the
situatio n.” Further “A generalized expectancy that events are outside of
one’s control is called an external locus of control . Contrastingly, an
internal locus of control is the generalized expectancy that reinforcing
events are under one's control and that one is responsible for the major
outcomes in life (Larsen & Buss, 2010. p. 381).” People who are high on
internal LOC believe that consequences or outcomes are dependent on
their efforts and people who are high on external LOC believe that
outcomes or circumstan ces are dependent on factors that are beyond their
control. Further, the same individual may have a different LOC depending
on the specific situation. This is called specific expectancies .
 Learned Helplessness
While studying avoidance learning in dogs, psy chologists started working
on learned helplessness. The dogs were put in a condition where they were
given shock from which they could not escape. In the first few shocks, the munotes.in

Page 62

Personality Psychology
62 dogs tried to escape by turning, twisting, jumping and pulling at their
binds. B ut after some time, they stopped trying and accepted the shocks
passively as they had learnt that they will not be able to escape. After that,
the dogs were transferred to a different cage from which escape was easily
possible by merely jumping over a smal l fence or wall. However, the dogs
did not even try to escape the shocks. It appeared as if they “had learned
that their situation was hopeless, and they gave up seeking to avoid their
painful circumstance” (Larsen & Buss, 2010, p. 382). Other dogs, who ha d
not been given a shock in an inescapable situation earlier, easily jumped
over the fence and protected themselves from the shock. Due to learned
helplessness, dogs were not even trying to escape. The researchers lifted
and put the dog outside the fence. In a way, they showed them that there is
an escape, after which these dogs also learnt that they could jump and save
themselves from the shocks. But if this had not been shown to them by the
researchers, then they would not have attempted jumping as they h ad
learnt to passively bare the pain of shock.
In real life, when people think or perceive that an undesirable situation is
beyond their control, they can develop learned helplessness. For example,
a woman who is being abused by her husband will initially try everything
to make him stop, such as threatening him that she will leave him if he
does not stop abusing her, etc. But if the husband keeps abusing her
irrespective of what she is trying to make him stop, eventually she may
develop learned helplessness and stop trying. However, if someone helps
her and shows or suggests to her how she can escape that situation, then
she can overcome this learned helplessness and save herself (Seligman &
Csikszentmihalyi, 2000).
4.2.3 Personality Revealed through Goals :
Personal Projects Analysis
A personal project analysis is a set of suitable actions with the intention of
accomplishing a goal. Psychologist Brian Little (e.g., Little, 2007) holds
that these personal projects are naturally occurring units that help to
understand how personality works because personal projects show the
different ways in which people solve different problems in their life. Most
people have a number of projects that they work on in their daily life. For
example, to score high marks in exams, get a job, exercise, maintain
weight, have healthy relationships, etc. People high on neuroticism think
that their personal projects are stressful, hard, and beyond their control;
and that they will fail. There is also a high possibility that they might th ink
that they have not made much progress in reaching their goals. People
high on neuroticism usually experience hurdles and discontent in
achieving their personal projects (Little, Lecci, & Watkinson, 1992).
Cognitive Social Learning Theory
Personality th eories which are built on the idea that personality is revealed
through goals and how people “think about themselves relative to their
goals collectively form the cognitive social learning approach to
personality” (Larsen & Buss, 2010. p. 386) munotes.in

Page 63

Biological Domain and
Cognitive -Behavioural Domain - II
63  Albert Bandu ra and the Notion of Self -Efficacy
Self-efficacy is a very important concept given by Albert Bandura, which
is also a part of his theory. In simple words, it refers to one’s belief in his
or her capabilities to perform a given task. For example, a child wh o is
learning to fill in the colour in the drawings may believe that she will be
able to fill in the colour inside the boundaries and that the colour will not
cross the boundary. In this case, the child has high self -efficacy beliefs for
colouring skills. In contrast, if the child doubts herself regarding her
colouring skill, then she has low self -efficacy beliefs. Research shows that
when people have high self -efficacy beliefs, they put in more effort in the
task, are persistent and set high goals compared to those who have low
self-efficacy.
Self-efficacy affects performance and vice versa. So, if self -efficacy leads
to better performance, then that better performance, in turn, will enhance
self-efficacy. When we start some task, self -efficacy is most impo rtant
during that time. A complex task can be divided into goals and subgoals.
Achieving a subgoal boosts overall self -efficacy. Researchers also
distinguish between generalised self -efficacy that cuts across the life
domains and specific self -efficacy tha t is limited to a certain domain (like
colouring). Self -efficacy is also affected by the means of modelling, that
is, observing other people performing successfully in different domains.
 Carol Dweck and the Theory of Mastery Orientation
The early research of Carol Dweck focused on helpless and mastery -
oriented behaviours in schoolchildren (Deiner & Dweck, 1978, 1980). She
noticed that when facing failure, some students persist and others give up
at the first hint of difficulty. She examined the cognitive be liefs that
caused such kinds of behaviour patterns. For example, she found out that
the implicit beliefs that students hold about intelligence can have a great
impact on the way in which they deal with challenging intellectual tasks.
Students who viewed in telligence as something that cannot change and is
a fixed internal feature (Dweck named it ‘entity theory’) do not like to
face academic tests or challenges. On the contrary, students who hold the
view that intelligence is not only changeable but can be en hanced through
persistence and effort (Dweck named it ‘incremental theory’) seek
academic challenges (Dweck, 1999a, 2002; Dweck, Chiu, & Hong, 1995).
This also shows that if we do not praise a student for their intelligence,
then they will view intelligenc e as something as unchangeable. They will
also start to think that success and failure are beyond their control.
 Tory Higgins and the Theory of Regulatory Focus:
Higgins proposed two types of regulatory focus, namely promotion focus
and prevention focus. I n promotion focus, a person cares more about
achieving positive outcomes and goals in their lives that lead to growing,
advancing, and accomplishing stories. “Promotion focus behaviours are
characterized by eagerness, approach, and “going for the gold”, in other
words, striving for the best” (Larsen & Buss, 2010. p. 388). In prevention munotes.in

Page 64

Personality Psychology
64 focus, a person cares more about avoiding negative outcomes in life and
focuses rather on safety and protection. These people are more cautious
and vigilant. Promotion focus has been found to be associated with
extraversion, while prevention focuses on neuroticism (Grant & Higgins,
2003).
 Walter Mischel and the Cognitive -Affective Personality System
(CAPS)
Walter Mischel, in his cognitive -affective personality system (CAPS)
visualized that personality is a build -up of cognitive and affective
activities and that personality is not merely just a collection of traits. And
these activities affect the ways in which we tend to respond to situations
(Mischel, 2000, 2004). These cognit ive and affective activities or
processes include mental activities like construal (how one views a
situation), abilities, feelings, plans, beliefs, goals, expectations, strategies,
and self -regulatory standards. This theory states that every person has in
themselves such a relatively stable network of mental activities which they
acquire by means of their biological and learning history, genetic
endowment and the culture and subculture they belong to. According to
Mischel, as and when people face different kinds of situations in life,
based on the situation their cognitive and affective processes get triggered
or activated. Mischel emphasised the person -situation interaction at the
root of a wide variety of behaviours that we observe.
Intelligence
One of t he many definitions of intelligence takes into account educational
attainment, which means how much knowledge has a person attained
relative to other people in his/her age cohort. Some of the other definitions
see intelligence as an ability or competence t o become knowledgeable or
educated, as an aptitude to learn. This view is called the aptitude view of
intelligence. The early intelligence measures or IQ tests are based on the
aptitude view. Earlier, psychologists viewed intelligence as a trait. They
also thought that individuals differed from each other only because of the
different amounts of intelligence they had. Intelligence was also thought
of as a single factor; it was called the g factor, in which g stands for
general intelligence. In due course of time, different tests of intelligence
were made and researchers became aware that separate abilities exist, like
verbal, perceptual, arithmetic, and memory ability.
Howard Gardner (1983) proposed a widely accepted definition of
intelligence according to w hich intelligence is the application of cognitive
skill and knowledge to solve problems, learn, and achieve goals that are
valued by the individual and the culture (Larsen & Buss, 2010. p. 390). He
gave a theory of intelligence called ‘the theory of multip le intelligences’,
according to which intelligence has seven forms, like intrapersonal and
interpersonal intelligence, kinaesthetic intelligence, musical intelligence,
visual -spatial intelligence, linguistic -verbal intelligence, logical -
mathematical (Gardn er, 1999). Peter Salovey and Jack Mayer (1990) put
forward the concept of emotional intelligence, on which Daniel Goleman munotes.in

Page 65

Biological Domain and
Cognitive -Behavioural Domain - II
65 (1995) wrote a book by the same name, thus making it more popular.
Emotional intelligence includes the ability to know your own emotio ns
(self-awareness), regulate one’s own emotions (self -management),
recognise the emotions of other people, and manage social relationships
(social skills).
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS
Write short notes on:
a) Self-efficacy
b) Conditioning of a response to a stimulus
c) Systematic desensitization
d) Operant conditioning
e) Pain tolerance
f) Locus of control
g) Learned helplessness
4.3 SUMMARY
Classical conditioning, popularised by Ivan Pavlov, is a form of learning
in which a neutral stimulus (bell ringing) is repeatedly paired with a n
unconditional stimulus (food) to elicit a response that was not associated
with the neutral stimulus previously (salivation). Stimulus generalisation
is a process through which a conditioned response follows a stimulus that
is similar to the original con ditioned stimulus. Through stimulus
discrimination, individuals learn to differentiate among various similar
stimuli and to limit responding to one stimulus to others. Extinction occurs
when the pairing of the unconditioned and conditioned stimulus ceases to
exist.
In operant conditioning, behaviour is encouraged or discouraged as a
result of consequences (reinforcement or punishment respectively).
Cognition is an umbrella term used to represent a wide variety of higher
mental abilities like perception, th inking, decision -making, reasoning,
language use etc. All these mental abilities add up to what is called
information processing.
Witkin's field -dependence and field -independence are widely studied
cognitive styles. Field -independent participants can perce ive objects as
having an identity beyond the field they are situated in (e.g., trees in a
forest) whereas field -dependents do not demonstrate this ability (Witkin,
1973). Field -dependents rely on social information, and social proof and
seek to act in a so cially conforming manner. In contrast, the field -
independents demonstrate higher autonomy, have an indifferent
orientation towards others, are not very bothered about what other people
think, and like to be alone.
The reducer/augmenter theory refers to th e dimension along which people
differ in their reaction to sensory stimulation; some appear to reduce
sensory stimulation, whereas some appear to augment stimulation (Larsen munotes.in

Page 66

Personality Psychology
66 & Buss, 2010). For example, pain tolerance - even when the physical
stimulus is th e same (e.g. injection via needle), people report differing
levels of pain.
In Kelly's theory, the constructs a person routinely uses to interpret and
predict events are called personal constructs. They are the lens through
which each individual sees the w orld.
Locus of control refers to one's beliefs about how much control he or she
has over his or her life. An external locus of control reflects a generalized
expectancy that events are outside of one’s control. Contrastingly, an
internal locus of control i s the generalized expectancy that life is in our
hands. For an individual with an internal LoC, the responsibility of
outcomes lies within the person whereas if they have an external LoC,
outcomes will be attributed to chance or luck.
A personal project a nalysis is a set of suitable actions with the intention of
accomplishing a goal.
Proposed and theorised by Albert Bandura, self -efficacy refers to the
belief in one's own ability to successfully pursue a task or goal.
4.4 QUESTIONS
1. What is Classical condi tioning? Explain its role in personality.
2. Explain in detail the radical behaviourism by B. F. Skinner.
3. Explain what is field -dependence and the field -independence with
suitable examples.
4. How is personality revealed through interpretation?
5. Explain cognitive social learning theory in detail.
4.5 REFERENCES
1. Baumeister, R. F. (1997). Identity, self -concept, and self -esteem: The
self-lost and found. In Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 681 -
710). New York: Academic Press.
2. Collins, M. D., Lawson, P. A., Will ems, A., Cordoba, J. J.,
Fernandez -Garayzabal, J., Garcia, P., ... & Farrow, J. A. E. (1994).
The phylogeny of the genus Clostridium: proposal of five new genera
and eleven new species combinations. International Journal of
Systematic and Evolutionary Micr obiology, 44(4), 812 -826.
3. Costa Jr, P. T., McCrae, R. R., & Dye, D. A. (1991). Facet scales for
agreeableness and conscientiousness: A revision of the NEO
Personality Inventory. Personality and individual Differences, 12(9),
887-898.
4. Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Seligman, M. (2000). Positive psychology.
American psychologist, 55(1), 5 -14.
5. Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well -being: The science of happiness
and a proposal for a national index. American psychologist, 55(1), 34. munotes.in

Page 67

Biological Domain and
Cognitive -Behavioural Domain - II
67 6. Diener, C. I., & Dweck, C. S. (1978). An analysis of learned
helplessness: Continuous changes in performance, strategy, and
achievement cognitions following failure. Journal of personality and
social psychology, 36(5), 451.
7. Eysenck, S. B., Eysenck, H. J., & Barrett, P. (1985). A revised versio n
of the psychoticism scale. Personality and individual differences, 6(1),
21-29.
8. Goodenough, D. R., & Witkin, H. A. (1977). Origins of the
field‐dependent and field ‐independent cognitive styles. ETS Research
Bulletin Series, 1977(1), i -80.
9. Grant, H., & Hi ggins, E. T. (2003). Optimism, promotion pride, and
prevention pride as predictors of quality of life. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 29(12), 1521 -1532.
10. Heatherton, T. F., & Polivy, J. (1991). Development and validation of
a scale for measurin g state self -esteem. Journal of Personality and
Social psychology, 60(6), 895.
11. Herbert, T. B., & Cohen, S. (1993). Depression and immunity: a
meta -analytic review. Psychological bulletin, 113(3), 472.
12. Jones, M. C. (1924). A laboratory study of fear: The ca se of Peter.
The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 31, 308 -315.
13. Kelly, G. (1955). Personal construct psychology. Nueva York:
Norton.
14. Larsen, R., & Buss, D. (2010). Personality psychology - Domains of
knowledge about human nature. (4th ed.) New York: Mc Graw Hi ll.
15. Larsen, R. J., & Cowan, G. S. (1988). Internal focus of attention and
depression: A study of daily experience. Motivation and Emotion,
12(3), 237 -249.
16. Lewis, M., & Ramsay, D. (2004). Development of self ‐recognition,
personal pronoun use, and pretend play during the 2nd year. Child
development, 75(6), 1821 -1831.
17. Little, B. R. (2008). Personal projects and free traits: Personality and
motivation reconsidered. Social and Personality Psychology Compass,
2(3), 1235 -1254.
18. Little, B. R., Leccl, L., & Watkinson, B. (1992). Personality and
personal projects: Linking Big Five and PAC units of analysis.
Journal of personality, 60(2), 501 -525.
19. Lucas, R. E., Diener, E., & Larsen, R. J. (2003). Measuring positive
emoti ons.
20. Lucas, R. E., Diener, E., & Larsen, R. J. (2003). Measuring positive
emotions. In S. J. Lopez & C. R. Snyder (Eds.), Positive
psychological assessment: A handbook of models and measures (pp.
201–218). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
21. Markus, H., & Nurius, P. (1987). Possible selves: The interface
between motivation and the self -concept.
22. Mowrer, O. H., & Mowrer, W. M. (1938). Enuresis —a method for its
study and treatment. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 8(3), 436.
23. Myers, D. G., & Diener, E. (1995). Who is happy?. Psychological
science, 6(1), 10 -19.
24. Oyserman, D., & Markus, H. R. (1990). Possible selves and
delinquency. Journal of personality and social psychology, 59(1), 112. munotes.in

Page 68

Personality Psychology
68 25. Powers, F. F., McConnell, T. R., Trow, W. C., Moore, B. V ., &
Skinner, C. E. (1938). Psychology in everyday living. New York: Ex -
Library.
26. Rotter, J. B. (1971). Generalized expectancies for interpersonal trust.
American psychologist, 26(5), 443.
27. Shoda, Y., & Mischel, W. (2000). Reconciling contextualism with the
core assumptions of personality psychology. European Journal of
Personality, 14(5), 407 -428.
28. Skinner, B. F. (1938). The behaviour of organisms. New York:
Appleton -Century Crofts.
29. Solomon, B., Powell, K., & Gardner, H. (1999). Multiple
intelligences. Encycl opedia of creativity, 2, 273 -283.
30. Tamir, Y., & Nadler, A. (2007). The role of personality in social
identity: Effects of field ‐dependence and context on reactions to threat
to group distinctiveness. Journal of Personality, 75(5), 927 -954.
31. Uttal, W. R. (200 0). The war between mentalism and behaviourism:
On the accessibility of mental processes. New York: Psychology
Press.
32. Veenhoven, R. (1988). The utility of happiness. Social indicators
research, 20(4), 333 -354.
33. Watson, J. B., & Rayner, R. (1920). Conditione d emotional
reactions. Journal of experimental psychology, 3(1), 1.
34. Witkin, H. A. (1973). The role of cognitive style in academic
performance and in teacher ‐student relations 1 2. ETS Research
Bulletin Series, 1973(1), i -58.
35. Wolpe, J., & Plaud, J. J. (1997). Pavlov's contributions to behaviour
therapy: The obvious and the not so obvious. American Psychologist,
52(9), 966.


munotes.in

Page 69

69 5
DISPOSITIONAL DOMAIN: TRAIT
APPROACH - I
Unit Structure :
5.0 Objectives
5.1 Introduction
5.1.1 What is a trait?
5.1.2 Identification of important traits
5.2 Allport
5.3 Cattell
5.4 Eysenck’s Three Factors
5.5 The Big -Five and Five -Factor Model
5.5.1 Theory/Model
5.5.2 Empirical Evidence
5.5.3 Circumplex Taxonomies of Personality
5.5.4 HEXACO
5.7 Summary
5.8 Questions
5.9 References
5.0 OBJECTIVES
After studying this unit, you should be able to:
 Understand what are traits.
 Know the d ifferent properties of traits.
 Study act frequency formulation to understand traits.
 Know how to identify important traits.
 To know Allport’s theory of personality
 Understand the personality taxonomy given by Eysenck.
 Know the taxonomy of personality d eveloped by Cattell. munotes.in

Page 70

Personality Psychology
70  Know the Five -Factor model
 To understand the circumplex taxonomies of personality
5.1 INTRODUCTION
Imagine a situation where your friend introduces you to their colleague
from work at a party. When your friend asks you what you though t about
the colleague, you say that you found them to be friendly, generous,
poised, etc. These descriptions are exactly what make up the trait-
descriptive adjectives - words that describe traits, and attributes of a
person that are reasonably characterist ic of the person and perhaps even
enduring over time. (Larsen & Buss, 2009, p. 61). This means that they are
consistent and stable. Most personality psychologists state that personality
characteristics are fairly stable over time, which means they do not g o
through significant change over even as time passes by.
Researchers, when studying personality often ask three important
questions?
a. How should we conceptualize traits?
b. Which are the most important traits and how do we identify them?
c. How often can we f ormulate a comprehensive taxonomy of traits, that
is a system that includes all major traits of personality?
5.1.1 What Is a Trait?
There are two broad views of personality according to personality
psychologists. First, internal properties (hidden) that cause behaviours to
occur. The other does not attempt to explain the cause, they simply
describe the enduring and consistent aspects of the person’s behaviour.
 Traits as Internal Causal Properties:
People tend to carry certain desires, needs or wants, t hat drive their
behaviour and change from one situation to the other. For example,
Dinesh needs excitement, Dhruv has the desire for materialistic things and
Dhaval wants to have power over others. The traits shown in the above
examples are all internal t o those individuals. They also cause certain
behaviours to occur. So, Dinesh will engage in certain behaviours to fulfil
his need for excitement, for example, going for sky -diving. Similarly,
Dhruv may go for shopping frequently and Dhaval may take up lead ership
roles at his workplace to be able to have power over others. This is how
internal desires influence external behaviour.
Just because an individual possesses these internal desires does not mean
they will constantly exhibit behaviours in line with th e desires. For
example, you may be craving a cheeseburger and fries but you have also
made a new year’s resolution to eat healthy food and lose weight, so you
do not give in to your craving and end up not eating the burger and fries.
Similarly, in the earl ier example, just because Dhruv loves materialistic munotes.in

Page 71

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - I
71 things and loves to go for shopping frequently, that does not mean he can
afford to shop every day.
Psychologists also use the example of glass. Glass is brittle (the ability to
break), but that does not mean that the glass will break without any reason.
Thus, psychologists view traits as an internal state that people have the
capacity for, Although the related behaviours are not always displayed.
Traits can exist in the absence of observable expressions. This view helps
us to rule out other possibilities when we are trying to explain the cause of
people’s behaviour. For example, when Dhruv goes to the mall frequently
because he loves shopping and because he loves materialistic things helps
us understand h is behaviour.
 Traits as Purely Descriptive Summaries:
Psychologists who follow this alternative formulation, define traits simply
as descriptive summaries of attributes of persons; they make no
assumptions about internality or causality (Hampshire, 1953) . For
example, the trait of jealousy may come across through several
behaviours. Jay may possess this trait because of which he may engage in
certain behaviours with his partner like restricting her from going out
alone, expecting her to dress a certain wa y, etc. All these behaviours
describe or summarize the trait of jealousy. those who view traits as
descriptive summaries do not prejudge the cause of someone’s behaviour.
They merely use traits to describe, in a summary fashion, the trend in a
person’s beh aviour. Personality psychologists of this persuasion (e.g.,
Saucier & Goldberg, 1998; Wiggins, 1979) argue that we must first
identify and describe the important individual differences among people;
and then subsequently develop causal theories to explain them (Larsen and
Buss, 2008, p. 63, 64).
 The Act Frequency Formulation of Traits – An Illustration of the
Descriptive Summary Formulation:
Several psychologists who support the descriptive summary formulation
of traits have explored the consequence of this formulation through a
research program called the “act frequency approach” (Amelang, Herboth,
& Oefner, 1991; Angleiter, Buss, & Demtroder, 1990; Buss & Craik,
1983; Romero et al., 1994).
The act frequency approach begins with the notion that traits are
categories of actions, like “animals” which is a category that includes
dogs, tigers, elephants, etc. Similarly, traits like dominance or aggression
will have specific behaviours that fall under this category. For example, in
the category of dominance, you will see acts like constantly ordering
people to do things, wanting control over the situation, wanting to assign
roles to other people in a group task, etc. Thus, dominance is a trait
category comprising such and several other acts that fall under it.
Someone who is highly dominant will thus engage in a large number of
such acts. Hence, according to the act frequency formulation, a trait like
dominance is a descriptive summary of the large number of behaviours
that people engage in. munotes.in

Page 72

Personality Psychology
72  Act Frequency Research Program:
The act frequency approach includes three important elements: act
nomination, act prototypicality judgment and recording of activity
performance.
Act Nomination:
Act nomination is a procedure designed to identify which acts belong to
which trai t categories (Buss & Larsen, 2008, p. 64). Think about someone
who is “impulsive”. Now list the specific acts or behaviours that fall
under this. One might say “she immediately accepted a dare given to her
even though it could have been dangerous”, “he ag reed to go to the party
even if he was unwell”, and “she decided to bunk the lecture just to go
watch a movie with friends”. By inquiring about such nominations
researchers try to identify the several acts that fall under the category.
Prototypicality jud gment:
The next step in this research is to identify which acts are the most
prototypical or central to each of the trait categories. For example, animals
like dogs, cats, tigers and lions may be the ones to come to your mind
when you hear the word “animal ”. But animals like koala bears,
hedgehogs, and iguanas may not be the first to come to your mind. Thus,
dogs, cats, lions and tigers are better examples or they are more central to
the category of animals.
Similarly, the acts that are most typical of tha t particular category will
become the prototypes. There may be a panel of raters who would be
asked to rate which acts are prototypical of the category. For example,
raters find the acts “She controlled the outcome of the meeting without the
others being a ware of it” and “She took charge after the accident” to be
more prototypically dominant than the act “She deliberately arrived late
for the meeting.” All three examples could be considered to be part of the
dominant category, but the first two are more pro totypical of the category.
Recording of act performance:
This stage includes securing the information on the actual act or
performance of individuals in daily life. Most researchers have used self -
reports or collected data from family or close friends. He re is an example:
Table 5.1: Self-Report of Impulsive Acts Instructions: Following is a list of acts. Read each act and circle the
response that most accurately indicates how often you typically perform
each act. Circle “0” if you never perform the act; c ircle “1” if you
occasionally perform the act; circle “2” if you perform the act with
moderate frequency; and circle “3” if you perform the act very frequently. Circle Acts
0 1 2 3 1. I say what I think without thinking about the munotes.in

Page 73

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - I
73 possible conseque nces.
0 1 2 3 2. I react quickly and aggressively to verbal thoughts.
0 1 2 3 3. I bought a new car without giving it too much thought.
0 1 2 3 4. I decide to live with somebody without due
reflection.
0 1 2 3 5. I make hast y decisions.
0 1 2 3 6. I speak without thinking about what I am going to
say.
0 1 2 3 7. I am led by feelings of the moment.
0 1 2 3 8. I spend my money on whatever strikes my fancy.
0 1 2 3 9. Having made definite plans, I su ddenly change them and do something totally different.
0 1 2 3 10. I do the first thing that comes to my mind.

{Source: Adapted from Romero et al. (1994) and Buss & Larsen (2008),
from among the most prototypical impulsive acts. According to the act
frequency approach, you would be judged to be “impulsive” if you
perform high (overall frequency of these impulsive acts), relative to your
peer group}.
Critique of the Act Frequency Formulation:
This formulation has been criticized by several researc hers (Angleitner &
Demtroder, 1988; Block, 1989). Most of the criticism is aimed toward
technical implementation. It does not specify how much context should be
included in the trait -relevant act. Consider the following dominant act:
Rahul insisted others go to his favourite restaurant. To understand this act
as a dominant act, we might need to know (1) the relationships among the
people involved, (2) the occasion for going out to eat, and (3) who is
paying for the dinner. How much context is needed to iden tify the act as a
dominant act? Thus, we need more information to understand if these acts
are truly frequent and prototypical of the category.
Another criticism of this approach is that it is only applicable to overt
actions, that is to the actions that are observable easily. It does not apply to
actions that are not observable directly. A person may be very courageous
but we may fail to identify their courageousness as they might not get an
opportunity or need to show their courageousness in daily life. Another
challenge to the approach is whether it can successfully capture complex
traits, such as the tendency of narcissistic individuals to oscillate between
high and low self -esteem (Raskin & Terry, 1988).
Despite its limitations, the act frequency form ulation has its fair share of
advantages. It has helped in making behavioural phenomena explicit,
simply because this may be the primary way to understand behaviours. munotes.in

Page 74

Personality Psychology
74 “Behavioural acts constitute the building blocks of interpersonal
perception and the basi s for inferences about personality traits” (Gosling,
John, Craik, & Robins, 1998). Therefore, understanding behaviours as a
way to understand personality is essential, even though there may be
difficulties that could occur. The act frequency approach is al so helpful in
identifying behavioural regularities (behaviours that occur on a regular
and constant basis). This approach also helps in understanding the
meaning of some traits that were difficult to be studied such as creativity
and impulsivity.
Understa nding the act frequency approach also helps identify the domains
in which it provides insight into personality. One study examined the
relationship between self -reported act performance and observers’ reports
of individuals’ actual behaviour (Goslin et al. , 1998). Some acts like
extraversion and conscientiousness showed higher agreement when
measured using self -report. This meant that for such acts the self -report
and the observer reports showed a greater match. Other acts like
agreeableness showed lower ag reement. It was concluded that the more
observable the act, the higher the agreement between self -report and
observers’ ratings. For example, acts that are associated with extraversion
like going out to a party, having a larger number of friends, and frequ ency
of talking to strangers, are more observable and thus there is a greater
agreement between self -report and observer’s report.
There are other researches which have shown that the act frequency
approach can also be used to predict essential outcomes i n everyday life
like job, salary, promotions, business acumen, etc. (Kyl -Heku & Buss,
1996; Lund et al., 2006).
To conclude, there are two formulations of traits. One that looks at the
internal cause that affects observable behaviour. The second considers the
traits to be descriptive summaries of the observable behaviour.
5.1.2 Identification of Important Traits :
There are the following three essential ways to identify important traits:
i) Lexical Approach:
According to this approach, all traits listed and defined in the dictionary,
form the basis of the natural way of describing differences between people
(Allport & Odbert, 1936; Larsen & Buss, 2008, p. 67). This approach
suggests that we begin with language as a source of identifying important
traits.
This approach is based on the lexical hypothesis which states that “all -
important individual differences have become encoded within the natural
language” (Buss & Larsen, 2008, p. 67). Over time, the differences among
people are identified and noted and subseq uent changes or additions are
made in the natural language as and when required. People will invent
words like hot -headed, hot -tempered, self -centred, etc. which help
describe people and is useful for communicating information about them.
Thus, these terms begin to be used frequently. But words that do not
communicate information accurately are not used frequently and thus are
eliminated from the natural language over a period of time. munotes.in

Page 75

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - I
75 There are several words in the English language that are used as
adject ives, for example - manipulative, arrogant, warm, etc. A perusal of
the dictionary yields about 2,800 trait -descriptive adjectives (Norman,
1967). This highlights how trait terms are extremely essential to
communicating with others.
There are two ways in which important traits can be identified according
to the lexical approach – synonym frequency and cross -cultural
universality. For the synonym frequency criteria, the idea is that if there
are more than two or three trait adjectives associated with a dime nsion, it
must be important. The more the number of trait adjectives, the more
important it seems to be. “More the attribute is important, the more
synonyms and subtly distinctive facets of the attribute will be found within
any one language” (Saucier & Go ldberg, 1996, p.24). For example, the
trait of dominance has several synonyms to it dominant, bossy, assertive,
powerful, pushy, forceful, leaderlike, domineering, influential, ascendant,
authoritative and arrogant. Each synonym has a subtle and minor
difference and it conveys important aspects of the dominance trait. All
these adjectives are important to understand the trait and for social
communication.
Cross -cultural universality states that “the more important is an individual
difference in human trans actions, the more languages will have a term for
it” (Goldberg, 1981, p. 142). Also, “the most important phenotypic
[observable] personality attributes should have a corresponding term in
virtually every language” (Saucier & Goldberg, 1996, p. 23). The log ic
used is that if the trait is important then it will be frequently used across
cultures. Contrary to this, if the trait is specific to one or two cultures,
there may not be a word or adjective for it in all cultures. Hence, for the
cross -cultural univers ality criteria, researchers must examine the natural
language and trait usage across cultures.
Though the lexical strategy has made remarkable contributions to
identifying important individual differences, several problems can occur
with the lexical strate gy. Many trait terms are ambiguous like elliptical,
snaky, and stygian. There may also be terms that are difficult to
understand like clavering (inclined to gossip or idle talk), davering,
gnathonic and theromorphic (Saucier & Goldberg, 1998). These terms are
not often used and are eventually eliminated from natural language.
Another issue with the lexical strategy is that personality is not always
conveyed through adjectives but can also be communicated through nouns
and adverbs. For example, there are als o dozens of noun terms encoded
within the English language to describe someone who is not too smart:
birdbrain, blockhead, bonehead, chucklehead, cretin, deadhead, dimwit,
dolt, dope, dullard, dumbbell, dummy, dunce, jughead, lunkhead, moron,
peabrain, pin head, soft head, thickhead, and wooden head. However,
researchers choose to focus on trait -adjective for personality description.
ii) Statistical Approach:
This approach uses statistical methods like factor analysis to identify
major personality traits. This approach begins with a pool of personality
items. Similar to the lexical approach, it starts with trait words or a series munotes.in

Page 76

Personality Psychology
76 of questions about behaviour, experience and emotion. Frequently, those
researchers who begin with the lexical approach turn to the s tatistical
approach to help form basic categories of personality traits. Researchers
can begin with self -ratings of trait adjectives on a large collection of
personality -relevant sentences (For example – I find that I am easily able
to persuade people to m y point of view). Once a large enough number of
adjectives, items and statements are generated the statistical approach is
applied. A large number of people begin to rate themselves on these items
and then statistical procedures are applied to identify cat egories or
clusters. The major goal of the statistical approach is to cover all the trait
adjectives that fall under a category.
A procedure called factor analysis is most commonly used. It is a complex
mathematical procedure, which essentially identifies groups of items that
co-vary (i.e., vary together), but tend not to vary with other groups of
items (Buss & Larsen, 2008, p. 69). Take for example, in the university,
the cabins of psychology professors, sociology professors, history
professors, etc. Each psychology professor’s cabin will be near the each
other, in the department building. Similarly, the sociology department will
have the cabins of the sociology professors nearby. Thus, after factor
analysis, we will be able to understand which traits are similar to each
other and which traits can be clustered together. This also helps us
understand which traits have some common properties. Factor analysis
reduces a large number of factors or traits into understandable and easily
usable clusters or categori es.
Here is a tabular example of factor loadings (which are indexes of how
much of the variation in an item is “explained” by the factor.) Factor
loadings indicate the degree to which the item correlates with, or “loads
on,” the underlying factor. (Buss & Larsen, 2008, p. 69).
Table 5.2 Factor Loadings for Adjective Rating
Adjective Rating Factor 1
(Extraversion) Factor 2
(Ambition) Factor 3
(Creativity)
Humorous .66 .06 .19
Amusing .65 .23 .02
Popular .57 .13 .22
Hard -working .05 .63 .01
Producti ve .04 .52 .19
Determined .23 .52 .08
Imaginative .01 .09 .62
Original .13 .05 .53
Inventive .06 .26 .47
{Source : Adapted from Matthews & Oddy (1993)}. munotes.in

Page 77

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - I
77 Note : The numbers refer to factor loadings, which indicate the degree to
which an item correla tes with the underlying factor.
The first factor of extraversion has the highest loadings on humorous,
amusing and popular. The second factor of ambition has the highest
loading on hard -working, productive and determined. The third factor of
creativity ha s the highest loadings on imaginative, original and inventive.
Because of the factor analysis, the researcher may be able to cluster the
trait adjectives appropriately rather than looking at all these nine traits
independently.
One important thing to keep in mind while using factor analysis is that if
you miss out on putting in the data for a particular trait adjective, the
results will not account for it. Thus, what input you give when calculating
the factor loadings will be critical.
iii) Theoretical Approac h:
In this approach, researchers rely on theories to explore important
personality traits. This approach begins with a theory that determines
which variables are important. It begins with a strong assumption of which
traits are important. For example, the sociosexual orientation theory was
developed by psychologists Jeff Simpson and Steve Gangestad (1991).
This theory states that men and women pursue either one of the sexual
relationship strategies. First, seeking a single committed relationship that
entail s monogamy (having one partner at a given time) and having a
significant investment in children. The second includes a great degree of
promiscuity (having multiple sexual partners), frequent partner switching
and less investment in children. Based on this theory, we can identify traits
that are essential to explain the mate selection strategy. Psychologists have
also developed a scale to measure these aspects of mate selection.
Thus, under this approach, the theory and what we know about it will be
the dri ving force to understanding personality and the various traits that
are included under those categories. It lets theory determine which traits
are important.
The drawback of the theoretical approach is that we must have a strong
enough theory to support t he understanding of the personality traits being
studied. If the theory is weak it may lead to omission or misinterpretation.
There is no consensus amongst researchers about which of the three
approaches is the best to be used. The researchers most often u se a
combination of all three strategies to understand personality traits. For
example, Norman (1963) and Goldberg (1990) started their work with the
lexical strategy to identify their first set of variables for inclusion. Then
they applied factor analysis to selected traits and reduced the set of five
variables. In this way, they used the lexical strategy to sample the traits
and the factor analysis strategy to find statistical support and structure.
munotes.in

Page 78

Personality Psychology
78 CHECK YOUR PROGRESS:
 What are the approaches to ident ifying important traits?
5.2 ALLPORT
Gordon Allport was born on November 11, 1897, in Montezuma, Indiana,
USA. He developed a theory of personality that emphasizes the
uniqueness of the psychologically healthy individual who strives
proactively towards a g oal that they have consciously set. He viewed traits
as the basic structural elements of personality. He used the term
“predisposition to respond”. Allport stated that the traits brought together
a set of behaviours. These behaviours lead to consistency in the kind of
response that could be expected from a person who possessed the traits.
These behaviours are viewed as forms of adaptive and expressive
behaviour. For example, a highly sociable person will be friendlier and
more outgoing. They will view these situations as opportunities to meet
and interact with people and relate to them. This helps them function
better in the world. Traits represent a readiness to respond to a certain
situation in a particular way. Allport believed that traits existed as a
“neuropsychic system”. He could not show how one could measure them
but he believed they were rooted in biology and are seen through the
individual difference among people.
Allport suggested different categories of traits. The first distinction he
made was whether traits could be used to describe just a single individual
or people in general. This is known as the nomothetic -idiographic issue.
The nomothetic approach emphasizes that it’s important to develop traits
that could be applied to all. The idiographi c approach insists that traits are
unique to individuals. The second distinction Allport makes is among
cardinal, central and secondary traits. A cardinal trait expresses a
disposition that is so pervasive in a person’s life that virtually every act is
traceable to its influence. Central traits (e.g., honesty, kindness,
assertiveness) express dispositions that cover a more limited range of
situations than cardinal traits but still represent broad consistencies in
behaviour. And secondary dispositions repres ent tendencies that are the
least conspicuous, generalized, and consistent (Pervin, 2002, p. 39).
Allport rejected factor analysis as a method to understand personality
clusters. He identified important terms from the English dictionary, added
some slang terms and classified almost 18,000 terms. These included
stable and enduring categories, temporary mood and activity -based, social
evaluations and physical characteristics and talent or abilities. The stable
category was most significantly related to trait s (which are known to be
fairly enduring). Although Allport’s method of coming up with the
categories was not based on research, his work initiated the movement to
understand how ordinary language could be used to develop a taxonomy.
Allport emphasized th e idiographic approach and was critical of those
research studies that attempted to identify individual differences or
compare individuals to other large groups. He believed that people’s munotes.in

Page 79

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - I
79 behaviour cannot always be predicted and that there was always a str ong
influence of situational factors. He also that believed motives are included
in the trait approach. He believed motives/motivation was important to the
understanding of traits and behaviours.
5.3 CATTELL
Cattell worked closely with Charles Spearman wh o was the inventor of
factor analysis. Cattell was very impressed by the potential and utility of
factor analysis and realized how important it is for developing a scientific
taxonomy of personality. He devoted much of his career to using factor
analysis t o apply and develop factor analytic techniques to understand
personality.
Cattell followed the work of biochemists, who back then were discovering
the basic vitamins. He was influenced by how they used the alphabet from
the English language to name the vi tamins. He followed a similar system.
He believed that true factors of personality can be found across different
sets of data such as self -report (S -data) and laboratory tests (T -data).
Cattell developed a 16 -factor taxonomy which was one of the largest
taxonomies. Here is a brief description of the 16 factors identified and
developed by Cattell:
Table 5.3 Sixteen Factors Developed by Cattell and Their Description
Factor Name Description
Factor A Interpersonal
warmth Warm -hearted, personable, easy to get
along with, likes being with other people,
likes helping others, adapts well to the
needs of others rather than has others adapt
to his or her needs; this is similar to
Eysenck’s extraversion
Factor B Intelligence A rough indicator of intellectual
functi oning or efficiency in processing
information
Factor C Emotional
stability A high level of emotional resources with
which to meet the challenges of daily life,
ability to work toward goals, not easily
distracted, good emotional control, ability
to “roll with the punches,” tolerates stress
well; this is similar to Eysenck’s
neuroticism factor (reverse scored).
Factor E Dominance Self-assertive, aggressive, competitive,
forceful and direct in relations with others,
and like to put their ideas into practic e and
have things their way. Occupational groups
scoring high on this dimension include
athletes and judges, and low -scoring
groups include janitors, farmers, and munotes.in

Page 80

Personality Psychology
80 cooks.
Factor F Impulsivity Happy -go-lucky, lively, enthusiastic, enjoy
parties, likes to t ravel and prefers jobs with
variety and change. Occupational groups
scoring high on this dimension include
airline attendants and salespersons. Adults
scoring high on impulsivity tend to leave
home at an earlier age and move more
often during their adult l ives.
Factor G Conformity Persistent, respectful of authority, rigid,
conforming, follows group standards, likes
rules and order, and dislikes novelty and
surprises. Military cadets score above
average, along with airport traffic
controllers; university professors, however,
tend to be below average on conformity.
Factor H Boldness Likes being the centre of attention,
adventurous, socially bold, outgoing,
confident, able to move easily into new
social groups, not socially anxious, and has
no problems wit h stage fright.
Factor I Sensitivity Artistic, insecure, dependent,
overprotected, prefers reason to force in
getting things done. High scorers are found
among groups of employment counsellors,
artists, and musicians, whereas low scorers
are found among engineers
Factor L Suspicious -
ness Suspecting, jealous, dogmatic, critical,
irritable, holds grudges, worries much
about what others think of him or her;
tends to be critical of others; accountants
are one group scoring high on this
dimension.
Factor M Imagination Sometimes called the “absent -minded
professor” factor; unconventional,
impractical, unconcerned about everyday
matters; forgets trivial things, and is not
usually interested in mechanical activities.
High -scoring groups include artists and
research scientists; high scorers are more
creative than low scorers but also tend to
have more automobile accidents.
Factor N Shrewdness Polite, diplomatic, reserved, good at munotes.in

Page 81

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - I
81 managing the impression made on others,
socially poised and sophisticated, and good
control of her behaviour; high scorers may
appear “stiff” and constrained in their
social relations.
Factor O Insecurity Tends to worry, feels guilty, moody, has
frequent episodes of depression often feels
dejected, sensitive to criticism from other s,
becomes upset easily, anxious, often
lonely, self -deprecating, and self -
reproaching. Extremely low scorers come
across as smug, self -satisfied, and overly
self-confident. Low -scoring persons may
not feel bound by the standards of society
and may not ope rate according to accepted
social conventions (i.e., may be somewhat
antisocial).
Factor Q1 Radicalism Liberal attitude, innovative and analytic;
feels that society should throw out
traditions, and prefers to break with
established ways of doing things. High
scorers tend to be effective problem
solvers in group decision -making studies.
However, high scorers, because they tend
to be overly critical and verbally
aggressive, are not well -liked as group
leaders.
Factor Q2 Self-
sufficiency Prefers to be alon e, dislikes being on
committees or involved in group work, and
shuns support from others. Social workers
tend to be below average on this
dimension; accountants and statisticians
tend to be high, with Antarctic explorers
among the highest groups ever teste d on
self-sufficiency.
Factor Q3 Self-
discipline Prefers to be organized, think before
talking or acting, is neat, and does not like
to leave anything to chance. High -scoring
persons have strong control over their
actions and emotions; airline pilots sco re
high on this dimension.
Factor Q4 Tension Anxious, frustrated, takes a long time
calming down after being upset, irritated
by small things, gets angry easily, and has
trouble sleeping.
{Source : Adapted from Krug (1981); Buss and Larsen, (2008), p. 78 -79} munotes.in

Page 82

Personality Psychology
82
Cattell has developed a strong system for studying personality traits, but
there is some criticism associated with his work. Some researchers have
failed to replicate his taxonomy and some argue that a smaller number of
factors can explain the individ ual difference.
5.4 EYSENCK’S THREE FACTORS
Hans Eysenck proposed the hierarchical model of personality. He
developed this based on the traits which he believed were highly heritable,
that is they could be passed on from one generation to the next and they
also had a psychophysiological foundation (based on psychology and
physiology). According to Eysenck, the three main traits that met this
criterion include extraversion -introversion (E), neuroticism -emotional
stability (N) and psychoticism (P). Together t hey were abbreviated as
PEN.
Figure: 5.1 : Distribution of Specific traits for Eysenck’s hierarchical
model

















munotes.in

Page 83

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - I
83









Eysenck described extraversion to include traits like sociable, active,
lively, venturesome, dominant, etc. Eysenck d escribed extraverts to be
people who enjoy going to parties frequently, have many friends, and
constantly want to have several people around them to talk to them, enjoy
playing practical jokes on people, are carefree and easy manner and high
level of activ ity (Eysenck & Eysenck, 1975). On the contrary, introverts
were described as people who enjoy spending time alone, prefer quiet time
and solitude and seek activities accordingly. They are sometimes aloof and
distant but often have a small number of intimat e friends with whom they
share confidence. They are described to be more serious than extroverts
and prefer a moderate pace. They are well -organized, prefer and a routine
and predictable lifestyle (Larsen & Kasimatis, 1990; Buss & Larsen, 2008)
The trait o f neuroticism (N) includes specific traits, such as anxiety,
irritability, guilty, lacking self -esteem, tension, shy, and moody.
Generally, anxiousness and irritability may be viewed differently, but
factor analysis has helped us understand that these two traits are related to
each other. When one is anxious, they can become irritable and factor
analysis has confirmed this. Those high on neuroticism are worriers and
they get easily anxious and depressed. They also have trouble sleeping and
can experience a wide range of psychosomatic symptoms (when the
conflict and trouble from the mind begin to influence or show itself
through bodily symptoms). Another key characteristic of those high in
neuroticism is that they experience high emotional arousal in response to
normal stresses of life. That means that even if the stressors in their life
are similar to those experienced by others, they have a stronger emotional
response to them. Those who score low on neuroticism are found to be
emotionally stable, even -temper ed and calm and they react slowly to
stressful events. They also can return quickly and easily to a normal
emotional state after a stressful event has occurred.
The third target trait proposed by Eysenck is psychoticism (P). Those, who
are high on this tr ait, exhibit narrower traits like aggression, egocentric,
creativity impulsiveness, lacking empathy, and antisocial. Factor analysis
has helped us understand that lack of empathy and impulsivity co -occur. munotes.in

Page 84

Personality Psychology
84 This means that those who tend to act without think ing (impulsivity) also
find it difficult to see situations from other people’s perspectives (lack of
empathy). Those scoring high on psychoticism are typically solitary
individuals, often called loners. They also are cruel in many ways they
may show cruelt y to animals as well (e.g., laughing when an animal gets
hurt). They also show insensitivity to the pain and suffering of others even
/her family members. They are physically and verbally aggressive with
their family members. They show deep interest in str ange and unusual
things and do not get scared of dangerous things/act simply out of
curiosity. They enjoy making a fool of other people and in extreme cases,
they can display symptoms of antisocial personality disorder.
Several interesting correlations ha ve been studied by researchers in line
with psychoticism. High scorers tend to show a strong preference for
violent films and rate violent scenes from films more enjoyable and even
more comical than those who score low on P (Bruggemann & Barry,
2002; Buss & Larsen, 2008). High scorers on P, prefer unpleasant
paintings and photographs more than do low -P individuals (Rawling,
2003; Buss & Larsen, 2008). Men, but not women, who score high on
Machiavellianism (which is highly correlated with P) endorse
promiscu ous and hostile sexual attitudes - they are more likely than low
scorers to divulge sexual secrets to third parties, pretend to be in love
when they are not in love, ply potential sex partners with alcoholic drinks,
and even report trying to force others i nto sex acts (McHoskey, 2001;
Buss & Larsen, 2008). Low scorers of P tend to be more deeply religious,
whereas high -P scorers tend to be somewhat cynical about religion
(Saroglou, 2002; Buss & Larsen, 2008). Also, high scorers are predisposed
to getting in to severe and life -threatening events, such as violence and
criminal activity (Pickering, Farmer, Harris, Redman, Mahmood, Sadler,
& McGuffin, 2003; Buss & Larsen, 2008).
There are two characteristics of Eysenck’s theory which also need to be
discussed: h ierarchical structure and biological underpinnings.
Hierarchical Structure:
As seen in Figure 5.1, there are two levels of the traits. The first level
includes the super traits, the second level includes narrower traits, and the
third level includes habit ual acts. For example, one habitual act under
sociable might be talking on the telephone; another might be taking
frequent coffee breaks to socialize with other students. Narrow traits
include a variety of habitual acts. At the very lowest level in the hie rarchy
is a specific act (e.g., I talked on the telephone with my friend and I took a
coffee break to chat at 10:30 A.M.). If enough specific acts are repeated
frequently, they become habitual acts at the third level. Habitual acts when
clustered together become narrow traits at the second level and these
narrow trait clusters become super -traits at the top of the hierarchy. This
hierarchy helps understand behaviours.

munotes.in

Page 85

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - I
85 Biological Underpinnings:
The second aspect of understanding Eysenck’s hierarchy is by
understanding the biological underpinnings. Biological underpinnings
include two components: heritability and identifiable physiological
substrate. Eysenck’s criteria for any basic personality trait is that it has
high heritability. Behavioural genetics sh ow evidence to support that the
three super traits given by Eysenck have moderate heritability. The second
criterion is that basic personality traits must have an identifiable
physiological substrate. This means that one can identify the brain and
nervous system that corresponds to the traits and are known to be partly
involved in producing these traits. According to Eysenck, extraversion is
supposed to be linked with central nervous system arousal and reactivity.
Eysenck predicted that introverts would be more easily aroused as
compared to extroverts. Also, he predicted that neuroticism was linked
with a high degree of changeability. High scorers are also shown to have
high testosterone (a sex hormone) levels and low levels of MOA
(Monoamine Oxidases) which is an inhibitory neurotransmitter.
Despite the admirable qualities associated with Eysenck’s taxonomy, there
are some limitations. One, there are many other traits aside from the one
prescribed that show heritability. Second is that some psychologists ar gue
that Eysenck may have missed some important traits in his taxonomy. This
point was argued by several prominent psychologists, such as Raymond
Cattell, Lewis Goldberg, Paul Costa, and Robert McCrae.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS:
 What are the two characteristi cs of Eysenck’s theory?
5.5 BIG -FIVE AND FIVE -FACTOR MODEL
5.5.1 Theory/Model:
This model has received the most attention and support. It is also called
the Big -Five model. The broad categories have been provisionally named
as follows:
1. Surgency or extrave rsion
2. Agreeableness
3. Conscientiousness
4. Emotional stability
5. Openness -intellect
The model was based on a lexical and statistical approach. The lexical
approach was developed by Allport and Odbert (1936) who identified
around 17,953 traits from the dictio nary. Allport and Odbert then divided
the original set of trait terms into four lists: (1) stable traits (e.g., secure,
intelligent), (2) temporary states, moods, and activities (e.g., agitated,
excited), (3) social evaluations (e.g., charming, irritating) , and (4)
metaphorical, physical, and doubtful terms (e.g., prolific). From this munotes.in

Page 86

Personality Psychology
86 original list, Cattell used 4,500 as a starting point for his work. Due to the
limited advances in computers, Cattell could not use factor analysis. He
limited his list to 171 clusters by clubbing some traits together and
eliminating some. He ended up narrowing it down to 35 traits.
Fiske (1949) used 22 subsets of Cattell’s list of 35 clusters and by using
factor analysis he identified a five -factor taxonomy. He was the first
known researcher to develop a five -factor model.
Tupes and Christal (1961) made the subsequent major contribution to the
five-factor taxonomy. They examined the factor structure of 22 simplified
descriptions: surgency, agreeableness, conscientiousness, emo tional
stability, and culture. This factor structure was subsequently replicated by
Norman (1963), and then by a host of other researchers (e.g., Botwin &
Buss, 1989; Goldberg, 1981; Digman & Inouye, 1986; McCrae & Costa,
198).
This model has seen a treme ndous amount of literature and research
generated around it. There is also great consensus amongst research
studies for this model. However, there are key questions and controversies
raised.
1. What is the empirical evidence?
2. What is the identity of the fif th factor?
3. Is the Big Five taxonomy comprehensive, or are there major trait
dimensions that lie beyond the Big Five?
5.5.2 Empirical Evidence :
The five -factor model has generated tremendous research. Studies have
been conducted over a decade with varying samples in different formats.
In the modern format, the model was measured using two ways. One way
is based on self -ratings of single -word trait adjectives like talkative, shy,
warm, etc. (Goldberg, 1990) and the second is based on self -ratings of
sentence items like “Life is fast -paced.” (McCrae & Costa, 1999).
Lewis Goldberg has conducted extensive research surrounding the five -
factor model. According to Goldberg (1990), some key adjectives are:
1. Surgency or extraversion : talkative, extraverted, assertiv e, forward,
outspoken versus shy, quiet, introverted, bashful, inhibited.
2. Agreeableness : sympathetic, kind, warm, understanding, sincere
versus unsympathetic, unkind, harsh, cruel.
3. Conscientiousness : organized, neat, orderly, practical, prompt,
meticulous versus disorganized, disorderly, careless, sloppy,
impractical.
4. Emotional stability : calm, relaxed, stable versus moody, anxious,
insecure. munotes.in

Page 87

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - I
87 5. Intellect or imagination : creative, imaginative, intellectual versus
uncreative, unimaginative, unintellectual. (Lar sen & Buss, 2008, p. 83)
Paul T. Costa and Robert McCrae developed a measure of the Big Five
model using sentence structures called NEO -PI-R (the neuroticism -
extraversion - openness (NEO) Personality Inventory (PI) Revised (R)
(Costa & McCrae, 1989).
Each of the five factors has a host of specific facets which cover subtle
components of personality. For example, the trait of conscientiousness
includes facets like self -discipline, competence, order, dutifulness,
achievement striving and, deliberation. The gl obal trait of neuroticism
includes facets like anxiety, angry hostility, depression, self -
consciousnsess, impulsivity, and vulnerability.
 What is the identity of the fifth factor?
There is still a lack of consensus regarding the fifth factor of this model .
Different researchers have labelled it differently, such as culture, intellect,
intellectance, imagination, openness, openness to experience, and even
fluid intelligence and tender -mindedness (see Brand & Egan, 1989; De
Raad, 1998). The reason for the di fference is that different researchers
begin from different starting points. Some have begun from the lexical
approach and prefer intellect as the meaning and label (Saucier &
Goldberg, 1996) and those who began with the questionnaire items prefer
openness or openness to experience (McCrae & Costa, 1997; 1999).
To resolve this issue, cross -cultural research could be conducted. Traits
that emerge universally rather than in specific cultures can be considered.
Unfortunately, there is still a lack of consensu s even in the various cross -
cultural or culture -specific research conducted. In a study conducted in
Turkey, a clear fifth factor emerged that is best described as openness
(Somer & Goldberg, 1999). A separate Dutch study found a fifth factor
marked by pro gressive at one end and conservative at the other (DeRaad et
al., 1998). In German, the fifth factor represents intelligence, talents, and
abilities (Ostendorf, 1990). In Italian, the fifth factor is conventionality,
marked by the items rebellious and crit ical (Caprara & Perugini, 1994;
Larsen & Buss, 2008, p. 85). More extensive research, especially cross -
cultural and beyond the Western cultures is required to further understand
the fifth factor.
 What are the empirical correlates of the fifth factor?
Trem endous literature has been generated surrounding the five factors.
Below is the summary of some of the important research findings:
 Surgency or extraversion : Those high on extraversion love to party,
they engage in frequent social interaction, take the lea d in livening up
dull gatherings, and enjoy talking a lot. Recent evidence suggests that
social attention is the key feature of extraversion (Ashton, Lee, &
Paunonen, 2002). Extraverts have a greater impact on their social
environment, often assuming leade rship positions, whereas introverts munotes.in

Page 88

Personality Psychology
88 tend to be more like wallflowers (Jensen -Campbell & Graziano, 2001).
Extraverted men are more likely to be bold with women they don’t
know, while introverted men tend to be timid with women (Berry &
Miller, 2001). There are also downsides to having high scores on
extraversion such as wanting to drive fast, and listening to music while
driving, and as a consequence, they tend to get into more car accidents,
and even road fatalities, than their more introverted peers (Lajun en,
2001) (Larsen & Buss, 2008, p. 86).
 Agreeableness : Those high on agreeableness favour using negotiation
to resolve conflicts; low agreeable persons try to assert their power to
resolve social conflicts (Graziano Tobin, 2002; Jensen -Campbell &
Graziano, 2001). They are agreeable and more likely to withdraw from
social conflict, avoiding unharmonious situations. These individuals
like harmonious social interaction and cooperative family life.
Agreeable children tend to be less often victimized by bullies during
early adolescence (Jensen -Campbell et al., 2002). (Larsen & Buss,
2008, p. 86).
 Conscientiousness: Those who are high on this trait, are hardworking
and punctual which leads to several positive outcomes such as higher -
grade point average, greater jo b satisfaction, greater job security, and
more positive and committed social relationships (Langford, 2003). On
the contrary, those who score low are likely to perform poorly at school
and work. They tend to procrastinate more than the high scorers. High
scorers are more industrious and put in long working hours (Lund et al.,
2006). Those scoring low on conscientiousness exhibit risky sexual
behaviours and are likely to have multiple romantic relationships at a
time (Trobst, Herbst, Masters, & Costa, 2002). They also tend to have
higher arrest rates (Clower & Bothwell, 2001; Larsen & Buss, 2008, p.
87)
 Emotional stability : This taps into people’s emotional ability to cope
with life stresses. The hallmark of those who show emotional stability
is mood fluctuat ions. They can manage their mood swings (Murray,
Allen, & Trinder, 2002) which leads them to experience fatigue over
the day (De Vries & Van Heck, 2002). People with emotional
instability are more likely to have dissociated experiences, where they
cannot r emember incidents/life events properly, they may feel
disconnected from others around them and can often feel like they have
woken up in a strange and unfamiliar place (Kwapil, Wrobel, & Pope,
2002). Those high in neuroticism also have frequent suicidal th oughts
as compared to those who score low (Chioqueta & Stiles, 2005). High
scorers show poorer physical health, and more physical symptoms and
engage in fewer health -promoting behaviours (Williams, O’Brien, &
Colder, 2004). Those scoring high on neuroticis m show ups and downs
in their social relationships. Emotionally unstable individuals
experience more sexual anxiety (e.g., worried about performance) as
well as a greater fear of engaging in sex (Heaven, Crocker, Edwards,
Preston, Ward, & Woodbridge, 2003; Shafer, 2001). Self -handicapping
is defined as a tendency to “create obstacles to achievement in munotes.in

Page 89

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - I
89 performance or competitive situations to protect one’s self -esteem”
(Ross et al., 2002, p. 2). Such self -handicapping is observed frequently
in those with emo tional instability. Those high on neuroticism seem to
undermine themselves and create roadblocks to their achievements.
 Openness : This trait has been linked to experimentation with new
foods, novel experiences, and sometimes even openness to extramarital
affairs (Buss, 193). Peterson, Smith & Carson (2002) found that those
high on openness had more difficulty in ignoring previously
experienced stimuli. The process of information processing is different
and people who are high on openness are even open to r eceiving
information.
Some research findings with combinations of Big Five variables:
 Good grades are best predicted by high conscientiousness and high
emotional stability (Chamorro -Premuzic & Furnham, 2003). Watson
(2001) attributes this to emotionally stable and conscientious people as
they are less likely to procrastinate (Watson, 2001).
 Risky sexual behaviours, such as having many sex partners and not
using condoms, are best predicted by high extraversion, high
neuroticism, low conscientiousness, and low agreeableness (Miller et
al., 2004; Trobst et al., 2002).
 Alcohol consumption is best predicted by high Extraversion and low
conscientiousness (Paunonen, 2003). A study by Grano et al. (2004)
showed that more than 5,000 workers in Finland found that lo w
conscientiousness also predicts increases in alcohol consumption over
time, that is, who ends up becoming a heavy drinker.
 Egan and Stelmack (2003) found that mountain climbers that climbed
Mount Everest tend to be extraverted, emotionally stable, and h igh on
psychoticism.
 Happiness and experiencing positive affect in everyday life are best
predicted by high extraversion and low neuroticism (Cheng &
Furnham, 2003; Steel & Ones, 2003; Stewart, Ebmeier, & Deary, 2005;
Yik & Russell, 2001).
 The likelihood t o engage in volunteer work, such as campus or
community services, is best predicted by a combination of high
agreeableness and high extraversion (Carlo et al., 2005).
 Forgiveness, the inclination to forgive those who have committed
something wrong, charact erizes individuals who are high on
agreeableness and high on emotional stability (Brose, Rye, Lutz -Zois,
& Ross, 2005).
 Silverthorne (2001) found that leadership effectiveness in business
settings is best predicted by high extraversion, high agreeableness, high
conscientiousness, and high emotional stability. munotes.in

Page 90

Personality Psychology
90 5.5.3 Circumplex Taxonomies Of Personality :
Timothy Leary and Jerry Wiggins were the most prominent advocates of
the circular representation of personality spheres. The circumplex model
tries to explai n personality traits using a circular representation.
Wiggins (1979) started with a lexical assumption that all individual
differences can be depicted within the natural language. He went further in
his efforts by arguing that trait terms specify differen t types of ways in
which individuals differ. One of the ways prescribed was intrapersonal
traits. Other kinds include temperament traits like gloomy, nervous,
sluggish, and excitable. Then there are character traits like moral,
principled, and dishonest. T here are material traits like miserly and stingy;
attitude traits such as pious, and spiritual; mental traits such as clever, and
logical; physical traits such as healthy and tough. Wiggins was only
concerned with intrapersonal traits. Based on the theory given by Foa and
Foa (1974), he defined interpersonal as interactions between people
involving exchanges. The two resources that define social exchange are
love and status: “interpersonal events may be defined as dyadic
interactions that have relatively cl ear-cut social (status) and emotional
(love) consequences for both participants” (Wiggins, 1979, p. 398). Thus,
the love and status dimensions are two major axes in the circumplex.
Figure 5.2 Dimensions in the Circumplex Taxonomies of Personality

{Sourc e: Adapted from “Circular Reasoning About Interpersonal
Behaviour” by J. S. Wiggins, 1989, Journal of Personality & Social
Psychology, 56, p. 297. Copyright 1989 by the American Psychological
Association}. munotes.in

Page 91

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - I
91 Love and status are two axes of Wiggins’ model. Fo r example, someone
who is cold -hearted will be low on love and maybe high on status.
Someone assured and dominant may be below the status and moderate in
love. This model helps explain traits in a circular manner where every trait
can be explained in the c ontext of love and status and a circular
relationship of some kind can be established.
The advantages of Wiggins circumplex include firstly, that it provides an
explicit definition of interpersonal behaviour. We can explain any
behaviour or transaction ab out this circumplex. For example, acts of
giving love (giving a hug), granting status (showing respect and honour to
a parent), denying love (shouting at your partner) or denying status
(disrespectfully talking to a colleague). The model gives explanations for
everyday interactions.
The second advantage is that it specifies the relationship between each
trait and every trait within the model. There are three types of
relationships specified by this model.
1. Adjacency : how close the traits are to each other in the circumplex
(traits close to each other are positively correlated to each other)
2. Bipolarity : traits which are bipolar, that is on the opposite ends of the
circumplex are negatively correlated to each other.
3. Orthogonality : traits that are perpendicu lar (90 -degree separation or at
right angles to each other) to each other are entirely unrelated to each
other. There is zero correlation with each other. Orthogonality allows
us to specify with greater precision the different ways in which traits
are expr essed in actual behaviour.
The third advantage of the model is that it alerts investigators to the gaps
while studying interpersonal behaviour. The model directs the attention of
researchers to unexplored areas associated with personality.
The major limita tion of this model is that it is limited only to two
dimensions. Some argue that other traits have not been captured by the
model. And those that have not been captured, hold important
explanations for interpersonal behaviour. For example, traits like
conscientiousness, neuroticism and emotional stability.
5.5.4 HEXACO :
There are critiques of the models who believe that the model leaves out
key aspects of personality. Almagor, Tellegen, and Waller (1995) suggest
that there are two more factors namely posi tive evaluation (e.g.,
outstanding vs. ordinary) and negative evaluation (e.g., awful vs. decent).
Goldberg (1995) suggested components like religiosity or spirituality also
emerge as factors. Lanning (1994) found a sixth factor which he labels
attractiven ess which includes items tapping on physical attractiveness, and
seeing the self as attractive and charming. Schmitt and Buss (2000) found
individual differences in the sexual sphere, such as sexiness (e.g., sexy, munotes.in

Page 92

Personality Psychology
92 stunning, attractive, alluring, arousing, sensual, and seductive) and
faithfulness (e.g., faithful, monogamous, devoted, and not adulterous).
They found sexiness is positively correlated with extraversion, and
faithfulness is positively correlated with both agreeableness and
conscientiousness (Lar sen & Buss, 2008, p. 89). Proponents of the model
encourage the addition of more dimensions if there is sufficient empirical
evidence (Costa & McCrae, 1995; Goldberg & Saucier, 1995).
An alternative to the Five -Factor Model is the personality descriptive
nouns rather than adjectives. Saucier (2003) discovered eight personality
domains of personality nouns like Dumbbell (e.g., dummy, moron, twit),
Babe/Cutie (e.g., beauty, darling, doll), Philosopher (e.g., genius, artist,
individualist), Lawbreaker (e.g., pothead, drunk, rebel), Joker (e.g., clown,
goof, comedian), and Jock (e.g., sportsman, tough, machine) (Larsen &
Buss, 2008, p. 90).
A second approach is to adopt the lexical approach focusing on large pools
of adjectives in different languages. One stud y of seven languages (Dutch,
French, German, Hungarian, Italian, Korean, and Polish) found variants of
the Big Five, plus a sixth -factor Honesty -Humility (Ashton et al., 2004).
At one end of the Honesty -Humility factor lies trait adjectives, such as
honest , sincere, trustworthy, and unselfish; the other end is anchored by
adjectives, such as arrogant, conceited, greedy, pompous, self -important,
and egotistical (Larsen & Buss, 2008, p. 90). The inclusion of the sixth
factor by Ashton et al. is labelled as th e HEXACO model. Where H stands
for Honesty -Humility, E is emotionality, X is extraversion, A is
agreeableness, C is conscientiousness and O is openness to experience.
Based on this model, an inventory was also developed called the
HEXACO -PI-R by Lee and As hton (2004). The HEXACO -PI-R assesses
the six broad HEXACO personality factors, each of which contains four
"facets", or narrower personality characteristics (An additional 25th
narrow facet, called Altruism, is also included and represents a blend of
the Honesty -Humility, Emotionality, and Agreeableness factors). The six
factors, their facets, and the personality -descriptive adjectives that
typically belong to these six groups are as follows (Ashton & Lee, 2007):
Table 5.4 Six HEXACO Personality Factors wi th Their Facets and
Adjectives
Factors Facets Adjectives
Honesty -Humility (H) Sincerity, Fairness,
Greed Avoidance,
Modesty Sincere, honest, faithful,
loyal, modest/ unassuming
versus
Sly, deceitful, greedy,
pretentious, hypocritical,
boastful, pompous
Emotionality (E) Fearfulness,
Anxiety,
Dependence,
Sentimentality Emotional, oversensitive,
sentimental, fearful, anxious,
vulnerable munotes.in

Page 93

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - I
93 versus
Brave, tough, independent,
self-assured, stable
Extraversion (X) Social Self -Esteem,
Social Boldness,
Sociability ,
Liveliness Outgoing, lively, extraverted,
sociable, talkative, cheerful,
active
versus
Shy, passive, withdrawn,
introverted, quiet, reserved
Agreeableness (A) Forgivingness,
Gentleness,
Flexibility, Patience Patient, tolerant, peaceful,
mild, agreeable, lenient,
gentle
versus
Ill-tempered, quarrelsome,
stubborn, choleric
Conscientiousness (C) Organization,
Diligence,
Perfectionism,
Prudence Organized, disciplined,
diligent, careful, thorough,
precise
versus
Sloppy, negligent, reckless,
lazy, irrespons ible, absent -
minded
Openness to
Experience (O) Aesthetic
Appreciation,
Inquisitiveness,
Creativity,
Unconventionality Intellectual, creative,
unconventional, innovative,
ironic
versus
Shallow, unimaginative,
conventional
{Source: Ashton & Lee, 2007}
Asid e from extending the Big Five factor and adding more factors, there is
also research which is exploring predicting behavioural criteria from
within the Big Five using facets. Paunonen and Ashton (2001a) found
significantly greater predictability from the facet subscales of need for
achievement (a facet of Conscientiousness) and need for understanding (a
facet of Openness) than from the higher -level factor measures of
conscientiousness and openness themselves. Dudley et al. (2006) found
greater predictabili ty for job performance by including facets such as
achievement, dependability, order and cautiousness with
conscientiousness.
Thus, to conclude whether the Big Five model is comprehensive or not,
there is evidence to support its robustness and replicabili ty. Four out of the
five factors have shown replicability across investigators, formats, data
sources, samples, languages and cultures. This model also is the basis for
several personality inventories. But as a limitation, Block (1995b) states
that the mod el fails to establish the causal personality processes that munotes.in

Page 94

Personality Psychology
94 researchers are trying to establish. For example, describing someone as
high on neuroticism may be helpful in social communication or global
character descriptions, but it does not capture the und erlying psychological
processes involved in things like feeling guilty, obsessing over worst -case
scenarios, and worrying excessively when someone fails to respond to an
e-mail.
There continues to be scope for further research in the area to develop a
comprehensive personality taxonomy.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS:
 Write a Short note on six broad HEXACO personality factors
5.6 SUMMARY
In this unit, we began by explaining what are traits. We tried to see how
traits are related to behaviours and how they offer exp lanations of
behaviours. Then we began looking into how important traits can be
identified. Identification of important traits follows three methods: lexical
approach, statistical approach and theoretical approach. We then moved to
understand the theory of personality and the personality traits identified by
Allport. Then we looked into the taxonomy proposed by Eysenck who
proposed three primary personality factors and some secondary factors.
Lastly, we discussed Cattell’s personality taxonomy. Cattell prop osed 16
factors that he viewed to be essential in understanding personality. We
then tried to understand the widely used and popular Five -Factor Model
and also the circumplex taxonomy. We critically evaluated them to
understand if they can be useful in und erstanding personality traits.
5.7 QUESTIONS
1. Write long answers:
a) Discuss in detail how important traits are identified.
b) Discuss Allport’s theory of personality.
c) Discuss Eysenck’s three -factor theory.
d) Explain Cattell’s 16 -factor theory of personality.
e) What is the frequency formulation of traits?
f) Write about the circumplex taxonomy of personality.
g) Explain the Five -Factor Model in detail.
2. Write short notes:
a) Lexical approach.
b) Statistical approach.
c) Act frequency research program.
d) Limitation of act frequen cy formulation program. munotes.in

Page 95

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - I
95 e) Evaluate if the Five -Factor model is comprehensive.
f) Explain the identity of the fifth factor in the Five -Factor model.
5.8 REFERENCES
1. Pervin, L. A. (2002). The Science of Personality (2nd ed.). Oxford
University Press.
2. Larsen, R. J., & Buss, D. M. (200). Personality Psychology: Domains
of Knowledge About Human Nature, 3rd Edition. McGraw -Hill.
3. Buss D. M. & Larsen R. J. (2009). Personality Psychology: Domains
of Knowledge About Human Nature. NJ: McGraw Hill Humanities.
4. Corr, P. J. & Gerald Matthews, G. (2009). The Cambridge Handbook
of Personality Psychology. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
5. Dan P. McAdams D. P. (2008). The Person: An Introduction to the
Science of Personality Psychology. Wiley.




munotes.in

Page 96

96 6
DISPOSITIONAL DOMAIN: TRAIT
APPROACH - II
Unit Structure :
6.0 Objectives
6.1 Introduction: Personality Trait
6.2 Personality Disorders
6.2.1 The Concept of Disorder
6.2.2 What is a personality disorder?
6.3 Measurement of Traits and Theoretical Me asurement Issues
6.3.1 Theoretical Issues
6.3.2 Measurement Issues
6.4 Personality Dispositions Over Time
6.4.1 Three Levels of Analysis
6.4.2 Personality Change Over Time
6.4.3 Personality Stability Over Time
6.4.4 Personality Coherence Over Ti me
6.5 Summary
6.6 Questions
6.7 References
6.0 OBJECTIVES
After studying this unit, you should be able to:
 Understand the concept of disorders.
 Know various personality disorders.
 Understand the measurement of traits and theoretical and
measureme nt issues.
 Know the personality disposition over time.
 Know the three levels of analysis. munotes.in

Page 97

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - II
97  Understand personality changes and stability that occur over time.
 Know the personality coherence over time.
6.1 INTRODUCTION: PERSONALITY TRAITS
Personality tr aits are described as consistencies in behaviour, thought, or
action and they represent meaningful differences between persons. Thus,
personality disorders can be viewed as maladaptive variations or
combinations of normal personality traits. Extremes on ei ther end of the
personality spectrum can be associated with personality disorders. Widiger
and colleagues demonstrated how being extremely high or low on a trait
would be associated with a personality disorder. Someone with extremely
high hostility and low trust might be predisposed to paranoid personality
disorder. Someone else with extremely high sociability and low anxiety
has a likelihood of developing a histrionic personality disorder.
Motivation is another factor that can contribute to understanding
personality disorders. Motives describe what people want and why they
behave in a particular way (Larsen & Buss, 2008, p. 622). A common
theme across all personality disorders is the maladaptive variation of the
common motives, especially factors, such as power and achievement. In
some personality disorders, there may be extremely low motivation to
engage in intimacy. Another factor could be an extremely high need for
power over the situation or people, wanting to be superior and receive
praise from others (usually observed in narcissistic personality disorder).
Cognition also will contribute to the understanding of personality and
personality disorders. It would involve perceiving, interpreting and
planning. These factors are prone to distortions. Some dis orders involve
routine and consistent misinterpretations of the intentions of others. This
would also involve impairment of social judgment, for example, an
individual with paranoia may think others are out to get them or a person
with borderline personali ty may misinterpret innocent comments as signs
of criticism or rejection.
Emotions also help in understanding personality disorders. Usually, people
with a personality disorder do not present a normal range of emotions.
They usually depict an extreme vari ation of inexperienced emotions. Some
may show extreme volatility in emotions (e.g., borderline) whereas some
may show instability with a specific emotion like anxiety, fear or rage.
Another building block is self -concept (the person’s collection of self -
knowledge – one’s understanding of oneself). Most personality disorders
exhibit some distortion in this area. There is a lack of stability in their self -
concept. Related to self -concept is self -esteem which is also an important
part of the self and some di sorders are associated with extremely high or
extremely low levels of self -esteem. The self provides an important
perspective on understanding personality disorders.
Social relationships are also frequently affected by maladaptive
personality disorders. T his includes issues with sexual and emotional munotes.in

Page 98

Personality Psychology
98 intimacy. They may also showcase issues with interpersonal skills which
are the basis for any social relationship. This would include empathy
(usually an extreme lack of empathy). They may also struggle with po or
social skills such as maintaining a healthy or appropriate conversation
with someone.
Biology is another essential building block for personality and personality
disorders. Some personality disorders have been found to have a genetic
component. Others have been studied via physiological components, such
as examining the brain functioning of antisocial persons. There has even
been an evolutionary theory proposed to explain the existence of
personality disorders (Millon, 2000a; Larsen & Buss, 2008, p. 623 ).
6.2 PERSONALITY DISORDERS
6.2.1 The Concept of Disorder :
According to the American Psychiatric Association (1994), a disorder is
something distressing and painful to the person, that leads to disability or
impairment in important life domains (e.g., pr oblems with work, marriage
or relationship difficulties), and that is associated with increased risk for
further suffering, loss of function, death, or confinement (Larsen & Buss,
2008, p. 624). An early concept derived by French psychiatrist Philippe
Pinel was manie sans delire (madness without loss of reason). This
applied to those individuals who demonstrated disordered behaviour and
emotions, but who did not lose contact with reality (Morey, 1997; Larsen
& Buss, 2008, p. 624). Kurt Schneider an influent ial psychiatrist proposed
the term psychopathic personality which referred to the behaviour patterns
that caused the person and the community to suffer. He emphasized
statistical rarity that hurts the person and the community in which those
individual live s. This idea proposed by Schneider highlights how all forms
of personality disorders have an impact on social relationships and the
people associated also suffer in some way or the other.
The concept of a disorder helps us identify the difference between normal
and abnormal or pathological behaviour. The field of abnormal
psychology studies this in -depth. There are multiple perspectives to
defining what is abnormal. One definition may look at anything that is
away or different from the normal to be conside red abnormal. A statistical
way of defining abnormal may be to observe how often something occurs
and how rare is this abnormal behaviour. The social definition may be to
consider those behaviours abnormal that are socially unacceptable. The
statistical an d social definitions are subject to changes in society and
culture, what may be abnormal today, may not be considered so 10, 15 or
50 years later. For example, 20 to 30 years ago homosexuality was
considered abnormal, but that is not the case now (American Psychiatric
Association, 1994).
6.2.2 What Is a Personality Disorder?
A personality disorder is an enduring pattern of inner experience and
behaviour that deviates markedly from the expectations of the individual's munotes.in

Page 99

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - II
99 culture, is pervasive and inflexible, h as an onset in adolescence or early
adulthood, is stable over time, and leads to distress or impairment
(American Psychiatric Association, 2013, p. 645). If a trait becomes
maladaptive and inflexible and causes significant impairment or distress,
then it i s considered to be a personality disorder. As per the American
Psychiatric Association (1994), a personality disorder reflects itself in
many forms: in the person’s thoughts, emotions, behaviours, ability to
control their behaviour, beliefs, how they get a long with other people, etc.
They display rigidity in many ways which increases distress and
impairment in a variety of situations.
To understand personality disorders, researchers have assumed two views:
categorical and dimensional views. The categorical view is the one that is
dominant in psychiatry and clinical psychology. This view tries to
categorize people as either having the disorder or not. Contrary to this, the
dimensional view assumes personality disorders to be placed on a
continuum. This view assumes that the only difference between people
with and without a diagnosis of a personality disorder is based on
intensity. This means that those who are diagnosed with a personality
disorder, have a higher degree of intensity of the symptoms as compared
to those without the diagnosis. Since it is a continuum, some will be on the
end as well, those who exhibit severe and intense symptoms. This view
suggests that a person diagnosed with a personality disorder engages in
behaviours which pose to be a proble m to others and themselves.
 The Effect of Context:
An individual’s culture, age, gender, the social and ethnic background has
a definite impact on our understanding of personality disorders. For
example, immigrants, those who have relocated to a differen t country will
have difficulty fitting into the new culture. They will be influenced by the
culture, customs, traditions, religion, habits, expressions, values, etc. of
their country of origin. Thus, before judging whether an individual should
be diagnosed with a personality disorder, we must take into consideration
their cultural background.
Age is also an important consideration that must be kept in mind. For
example, adolescents may go through a phase of instability and rebellion
and it may also include identity crises. They may be rebellious, challenge
authority, not follow instructions given by parents and elders, behave
recklessly, etc. This may be misinterpreted as a form of personality
disorder. This is why the American Psychiatric Association (1994 )
cautions against diagnosing an individual with a personality disorder
before the age of 18. Besides, those who experience loss, trauma and
abuse may also exhibit certain behaviours of instability or impulsive
behaviours, which may look like a personality disorder. Those who
experienced such a traumatic event may also suddenly behave violently or
may enter sexual relationships impulsively.
Gender is also an important influencing factor. Certain personality
disorders like antisocial personality disorder ar e frequently found to be munotes.in

Page 100

Personality Psychology
100 diagnosed among men more than women. Other disorders are more
frequently diagnosed among women than men. There is a gender
difference in how men and women respond to a distressing situation,
which may influence the diagnosis or dec ision to diagnose. Studies by
Huselid and Cooper (1994) found that males exhibit externalizing
problems, such as fighting and vandalism, while females tend to exhibit
relatively more internalizing problems, such as depression and self -harm.
Following are the clusters of personality disorders along with the types of
disorders included in them.
A. The Erratic Cluster:
This cluster has trouble with emotional control and has difficulties getting
along with other people. This group includes antisocial, borderline,
histrionic and narcissistic personality disorders.
1) Antisocial Personality Disorder:
People with this diagnosis show a general disregard for other people and
care very less about peoples’ feelings, rights and happiness. Those adults
who have been given t his diagnosis usually have faced a troubled
childhood with behavioural issues. They end up violating rules, violating
the rights of others (minor thefts), and breaking age -related social norms
(smoking at an early age or fighting other children). They also behave
aggressively or cruelly with animals, scare young children, destroy
property, lie and break rules in general. They may also use harmful
weapons which may be a threat to themselves and others. When childhood
behavioural problems are identified as a pattern, the likelihood of the
diagnosis becomes higher. As this person grows up the issues also worsen
because they are growing in their strength, cognitive power and sexual
maturity. The issues begin as minor behavioural problems, but worsen into
more se rious issues. For example, it may start as simply shoplifting and
escalate to theft, vandalism, etc. Thus, the key features of a person
diagnosed with an antisocial personality disorder are lack of concern for
social norms or rules, repeated lying and conn ing people for their profit,
impulsivity, becoming easily irritated, being irresponsible, lack of remorse
(not feeling sorry for whatever bad they have done), disregard for the
safety of themselves and others.
2) Borderline Personality Disorder:
People with this personality disorder are marked by extreme amounts of
instability. This instability is seen in their relationships, behaviours,
emotions and their view of themselves. They have intense, emotional and
sometimes potentially violent relationships. They have a constant fear of
abandonment. When their relationship goes through difficulties, they may
become angry and aggressive. This may also lead to self -harm (burning or
cutting oneself or attempting suicide). They also have a constantly shifting
view of t hemselves. Their values and goals are shallow and change
constantly. Their opinions also tend to change constantly, and they may
experiment with their friendships and even sexuality. They experience munotes.in

Page 101

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - II
101 strong emotions and they are usually due to interpersonal events. They
frequently experience feeling empty and lonely. They may experience
anger and bitterness followed by shame and guilt. This cycle of negative
emotions may quickly continue and occurs frequently. They show major
swings between their positive an d negative emotions.
3) Histrionic Personality Disorder:
The hallmark of this personality disorder is excessive attention -seeking
and emotionality. They are found to be overly dramatic and want to be the
centre of attention constantly. They can come across as charming and
flirtatious. And they also tend to thus be sexually provocative. They show
excessive and strong emotions in public which may be embarrassing for
friends and family members. They get influenced by people’s opinions
easily, that is they are s uggestible. They take up whatever the popular
opinion is. Their excessive need for attention makes them often act
impulsively and they may manipulate others to care for them.
4) Narcissistic Personality Disorder:
The important feature of this disorder is th at they want to be admired by
everyone, they have a strong sense of self -importance and they lack an
understanding and insight into other people’s feelings. Those with
Narcissistic personality disorder will overstate their accomplishments and
undervalue ot her people’s work. They constantly want people to
appreciate, value and compliment them, that is they exhibit constant
feelings of entitlement. They believe that they should receive special
treatment, respect and privilege from everyone. They always showca se a
sense of superiority over others. They also cannot recognize the needs or
desires of people. This is seen through their conversations, which will
constantly revolve around “I” and “myself”. Ironically there is a
narcissistic paradox. This paradox stat es that although people with
narcissistic personality disorder demonstrate that they have high self -
esteem, they have fragile self -esteem. Even though they may appear
confident and strong, internally they are sensitive to any minor criticism
and get into a rage if they are criticized or hear something negative about
themselves. They are also envious of other people and their successes.
B. The Eccentric Cluster:
The second cluster under personality disorders is defined by their oddness.
This oddness is se en most commonly in the way they interact with others.
Some have no interest in others, some are suspicious and some are
extremely uncomfortable.
1) Schizoid Personality Disorder:
The word schizoid is derived from the word schism, which means split off
or detached from normal social relations. They show no desire to be
attached to their friends or family members. They do not derive any
satisfaction from being around family members which usually other
people would experience. They have few or no friends and e ven choose munotes.in

Page 102

Personality Psychology
102 hobbies that can be done alone. They also experience little or no pleasure
from bodily or sensory experiences, such as eating or having sex. Their
emotional life is limited. They also appear to be socially clumsy and they
are also usually passiv e in the face of unpleasant social situations.
2) Schizotypal Personality Disorder:
Those with schizotypal personality disorder are anxious in social
situations, especially around strangers. And unfortunately, they are not
typically found to be comfortable around familiar people either. For
example, we all experience mild discomfort around strangers at a party or
in a new setting, but we can overcome that and become comfortable in the
presence of a known person or as we begin to interact with others. But
people with this personality disorder may not become comfortable at all,
no matter what. They may become anxious and eventually begin to
become suspicious as well. They constantly feel like they do not fit in and
are different from others. They behave in odd and eccentric ways. They
have unusual perceptions that may border around delusions and
hallucinations. They believe in superstitions, psychics and other
paranormal phenomena. Because of social discomfort and eccentricity,
they violate common social convent ions like the inability to make eye
contact, not dressing in a tidy way, etc. They also exhibit disorganized
thoughts and speech where they may not always make sense in the way
they behave or what they speak. This leads to a tendency to avoid people
and th ey exhibit nonconformity in many ways.
3) Paranoid Personality Disorder:
This personality disorder is characterized by major mistrust of others and
they see others as a constant threat. They believe people are going to take
undue advantage of them and cheat and deceive them always, even though
they do not have sufficient evidence to support this idea. People with this
disorder feel that others may injure them and they constantly are seen
doubting the intentions of people in their life. They also tend to
misin terpret social events and fear sharing information with others
assuming that the information may be misused. They also tend to hold
bitterness against someone who may have insulted them in the slightest
way possible. They also may look out for unnecessary hidden meaning in
the things people say and do. They also are seen be experiencing
pathological jealousy. This is an extreme form of jealousy where the
person may misinterpret the situation and go out of their way to act upon
these feelings of jealousy. Fo r example, a man may suspect that his wife is
unfaithful to him without any objective evidence/proof. He may restrict
her activities, prohibit her from going out of the house, or meeting friends
or family members, he may also track her activities, etc. Due to the
mistrustful nature of people with paranoid personality disorder, they may
also show argumentative and hostile behaviour which may provoke others.
This in turn will feed the person’s paranoi d beliefs.

munotes.in

Page 103

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - II
103 C. The Anxious Cluster:
This cluster exhibits the neurotic paradox: a behavioural pattern that may
successfully solve a problem but may also give rise to a new set of equally
or even more severe problems.
1) Avoidant Personality Disorder:
They experience a constant sense of inadequacy, that is they fee l like they
are insufficient. These people are also poor at handling criticism and are
sensitive. Generally, no one likes being criticized, but people with an
avoidant personality disorder will go out of their way to avoid situations at
home, work, or scho ol, where they believe they may stand a chance of
being criticized. They experience anxiety around their performance for the
fear of being criticized. This leads them to avoid making friends and going
out to new places even though friends and family may be encouraging.
They end up losing out on important opportunities due to anxiety. They
are seen as shy, quiet, lonely and solitary. They also show low self -esteem,
their feelings are easily hurt and because they keep away from people at
most times, they may find it difficult to find a constant source of social
support. The paradox is that they avoid social interactions and avoid
supportive relationships with caring others that could improve their self -
esteem.
2) Dependent Personality Disorder:
People with this disorder have an excessive need to be taken care of,
nurtured and told what to do. They act in an extremely submissive manner
and encourage people to take care of them or be in charge of the situation.
They need constant advice and encouragement from othe rs and have great
difficulty in making decisions. They rarely will take initiative in things for
making big or small decisions like what to eat at a restaurant or which
course to choose in college. They fear losing people, so they avoid
disagreement. These people are also not able to work independently, so
they will wait for others at school or work to take initiative and begin
working. They may also avoid becoming experts on a task, so that they
can always be dependent on someone to help them with it. Thei r
dependence can make them bear extreme situations simply to obtain
assurance and support from others. They may go to the extent of tolerating
abuse.
3) Obsessive -Compulsive Personality Disorder:
A person with an obsessive -compulsive personality disorder is worried
about perfection and order. They pay unnecessary attention to small and
trivial details, rules, rituals, procedures and schedules. They tend to hold
very high standards for themselves and end up working so hard at being
perfect that they may never be satisfied with their work. For example, a
student may not submit their assignment in time, because it was not
perfect as per their standards. This may lead them to not take a break and
find leisure time leading to extreme fatigue and burnout. They may also
tend to work at the cost of leisure and friendships. They may also select munotes.in

Page 104

Personality Psychology
104 leisure activities or hobbies that are tiring and demanding or require
attention to detail like stitching, or computer programming. These people
may also come across as being in flexible with their ethics and morals and
may not mould as per the situation’s demands. They believe there is one
right way to do things, and that is their way. Several people with this
personality disorder are also stingy and miser.
This disorder may be often confused with Obsessive -Compulsive Disorder
(OCD), which is an anxiety disorder. However, people with Obsessive -
Compulsive Personality Disorder (OCPD) have a high risk of developing
OCD.
 Dimensional Model of Personality Disorder:
Theorists are now m oving to a dimensional model instead of the prior
categorical model. This model states that personality traits lie on a
continuum where the traits when present at normal levels are on one end
and those exhibited at an extreme, rigid and maladaptive level a re to be
diagnosed as a disorder. Widiger (1997) states that personality disorders
are simply rigid and extreme presentations of normal -range personality
traits.
This view accounts for how there may be variations between people with
the same diagnosis. Th is view also allows people to be diagnosed with
multiple types of personality disorders. And finally, the fact that
something is categorized as abnormal may be a matter of degree than a
qualitative break. These points make for the advantages of the dimensi onal
model.
 Causes of Personality Disorder:
Some researchers have attempted to find the causes of specific personality
disorders. Researchers have examined both biological and environmental
factors that may contribute to the development of personality di sorders
(Nigg & Goldsmith, 1994). For example, persons who suffer from
borderline personality disorder experienced poor attachment relationships
in childhood (Kernberg, 1975, 1984; Nigg et al., 1994), and several
borderline personality persons were the tar get of sexual abuse in childhood
(Westen et al., 1990). There is sufficient evidence that most people with
borderline personality disorder grew up in chaotic homes, with a lot of
exposure to the impulsive behaviours of adults in their life (Millon,
2000b). There is also evidence to implicate that loss or neglect by parents
is another contributing factor to borderline personality disorder.
Schizotypal personality disorder shows causes associated with genetic
factors. Several families, twin, and adoption stu dies suggest that
schizotypal disorder is genetically similar to schizophrenia (Nigg &
Goldsmith, 1994). Prevalence rates for paranoid and avoidant personality
disorders were also high among the relatives of the schizophrenia patients
which suggests that t hese disorders may be genetically related to
schizophrenia (Kendler et al., 1993). There are several explanatory
theories for antisocial personality disorder too. Several antisocial persons munotes.in

Page 105

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - II
105 were abused and victimized when they were children themselves (Pol lock
et al., 1990). A high proportion of antisocial persons also abuse multiple
illegal drugs or alcohol, thus, some researchers propose biological changes
associated with drug abuse are responsible for antisocial behaviour. There
are also clear familial t rends suggesting that antisocial personality disorder
is partly due to genetic causes (Lykken, 1995). Some other researchers
have proposed learning theories of antisocial personality disorder, due to
research showing that such persons are deficient in lear ning through
punishment (e.g., Newman, 1987).
There are biological, learning, psychodynamic and cultural explanations
for several personality disorders. Biology and experiences are strongly
interconnected. Further research can help clarify the causes in du e course
of time.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS:
 Explain three clusters of personality disorder.
6.3 MEASUREMENT OF TRAITS AND THEORETICAL
AND MEASUREMENT ISSUES
Personality measures can be used in several settings like in an
organization for a job interview s election process, they may be used also
by dating apps to help people find the right partner for them. Personality
evaluations may be used in legal matters to understand the personality
characteristics of the individuals involved in the case. It could also be part
of aptitude testing for college admissions for specialized courses and high
education. Some theoretical issues may arise while conducting or
developing such personality scales, which will be discussed further.
6.3.1 Theoretical Issues :
Trait the ories are one of the most prominently used sets of theories when
understanding personality psychology. They share some common
assumptions and are the basic foundation of trait psychology. These
include the following:
1. Meaningful individual differences : Trait psychologists want to
identify how people are different from each other and these differences
help them to identify personality traits. For example, some people talk a
lot, some do not talk much; some people are more active than others, some
people e njoy challenges, and some love to relax more than others. Thus,
trait psychology sometimes is also called differential psychology.
Differential psychology includes the study of other forms of individual
differences in addition to personality traits, such a s abilities, aptitudes, and
intelligence.
The trait approach takes a quantitative approach which attempts to
understand the emphasis on the difference between individuals and the
agreed -upon average. This means, trying to understand how much a
person diff ers from the average that has been defined by theory. This munotes.in

Page 106

Personality Psychology
106 approach is the most systematic and statically oriented. We can compare
trait psychologists to chemistry scientists. They believe that by combining
a few primary traits in various amounts, one can distil the unique qualities
of an individual. So no matter how complex or unusual someone’s
personality is, it is a combination of basic or primary elements.
2. Stability and consistency: This assumption believes that personality
traits will be consistent over time. If someone is highly extroverted when a
psychologist observes them, it can be assumed that the extroverted
tendency will remain stable over long periods. Especially those personality
traits that show biological basis like extraversion, sensatio n seeking,
activity level, shyness, etc. tend to show consistency over time. Attitudes,
opinions, and behaviours are less consistent as they tend to change over
time based on the social environment that the person is in. Although the
assumption states that some traits will be consistent over time, there could
be a change in how the traits manifest in particular situations. For
example, a child tends to throw temper tantrums frequently which shows
high levels of disagreeableness, they may start fist -pounding and may
have undirected rage. But as this child grows up their disagreeableness
may manifest, that is it may be represented in the form of being
uncooperative at work and having difficulty in holding a job. Thus, the
same trait of disagreeableness is cons istent over time but has managed to
manifest itself differently in different situations.
There also may be times when traits decrease as the individual grows older
like activity level. An adolescent growing up as a teenager may have high
activity levels, but as they grow older into an adult and then as an older
adult their activity levels may decrease. Similarly, the trait of being
impulsive can also show a reduction in overage. The way a 20 -year-old
would show impulsivity would be different from how a 5 -year-old would.
Also, one person who is highly impulsive at age 20 when compared to
others of their age, may continue to show high levels of impulsivity at age
50 when compared to other 50 -year-olds.
3. Consistency across situations: Trait psychologists be lieve that
people’s personalities show consistency from one situation to another. For
example, if a young man is “really friendly”, he would be this way at
work, at home and with friends. This person may also be friendly to
strangers and people from differ ent backgrounds and age groups. But there
will remain a difference in how friendly the person would be. For
example, a person may be more friendly while at home than to strangers or
may be more friendly to elderly people than people of their age. Thus,
there exists debate in the field about whether traits remain consistent
across situations. Walter Mischel in his book called Personality and
Assessment (1968) published the results of an important study conducted
by Hartshorne and May (1928) who were trying t o see the consistency of
traits across situations. Hartshorne and May (1928) evaluated whether
helpfulness and self -control traits were consistent across situations. They
observed a large group of elementary school students who were at a
summer camp. They observed honest and dishonest behaviours in various
situations. For example, a child may cheat while playing football but was munotes.in

Page 107

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - II
107 not likely to cheat during an examination. In line with these results, in the
book, Mischel reported low correlations for personal ity scores across
situations. Mischel (1968) concluded that “behavioural consistencies have
not been demonstrated and the concept of personality traits as broad
predispositions is thus untenable” (p. 140). Mischel suggested that
differences across situatio ns must be understood as situational differences
and not as personality traits changing. This is called situationism. The
situationist position can be explained with an example, where a young girl
may be friendly with her basketball team and coaches becaus e she wants
to pursue her professional basketball career; while she may be more shy,
quiet and less friendly with her classmates. Thus, Mischel proposed that
behaviour is a function of the situation rather than broad personality traits.
Two changes in theo ry that have been adopted by trait psychologists are
person -situation interaction and the practice of aggregation as a tool for
assessing personality traits.
 Person Situation Interaction : According to this view, there are two
possible explanations for beh aviour:
1. Behaviour is a function of personality traits: B = f(P).
2. Behaviour is a function of situational forces: B = f(S).
Thus, we can say that both personality traits and situational forces both
work toward explaining behaviour. For example, we would fin d someone
who is quiet and shy across all situations and there could be someone quiet
and shy only in some situations.
We can then modify the two formulas: B = f (P x S). This formula
suggests an interaction between personality traits and situational forc es.
For example, the trait of being hot -tempered is a tendency to respond
aggressively to minor frustrations. People who know that a person is hot -
tempered may not be aware of the intensity of the trait, unless they have
been around the person during minor frustrating situations. The trait may
only be expressed when a frustrating situation may arise. Thus, when this
person is at the ATM, which does not function properly, he or she may
experience frustration and may show hot -tempered behaviour by maybe
kicki ng the ATM or pounding their fist. Thus, the interaction view
suggests that the personality trait and the situational factors together help
explain this incident. This is known as situation -person interaction . In
this view, the difference in people will be understood under the right
circumstances. Some traits are specific to certain situations, while some
are not. For example, the trait of test anxiety will only occur when
someone is going to give a test and they will begin to experience anxiety
in that spe cific situation. This is also referred to as situational specificity.
However, some situations are so strong that everyone may end up reacting
in the same way. For example, Larsen, Diener and Emmons (1986) tried to
understand who overreacted emotionally t o everyday events. Participants
in this study were asked to keep a daily diary of life events for two
months. They also rated their emotions each day. Based on the emotional
reactivity and the events that occurred, some incidents evoked strong munotes.in

Page 108

Personality Psychology
108 emotions fro m everyone like the death of a pet. These situations were
called strong situations. Some situations like funerals, religious services,
crowded places, etc. may be vague and ambiguous, wherein different
personalities may react differently.
Situational sele ction is the tendency to choose the situations in which one
finds oneself (Ickes, Snyder, & Garcia, 1997; Snyder & Gangestad, 1982).
This means people tend to select situations in which they will spend their
time. This is viewed as a conscious choice that may reflect the
personality's features. So, if someone is extraverted, they may choose
situations that bring out this personality trait or go hand in hand with it.
Thus, personality influences the kind of situations in which people wish to
spend their time . There is also literature to show how personality can be
affected due to the situations encountered by the individual. Bolger and
Schilling (1991) wanted to understand this by trying to see if those
individuals are high on neuroticism, do they experience stressful situations
frequently or react to ordinary situations with greater reactivity. They
discovered that both were true: high neuroticism led to frequent stressful
life events and they reacted to such stressful events with more subjective
distress.
Evocation is another form of person -situation interaction. It is how certain
personality traits evoke specific responses from the environment. For
example, those who are disagreeable and manipulative may evoke certain
hostile or avoidant reactions from othe rs.
Manipulation is the third form of person -situation interaction. It is
defined as the different means by which people influence the behaviour of
others. It is when people intentionally use certain tactics to influence,
force or change others. Manipulat ion involves altering the environment
that they are part of. Researchers have found that people use different
manipulation tactics, like charm tactics, complementing others, acting in a
caring and warm manner and doing favours. People also use the silent
treatments, ignoring, failing to respond and coercion (making demands,
yelling, criticizing, cursing and threatening) (Buss et al., 1987). Extraverts
tend to deploy the charm tactic more than introverts do. Those high on
neuroticism tend to use the silent treatments to get their way. And those
high on quarrelsomeness tend to use the coercion tactic to get their way.
(Larsen & Buss, 2018, p. 106).
Aggregation is the process of adding up and averaging multiple single
observations, which results in a better a nd more reliable measure of
personality traits rather than a single observation of behaviours.
Personality psychologist Seymour Epstein (1979, 1980, 1983) published
several papers showing that aggregating several questions or observations
results in better trait measures. Also, longer tests are known to be more
reliable than shorter ones and hence are better measures of traits. It helps
in improving the trait measures by adding items to a questionnaire and
adding observations to an overall score that is obt ained. It implies that
traits are one of the many factors that influence a person’s behaviour in a
given situation. Thus, personality becomes an averaging tendency and munotes.in

Page 109

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - II
109 cannot be very good for predicting a single action in a single
event/occasion.
6.3.2 Me asurement Issues :
Most of the personality measures rely on self -report measures although
other measurement methods can be used. The rationale is to identify how
much an individual differs from the other on a particular trait. Traits are
assumed to be on a continuum, that is someone low on conscientiousness
is on the end of the continuum and someone extremely high will be on the
other end. So, the best way to find out about someone’s personality
characteristics is to ask them. This assumes that people are wi lling and
able to report accurately on their behaviour. There may be people who
may not be willing, some may over -report or under -report. So, the
validity, accuracy, reliability and utility must be evaluated carefully.
 Carelessness:
Some participants may not be motivated to answer the questionnaire
truthfully or carefully. Some may be motivated to complete it carefully,
but may rush through the items and answer randomly. Some may
accidentally skip items, or they may not read the items carefully enough
and respond randomly. Some may even face difficulty in reading and
understanding the meaning of the statements presented. A common way of
identifying the possible error is by using an infrequency scale which is
embedded in the questionnaire items. These scale s contain items that
almost all participants will answer in the same or similar manner. For
example, a statement which says, “I do not believe that wood burns” or “I
walk down the stairs using my hands on the steps”. Most people should be
answering “false” to these statements. Those who answer “true” can be
identified as answering the questionnaire in a random and untrue manner.
Another way to identify carelessness is to duplicate items, which may
come at different sections of the scale. The psychologists c an verify if the
same participant has given the same answer to the two items.
 Faking on Questionnaires:
When personality questionnaires are used to make important decisions like
for a job, promotion, etc., there is a strong possibility that the person
responding may try to fake their responses. Some may be attempting to
“fake good” (wanting to appear to be good) or some may “fake bad”
(wanting to appear to be bad or maladjusted). For example, in a legal case,
the accused may use want to appear as being ma ladjusted, so that they can
be proven innocent. So they may try to “fake bad” to get a diagnosis from
the psychologist. Questionnaire developers must be careful regarding this.
Psychologists when interpreting the results may make a mistake in
distinguishin g between genuine and faked responses. They may conclude
that someone truthful may be faking it (called a false negative ) or
someone who is faking it is being genuine (called a false positive ). This
could certainly become a limitation of self -report measur es since the true
nature of the faking may not be truly understood. munotes.in

Page 110

Personality Psychology
110  Response Sets:
It is the tendency for some people to respond to a question on a basis that
is unrelated to the content of the question. Psychologists may assume that
people will be thinki ng about the content of the item in the context of all
the instances that are related. For example, for the item “Have you
smashed items when being angry?”, people may not be able to recall all
instances when they may or may not have done so. They may not always
make a deliberate and conscious effort to consider the content of the
question to answer honestly. This tendency is also known as non-content
responding. An example of this could be acquiescence or yes -saying,
which is the tendency to simply agree w ith the questionnaire regardless of
the content of the items. Psychologists attempt to counter acquiescence by
using reverse scoring the items. For example, they may word an item for
extraversion as “I frequently prefer to be alone”. There is also extreme
responding that could take place, which is the tendency to give endpoint
responses and avoid the middle part response. So, if there are two extreme
options like “strongly agree” and “strongly disagree”, they may frequently
keep selecting these rather than options, such as “slightly agree” or
“slightly disagree”. Response sets may hamper the validity of the
questionnaire because the person is not responding to the content of the
items.
Another important response set is social desirability . It is the tenden cy to
answer items in a way, which comes across as socially attractive, likeable
or acceptable. For example, statements like “I am happy most of the time”,
or “I do not intentionally harm animals” may evoke social desirability.
That is, for both statements , the person may respond as “True”, when it
may not be the case. Social desirability represents distortion or error and
should be eliminated or minimized as much as possible. While another
view states that it is a valid part of other desirable personality traits like
happiness, conscientiousness or agreeableness. It may not be an outright
effort to distort responses and thus must be differentiated from outright
faking or lying. It simply is the case that the person has a distorted view of
themselves or may want others to like them. Although several
psychologists believe that it must be eliminated as it does create a bias,
some psychologists believe the questionnaire must be designed well
enough, so that it measures the construct accurately and does not evoke
social desirability, to begin with. This can be done by selecting items that
have low correlations to social desirability. Another way to solve the issue
of social desirability suggested by psychologists is to eliminate those
responses statistically. For example, the social desirability scale developed
by Crowne and Marlowe (1964) asks about minor mistakes or
transgressions we all make and some saint -like behaviour. For example, “I
am always willing to admit it when I make a mistake”, and “I like to
gossip at times”. Those who show perfect saint -like behaviour and do not
admit to committing any mistakes can be judged to be high on social
desirability. A third approach is to use a forced -choice questionnaire
format. Here, the test takers are confined to two pairs of statements and
must select one that describes them the best. By forcing the participants to munotes.in

Page 111

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - II
111 choose between equally socially desirable items, it may reduce the effect.
For example:
1. a. To read the book.
b. To watch the movie.
2. a. Continuous h allucinations.
b. Continuous anesthesia.
Many psychologists are also of the opinion that it can be considered a
valid response. They view social desirability as a trait in itself, which
means that some people are prone to giving socially desirable r esponses
regularly. Some research correlates social desirability with happiness,
adjustment and conscientiousness. The assumption made is that being
mentally healthy involves having an overly positive view of oneself and
abilities. Shelly Taylor in her tit le “Positive Illusions” (1989) summarizes
research surrounding positive and self -enhancing illusions to state that
they can promote psychological adjustment and mental health.
Psychologist Delroy Paulhus has developed a social desirability inventory
called the Balanced Inventory of Desirable Responding, which contains
two subscales namely the self -deceptive enhancement subscale and the
impression management subscale. They help identify self -presentation
motives and faking good or bad tendencies. (Paulhus, 1 984, 1990).
 Barnum Statements:
These are general statements that could apply to anyone. They often
appear in astrology advice columns in newspapers and magazines. For
example, “You sometimes have doubts about whether you have done the
right thing”, “You need others to admire and love you”, or “Although you
can deal with confrontation, you tend to avoid it”. One needs to be careful
when getting personality testing done by someone who may not be well -
trained or unlicensed. They could use the Barnum statemen ts in the
interpretation which could be misleading.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS:
 Explain theoretical and measurement issues of traits.
6.4 PERSONALITY DISPOSITIONS OVER TIME
Personality development is defined as the continuities, consistencies and
abilities in people over time and how people change over time (Larsen &
Buss, 2008, p. 138). Many forms of personality change and stability have
been identified by researchers. This section examines the research
evidence surrounding change and stability across infancy, childhood and
adulthood.
munotes.in

Page 112

Personality Psychology
112 There are the following three levels of analyses of personality
development:
1. Population -level:
This level of personality development is the changes and constancies that
apply to more or less everyone. Almost everyone will hit se xual puberty.
Overall, there is a decrease in impulsivity levels or risk -taking behaviour
as an individual grows up. So, these changes are part of almost the entire
population.
2. Group Differences Level:
Some changes affect different groups differently. F or example, sex
differences. Females go through puberty differently than males. Age -based
differences can also be observed. The aggression shown by adolescents
versus that shown by adults will vary. Cultural and ethnic groups will also
show differences in some aspects. For example, body image satisfaction
varies across American, European, and African American women.
3. Individual Differences Level:
Personality psychologists focus on individual differences in personality
differences. There are issues related to whether we can predict an
individual’s change over time in the various characteristics that they
exhibit.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS:
 What are the three levels of analyses of personality development?
6.4.1 Personality Change Over Time :
 Personality Change:
Not all personality changes can qualify as development and not all internal
changes can properly be considered development. Like when we fall sick,
the way our body changes may not always account for development.
Hence, the two qualities of personality ch ange include firstly that changes
are usually internal to the person and not just changes that take place in the
external surroundings. Second, the changes are relatively enduring over
time and not temporary changes.
Most of the global measures of persona lity traits focus heavily on
personality stability. There is very little literature to understand personality
change.
 Changes in Self -Esteem from Adolescence to Adulthood:
Block and Robbins (1993) studied self -esteem about the personality
characteristics associated with it. They defined self -esteem as “the extent
to which one perceives oneself relatively close to being the person one
wants to be and/or as relatively distant from the kind of person one does
not want to be, concerning person -qualities one p ositively and negatively munotes.in

Page 113

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - II
113 values” (Block & Robbins, 1993, p. 911). It was measured by an overall
difference between the current self -description and the ideal self -
description. The researchers hypothesized that the smaller this difference,
the higher the se lf-esteem. They assessed the sample at age 14 and then at
age 23. There was no change in self -esteem with increasing age for the
sample as a whole. When males were compared to females there were
stark differences. Males’ self -esteem increased with age, whi le it showed a
decrease for females. There were also interesting differences with the
other personality correlates. For those females whose self -esteem was
increasing over time, observers judged them to have an excellent sense of
humour, be protective of o thers and be a talkative and giving person. The
females whose self -esteem tended to go down over time were judged to be
moody, hostile, negativistic, irritable, unpredictable and condescending.
For males whose self -esteem increased over time, they were ob served to
be socially at ease, regard themselves as physically attractive and were
observed to be calm and relaxed. Those who showed a decrease in self -
esteem tended to be anxious, easily stressed, ruminative and self -
defensive. Thus, there was a significa nt difference between males and
females as they age in self -esteem levels.
 Flexibility and Impulsivity:
In a study on creative architects, the researchers measured personality
twice with testing across 25 years (Dudek & Hall, 1991). The California
Psycho logical Inventory (CPI) and Adjective Check List (ACL) were
administered. The architects were tested at the beginning of their careers
and again after 25 years. Some architects turned out to be highly creative
and successful while some were just average. T he highly creative
architects displayed high scores on spontaneity, an intensity of motivation,
and independence. The less creative ones showed high scores on
conformity even 25 years later. They all showed a decrease in impulsivity
and flexibility with ag e.
 Autonomy, Dominance, Leadership and Ambition:
Howard and Bray (1988) conducted a longitudinal study with 266
managerial candidates at AT&T. They tested these men in their twenties
and then followed up 20 years later in their forties using the Edwards
Personal Preference Schedule. There were several dramatic observations
throughout the study. There was a steep drop in the ambition scores which
was dropping during the first 8 years and continued to drop for the next 12
years. The men who went to college started with high ambition, but saw a
sharp drop compared to non -college men. The men became more and
more realistic about their expectations which were discovered through the
interviews conducted. Their scores on autonomy, leadership, motivation,
dominanc e and achievement increased over time. The men seemed to
become less dependent on others.

munotes.in

Page 114

Personality Psychology
114  Sensation Seeking:
It is commonly believed that people become more cautious and
conservative with age. The literature surrounding sensation -seeking
confirms that. The Sensation -Seeking Scale (SSS) has four subscales
namely thrill and adventure -seeking (e.g., “I would like to try out
parachute jumping”), experience -seeking (e.g., I am not interested in
experience for its own sake” vs. “I like to have new and exciting
experiences and sensations even if they are little frightening,
unconventional or illegal”), disinhibition (e.g., “I like wild uninhibited
parties” vs. “I prefer quiet parties with good conversation”), and boredom
susceptibility (e.g., “I get bored seeing old faces” vs. “I like the
comfortable familiarity of everyday friends”). The trait of sensation
seeking is known to increase with age from childhood to adolescence
around the age of 18 to 20. Then it begins to fall continuously as one ages
(Zuckerman, 19 74).
 Femininity:
Helson and Wink (1992) examined personality changes in a longitudinal
study of women from Mills College in San Francisco. They used the
California Psychological Inventory to study the femininity scale. High
scorers were described by obser vers as being dependent, emotional,
gentle, feminine, high -strung, nervous, mild, worrying, sympathetic,
sentimental, sensitive, and submissive (Gough, 1996). Low scorers, that is
those who scored high on masculinity were described as tough, strong,
self-confident, masculine, independent, forceful, determined, confident,
assertive, boastful and aggressive. An interesting finding is that this
sample of educated women showed a consistent drop in femininity as they
moved from the age of 40 to 50, but the under lying cause remains
undetermined.
 Competence:
A key element from the longitudinal study from Mill College mentioned
earlier is self -assessment of competence. It was measured using the
Adjective Check List (ACL) scale, which contained items, such as goal -
oriented, organized, thorough, efficient, practical, clear, realistic, precise,
mature, confident, and contented thinking (Helson & Stewart, 1994). The
high scorers state that these items describe them well. The women who
were part of the sample showed a sh arp increase in the self -assessments of
competence. Their spouses showed constant scores across two time
periods. The scores did not depend on whether they had children or not.
 Independence and Traditional Roles:
The study also gave some other fascinating findings. The women in the
study were divided into four categories: 1) Homemakers with intact
marriages and children, 2) Working mothers with children (neo -
traditional), 3) Divorced mothers, and 4) Non -mothers (Helson & Picano,
1990). munotes.in

Page 115

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - II
115 The CPI Independenc e scale measured two related facets. First included
self-assurance, resourcefulness and competence. Second, distancing self
from others and not bowing to the conventional demands of society. Those
who were high on independence tended to set goals for group s that they
were part of, they would talk to many people at the party, and they would
also take charge of situations when called for. The high scorers also tend
to interrupt conversations and do not necessarily follow instructions from
those who are in the position to lead. For divorced mothers, working
mothers, and non -mothers, the independence scores increased significantly
over time. Only traditional homemakers showed an increase over time in
independence. Causation cannot be assumed since the data was
correlational. The study nevertheless shed light on the idea that specific
subgroups will show specific changes in personality characteristics.
 Personality Changes across Cohorts: Women’s Assertiveness in
Response to Changes in Social Status and Roles
Interesting to understand whether personality changes are a function of
individual variations or a cohort effect can be observed, that is the effect
of the social time that they lived in on the personality. Jean Twenge (2000,
2001a, 2001b) studied the cohort e ffect extensively. She argues that
American society has drastically changed over the past seven decades
which has led to a change in women’s status and roles. During the 1930s
women had more domestic roles which kept changing from the 1960s to
the 1990s. T wenge (2001a) also discovered that women’s scores on
assertiveness also shifted as per the cohort in which they were raised.
6.4.2 Personality Stability Over Time :
 Rank order stability is the maintenance of an individual position
within a group. This mean s that if someone scores high on traits like
conscientiousness or impulsivity for their age of 15 years, as they
grow older, they will continue to have a high -rank order for this trait.
So, when this individual high on conscientiousness or impulsivity
turns 30 years old, they will continue to remain in the high -rank order
when compared to other 30 -year-olds.
 Mean Level Stability is the constancy level. If there is an average
level of religiousness in a group, that average may remain constant
even with the increase in age. There could also be a mean level
change, maybe due to socio -political conditions and the average level
of religiousness may shift.
 Stability of Temperament During Infancy: Many parents often
state how their children are different from ea ch other. But, Albert
Einstein the Nobel prize winner, and father of modern physics who
had two sons, is one extreme and a good example of this. The older
son, Hans was fascinated by puzzles as a child and he had a gift for
mathematics. He went on to becom e a distinguished professor of
hydraulics at the University of California at Berkley. The younger
son, Eduard took interest in music and literature, but unfortunately, he munotes.in

Page 116

Personality Psychology
116 ended up in a Swiss psychiatric hospital and died. This is an example
of no matter i f you have good genes passed on from your parents, you
and your sibling may turn out to be different in many ways.
The most commonly studied aspect related to infancy is temperament,
which is the individual differences that emerge very early in life and h ave
been heritable. These are often behaviours like emotionality or
arousability. Researcher Mary Rothbart (1981, 1986) conducted a study of
a group of infants of different ages starting from three months and
examined their temperament using some measures that the infants’
caregivers filled out. The measures included:
1. Activity level : The overall motor activity of legs, arms, etc.
2. Smiling and laughter : How much did the infant smile or laugh?
3. Fear : The amount of distress and reluctance shown by the child to
approach new stimuli.
4. Distress to limitations : How much distress did the child express at
being denied food, being dressed, being confined, etc.
5. Soothability: It is the degree to which the child reduced stress or
calmed down after being soothed.
6. Durati on of orienting : The degree to which the child sustained
attention to objects in the absence of a sudden change.
The results showed that in those infants who scored high on these aspects
of temperament, these traits increased with age (3 to 6 months, 3 to 9
months, 3 to 12 months, etc.). Activity level, smiling and laughter showed
higher levels of stability over time. Personality traits also showed to be
stable at the end of infancy, that is around 9 to 12 months. The limitation
of this study by Rothbart i s that caregivers may not always be honest or
accurate in reporting about their infants. It may be their conception rather
than the actual behaviour of the infant. However, we can draw important
conclusions from this study which are that stable individual differences
appear to emerge early in life, temperament variables show moderate
levels of stability overtime during the first few years of life, and the
stability temperament tends to be higher over short intervals of time rather
than long intervals of tim e and lastly, the level of stability of temperament
tends to increase as infants mature (Goldsmith & Rothbart, 1991; Larsen
& Buss, 2008).
 Stability During Childhood:
Longitudinal studies which examine the same groups of individuals over
time have their se t of limitations since they can be costly and difficult to
conduct. Because of such limitations, there are few such studies. An
important study is the Block and Block Longitudinal Study, which was
conducted by testing a sample of more than 100 children fro m the
Berkley -Oakland region of California. This sample has been followed
through ages 4, 5, 7, 11 and adulthood. The first publication of this project munotes.in

Page 117

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - II
117 was to identify the differences in activity levels of the children. The
activity level of the sample whe n they were 3 years old was measured
using an acto -meter, a recording device that is attached to the wrists of the
children during playtime. This records the motoric movement. There was
also a teacher -observed activity level questionnaire containing three items
enquiring whether the child was “physically active”, “is vital, energetic,
active” and “has rapid personal tempo”. The acto -meter readings were
correlated at ages 3 and 4 and also different sources, such as a judge were
given the questionnaire. The c orrelations between the same measure
obtained at two different points in time are called the stability coefficient,
while those correlations that are different measures of the same trait
obtained at the same time are called validity coefficients . (Larsen & Buss,
2008, p. 145).
This study helped draw critical conclusions. First, the acto -meter
measurements of activity level showed significant positive validity
coefficients with the judge -based measurements of activity. This meant
that activity levels in chi ldhood can be assessed validly through
observational judgements and activity recordings. Second, the activity
level measurements are positively correlated with measurements of
activity levels taken at different ages. Thus, when the measures were taken
at 4 and 7 years, those who scored high at age 3 continued to score high at
ages 4 and 7. Third, the measures that are taken early are stable over time
and have predictability for later life. If the activity levels are measured
between short intervals the pred ictability may reduce.
In sum, individual personality differences emerge very early in life and
they are moderately stable over time. The stability coefficients gradually
decline as the distance between testing increases.
 Rank Order Stability in Adulthoo d:
Several studies were conducted to evaluate the stability of adult
personality. Costa and McCrae (1994) categorized five personality factors
for the five -factor model. The self -report measures data indicated that
traits of neuroticism, extraversion, open ness to experience, agreeableness
and conscientiousness are all moderate to highly stable traits with average
correlations between these traits, scales and time intervals was roughly
+.65. There were studies with other reports which also showed stability,
such as a six -year longitudinal study of adults where spouse ratings were
used. Neuroticism, openness to experience and extraversion showed stable
correlation coefficients. Some other studies used peer ratings (Costa &
McCrae, 1988, 1992). A study conducte d by Richard Robins and
colleagues (2001) evaluated 275 college students during their freshman
year and again in their senior year. They made use of the NEO -PI
inventory, which indicated stability for extraversion (.60), agreeableness
(.59), conscientiousn ess (.53) and neuroticism (.70). Trzesniewski,
Donnellan, and Robins (2003) also found stability in self -esteem over
time. They found consistency in self -confidence levels too. Roberts and
DelVecchio (2000) found that personality consistencies have a step -wise
pattern with increasing age. The average personality consistency during munotes.in

Page 118

Personality Psychology
118 teenage years was +.47 which increased to +.57 in the twenties and was
+.62 during the thirties. Also, the consistency was found to peak in the
fifties. Thus, as people age, their personality traits appear to become more
set or stable.
 Mean Level Stability in Adulthood:
The five -factor model by Costa and McCrae shows mean level stability
over time. Especially after the age of 50, there are little changes to the
average level of s tability in openness, extraversion, neuroticism and
agreeableness. There is a tendency for openness, extraversion and
neuroticism to gradually decline with increasing age, till age 50.
Conscientiousness and agreeableness on the other hand show a gradual
increase over time. Recent studies confirmed that the mean -level
personality traits change is slight but important during adulthood. The
most consistent change is in lower levels of neuroticism. Students have
shown a decrease in neuroticism (Vaidya, Gray, Ha ig, & Watson, 2001,
2002). Similar findings were obtained in a massive longitudinal study of
2,804 individuals over a 23 -years time span. Negative affectivity
decreased consistently as the participants got older (Charles, Reynolds, &
Gatz, 2001). A massive meta -analysis of 92 different samples found that
both women and men gradually become more emotionally stable as they
grow older, with the largest changes occurring between the ages of 22 and
40 (Roberts, Walton, & Viechtbauer, 2006). People were also foun d to
score higher on agreeableness and conscientiousness as they grow older.
Studies found that college students became more agreeable, conscientious
and extraverted from freshman year to two and half years later, and
conscientiousness and agreeableness sh owed an increase throughout early
and middle adulthood (Vaidya et al., 2002; Srivastava, John, Gosling, &
Potter, 2003). “The personality changes that did take place from
adolescence to adulthood reflected growth in the direction of greater
maturity; many adolescents became more controlled and socially more
confident and less angry and alienated” (Roberts, Caspi, & Moffitt, 2001,
p. 670). Interestingly, Ralph Piedmont (2001) found that the Big Five
personality dispositions may change due to therapy. They ad ministered
therapy to 82 men and 50 women over six weeks. The sample showed a
decrease in neuroticism and an increase in agreeableness and
conscientiousness. And these results were maintained post 15 months of
follow -up assessment. Thus, predictable change s do occur for certain
personality traits but overall stability can be observed.
6.4.3 Personality Coherence Over Time :
Personality Coherence is a change in the manifestation of a trait is
personality coherence. Consider the example of dominance at the age of
20. This 20 -year-old’s manifestation of dominance may be seen among
friends and family members. They are known to be high on the dominance
trait. As this individual grows old, they continue to show high dominance
with friends, coworkers and their partner wh ere the manifestation has
become more physical. Thus, this shift in manifestation but maintenance
of the rank order is known as personality coherence. Personality coherence munotes.in

Page 119

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - II
119 does not require the manifestation to be constant. This includes elements
of contin uity and change. Personality coherence refers to the predictable
changes in the manifestations or outcomes of personality factors over time
even if the underlying characteristics remain stable.
 Marital Stability, Marital Satisfaction and Divorce:
Kelley a nd Conley (1987) studied 300 couples from the 1930s from the
time they were engaged to the 1980s. Amongst the couples studied, 22
broke their engagements, 278 couples did get married and 50 ended up
divorced. During the first testing in the 1930s, the acqu aintances of the
participants were asked to give ratings to each participant’s personality on
several dimensions. There were three predictors of divorce - neuroticism
of the wife and the husband and the impulse control of the husband. Those
high in neuroti cism were found to be high in marital dissatisfaction in the
1930s, 1955 and 1980. When the husband and wife were high on
neuroticism and lacked impulse control, it was a strong predictor of
divorce. Those husbands who showed low impulse control when first
assessed, were more likely to engage in extramarital affairs as compared to
those high on impulse control who managed to avoid engaging in flings.
Neuroticism was also important for resilience after losing a spouse. A
study found that the best predictor of coping with the death of a spouse
was emotional stability (Bonanno, Wortman, Lehman, Tweed, Haring,
Sonnega, Carr, & Nesse, 2002). Out of the 205 individuals assessed,
several years before the death of their spouse, then 6 and 18 months post
the demise, those who were high on emotional stability grieved less,
showed less depression and showed quick psychological recovery.
 Alcoholism and Emotional Disturbance:
Conley and Angeldes (1984) found that early personality predictions can
help understand the de velopment of alcoholism and emotional
disturbance. They studied 233 men and 40 were judged to develop serious
emotional problems or alcoholism and they were rated as being high on
neuroticism by acquaintances. The early personality characteristics helped
distinguish between men who had become alcoholics and men who
developed emotional disturbance. Impulse control was found to be related
to emotional disturbance. Recent studies have found that those who are
high scorers on measures of sensation -seeking and i mpulsivity and low
scorers on agreeableness and conscientiousness tend to use and abuse
alcohol more than others (Cooper, Wood, Orcutt, & Albino, 2003;
Hampson, Severson, Burns, Slovic, & Fisher, 2001; Markey, Markey, &
Tinsley, 2003; Ruchkin, Koposov, Eis emann, & Hagglof, 2002).
 Education, Academic Achievement and Dropping Out:
Kipnis (1971) conducted a self -report measure of impulsivity. He also
obtained their SAT scores which measure academic achievement and
potential. Those high scorers on SAT showed hi gh impulsivity. Impulsive
individuals were more likely to drop out of college. Impulsivity has also
been found to affect workplace performance. A longitudinal study looked munotes.in

Page 120

Personality Psychology
120 at personality dispositions at the age of 18 and then checked the work -
related outc omes at age 26. They found that those high on self -control at
age 18, showed higher occupational attainment, were more involved in
their work and had superior financial security at age 26 (Roberts, Caspi, &
Moffitt, 2003).
Conscientiousness was the best p redictor of achievements at work and
school. Those who were high on conscientiousness at age 3 were predicted
to perform successfully in academics, nine years later. (Asendorpf & Van
Aken, 2003). Emotional stability, agreeableness and openness also are
predictors of success but conscientiousness is the strongest. As adults
these people become less alienated, they are better at handling stress, they
show an increase in social closeness, they like people more, and they turn
to others for comfort.
 Health and Longevity:
High conscientiousness, positive emotionality (extraversion) and low
levels of hostility are predictors of longevity (Danner et al., 2001, 2001;
Friedman et al., 1995; Miller et al., 1996). Conscientious individuals
engage in more health -promoti ng practices, like maintaining a good diet
and engaging in regular exercise; they also avoid unhealthy practices, such
as smoking and having a sedentary lifestyle. Those low on
conscientiousness in adolescence are more likely to get addicted in young
adult hood to all sorts of drugs. Extroverts tend to have lots of friends, so
they have a social support network which is linked with positive health
outcomes. Those low on hostility put less stress on their heart and overall
cardiovascular system.
 Prediction o f Personality Change:
Caspi and Herbener (1990) tried to answer the question of whether we can
predict who is likely to change their personality and who is not. They
studied middle -aged couples for over 11 years. They tested the couples
twice in 1970 and 1 981. The question was if you marry someone similar to
you, do you tend to remain more stable over time than if you marry
someone different from you? They reasoned that by marrying someone
similar you would find a supportive and stable environment and marry ing
someone different may lead to attitudinal clashes and encountering social
and environments that you may not generally seek which may make you
uncomfortable. Thus, they divided the sample into those couples who were
highly or moderately or least similar to each other. They found that men
and women who are married to someone similar to themselves in
personality show the highest levels of personality stability over time.
6.5 SUMMARY
In this chapter, we first understood the concept of disorders, specificall y
personality disorders. We then examined the various types of personality
disorders based on the categorization, that is the erratic cluster, the
eccentric cluster and the anxious cluster. We then moved on to munotes.in

Page 121

Dispositional Domain:
Trait Approach - II
121 understanding the measurement process, and how can psychologists
measure the various personality traits and disorders. There could be some
possible issues that could arise in the measurement process, those were
also examined. We then try to understand how personality characteristics
can be used to pre dict certain everyday aspects of human life. We also
attempted to explore the literature surrounding personality change and
whether there is stability or change that occurs.
6.6 QUESTIONS
1. Write long answers:
a) Explain in detail the erratic cluster of per sonality.
b) Explain in detail the eccentric cluster of personality.
c) Explain in Detail the anxious cluster of personality.
d) Evaluate personality change with research examples.
e) Explain measurement issues surrounding personality traits.
2. Write short notes:
a) Explain the concept of personality disorders.
b) Write a note on personality coherence over time.
c) Explain the theoretical issues that can arise during the measurement of
personality traits.
6.7 REFERENCES
1. Larsen, R. J., & Buss, D. M. (2008). Personality Psy chology:
Domains of Knowledge About Human Nature. McGraw -Hill
Education.
2. Buss D. M. & Larsen R. J. (2009). Personality Psychology: Domains
of Knowledge About Human Nature. NJ: McGraw Hill Humanities.
3. Corr, P. J. & Gerald Matthews, G. (2009). The Cambridge Handbook
of Personality Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4. Dan P. McAdams D. P. (2008). The Person: An Introduction to the
Science of Personality Psychology. Wiley.
5. Pervin, L. A. (2002). Science of Personality (2nd Ed.). USA: Oxford
University Press.


munotes.in

Page 122

122 7

SOCIO -CULTURAL AND ADJUSTMENT
DOMAIN - I

Unit Structure :
7.0 Objectives
7.1 Personality and Social Interaction
7.1.1 Selection
7.1.2 Evocation
7.1.3 Manipulation: Social influence tactics
7.1.4 Panning Back: An overview of personality and social
interaction
7.2 Sex, Gender and Personality
7.2.1 The Science and Politics of studying gender
7.2.2 Sex differences in Personality
7.2.3 Masculinity, Femininity, Androgyny and Sex roles
7.2.4 Theories of sex differences
7.3 Summary
7.4 Questions
7.5 References
7.0 OBJECTIVES
After studying this unit, you should be able to:
 Understand how personality is affected
 Understand the causes of large or small sex differences in different
personality traits
 Understand the process of selection, evocation an d manipulation.
 Understand how cultures shape personality
 Know the history and study of sex differences munotes.in

Page 123

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - I
123  Know actual sex differences found in research on various
psychological variables.
 Know various theories of sex differences.
7.1 PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL I NTERACTION
Vanita and Shrikant were discussing her first date with Parag. Vanita said,
“Paragat first seemed like a nice guy.But eventually, he started displaying
aggression towards the waiter in the restaurant we went.He also dominated
what I should eat f or the dinner that day. He did notevengive me a good
night hug, and when I tried, he acted aggressively!”
The personality characteristics of others affect whether we select them as
dates, friends, or marriage partners. People's personality characteristics
also play a role in the kinds of interpersonal situations they select to enter
and stay in. For example, someone with a personality different from
Vanita's might have been attracted to a man like Parag and could tolerate
his self -centeredness and impatient behaviour.The personality traits of
other people evoke certain responses in us. Parag's aggressive displays
upset Vanita, evoking an emotional response that would not have been
evoked if he had been kinder and more caring.
Personality is also linked to th e ways, in which we try to influence or
manipulate others. The question here is, “What are the strategies that
people use to get what they want from others?” A person may first use a
charming tactic to convey to others and then may use the boasting tactic
and finally use the aggressive tactic. People have different personalities.
So, different people use different tactics of social influence.
7.1.1 Selection:
People choose to face some situations and avoid others. We select social
situations often on the b asis of our personality characteristics in everyday
life. The choices range in importance from trivial ("Should I attend this
party tonight?") to profound ("Should I select this person as my marriage
partner?"). Social selections are decision points that d irect us to choose
one path and avoid another. For example, by selecting a mate, you are
altering your social environment as you are simultaneously selecting the
social acts you will experience and the network of friends and family in
which those acts will be carried out.
Questions arise generally in our mind, whom people select as mates. Are
any common personality characteristics highly desired by anyone? Do we
look for mates similar to our personality or different fromours? And how
is the choice of a mate related to the likelihood that a couple will stay
together overtime?
 Personality characteristics desired in a marriage partner:
What do people want in a marriage partner? munotes.in

Page 124

Personality Psychology
124 One research study attempted to learn this. Asample of 37 participants was
chosen f rom 33 countries, representing every major racial group, religious
group, and political system including Australian, South African and Zulu
people, and Gujarati Indians . The sample varied in socio -economic status.
Standardized questionnaires were translate d into the native language of
each culture and were administered to the samples by native residents of
each culture. This study revealed that personality characteristics are
important in selecting a long -term mate. It revealed that mutual attraction
or lov e was the most desiredorfavoured characteristic by almost everyone.
After love, other characteristics which were importantfor participants, are
a dependable character, emotional stability, and a pleasing disposition.
 Assortative Mating: Search for the Simi lar:
Two competing theorieshave been developed regarding who is attracted to
whom. Also, manyother competing scientific theories have been advanced
regarding the same. Complementary Needs Theory postulates that people
are attracted to those who have differ ent personality dispositions than they
have.For example, submissive people will choose a mate that dominates
and controls them. We can think of this theory with the help of the phrase
“opposites attract”.
Attraction Similarity Theory says that people are a ttracted to those who
have similar personality characteristics. For example, submissive people
will be attracted to people who are submissive. We can think of this theory
with the help of the phrase “Birds of a feather, flock together.”
The Assortative Mat ing phenomenonexplains that people get married to
people who are similar to themselves. For physical characteristics such as
height, weight, and, astonishingly, nose breadth and earlobe length,
couples show positive correlations. Couples who have been toge ther for
the longest, appeared most similar in personality.
Are these positive correlations due to the active selection of mates who are
similar? Or they are by -products of other causal processes?For example,
people may marry each other because they stay c loseby, called “shared
proximity.” Since people in proximity may have certain common
characteristics, the positive correlations found between married couples
may be just a side effect of mating or being with those who are close by,
rather than the active s election of partners who are similar. When we are
born in a particular culture, or go to a college or school, these institutions
may promote associative mating by selecting individuals who are similar
with respect to intelligence, social skills, etc.
Resea rch by Botwin, Buss, & Shackelford(1997) found that the
correlations between people’s personality traits and the traits they desired
in a partner were positive. Those partners who were high on extraversion
wanted to select a partner, who is an extrovert. B ut one caution mentioned
in the study is that the preferences people express for the personalities of
their ideal mates might be influenced by the mates they already have. If an
emotionally stable person has already mated an emotionally stable person,
perhaps they justify their choice by claiming that they are truly attracted to munotes.in

Page 125

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - I
125 the one they are with. That could result in positive correlations between
one's own personality and the personality people express for a desired
mate.Even people who are not mated, show a similar pattern of results.
They prefer those who are similar to themselves, supporting the attraction
similarity theory.
 Do People Get the Mates They Want and Are They Happy?
Many people mate with those who fall short of their ideals. Therefore, we
can predict that individuals whose mates deviate, or are different from
their ideals will be less satisfied than those whose mates embody their
desires. But, a research by Botwin et al.(1997) shows that there are
modest, but consistently positive correlat ions between the personality
desired in a partner and the actual personality characteristics displayed by
the partner. The correspondence or agreement between what one wants
and what one gets is strong for extraversion and intellect -openness. But,
people s eem to get the mates they want in terms of personality.
Let us say if people get what they want in marriage partners, are they
happier than those who do not get what they want? To test this, Botwin et
al. (1997) created difference scores between the prefer ences each
individual expressed for the ideal personality of a mate and assessments of
the spouse's actual personality. The results showed that one's partner's
personality had a substantial effect on marital satisfaction. People were
happy with their relat ionships if they were married to partners who were
high on agreeableness, emotional stability, and openness. And, the
difference scores between the partner's personality and one's ideal for that
personality did not predict marital satisfaction. Thus, it se ems that the key
to marital happiness is having a partner who is agreeable, emotionally
stable, and open, regardless of whether the partner departs in specific ways
from what one wants. It has been found that people married to agreeable
partners are more s atisfied with their sex lives, and view their spouses as
more loving and affectionate, as a source of shared laughter, and as a
source of stimulating conversation.
It was also found that men whose wives score high on conscientiousness
are significantly mor e sexually satisfied as compared to others. Women
whose husbands score high on conscientiousness are more satisfied, and
happier with their spouses as sources of stimulating conversation. Both
men and women whose spouses are high on emotional stability are more
satisfied, view their spouses as sources of encouragement and support, and
enjoy spending time with their spouses. Both men and women whose
spouses score high on openness are generally satisfied with the marriage
and perceive that a lot of love and a ffection are expressed in the marriage.
Optimism also predicts high levels of satisfaction in romantic relationships
overtime.
 Personality and Selective Breakup of Couples:
According to the Violation of Desire Theory, people married to others
who lack desi red characteristics, such as dependability and emotional
stability will frequently dissolve a marriage or a breakup. So, a breakup munotes.in

Page 126

Personality Psychology
126 should occur more when your desires are violated rather than satisfied. We
can also predict that couples who are dissimilar i n personality traits
willbreakup more often than those who fulfil their desires for similarity.
Emotional instability has been a consistent predictor of marital instability
and divorce. One reason why this characteristic is associated with marital
instabil ity and divorce is that emotionally unstable people may experience
jealousy within romantic relationships. Husbands who are low on impulse
control and conscientiousness are good predictors of marital dissolution.
Low agreeableness also predicts marital dis satisfaction and divorce
although this is a less consistent finding. One reason maybe that low
agreeableness and low conscientiousness were associated with sexual
unfaithfulness. Although extraversion and dominance are also related to
sexual promiscuity, t hese variables are not related to marital breakups and
satisfaction.
Other researches point to two other influences of personality on
relationship satisfaction or dissatisfaction. One is the similarity in an
overall personality profile, rather than the sim ilarity in individual
personality traits. The second is the extent of the match between an
individual's conception of an ideal mate and their partner's actual
personality.
 Shyness and Selection of Risky Situations:
Shyness is a tendency to feel anxious, te nse,and worried during social
interactions and anticipating social interactions. Shyness is not unusual, it
is a common phenomenon as more than 90% of people report feeling shy
atleast at some point in their life or the other. But, some people are
disposit ionally shy, and they tend to feel awkward in most social situations
so, tend to avoid situations in which they will be forced to interact with
people. Effects of shyness are well -documented, for example, shy women
avoid others by creating social isolation , are less likely to go to thedoctor
for gynecological exams, put themselves at greater health risk, are less
likely to use contraceptives with sexual partners, etc.
It is also seen that shyness also affects whether a person is willing to
engage in risky s ituation such as gambles. In a research study by Addison
and Schmidt, 1999, it was found that shy women chose smaller bets that
had a high likelihood of winning whereas non -shy women preferred riskier
bets with a low probability of winning, but a larger pa yoff, if they did win.
Thus, shy women avoid choosing risky gambles.
 Other Personality Traits and Selection of Situations:
Here are listed some other personality traits. It is found that those who are
empathetic, choose to volunteer for community activitie s and similar other
activities. People who are high on psychoticism seem to choose volatile
and spontaneous situations more than formal or stable ones. Those high on
machiavellianism (a personality trait marked by slyness, manipulativeness,
and the one who strives for money, power etc.) prefer face -to-face munotes.in

Page 127

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - I
127 situations, as theygive a better chance to practice their socially
manipulative skills to exploit others.
High sensation -seekers are more likely to volunteer for unusual things,
like experimenting with dru gs and sex, in that they may frequently choose
to enter risky situations, engage in unwanted sex when drunk or engage in
risky sexual behaviour, such as having unprotected sex, etc.
7.1.2 Evocation:
Evocation is a way, in which features of our personality elicit reactions
from others. Let us take an example. There are two groups of children.
One group of highly active children and the other onewith less activity. As
compared to less active peers, children who are high in activity elicit or
evoke hostility a nd competitiveness from others. On the other hand, social
interactions of less active children are more peaceful andcalm,
harmonious. Thus, a personality characteristic (in this case, activity level)
evokes a predictable set of social responses from others (hostility and
power struggles).
 Aggression and Evocation of Hostility:
It is seen that aggressive peopleassume that others will be hostile toward
them. One study has shown that aggressive people chronically interpret
ambiguous behaviour from others, such as being bumped into or
mistakenly clashed withsomeone, as intentionally hostile. This is known
as “Hostile Attributional Bias” - the tendency to infer hostile intent on the
part of others in the face of uncertain or unclear behaviour from them.
Because th ey perceive others being hostile towards them, so they also
behave aggressively towards others. And as a result, others aggress back.
Thus, it becomes like a cycle. Thus, aggressive reactions from others
confirm what the aggressive person suspected all alo ng- that the other
person has hostility towards him or her. But, the person with hostile
attributional bias fails to realize that aggression on the part of others is a
product of his or her own aggression thatevokes the same from others by
treating them ag gressively.
 Evocation of Anger and Upset in Partners :
After the initial selection of the partner, there are two ways in which
personality can evoke conflict in close relationships. The first way is that
the person can perform an action that can evoke an em otional response in
a partner. For example, a dominating person can act in a superior manner,
habitually, evoking upset in the partner. The second way is that when a
person evokes actions from others, those actions can inturn upset the
original elicitor. L et us take an example,an aggressive man, may elicit
silent treatment from his mate, which may upset him in return,because she
will not speak to him.
In order to support these two processes, a research study was carried out.
The personality characteristics of both husbands and wives were assessed munotes.in

Page 128

Personality Psychology
128 through three data sources: self -report, a report by partners, and
independent reports by two interviewers. Statistical analyses
wereperformed to determine which personality traits could predict
upsetting spousal be haviour . Results indicated that husbands who were
high on dominance tended to upset their partners by being superior
(treating the opinions of wives as stupid or inferior and putting more value
on their own opinions). The husbands who scored low on
conscie ntiousness, in contrast, tended to upset their wives by having
extramarital affairs – seeing someone else intimately or having sexual
contact with another woman. Husbands low on openness evoked upse tin
their wives by rejecting (ignoring the wife's feelings ), abusing (physically
and verbally), exhibiting self -absorbedbehaviour (focusing too much on
his face and hair), sexually withholding (refusing the wife's sexual
advances), and abusing alcohol (consuming alcohol).
The strongest predictors of evoked anger and upsetting behaviour were the
personality characteristics, such as emotional instability and
disagreeableness. Disagreeable and emotionally unstable husbands upset
their wives inmanyways, such as beingarrogant, neglecting, rejecting,
abusing, showing un faithfulness, being inconsiderate, abusing alcohol, and
being moody, jealous, and possessive.
The personality traits that are found to evoke or reduce conflict in
interpersonal relationships are agreeableness and emotional stability. It has
been found in a study that people high on agreeableness tend to evoke less
interpersonal conflict than people low on agreeableness. One reason
maybe that they tend to use compromise as a way of dealing with conflicts
and people who are low on agreeableness are less willi ng to use
compromise and use physical force and verbal insults to deal with conflict.
The link between personality and conflictscan be seen as early
asduringearly adolescence, for example, young teenagers low in
agreeableness not only evoke more conflicts, but also are more likely to
bevictims by their peers in high school. Also, it was found that people
high on agreeableness use effective conflict resolution strategies, a path
leading to harmonious social interactions. Those high on negative
emotionality ( high neuroticism) were likely to experience more conflict in
all their relationships, whereas those high on positive emotionality (a close
cousin of agreeableness) had less conflict in all of their relationships.
Thus, we can say that agreeableness and emo tional stability are key traits
that are consistently found to be most encouragingin satisfaction in
relationships.
 Evocation through Expectancy Confirmation:
Expectancy confirmation is a phenomenon which means people's beliefs
about the personality charac teristics of others cause them to evoke in
others, actions that are consistent with their initial beliefs. It is also called
a self -fulfilling prophecy. munotes.in

Page 129

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - I
129 In one study regarding this, researchers Synder and Swann(1978) led
people to believe that they would b e dealing with aggressive and hostile
individuals and then researchers introduced two people. People’s beliefs
caused them to behave aggressively with the unsuspecting target. Then,
the behaviour of an unsuspecting target was examined. It was found that
the unsuspecting target acted in a more hostile manner, behaviour that was
evoked by the person who was led to expect hostility. In this example,
beliefs about the personality of the other created the behaviour that
confirmed those initial beliefs.In other w ords, here the belief aboutthe
other person as being aggressive led participants to behave in a hostile
manner towards the unsuspecting target, and then due to the participant’s
aggressive behaviour, the target also responded aggressively.
Thus, we often h ear about the person’s reputation before or following the
actual encounters with the other person. Our beliefs regarding these
personality characteristics have broad effects on evoking behaviour that
confirm our initial beliefs. Sometimes, it is said that if you want to change
your personality, move to a place where people do not know you.Through
the process of expectancy confirmation, people who already know you
may unwittingly evoke in you, thebehaviour that confirms their beliefs,
thereby constraining y our ability to change.
7.1.3 Manipulation: Social Influence tactics:
Manipulation, or social influence, involves all the ways, in which people
intentionally try to change the behaviour of others. We influence each
other all the time. Thus, the term manipul ation is used here descriptively,
with no negative connotation. Natural selection favours people who
successfully manipulate their objects in the environment. Objects can be
unanimated such as tools, and shelter or can be animated, such as parents,
members of different species, etc.
Here,two questions that can be asked are 1) “Are some individuals
consistently more manipulative than others?" and 2) "Given that all people
attempt to influence others, do stable personality characteristics predict the
sorts of tactics that are used?" Do extrovert people more often use the
charm tactic, and introverts use the silent treatment tactic?
 A Taxonomy of Eleven Tactics of Manipulation:
A taxonomy is a classification scheme - the identification and naming of
groups withi n a particular subject field. For example, taxonomies of plants
and animals, have been developed to identify and name all the major plant
and animal groups. In Psychology, the Big -Five personality traits are a
taxonomy, which is an attempt to develop a tax onomy regarding the major
dimensions of personality.
A taxonomy of tactics of manipulation was developed through the
following steps: (1) nominations of acts of influence and (2) factor
analysis of self -reports and observer -reports of the previously nomina ted
acts. The act -nomination procedure is "Please think of your romantic
partner or close friend or mother or father, etc. How do you get this person munotes.in

Page 130

Personality Psychology
130 to do something? What do you do? Please write down specific behaviours
or acts that you perform in order t o get this person to do things. List as
many different sorts of acts as you can.”
After this list was generated, the researchers converted it into a
questionnaire that could be administered via self -report or observer report.
Several participants completed versions of an expanded instrument,
consisting of 83 acts of influence or tactics. Factor analysis was then used
to identify clusters of acts of influence or tactics. After doing Factor -
Analysis (A statistical technique of the data -reduction). Eleven tact ics of
manipulation were discovered as shown in the following table:
Table 7.1 ElevenTactics of Manipulation
Tactic Sample Act
Charm I try to be loving when 1 ask her to do it
Coercion I yell at him until he does it.
Silent treatment I don't respond t o her until she does it
Reason I explain why I want him to do it.
Regression I whine until she does it.
Self-abasement I act submissive so that he will do it.
Responsibility invocation I get her to make a commitment to do it.
Hardball I hit him so tha t he will do it.
Pleasure induction I show her how much fun it will be to do it. Social comparison I tell him that everyone else is doing it.
Monetary reward I offer her money so that she will do it.
Source: R.J. Larsen and D.M. Buss (2009). Personalit y Psychology:
Domains of Knowledge about human nature(4th ed.). McGraw Hill.
 Sex Differences in Tactics of Manipulation:
Do men and women differ in their use of tactics of manipulation? In
research by Buss(1992), it was found thatwomen and men equally
performed almost all of the tactics of social influence. There was only a
small exception regarding the regression tactic. In dating couples and
married couples, women more than men reported more frequent use of the
regression tactic, including crying, whining , pouting, and sulking to get
their way. The differencewas quite small.Thus, supporting the overall
conclusion that men and women, in general, are similar in their
performance of tactics of manipulation.
munotes.in

Page 131

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - I
131  Personality Predictors of Tactics of Manipulation :
Whether people with particular personality traits are more likely to use
particular tactics of manipulation? More than 200 participants rated each
act of influence on the degree to which they used it in each of four
relationships: spouse, friend, mother, a nd father. Correlations were then
computed between the personality traits of the participants and their use of
each tactic of manipulation.
Findings indicated that those scoring relatively high on dominance
(extraversion) tended to use coercion, such as de manding, threatening,
cursing, and criticizing, in order to get their way. Highly dominant people
tended to use responsibility invocation, getting others to make
commitments to a course of action and saying that it was their duty to do
it. People low on do minance (relatively submissive individuals) used the
self-abasement tactic as a means of influencing others. They also tended to
use the hardball tactic - deception, lying, degradation, and even violence.
Agreeable people used pleasure induction and reason . Those who were
disagreeable used silent treatment and coercion. Low -agreeable
individuals are also likely to take revenge on people whom they have
perceived as they have done something wrong to them in some way. They
tend to be more selfish in their use of collective resources, whereas a high
agreeable individuals exercise more self -restraining behaviourwhen the
group's resources are scarce or threatened.
Conscientiousness is relatedto only one tactic of manipulation. They
explained why they want the othe r person to do something, provide logical
explanations for wanting it done, and explain the underlying rationale for
doing it. Peoplewho are low on conscientiousnessare more likely to use
criminal strategies in gaining resources.
Emotionally unstable indivi duals use force and also the use of monetary
rewards. They also most commonly use regression. Thus, this kind of
behaviour comes close to the definition of emotional instability – the
display of unstable emotions, some positive and some negative. People
high on Intellect -Openness use the tactic of reason above all other tactics
as they are smart, perceptive, pleasure inductive and responsibility
invocative. On the other hand, people low on Intellect -Openness use the
tactic of social comparison, that is comp aring the partner with someone
else who would do it, and telling others that they will look stupid if they
do not do it.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS:
 What are tactics of manipulation?
7.1.4 Panning Back: An overview of Personality and Social
interaction:
The most important message we should take is that personality does not
passively reside within the individual, but reaches out and profoundly munotes.in

Page 132

Personality Psychology
132 affects each person’s social environment. Let us consider selection first. In
the physical habitat, an introvert is more l ikely to “choose/select” a rural
habitat whereas an extrovert is likely to choose a city with a lot of
opportunities for social interaction. In the social domain, an extrovert will
select a mate, who is extraverted and an introvertwill select a mate, who i s
introverted.
For the process of evocation, in the social domain, narcissistic people
evoke admiration from their followers and contempt from those who
dislike their unbridled self -centeredness. For the process of manipulation,
research has shown that per sonality affects how people mould and modify
the rooms in which they live. Those who are high onopenness will
decorate their rooms with unconventional, fashionable and stylish objects,
books and CDs that are highly varied in genre. People low on openness
have fewer and more conventional decorations, a narrower range of books
and a limited collection of CDs. In the social area, disagreeable
individuals are more likely to use "silent treatment" as a tactic of
manipulationthan emotionally stable people. Those high in Intellect -
Openness tend to use reason and rationality to get their way.
Thus, personality affects the mates and friends that a person chooses as
well as the environments a person decides to enter or avoid (selection); the
reactions elicited from ot hers and the physical environment (evocation);
and the ways, in which one's physical and social environments are altered
once inhabited (manipulation). See Figure 7.1.
Figure 7.1 Personality and social interaction

{Source: Buss D.M. & Larsen R.J. (2009). Personality Psychology:
Domains of knowledge about human nature (4th ed.).McGraw Hill.}
Further research is needed to determine whether the causal arrows in the
figure run in both directions. Does the choice of a mate who is similar in
personality, for ex ample, create a social environment that reinforces the
personality and makes it more stable over time? Does the wide variety of
manipulative tactics used by emotionally unstable individuals (from
hardball to threats to sulking, whining, and pouting) create a social
environment that is indeed rocked with greater turmoil, thus maintaining
the personality disposition of neuroticism?
munotes.in

Page 133

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - I
133 7.2 SEX -GENDER AND PERSONALITY
People are intrinsically fascinated with the psychological sex differences
mentioned here.First, average differences between women and men in
personality or behaviour. Second, many people are concerned with the
political implications of findings of sex differences. Will such findings be
used to foster gender stereotypes (beliefs about how men and wome n
differ or are supposed to differ, in contrast to what the actual differences
are)? Will such findings be used to oppress women?People are concerned
with the practical implications of sex differences in their everyday lives.
Will knowledge of sex differen ces help us, for example, understand and
communicate better with others?
7.2.1 The Science And Politics of Studying Sex and Gender:
Few topics have generated as much controversy as the topic of sex
differences. Some people worry that findings of sex differ ences might be
used to support certain political agendas, such as excluding women from
leadership or work roles. Still, others worry that findings of sex
differences might be used to support the status quo, such as keeping men
in power and women out of pow er. Some people argue that findings of sex
differences merely reflect gender stereotypes rather than real differences.
Some psychologists argue that any discovery of sex differences merely
reflects the biases of the scientists and they are not an objective
description of reality.
Psychologist Roy Baumeister advocated that the study on sex differences
must be stopped because sex differences may conflict with the ideas of
egalitarianism, although he has reversed his views on this and published
articles on sex differences.
On the other hand, the Feminist Psychologist Alice Eagly (1995) argues
that sex differences exist, they are consistent across studies, and they
should not be ignored merely because they are perceived to conflict with
certain political agendas . She says that feminists who try to minimize
these differences or pretend that they do not exist, actually hamper the
feminist agenda and present a dogma that is outoftouch with reality. Janet
Hyde, argue that sex differences have been exaggerated and the re is so
much overlap between the sexes on most personality traits that the
differences are minimal.
 History of the Study of Sex Differences:
The study of sex differences has a fascinating history within psychology.
Little attention was paid to sex differe nces before 1973and in
psychological research, participants used to be of only one sex, males.
And even when participants were of both genders, a few articles analyzed
or reported whether the effects differed for men and women.
All these things changed in the early 1970s. In 1974, Eleanor Maccoby
and Carol Jacklyn published a classic book titled‘ The Psychology of Sex
Differences ’, in which they reviewed hundreds of studies and then drew munotes.in

Page 134

Personality Psychology
134 conclusions about how men and women differed.Their conclusion was that
women were slightly better than males in verbal ability and men were
slightly better than women in mathematical and spatial ability.In terms of
personality characteristics, they concluded that men were more aggressive
than women. With other aspects of pers onality and social behaviour, they
concluded that there was not enough evidence to determine whether men
and women differed. They concluded that sex differences were less or few
in number and trivial in importance.
Many research studies were conducted on t he topicafter thisbook. The
book itself was criticized on various grounds. Some argued that many
more sex differences existed than mentioned in the book by the authors.
Also, the method by which authors drew their conclusions was crude with
respect to toda y’s standard.Following the publication of the book, the
journals began to change their reporting practices.There began the
explosion of research and thousands of studies conducted on sex
differences.
Since Maccoby and Jacklyn's early work, researchers have developed a
more precise quantitative procedure for examining conclusions across
studies and for determining sex differences, called a meta -analysis.Meta -
analysis is a statistical method for summarizing the findings of large
numbers of individual studies. Meta -analysis allows researchers to
calculate with greater objectivity and precision whether a particular
difference (such as a sex difference) isconsistent across studies. It also
allows researchers to estimate how large the difference,in reality, iscalle d
the effect size.
 Calculation of Effect Size: How Large are the Sex Differences?
The most commonly used statistic in meta -analysis is effect size or ‘d’
statistic. It is used to indicate a difference in standard deviation units. How
to interpret “d”?
A d of 1.00 means that the difference between the groups is one full
standard deviation (S.D.)A d of 0.25 means -the difference between the
groups is one -quarter of S.D. An effect size can be calculated for each
study of sex differences and then averaged across studies to give a more
precise and objective assessment of whether and how much sex
differences exist.
Most meta -analyses have adopted a convention for interpreting effect sizes
as follows:
Table 7.2Interpretation of Effect Sizes
d score Meaning
0.20 or -0.20 Small difference
0.50 or -0.50 Medium difference
0.80 or -0.80 Large difference munotes.in

Page 135

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - I
135 {Source: R.J. Larsen and D.M. Buss (2009). Personality Psychology:
Domains of Knowledge about human nature (4th ed.). McGraw Hill}.
Positive d -scores, such as 0.20 or 0.50, indicate that men score higher than
women. Negative d -scores, such as -0.20 or -0.50, indicate that women
score higher than men. For example, a d -score of -0.85 means that women
score much higher on a particular trait.
Let us take an example. Which s ex can throw the ball faster? Although
individual differences in ball throwing exist, it is generally clear that men,
on an average, throw the ball faster than women. One researcher reported
that d is approximately 2.00.It means that the sexes differ, on a verage, by
2 standard deviations, which is quite large.
Let us take another example. Which sex scores higher in verbal ability? It
turns out that women are slightly better than men, but the d is only - 0.11.
Findings from most research tell us that men and women are generally the
same with respect to cognitive abilities, but only one exception is in the
realm of spatial ability. The d value for spatial ability is 0.73, which comes
close to the standard for "large".
It is important to keep in mind that even large effect sizes for average sex
differences do not necessarily have implications for any one particular
individual. Even with a d of 2.00 for throwing a ball(distance/spatial
ability), some women can throw a ball much farther than the average man
and so me men cannot throw a ball as far as the average woman.
 Minimalists and Maximalists:
Those who describe sex differences as small and inconsequential are
called “Minimalists". They say, first, empirically most research findings
show a small magnitude of eff ect arguing that any personality variable
shows tremendous overlap in men and women. Second is that if the sex
differences are small, they have little practical importance and do not have
much consequences on people’s lives, so it is important to focus on other
psychological issues.
Maximalists argue that themagnitude of sex differences is equal to the
magnitude of other effects in psychology and should be regarded as small
or trivialized. Accordingly,some sex differences tend to be small in
magnitude, wher eas others are large in magnitude, and many are in the
moderate range. Eagly, a Maximalist, notes that even small sex differences
can have large practical importance. A small sex difference in the
proclivity to help other people, for example, could result in a large sex
difference in the number of lives each sex aids over the longrunin times of
distress.
7.2.2 Sex Differences in Personality :
The five -factor model of personality provides a convenient framework for
organizing many findings about sex differenc es in personality.
munotes.in

Page 136

Personality Psychology
136  Temperament in Children:
Temperament reflects biologically -based emotional and behavioural
consistencies that occur early in life and predict in conjunction with other
factors -patterns and outcomes in several other domains, such as
psychopathology and personality.
One research included a massive meta -analysis ever undertaken on sex
differences in temperament in children.The researchers found that
inhibitory control (the ability to control inappropriate responses and
behaviours) showed t he largest sex difference, d = -0.41, considered in a
moderate range. Inhibitory control is related to the later development of
conscientiousness. The sex difference appears to get less or fade, as adult
men and women do not differ much in conscientiousnes s. Perceptual
sensitivity (The ability to detect subtle stimuli from the
environment)showed a sex difference favouring girls. Thus, girls are more
sensitive than boys in perceptual sensitivity.
Surgency (A cluster of approach behaviour, high inactivity and high
impulsivity) showed a sex difference with boys scoring higher than girls.
The combination of high surgency and low inhibitory control may account
for the fact that boys land up with more disciplinary difficulties in school
than girls in early life. I n addition, this combination may also account for
males scoring high on physical aggressiveness than girls. The contexts in
which this sex difference emerged, however, were quite specific, leading
the authors to suggest that "gender differences in personal ity can be
conceptualized as patterns of social adaptation that are complex and
context -specific".
Is there any dimension in which boys and girls show no sex difference?
Yes! That is the negative affectivity,which includes anger, difficulty,
amount of dist ress, and sadness. Only on the component of fearfulness, it
was found that girls were slightly more fearful than boys. This general
lack of gender difference in negative affectivity is interesting, because it is
closely connected with emotional instability , which does show a moderate
sex difference in adulthood. Else -Quest and her colleagues (2006)
speculate that gender stereotypes – beliefs that females are more emotional
than males – maylead to the actual development of the gender difference
in adulthood, given the negligible gender difference among children.
 Five-Factor Model:
The Five -Factor Model is a broad set of personality traits within which we
can examine whether men and women differ.
1) Extraversion :
Three facets of extraversion have been examined f or sex differences:
gregariousness, assertiveness, and activity. A study of personality in 50
different cultures revealed a relatively small gender difference. Women
score slightly higher on gregariousness than men, but the difference is
quite small. Men s core very slightly higher on activity level. A study of munotes.in

Page 137

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - I
137 personality in 50 different cultures revealed a relatively small gender
difference in extraversion. The only subscale of extraversion showing
observable gender difference is Assertiveness, with men sc oring
moderately higher than females on that. A related study also showed that
men placed more importance on the value of power than womendo.It
means that men value social status and dominance more than women.
Thus, men are more likely to interrupt the con versation than women.An
important source of conflict between the sexes – unwanted interruptions of
dialogue – may stem from this moderate sex difference in assertiveness.
2) Agreeableness :
The 50 -culture study revealed a small to medium sex difference
(d = -0.32) was found in agreeableness, with women scoring higher than
men. Older adults (age 65 -98) also show a similar pattern with women
scoring higher on this facet than men. On the facet of trust in
agreeableness (the proclivity to cooper ate with others, giving others the
benefit of the doubt, and viewing one's fellow human beings as basically
good at heart), women scored higher than men. On tender -mindedness,
another facet of agreeableness (a nurturant tendency – having empathy for
others and being sympathetic with those who are downtrodden), women
scored substantially higher than men.
Meta -analyses of smiling show that women smile more often than men,
with an effect size of - 0.60. If smiling reflects agreeableness, we can
conclude that w omen are more agreeable than men.Aggressiveness is at
the opposite end of agreeableness. In general, the effect sizes for
aggression are largest for projective tests, such as the TAT (d = 0.86), the
next largest for peer report measures of aggression (d = 0.63), and the
smallest for self -report measures of aggression (d = 0.40). Worldwide,
men commit roughly 90% of all homicides, and most of the victims of
these homicides are other than men. Men are also involved in gang
warsand various violent crimes. The largest sex differences in violent
crimes show up just after puberty, peaking in adolescence and the early
twenties. After age 50, violent crimes of all sorts start to reduce, and men
and women become much more similar to each other in criminal
aggressiven ess.
3) Conscientiousness :
The 50 -cultures study revealed a negligible sex difference on this factor.
The effect size of sex differences in conscientiousness is d = -0.13. This
means that women and men are essentially the same on this dimension.
Even very sm all effects can sometimes have large cumulative effects over
time. For example, a small difference in offeringan order between
marriage partners may result in a large number of arguments about the
house -cleaning over the course of a year.
4) EmotionalStabilit y:
At one end of the dimension are those who are steady, calm, and stable.
One can label this end "emotionally stable." The opposite end is munotes.in

Page 138

Personality Psychology
138 characterized by volatility and changeability of mood. The 50 -cultures
studyrevealedthe largest sex difference (d= -0.49)in emotional stability
whichindicated that women are moderately lower than men on this
dimension. This pattern is true even in the case of older adults.
5) Intellect -Openness to Experience :
The 50 -cultures study revealed no sex differences on this fact or (d= -
0.05). Openness means the range of thoughts or concepts that a person
entertains. Botwin et al. (1997) studied sex differences in Intellect -
Openness to experience using three data sources: self -report, spouse
report, and independent interviewer rep orts (one male and one female
interviewer). Separate analyses of these three data sources yielded no sex
differences in Openness -Intellect.
 Basic emotions: Frequency and Intensity:
The most extensive research studied 2,199 Australians and an international
sample of 6,868 participants drawn from 41 different countries (Brebner,
2003). Eightfundamental emotions were studied, four "positive" emotions
(Affection, Joy, Contentment, and Pride) and four "negative" emotions
(Fear, Anger, Sadness, and Guilt). Partic ipants used rating scales to
indicate how frequently or often they experienced each emotion andthe
intensity with which they experienced each emotion. Table 3 summarizes
the basic findings of the research.
Table 7.3Basic Emotions: Frequency and Intensity
Emotion Frequency Intensity
Positive emotions 0.20 0.23
Affection (Positive emotion) 0.30 0.25
Joy 0.16 0.26
Contentment 0.13 0.28
Pride NS NS
Negative emotions 0.14 0.25
Fear 0.17 0.26
Anger 0.05 0.14
Sadness 0.16 0.28
Guilt NS (Not significant) 0.07
{Source: Buss D.M. & Larsen R.J. (2009). Personality Psychology:
Domains of knowledge about human nature (4th ed.).McGraw Hill}. munotes.in

Page 139

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - I
139 As shown in the table, there are small, but statistically significant
differences in the experience of emotions in this i nternational sample. The
study has shown that women experience both positive and negative
emotions more frequently and intensely than mendo. In the positive areas,
affection and joy show the largest sex differences. Pride, shows no sex
difference in either frequency or intensity. In the negative areas, women
experience fear and sadness more than men, especially in the reported
intensity of the experience. Guilt, in contrast, shows a minimal sex
difference in intensity and no sex difference in frequency —perhaps
contradicting the stereotype that women are more guilt -prone than men.
These results must be qualified in two ways. First, the effect sizes are
generally small. Next, other research has revealedthat more specialized
explorations of emotions reveal some reversals of these sex differences,
such as women experiencing more intense jealousy in response to the
emotional infidelity of a partner. One of the most common complaints that
women express about men is that they donot express their emotions
enough (Bus s, 2003). Menoften complain that women are too emotional.
The results point to one possible reason for these complaints – perhaps
men donot express their emotions, because they literally donot experience
emotions as frequently or as intensely as womendo.
 Other Dimensions of Personality :
Self-Esteem: It is how we feel good about ourselves. Research has
explored many facets of self -esteem, such as self -esteem in athletic
abilities, social skills, etc. One far -measured component is Global Self -
Esteem - “The lev el of global regard one has for self as a person.” It can
range from highly positive to highly negative and reflects an overall
evaluation of self.
People with high self -esteem appear to cope better with the stresses and
strains of daily life. When faced w ith negative feedback about one's
performance, people with high self -esteem perform better on cognitive
tasks. They tend to take credit for their successes, but deny responsibility
for their failure.
The overall effect size is relatively small, with men sc oring slightly higher
than females in self -esteem (d = 0.21). Young children (ages 7 -10) showed
only a slight sex difference in self -esteem {d = 0.16). As the children
approached adolescence, the gap between the sexes widened or expanded.
At ages 11 -14, d was 0.23. The sex difference was at its peak during the
ages of 15 -18 (d = 0.33).
Females seem to have lower self -esteem than males as they hit their mid -
to late teens. In adulthood, the self -esteem gap starts to close. During the
age range 19 -22, the eff ect size shrinks to 0.18. During the ages of 23 -59,
the sexes come even closer, with a d of 0.10. From age 60 on up, the d is
only0.03, which means that the males and females are virtually identical in
self-esteem.
munotes.in

Page 140

Personality Psychology
140 The magnitude of all these effects is ve ry small, and even during
adolescence, the gap between the sexes is the widest. So, it is not true that
women’s self -esteem is permanently ruined. Even small differences in
self-esteem can be extremely important to day -to-day well -being, so this
sex differ ence cannot be dismissed.
Sexuality andMating : Meta -analyses show profound sex differences in
certain aspects of sexual desire, motivation, and attitudes. It was found
that men have a more favourable attitude towards casual sex than women
(d = 0.81). Can m en and women be just friends? It turns out that men have
more difficulty than women in just being friends with the opposite sex.
Men are more likely than women to initiate afriendship with someone of
the opposite sex because they are sexually attracted to them; more likely to
become sexually attracted to the opposite sex friendsin reality, and men
dissolve friendships if such friendships do not result in sex.
Not all men, but men who have hostile masculinity (domineering and
degrading attitudes towards wome n), men who lack empathy and are
narcissistic, are more sexually aggressive than women in the form that
forcing women to have sex when they express an unwillingness to have
sex.
People -Things Dimension : People who score toward the "things" end of
the dimen sion prefer vocations that deal with impersonal objects, like
machines, tools, or materials. Examples of such people include carpenters,
auto mechanics, building contractors, tool makers, and farmers. Those
scoring toward the "people" end of the dimension prefer social
occupations, which include thinking about others, caring for others, or
directing others. The correlation between sex and the people -things
dimension is .56, or a d of roughly 1.35, which means that men are more
likely to score at the things end of the dimension, and women are more
likely to score at the people end of the dimension.
When girls are asked to describe themselves spontaneously, they are more
likely than boys to make references to their close relationships. They value
personal qual ities linked to group harmony, such as sensitivity to others.
They are more likelyto identify their personal relationships as central to
their identity.
7.2.3 Masculinity, Femininity, Androgyny and Sex roles:
In the 1930s, it was found that men and women d iffered on personality
items in large inventories. Researchers assumed that the differences could
be described by a single personality dimension, with masculinity at one
end and femininity at the other end. A person who scored high on
masculinity was assum ed to score low on femininity. Researchers thought
that all could be located on this single personality dimension known as
Masculinity -Feminity. But does a single scale with masculinity and
femininity really capture the important individual differences? Ca n't
someone be both masculine and feminine? This question takes us to a new
concept - Androgyny. munotes.in

Page 141

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - I
141  The Search for Androgyny:
New researchers started with the premise that masculinity and femininity
are independent dimensions. Thus, one can be high on both, or , low on
both. Or, one can be stereotypically masculine, which means high on
masculinity and low on femininity or stereotypically feminine, which
means high on Femininity and low on masculinity. Two major personality
instruments were published in 1974 to a ssess people using this new
conception of sex roles (Bern, 1974; Spence, Helmreich, & Stapp, 1974).
The masculinity dimension contained items reflecting assertiveness,
boldness, dominance, self -sufficiency, and instrumentality.
The femininity dimension con tained items that reflected nurturance,
expression of emotions, and empathy. Those who agreed with personality
trait terms connoting these qualities scored high on femininity. Those who
scored high on both dimensions were labelled androgynous, to reflect t he
notion that a single person could possess both masculine and feminine
characteristics. Researchers who developed these measureswere of the
view that androgynous persons are most highly developed as it was
believed that they had the most valuable element s of both sexes. They
were presumed to be liberated from the shackles of traditional notions of
sex roles.
This approach of androgyny led to the concept of feminism in America as
women started working in the workforce, and men also began to opt for
more nu rturant roles. The new androgynous conception of sex roles was
not without its critics. The new scales were criticized on several aspects.
Like, items on the inventories and their correlations with each other.
Researchers assumed that masculinity and femin inity were single
dimensions. Other researchers arguedthat both constructs were
multidimensionalin reality, containing many facets. Another criticism is
that masculinity and femininity, indeed, consist of a single, bipolar trait.
In response to these criti cisms, the originators of androgyny changed their
views as one author believes that their instrument does not measure sex
roles, but measures personality characteristics of instrumentality and
expressiveness. Instrumentality consists of personality traits that involve
working with objects, getting tasks completed in a direct manner, showing
independence from others, and displaying self -sufficiency.
Expressivenessis the ease with which one can express emotions, such as
crying, showing empathy for the trouble s of others, and showing
nurturance to those in need.
Another author also says that the inventory measures gender schemata and
cognitive orientations that lead individuals to process social information
on the basis of sex -linked associations. Thus, the ide a is not to be
androgynous, but to be gender -aschematic. That is, the ideais not to use
gender at all in one's processing of social information. Findings generally
suggest that genes also play a role, even within each gender in the degree
to which the sex roles are adopted, but environmental influences also
affect them. munotes.in

Page 142

Personality Psychology
142  Gender Stereotypes:
Stereotypes are beliefs that we hold regarding the way, in which the sexes
differ regardless of whether those beliefs are accurate reflections of
reality. Gender stereoty pes have three components. The first component is
cognitive,which deals with the ways, in which we form social categories.
The second component is affective, while the third component is
behavioural. For example, you may discriminate against someone
(Actio n/behavioural component) simply because he belongs in a social
category —in this case, "man."
In most of the studies, it was found that women, compared with men, were
commonly seen as more affiliative, deferent, heterosexual, nurturant, and
self-abasing (Co mmunal) oriented towards the group. Men are perceived
to be more instrumental, asserting their independence from the group. In
addition to general gender stereotypes, studies show that most people have
more finely differentiated stereotypical views of each sex. Stereotypes of
women fell into a smaller number of subtypes. One might be called the
"classically feminine" subtype, which includes housewives, secretaries,
and maternal women. A second subtype is defined by short -term or overt
sexuality, which inclu des sex bombs, tarts, and vamps.A third stereotype
of women, however, involves a subtype that may have emerged relatively
recently, perhaps over the past 20 or 30 years – the confident, intellectual,
liberated career woman.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS:
 Explain th e concept of Androgyny.
7.2.4 Theories of Sex Differences:
 Socialization and Social Roles :
The most widely held theory, Socialization theory – the notion that boys
and girls become different because they are reinforced by parents,
teachers, and the medi a for boys being "masculine," and girls for being
"feminine." For example, boys are given baseball bats and trucks. Girls are
given dolls. Boys are praised for engaging in rough -and-tumble play. Girls
are praised for being cute, and obedient. Boys are puni shed for crying.
Girls are comforted when they cry. Over time, according to socialization
theory, children learn behaviours deemed appropriate for their sex.
In Bandura’s social learning theory, boys and girls also learn by observing
the behaviours of othe rs, called models of their own sex. Boys observe
their fathers, male teachers, and male peers. Girls observe their mothers,
female teachers, and female peer models. Overtime, through direct
reinforcement, the model provides guidance for behaviours that are
masculine or feminine.
Studies of socialization practices have found that both mothers and fathers
encourage dependency more in girls than in boys (J. H. Block, 1983).
Parents encourage girls to stay close to home, and boys are permitted or munotes.in

Page 143

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - I
143 even encourage d to roam. Fathers get involved in more physical play with
their sons than with their daughters. Fathers do not interact with their
daughters as frequently as with their sons (Whiting & Edwards, 1988).
Girls in most cultures tend to be assigned more domest ic chores than boys.
In most cultures, boys are permitted to stay far from home than girlsareand
are socialized to be more competitive than girlsare. Girls are trained to be
more nurturant than boys. In the majority of cultures, the parents tried to
teach their daughters to delay having sexual intercourse, whereas the boys
were encouraged to have sexual intercourse.
One potential difficulty, however, pertains to the direction of effects –
whether parents are socializing children in sex -linked ways or whethe r
children are eliciting their parents' behaviour to correspond to their
existing sex -linked preferences.For example, parents may buy a variety of
toys for boys and girls. But, if girls show no interest in trucks and boys
show no interest in dolls, parents may stop purchasing masculine toys for
girls and feminine toys for boys. Another problem with traditional theories
of socialization is that they provide no account of the origins of
differential parental socialization practices. Why do parents want their
boys and girls to grow up differently?
According to this theory, sex differences originate because men and
women are distributed differently into different occupational and family
roles. Men are expected to devote themselves to the bread -winning role.
Wome n are expected to assume the homemaker role. Over time, children
learn thesebehaviours that are linked to these roles.But, like socialization
theory, however, social role theory fails to provide an account of the
origins of sex -linked roles. This theory is becoming increasingly testable
as family and occupational roles change. Women are pursuing bread -
winning roles more often than in the past, and men are pursuing greater
responsibility for domestic duties. With these changes, if social role theory
is corre ct, sex differences should decrease as well. The countries that are
most sexually egalitarian – which give most equal access to education and
knowledge and the greatest levels of economic wealth – showthe largest
sex differences in personality.
 Hormonal Th eories:
Men and women differ because the sexes have different underlying
hormones. It is these physiological differences, not differential social
treatment, that cause boys and girls to diverge over development. There is
some evidence that hormonal influen ces on sex differences begin in utero.
The hormonal bath that the developing fetus is exposed to, for example,
might affect both the organization of the brain and consequently the
gendered interests and activities of the individual. Good evidence for this
comes from a condition called Congenital Adrenal hyperplasia (CAH), in
which the female fetus has an overactive adrenal gland. This results in the
female being hormonally masculinized.
Some research studieshave attemptedto identify links between hormones,
such as testosterone (present in greater amounts in men) and sex -linked munotes.in

Page 144

Personality Psychology
144 behaviour. There are even sex differences in the circulation of testosterone
levels. sex differences in circulating testosterone are linked with some of
the traditional sex differences found in behaviour, such as aggression,
dominance, and career choice. In women, high levels of testosterone are
associated with pursuing a more masculine career and having greater
success within the chosen career. Also, higher testosterone levels are
linked with greater dominance and aggressiveness in both sexes.
Sexual desire is linked to levels of circulating testosterone. Women's
testosterone levels peak just prior to ovulation, and women report a peak
in their sexual desire at precisely the same time. Men whose testosterone
level is high also report a higher level of sexual motivation.But,correlation
does not mean causation. There is some evidence in nonhuman primates
that rises in testosterone levels follow rises in status and dominance within
the grou p, rather than cause them.
An additional limitation of hormonal theories of sex differences in
personality is one shared with socialization theories – that is, neither of
these theories identifies the origins of the differences.
 Evolutionary Psychology The ory:
Men and women are predicted to be essentially the same in domains where
they have faced similar adaptive problems. They are assumed to be
different in those domains where they have faced different adaptive
challenges. Here, adaptive problems mean the problems that need to be
solved for survival and reproduction.For example, men and women show
similarities in food preferences for sugar, fat, protein, etc. These
preferences point out an adaptive problem of getting calories and nutrients
to survive.
In th e domain of mating, men and women have faced different adaptive
problems.For example, women must carry and keepan embryo for nine
months inorder to reproduce and men only do that with a single act of sex.
Thus, women have faced the adaptive problem of secu ring resources to
carry them through harsh winters or droughts, when resources might be
scarce and a woman's mobility might be restricted by the burden of
pregnancy. The costs of making a poor choice of a mate, according to this
logic, would have been more damaging to women than to men. Thus,
women’s mate preferencesarefor men who have the ability and willingness
to invest in them and their children.
On the other hand, men are predicted to be sexually cruel and more
aggressive than other men because they co mpete with other men for
opportunities for sexual access to women. Because of women’s heavy
investment, they become extraordinarily valuable reproductive resources
over which men compete. Women are more selective than men. An act of
casual sex will be more reproductively beneficial for an ancestral man
than an ancestral woman. Research has shown us that men desire a larger
number of sex partners, seek sex after a shorter time period has elapsed in
knowing a potential partner, and have more fantasies about c asual sex than
womendo. munotes.in

Page 145

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - I
145 But, this perspective alsoleaves some questions unanswered for us: What
accounts for individual differences within each sex? Why are some
women very much interested in casual sex? Why are some men meek,
dependent, and nurturing, whe reas others are callous and aggressive?
Some women benefit greatly from having a short -term sexual strategy,
which can lead to obtaining more and better resources, switching to a mate
who is better than her regular mate, and possibly securing better genes for
her offspring.
 An Integrated Theoretical Perspective:
The theoretical accounts we have examined seem very different, but they
are not necessarily incompatible. To some extent, they operate at different
levels of analysis. An Integrated Theoretical Pers pective will take into
account all the levels of analysis because they are clearly compatible with
one another. It has been found that parents have an interest in socializing
boys and girls differently, and these differences are universal. There is
also ev idence that both sexes change their behaviour according to the roles
to which they are assigned. For example, both become dominant in a
supervisor role, both become submissive when being supervised. Thus,
socialization theories play a role in an integrated theory of sex differences.
Men and women clearly differ in circulating testosterone levels, and these
differences are linked with differences in sexuality, aggression,
dominance, and career interests. Although, we cannot ignore the casual
possibility, tha t, being in a dominant position causes the testosterone level
to rise. Thus, social roles and hormones are closely linked and this finding
is important for an integrated theory of sex differences. These proximate
paths - socialization and hormones - might provide the answers to how the
sexes differ, whereas evolutionary psychology provides the answers to
why the sexes differ.
But, it is true that all the 3 levels of analysis - current social factors,
circulating hormones and evolutionary processes are needed for a
complete understanding of gender and personality.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS:
 What is Evolutionary Psychology theory?
7.3 SUMMARY
In this unit, we began by understanding the three processes of personality:
i) Selection , which means that we select situatio ns or avoid situations
based on our personality dispositions, ii) Evocation , which means that
personality qualities of othersevoke certain responses in us, and iii)
Manipulation , personality influences the ways, in which we try to
influence or manipulate o thers. We also saw the different aspects that
selection affects such as personality characteristics desired in marriage
partners, the effect of shyness on selecting risky situations, etc. We also
saw factors, such as aggressionand expectancy confirmation i n evocation.
We also learned the tactics of manipulation used by both sexes. munotes.in

Page 146

Personality Psychology
146 Then, we saw how the study of sex differences evolved through History,
the important factor of “Effect size” when analyzing sex differences. We
also had a look at sex differences in temperament, basic emotions and sex
differences on the factors of the Five -Factor model. We were also
introduced to a newer concept of androgyny, related concepts of
instrumentality and expressiveness, etc.
We also looked at some theories and their vary ing views regarding why
and how sexes differ, namely the socialization, hormonal and evolutionary
views on why and how sexes differ.
7.4 QUESTIONS
1. Write long answers:
a. Explain the concept of “selection” and the related concept of
assortative mating, pers onality characteristics desired in a marriage
partner and shyness and selection of risky situations.
b. Explain the concept of “manipulation”. The taxonomy of 11 tactics of
manipulation and sex differences in manipulation and personality
predictors of tactics of manipulation.
c. Comment on the science and politics of studying gender,the history of
the study of sex differences, the calculation of effect size, and the
views of minimalists and maximalists.
d. Explain socialization/social roles theory and Evolutionary T heory of
sex differences.
2. Write short notes:
a) Evocation through expectancy confirmation.
b) Evocation of anger and upset in partners.
c) Sex differences in the Five -Factor Model.
d) Hormonal Theories of sex differences.
7. 5 REFERENCES
1) Buss D. M. & Larsen R. J. ( 2009). Personality Psychology: Domains
of Knowledge About Human Nature (4th ed.). NJ: McGraw ‐Hill
Humanities.
2) Myers, D. G. (2013). Psychology. (10thed.). Customized edition for
Mumbai University. Macmillan Publishers India Ltd.


munotes.in

Page 147

147 8
SOCIO -CULTURAL AND ADJUSTMENT
DOMAIN - II
Unit Structure :
8.0 Objectives
8.1 Culture and Personality
8.1.1 Cultural Violations: An Illustration
8.1.2 What is Cultural Personality Psychology?
8.1.3 Three Major Approaches to Culture
8.2 Stress, Copi ng, Adjustment and Health
8.2.1 The Models of Personality -Illness Connection
8.2.2 The concept of Stress
8.2.3 Coping strategies and styles
8.2.4 Type A and Cardiovascular Disease
8.3 Summary
8.4 Questions
8.5 References
8.0 OBJECTIVES
After studyi ng this unit, you should be able to:
 Understand how culture affects personality
 Understand the three major approaches to understanding personality
across cultures
 Understand stress and coping
 Grasp the link between Type A behaviour and cardiovascular dise ase.
8.1 CULTURE AND PERSONALITY
Let us begin with an example. There are two groups of cultural heritage:
High -land Yanomamo Indians and low -land Yanomamo Indians. Both
differ in various personality traits, such as the low -land people fighting,
raiding the neighbouring villages when food stock goes down, showing
aggressive tendencies, beating wives, etc. The high -land people are more munotes.in

Page 148

Personality Psychology
148 peaceful and dislike fighting, are more agreeable, not raiding the
neighbouring villages. The question is how can we understa nd the
differences between the personality of high and low -land Yanomamo
Indians? Was one group temperamentally more disposed to aggression
than the other group? Or, did the two groups begin the same, and only
subsequently did cultural values took place in one group which is different
from those that took place in another group? Other questions that we will
try to find out in this unit are “What is the effect of culture on
personality?”, “What is the effect of personality on culture?”, a nd “How
can we under stand patterns of cultural variation amid patterns of human
universals?”
Personality psychologists explore personality across cultures because they
want to find out whether concepts of personality in one culture are also
applicable in other cultures. Anoth er reason is understanding whether
cultures differ, on average, in the level of different personality traits. For
example, are Indians more agreeable than Americans? The third reason is
to see the structure of personality traits across cultures and their
universality. For example, will the Five -Factor Model of personality be
discovered in American samples, will be replicated in Holland, Germany,
and the Philippines? A fourth reason is to see whether certain features of
personality are universal, correspondi ng to human nature and the level of
personality analysis.
8.1.1 Cultural Violations: an Illustration :
Consider the following events:
1. One of your family members eats beef regularly (your beef -eating
family member).
2. A young married woman goes alone to see a movie without letting her
husband know. When she returns home, her husband says, "If you do
it again, I will beat you black and blue." She does it again; he beats
her black and blue.
3. A poor man goes to the hospital after being seriously hurt in an
accident . The hospital refuses to treat him because he cannot afford to
pay (the refusing hospital).
Examine each event and decide whether you think the behaviour on the
part of the person or institution in parentheses is wrong and a serious
violation, a minor of fence, or not a violation at all.
If you are a vegetarian by culture, you will believe that the first event is a
serious violation, but the second event is not a serious one. If a person is
an American, he will not see the first event as a serious violatio n, he will
see nothing wrong in eating beef, but he will see the second event as a
serious violation. This points out that some aspects of personality
(attitudes, values, self -concepts) are highly variable across cultures, but
other aspects are universal. The main question is "What are the ways, in munotes.in

Page 149

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - II
149 which people from different cultures differ in personality, and What are
the ways, in which people from all cultures are the same?"
8.1.2 What Is Cultural Personality Psychology?
Humans everywhere show striking p atterns of local within -group
similarities in behaviour and thought and profound intergroup differences
(Tooby & Cosmides, 1992, p. 6). These local within -group similarities and
between -group differences can be of any sort – physical, psychological,
behavi oural, or attitudinal. This is known as cultural variations . For
example, beef eating is rare in some religions and is considered disgusting
among people from those religions. Among conservative religions in
India, values and behaviours are shared for the most part (within -group
similarity). But they differ from widely shared American attitudes towards
beef eating (between -group differences). This difference - a local within -
group similarity and between -group difference is an example of a cultural
variation . But it doesn't explain what has caused the cultural difference or
why the groups differ. Cultural personality psychology has three key
goals:
1) To understand or discover principles underlying cultural diversity,
2) To understand or discover how human psycho logy shapes culture,
3) To understand how cultural understanding, in turn, shapes our
psychology.
8.1.3 Three Major Approaches to Culture:
Certain traits are common to all, whereas certain traits show differences.
Cultural variations are personality attributes tha t differ from group to
group. Psychologists have developed the following three major
approaches to explaining and exploring personality across cultures:
1. Evoked Culture:
These are cultural differences, which are caused by differing
environmental conditions and activating the predictable set of responses.
For example, Kung Bushmen of Botswana tend to have thicker lumps on
their feet than most Americans because they walk around without shoes.
These differences can be thought of as aspects of evoked culture -
different environments have different effects on people’s callus -producing
mechanisms and sweat glands. People who live near the equator sweat
more because they are exposed to more intense heat than people who live
in more Northern parts.
Two components are needed to explain cultural variations:
1) A universal underlying mechanism (Sweat glands possessed by all
people),
2) Environmental differences in the degree to which the mechanism is
activated (In this case, differences in ambient temperature). Droughts munotes.in

Page 150

Personality Psychology
150 and snakes are all environmental events that affect some groups more
than others. These events cause the operation of mechanisms in some
groups that lay dormant in other groups.
This concept provides one model for understanding and explaining
cultural variatio ns in personality traits, such as cooperativeness or
aggression. It says that all humans have the same potential. The aspects of
these potentials that get evoked depend on features of the social or
physical environment.
Evoked cooperation : An example of ev oked culture is the patterns of
cooperative food sharing found among different bands of hunter -gatherer
tribes. High -variance foods – the foods that differ in their availability from
day to day. For example, on any particular day, one hunter will be
succes sful, whereas another hunter will be empty -handed. Gathered food,
is a lower -variance food resource. Under high -variance conditions, there
are large and high benefits to sharing. As, you may share your meat with
an unlucky hunter today, and next week, the same hunter will share his
meat with you. The benefits of sharing are also increased by the fact that
large animal contains more meat than a single person or even a single
family can share. As if it is not shared, it will get spoiled.
In one research stu dy, it was found that for gathered food (low -variance
condition), sharing did not occur outside the family. Cooperative sharing
seems to be evoked by the environmental condition of high variance. It
has been also found in another research that the degree o f egalitarianism is
correlated with variance in the food supply. For example, Kung San's food
supply is highly variable, and they share food and express egalitarian
beliefs. Among the Gana San, where the food variance is low, they show
great economic inequ ality. They tend to hoard their food and rarely share
it outside extended families.
Thus, Environmental conditions can activate some behaviours like
cooperation and food sharing. Everyone indeed has the capacity to
cooperate, but the degree of cooperation depends on external
environmental conditions, such as variance in the food supply.
Early experience and evoked mating strategies: Jay Belsky and his
colleagues found that harsh, inconsistent, rejecting child -rearing practices,
erratically provided resource s and marital discord lead children to develop
a Personality of impulsivity and mating strategy of early reproduction. On
the other hand, sensitive, supportive, responsive child -rearing, reliable
resources and spousal harmony foster conscientiousness and m ating
strategy of commitment marked by delayed reproduction and stable
marriage in children.
As children in uncertain and unpredictable environments seem to learn
that they cannot rely on a single mate, so opt for a sexual life that starts
early and seek gratification from multiple mates. In contrast, children who
grow up in stable homes and whose parents predictably invest in their
welfare, opt for long -term mating because they expect to attract a stable,
high-investing mate. Research shows that children from divorced homes, munotes.in

Page 151

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - II
151 reach puberty early, have sexual intercourse earlier, be more impulsive,
and have more sex partners than children from intact homes.
The sensitivity of personality and mating strategies to early experiences
may help explain the differe nces in the value placed on chastity across
cultures. For example, in China, marriages are lasting, divorce is rare, and
parents invest heavily in their children over extended periods. In Sweden,
there are many children are born out of wedlock, divorce is common, and
lesser fathers invest consistently over time. These cultural experiences
may evoke in the two groups different mating strategies, with the Swedesh
more than the Chinese tending toward short -term mating and more
frequent partner switching. These examples illustrate how a consistent
pattern of individual differences can be evoked in different cultures
producing a local pattern of within -group similarity and between -group
differences. As, all humans have within them a strategy of short -term
mating, frequently switching sexual partners, and a strategy of long -term
mating, such as commitment and love. But, these mating strategies may be
differentially evoked in different cultures, resulting in enduring cultural
differences in mating strategies.
Honour s, insults and evoked aggression: Why do people from some
cultures engage in killing more, whereas people from some other cultures
engage in killing less? Nisbett (1993) has provided a Theory to account for
these cultural differences.
Nisbett proposed that the economic means of subsistence of a culture
affects the degree to which the group develops what he calls a culture of
honour where insults are viewed as highly offensive public challenges,
that must be met with a direct confrontation and physical aggre ssion. The
differences in the degree to which honour becomes a central part of culture
rest ultimately within economics, the manner, in which the food is
obtained. In herding economies, one's entire stock could be lost suddenly
to thieves.
Cultivating a r eputation as willing to respond with violent force – For
example, by displaying physical aggression when publicly insulted –
presumably deters thieves and others who might steal one's property. In
more settled agricultural communities, the cultivation of a n aggressive
reputation is less important as one's means of subsistence cannot be
rapidly undermined or lessened.
Nisbett found that people from Southern parts of the United States
(historically using animal herding for subsistence) were more likely to
endorse violence for protection and in response to insults as compared to
Northerners (historically, who use farming or agriculture for subsistence).
Violence rates were higher in the Southern parts as compared to the
Northern parts.
Nisbett found the same pa ttern in the laboratory, where the northern and
southern participants were insulted by an experimenter. The experimenter
intentionally bumped into the participants and the participants were asked
to complete a series of incomplete word stems, such as "hate ". The munotes.in

Page 152

Personality Psychology
152 southerners who had been insulted wrote down more aggressive words,
such as hate, than did the northerners who had been insulted, suggesting
that the insults had evoked in the southerners a higher level of aggression.
We all have the capacity to dev elop a high sensitivity to public insults and
a capacity to respond with violence. These capacities are evoked in certain
cultures and lie dormant in others.
2. Transmitted Culture:
It comprises ideas, values, attitudes, and beliefs that are originally there in
one person’s mind and those are transmitted to another person’s mind
through interaction with the original person (Tooby & Cosmides, 1992).
For example, among some cultures, the view that it is wrong to eat beef is
an example of transmitted culture. Thi s value originated in the mind of
one person, who then transmitted it to all others.
Cultural differences in moral values: Cultures differ tremendously in
their beliefs about what is morally right and what is morally wrong. For
example, consider this state ment “It is immoral for adults to disobey their
parents.” If you are a conservative Indian, you would agree with this
statement. If a person is an American, the odds are great that he or she will
disagree with the statement strongly. Culturally variable vi ews of morality
are transmitted to children early onwards in life.
Views of what is right and what is wrong are important psychological
principles that guide behaviour, and they are central to personality.
Different cultures differ in their views of what is right and wrong,
sometimes in seemingly arbitrary ways. Among the Semang of Malaysia,
for example, it is sinful to comb one’s hair during a thunderstorm, to
watch a dog’s mate, and to act casually with one’s mother -in-law. There
are also universal simil arities in what is considered right and wrong. For
example, conservative Indian and American agree about the following
wrongs: Ignoring an accident victim, breaking a promise, committing
brother -sister incest, stealing a flower, etc.
In certain royal dynas ties, incest between brother and sister was actively
encouraged as a way to preserve the family's wealth and power.
Statements about universality are relative in the sense that there are always
some cultural or subcultural exceptions. Thus, many moral valu es are
specific to particular cultures and are likely to be examples of transmitted
culture. They appear to be passed from one generation to the next, not
through genes but through the teachings of parents and teachers or
observations of the behaviour of o thers within the culture.
Cultural differences in self -concept: The ways, in which we define
ourselves are self -concepts - which influence our behaviour. For example,
A woman who defines herself as conscientious may take pains to show up
for classes on time , to return all phone calls from friends and family, etc.
So, our self -concepts affect how we present ourselves to others and how
we behave in everyday life. munotes.in

Page 153

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - II
153 Markus and Kitayama (1991, 1994, 1998) propose that each person has
two fundamental "cultural task s", which have to be confronted. First is
interdependence, this cultural task deals with how much you are affiliated
with, attached to a larger group of which you are a member, your
relationships with other members of the group, and your embeddedness
with your group. The second cultural task is independence, which involves
how you differentiate yourself from the larger group. It includes your
unique abilities, your personal internal motives and personality
dispositions - the ways, in which you separate yours elf from the larger
group.
People from different cultures differ in the ways, in which they balance
these two tasks. Western cultures, according to this theory, are
characterized by independence. Conversations focus on individual choices
(For example, "Whe re do you want to eat tonight?"). In contrast, many
non-Western cultures, such as Japan and China, are characterized by
interdependence and value the fundamental interconnectedness among
those within the group.
The self is meaningful, only with the refere nce to the larger group of
which the person is a part. The major cultural tasks in these cultures are to
fit in and to promote harmony and group unity. Personal desires are to be
constrained rather than expressed in a selfish manner (For example,
"Where do we want to eat tonight?"). Conversational scripts focus on
sympathy, deference, and kindness.
This fundamental distinction between independence and interdependence
is similar to a distinction that many other cultural psychologists do.
Triandis (1989, 199 5) coined the terms individualism (a sense of self as
autonomous and independent, with priority given to personal goals) and
collectivism (a sense of self as more connected to groups and
interdependent, priority given to group goals). In individualist soci eties,
people tend to act independently of their groups, giving priority to
personal rather than group goals. They act according to their own attitudes
and desires rather than succumbing to the norms and attitudes of their in -
group. In collectivist societi es, people are interdependent with others in a
group, giving priority to the in -group goals. Here, people are especially
concerned about social relationships. They tend to be more self -effacing
and are less likely to boast about their own personal accompli shments.
There is a lot of overlap between the independent -interdependent
conception of cultural differences advanced by Markus and Kitayama and
the Individualistic -Collectivistic conception of cultural differences
advanced by Triandis.
Is there empirical evidence that the way, in which we define ourselves
depends on the culture in which we reside? Using the Twenty Statements
Test, researchers have discovered that North American participants tend to
describe themselves using abstract internal characteristic s, such as being
smart, stable, dependable, and open -minded (Rhee et al., 1995). Chinese
participants, more often describe themselves using social roles, such as "I
am a daughter" or "I am Jane's friend”. munotes.in

Page 154

Personality Psychology
154 The study was designed to examine cultural differen ces in self -concept,
but with an interesting twist: do Asians living in New York who self -
identify as Asian differ in self -concept from Asians living in the same
place who do not self -identify as Asian? In other words, do some people
shift their self -conce pts and adopt self -concepts similar to those of the
adopted culture? The process of adapting to the ways of life in one's new
culture is called acculturation. The Asian Americans living in New York
who did not self -identify as Asian described themselves us ing highly
abstract and autonomous self -statements, similar to the responses of
European Americans residing in New York.
These Asian Americans used even more trait terms in their self -
descriptions (45%) than did the European Americans (35%). In contrast, in
the study, the New York -dwelling Asians who identified themselves as
Asian used more socially embedded self -descriptions, much as the
Chinese respondents did. They often referred to themselves by describing
their role status (For example, student) and t heir family status (For
example, son). They were more likely to qualify their self -concepts with
contextual information. (Rather than describing themselves as reliable,
they described themselves as "reliable when I'm at home").
Another study asked Japanese and American College students to complete
Twenty Statements Test in four social contexts: With a friend, in a
classroom, with other students and in a Professor’s office. They found that
the Japanese students tended to describe themselves using preferences (I
like yoghurt) and context -dependent activities (I like to listen to rock
music on weekends). The American students used abstract, context -
independent items such as “friendly, and “assertive” to describe
themselves. Also, the Japanese students tended to characterize themselves
differently in different contexts.
In another study, it was found that 84% of Japanese students described
themselves as ordinary, whereas only 18% of American students did.
Thus, the theme of standing out and being unique versus fi tting in and
getting along with the group is seen in the folk sayings of American and
Japanese cultural proverbs. In America, people say, “The squeaky wheel
gets the grease.” In Japanese culture, people say, “The nail that stands out
gets pounded down.”
These cultural differences may be linked to the ways, in which people
process information. Japanese, compared with Americans, tend to explain
events holistically – with attention to relationships, context, and the links
between the focal object and the field as a whole (Nisbett et al., 2001).
Americans, in contrast, tend to explain events analytically – with the
object detached from its context, attributes of objects or people assigned to
categories, and a reliance on rules about the categories to explain
behaviour. So, we can see that the cultural differences in the personality
attributes of Individualism -Collectivism or Independence -Interdependence
may be linked to underlying cognitive proclivities in the ways, in which
individuals attend to and explain even ts in their world. munotes.in

Page 155

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - II
155 Criticisms of Interdependence -Independence and Collectivistic -
Individualistic concepts: Matsumoto (1999) contends that the evidence
for the Markus -Kitayama theory comes almost exclusively from North
America and East Asia and may not gene ralize to other cultures. Also,
there is far more overlap in the self -concepts of people from different
cultures than Markus and Kitayama imply. Many people in collectivist
cultures, do use global traits (For example, agreeable, fun -loving) when
describing themselves. Many in individualist cultures use relational
concepts (For example, "I am the daughter of . . .") when they describe
themselves. The cultural differences are more a matter of degree.
Church (2000) notes that "attempts to characterize cultures of individuals
in terms of such broad cultural dichotomies may be overly simplistic" (p.
688). Views of the self in all cultures incorporate both independent and
interdependent self -construals, and self -concepts in all cultures vary
somewhat across social contexts. A meta -analysis also suggested that
caution needs to be taken in generalizing cultural differences in
individualism and collectivism. It is found that even though European
Americans tended to be somewhat more individualistic (valuing
independenc e) and less collectivistic (valuing interdependence) than those
from other cultures, the effect sizes proved to be small and had important
exceptions.
European Americans were not more individualistic than either African
Americans or Latinos. Neither were they less collectivistic than Japanese
or Koreans – two cultures anchoring one end of the interdependence
continuum. In reality, the Chinese, rather than the Japanese or Koreans,
were unusually collectivistic and non -individualistic in self -concept. Still,
other studies have found little support for the influence of transmitted
culture on self -concept. One study of two individualistic and two
collectivistic cultures found: 1) People in all four cultures described
themselves in trait terms with a high level of frequency, and 2) People in
all four cultures mentioned personal rather than collective or social
identity as important to their sense of self.
Also, these characterizations such as Individualistic -Collectivistic have
been criticized because they are fa r too general conflating the different
kinds of social relationships and ignoring the context -specificity in which
they are expressed. For example, Americans may be individualistic and
independent at work and while playing computer games, but more
collecti vistic and interdependent while with their families or in Church.
Despite these criticisms, there are real differences across cultures, and
these must be explained. Most researchers have assumed that cultural
differences in individualism -collectivism are i nstances of transmitted
culture. Others on the basis of evolutionary psychology and evoked
culture, Oyserman, Coon, & Kemmelmeier (2002b) hypothesize that
humans have evolved psychological mechanisms for both types of self -
concepts and can switch or transf er from one mode to another depending
on fitness advantages. When one's group is low in mobility, is limited in
resources and has many relatives in close proximity, it has paid fitness munotes.in

Page 156

Personality Psychology
156 bonuses to be highly collectivistic and interdependent. One's genetic
relatives then, tend to benefit. When mobility is high and when resources
are relatively abundant, and when few genetic relatives live close by, it has
paid fitness dividends to adopt a more individualistic and independent
proclivity.
Cultural Differences i n Self -enhancement: Self-enhancement is
described as a tendency to describe and present oneself using socially
valued and positive attributes, such as kind, understanding, being
intelligent, industrious etc. One research showed that the self -concepts of
American adults contain more than four times as many positive attributes
as negative ones (Herzog et al., 1995). Japanese give far fewer
spontaneous positive statements about themselves. The Japanese
participants score lower than American participants on tra nslations of self -
esteem scales (Fiske et al., 1997). Japanese respondents tend to give more
negative descriptions of themselves (Yeh, 1995). Even the positive self -
descriptions of the Japanese tend to be in the form of negations, such as
"I'm not lazy.”
Korean participants are more likely to endorse negative statements about
themselves, whereas American participants are more likely to endorse
positive statements. Differences in self -enhancement also are visible in
parents' self -descriptions of the quality of their parenting practices.
American parents describe their parenting in generally glowing terms
whereas Korean parents give mostly negative self -evaluations. Cultural
differences in self -enhancement extend to the evaluation of one’s group
compared to t he evaluation of other groups. Heine and Lehman (1995)
asked Japanese and Canadian students to compare their own university
with a rival university within their own culture. The two pairs of
universities used for the study were matched in reputation. Among the
Canadians, there was a strong tendency toward in -group enhancement,
with the rival university evaluated negatively by comparison. Among the
Japanese, there was no favouritism in the evaluation of one's own
university in comparison with the rival unive rsity.
Why do these cultural differences in self -enhancement occur?
Psychologists have advanced two explanations. One is that Asians engage
in impression management – as deep in their hearts, they evaluate
themselves positively, but they do not do so publi cly as it may damage
their reputation. The second explanation is that cultural differences
accurately reflect one’s deep experiences. Asians, due to profound cultural
differences in values, evaluate themselves truly negatively as compared to
North American s. There has been only one empirical research test of these
competing explanations (Fiske et al., 1997). When self -evaluations are
made in conditions of total anonymity (no one will identify the
respondent), researchers still found that the self -enhancemen t commonly
seen among Americans does not occur among Asian respondents. This
study supports the theory that these cultural differences reflect the actual
subjective experiences of the respondent and are not merely surface
differences due to impression mana gement by Asians. munotes.in

Page 157

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - II
157 Do cultures have distinctive personality profiles? Are people from the
Mediterranean region of Europe or a particular region of the world more
emotionally expressive, or is this merely an incorrect stereotype? Robert
McCrae and 79 colleag ues from around the world studied the personality
profiles of 51 different cultures, using 12,156 participants (McCrae,
Terracciano, et al., 2005a). They studied the aggregate Big -Five
personality scores for each culture. The largest difference they found
across cultures was in extraversion. As a general rule, Americans and
Europeans scored higher than Asians and Africans on extraversion.
It is important to bear in mind that these differences in average
personalities are relatively small. Most of the differ ences in personality
occur within cultures, not between cultures. The most significant finding is
how similar the 51 cultures actually are in their overall scores on the Five -
Factor Model.
Personality Variations within cultures: Within -culture variations c an
arise from several sources, including differences in growing up in various
socio -economic classes, differences in the historical era, or differences in
the racial context in which one grows up. Social class also has an
influence on one’s personality. Pa rents from the lower -class value
obedience to authority, whereas parents from the upper class emphasize
self-direction and nonconformity under the commands of others.
According to Kohn, these socialization practices result from the sorts of
occupations tha t parents expect their children to enter. Higher -status jobs
(For example, manager, start -up company founder, doctor, lawyer) often
require greater self -direction, and lower -status jobs (For example, factory
worker, gas station employee) more often require the need to follow rules
and permit less latitude for innovation. In studies of American, Japanese,
and Polish men, Kohn and colleagues found that men from higher social
classes in all cultures tended to be more self -directed, had lower levels of
conformi ty, and had greater intellectual flexibility than men from lower
social classes.
These findings are correlational, so, the direction of effects cannot be
unambiguously assumed. People with personalities having self -direction
and intellectual flexibility te nd to move towards the higher social classes.
Or the socialization practices of higher -social -class parents tend to
produce children with personalities that are different from the personalities
of lower -social -class children. Even though cultures can diffe r in their
average level on a particular trait, many people within that one culture can
be higher (or lower) than many individuals in the other culture.
Another type of intracultural variation is the effects of the historical era on
personality. For exampl e, people who grew up during Great Depression in
the 1930s, might be more anxious about job security, adopting a more
conservative spending style. Disentangling the effects of historical era on
personality is an extremely difficult endeavor because most cu rrently used
personality measures were not in use in earlier eras.
munotes.in

Page 158

Personality Psychology
158 3. Cultural universals:
The third approach to culture and personality is to identify features of
personality that appear to be universal, or means present in most cultures.
In the history of the study of personality and culture, the study of cultural
universals has long remained in disfavour. For most of the twentieth
century, the focus was almost exclusively on cultural differences. This
emphasis was fueled by anthropologists who reported on exotic cultures,
which did everything differently than American culture did. Human nature
was presumed to be infinitely variable, infinitely flexible, and not
constrained in any way by a universal human nature: "We are forced to
conclude that human nature is almost unbelievably malleable, responding
accurately and contrastingly to contrasting cultural conditions" (Mead,
1935, p. 280).
Over the past few decades, the pendulum has swung to a moderate view.
Anthropologists who visited the islands, failed to con firm Mead's findings
(For example, Freeman, 1983). In cultures in which sexual jealousy was
presumed to be entirely absent, it turned out that sexual jealousy was the
leading cause of spousal battering and spousal homicide. In cultures such
as the Chambri, where the sex roles were thought to be reversed,
anthropologists instead found that men were considered to be in charge
(Brown, 1991; Gewertz, 1981). All available evidence back to 1850,
suggests that the Chambri's sex roles are, in fact, strikingly simil ar to those
of Western cultures. Now we will see three examples of cultural
universals.
Beliefs about Personality characteristics of men and women: Williams
and Best (1990) studied 30 countries over a period of 15 years. In each
country, university student s were asked to examine 300 trait adjectives
(For example, aggressive, emotional, dominant) and indicate whether each
trait is more often linked with men, women, or with both sexes. The
shocking results revealed that many of the trait adjectives were highl y
associated with one or the other sex and there proved to be tremendous
consensus across cultures.
In another study, Williams and Best (1994) scored some trait adjectives on
these dimensions: favorability (How desirable is the trait?), strength (How
much does the trait indicate power?), and activity (How much does the
trait signify energy?). These dimensions originate from older classical
work in the field that discovered three universal semantic dimensions of
evaluation (good -bad), potency (strong -weak), and activity (active -
passive) (Osgood, Suci, & Tannenbaum, 1957). The traits ascribed to men
and women were equally favourable. Some masculine traits, such as,
“serious and inventive” were viewed as favourable, whereas other traits,
such as “arrogant” and “busy” were viewed as unfavourable. Some
feminine traits, such as “Charming and Appreciative” were seen as
favourable. Whereas others, “Fearful” and “affected” were seen as
unfavourable.
munotes.in

Page 159

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - II
159 How can we interpret these cultural universals in beliefs regarding the
personality characteristics of men and women? One is that these beliefs
represent stereotypes based on the roles men and women take universally.
Williams and Best (1994) argued that society assumes that men are
stronger than women and so assigns men to roles and occupations, such as
soldiers and construction workers. A second possibility is that the traits
ascribed to men and women in all 30 cultures reflect actual observations of
real sex differences in personality. Studies of the Five -Factor Model, te ll
us that women score lower on emotional stability, suggesting that they are
more fearful and emotional. Thus, it means universal beliefs about
differences between men and women reflect actual differences in
personality.
Expression of emotion: It is widel y and commonly believed that people
in different cultures experience different emotions. Personality
psychologists have argued that different cultures have different words to
describe the emotional experience. For example, the Tahitians do not
experience t he emotions of grief, longing, or loneliness, so they have no
words in their language to express these emotions.
Thus, cultural variability in the presence or absence of emotion words has
been interpreted by some personality psychologists to mean that cult ures
differ in the presence or absence of experiences of emotions. Are emotions
really this culturally variable? Or are there cultural universals in the
experience of emotions?
The oldest or earliest evidence of cultural universals in emotions came
from C harles Darwin. In gathering evidence for his book on emotions,
‘The Expression of Emotions in Man and Animals’, Darwin (1872/1965)
asked anthropologists and travellers, who interacted with people on five
continents to give detailed information about how th e native people
expressed different emotions, such as grief, contempt, disgust, fear, and
jealousy. He summarized the answers he received as "The same state of
mind is expressed throughout the world with remarkable uniformity and
this fact is in itself int eresting as evidence of the close similarity in bodily
structure and mental disposition of all the races of mankind".
Darwin's methods are crude by today's scientific standards, but subsequent
research over the past few decades has confirmed his basic conc lusions.
Psychologist Paul Ekman developed a set of photographs of people
expressing six basic emotions and then showed them to people in various
cultures (Ekman, 1973). Some cultures, such as the Fore foragers of New
Guinea, had had almost no contact with Westerners. The Fore spoke no
English, had seen no TV/movies and had never lived with Caucasians. He
also administered the tests to people in Japan, Brazil, Chile, Argentina,
and the United States. Ekman asked each participant to label the emotion
express ed in each photograph and to make up a story about what the
person in the photograph had experienced. The six emotions – happiness,
sadness, anger, fear, disgust, and surprise – were universally recognized
by people in various cultures. These findings have been subsequently
replicated in other countries also. Further research by Ekman and his munotes.in

Page 160

Personality Psychology
160 colleagues has grown the list of universal emotions to include contempt,
embarrassment, and shame (Ekman, 1999). Ekman also reversed the
procedure. He then asked the f ore participants to act out situations, such as
"Your child has died" and "You are angry and about to fight," and then
photographed them. The emotions expressed in these photographs were
easily recognized by facial expressions and were strikingly similar t o the
expressions of the same emotions seen in the photographs of the
Caucasian participants.
Further evidence for the universality and possible evolutionary origins of
these basic emotions comes from research showing that children who are
blind from birt h display the same facial expressions as those with full sight
display (Lazarus, 1991).
Pinker suggests that whether a language has a word for a particular
emotion or not matters little, if the question is whether people experience
the emotion in the same way: Tahitians are said not to have a word for
grief; however, "when a Tahitian woman says 'My husband died and I feel
sick,' her emotional state is hardly mysterious; she is probably not
complaining about acid indigestion" (Pinker, 1997, p. 367). People
universally may experience the emotion of pleasure in an enemy's
misfortunes in the same way, even if all cultures do not have a single word
in their language to capture it.
The view that language is not necessary for people to experience emotions
may be co ntrasted with the Whorfian hypothesis of linguistic relativity,
which contends that language creates thought and experience. In the
extreme sense, the Whorfian hypothesis argues that the ideas that people
can think and the emotions they feel are constraine d by the words that
happen to exist in their language and culture (Whorf, 1956).
The difference between experiencing an emotion and expressing that
emotion in public may be important to resolve this debate. Ekman (1973)
conducted an experiment to explore t he difference between the experience
of emotion and its expression in public. He secretly video -taped the facial
expressions of Japanese and American students when they watched a
graphic film of a primitive puberty rite involving genital mutilation. In one
condition, an experimenter wearing a white lab coat was present in the
room (Public context). In another condition, the participants were alone.
When the experimenter was present, the Japanese students smiled politely
during the film, but the American stu dents expressed horror and disgust. If
this were the only condition conducted in the study, we might conclude
that Japanese and American students experience the emotion of disgust
differently. When the students were filmed when they were alone in the
room viewing the film, both the Japanese and American students showed
equal horror. This result suggests that Japanese and American students
experience this emotion in the same way, even if they differ in their
expression of it in a more public setting.
Five-Factor Model of Personality: A question is whether there is a
universal structure of personality, such as the Five -Factor Model, or munotes.in

Page 161

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - II
161 whether different factorial models exist in different cultures. According to
some, even the concept of personality lacks unive rsality. For example,
Hsu argues that the concept of personality is an expression of the Western
ideal of individualism (Hsu, 1985, p. 24). Shweder, a well -known cultural
psychologist, argues, "The data gathered from ... personality inventories
lend illuso ry support to the mistaken belief that individual differences can
be described in a language consisting of context -free global traits, factors,
or dimensions" (Shweder, 1991, pp. 275 -276).
These views have been elaborated on: "Universal [personality] struc ture
does not by itself implies that 'personality' as understood within a
European -American framework is a universal aspect of human behaviour .
. . nor does it imply that the variability that appears as an obvious feature
of human life is a function of at tributes called 'personality'" (Markus &
Kitayama, 1998, p. 67). Cultural Anthropologist Lawrence Hirschfeld
argues that in many, perhaps most cultures there is a marked absence of
discourse that explains human behaviour in terms of trans -situationally
stable motivational (or intentional) properties captured by explanations of
trait and disposition (Hirschfeld, 1995, p. 315).
What is reflected in all these quotations is a fundamental challenge to
personality psychology – whether the core concept of traits i s universal or,
instead is a local concept applicable only in Western cultures. The most
extreme perspective suggests that the very notion of personality, as an
internal set of psychological characteristics is an arbitrary construction of
Western culture ( Church, 2000). If this extreme perspective were really
true, then any attempt to identify and measure personality traits in non -
Western cultures would be doomed to failure (Church, 2000). At the other
extreme is the perspective that personality traits are universal and
precisely the same personality structure will emerge across cultures.
The first source of evidence bearing on this debate pertains to the
existence of trait terms in other cultures. Many non -Western psychologists
have, in fact, described trai t-like concepts that are indigenous to non -
Western cultures and that appear strikingly like those that appear in
Western cultures. Following are some examples: the Filipino concepts of
pakikiramdam (sensitivity, empathy), pakikisama (getting along with
others); the Korean concept of chong (human affection); the Japanese
concept of amae (indulgent dependence), etc.
A second source of evidence in the debate concerns whether the same
factor structure of personality traits is found across cultures. The trait
perspective does not require the existence of precisely the same traits in all
cultures. The trait perspective might be extremely useful even if cultures
were to differ radically in terms of which trait dimensions they used. The
support for the trait perspe ctive across cultures would be there if the
structure of personality traits were found to be the same across cultures.
Two approaches have been taken to explore this issue. At first, called the
"transport and test" strategy, psychologists translated existi ng
questionnaires into other languages and then administered them to native
residents in other cultures. It has generated some findings supporting the munotes.in

Page 162

Personality Psychology
162 Five-Factor Model. The Five -Factor Model has now been replicated in
France, Holland, and the Philippines and languages from entirely different
language families, (McCrae et al., 1998).
The most impressive was a massive study of 50 different cultures
(McCrae, Terracciano, et al., 2005b). This research, involving 11,985
participants, had college -age individuals rate someone they knew well
using the Revised NEO Personality Inventory. Factor analyses of these
observer -based ratings yielded the Five -Factor Model, with only minor
variations in factor structure across cultures. This study is important in
suggesting t hat cross -cultural evidence for the Five -Factor Model is not
limited to self -report data but extends to observer -based data also. Using
the transport and test strategy, the five -factor structure of personality
appears to be general across cultures only it failed to emerge among those
with relatively low levels of intellectual ability.
A more powerful test of generalizability would come from studies that
start out using indigenous personality dimensions first, then testing
whether the five -factor structure still emerges. This approach has been
tried in Dutch, German, Hungarian, Italian, Czech, and Polish (De Raad et
al., 1998). The Trait terms in each of the languages were identified.
Although the absolute numbers of personality trait terms varied from
langu age to language, the percentage of words in each language that
constituted trait terms was remarkably consistent, averaging 4.4% of all
dictionary entries. It is similar to the Lexical Hypothesis - which states that
the most important individual differences have been encoded within the
natural language.
The next step in the study was to reduce this list to a manageable number
of several hundred trait terms, identified as indigenous to each culture,
which could then be tested in each culture. Factor analyses of each sample
within each culture showed that there was tremendous replicability of four
of the five factors: extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and
emotional stability. Despite cross -cultural agreement on these four factors,
this study found some differences in what constituted the fifth factor. As,
in Polish and German, the fifth factor resembled the American fifth factor
of Intellect -Openness, in which intelligent and imaginative were on one
end and dull and unimaginative at the other end.
Other languages, revealed different fifth factors. For example, in Dutch,
the fifth factor seemed more like a dimension of political orientation,
ranging from conservative at one end to progressive at the other. Recent
cross -cultural research using the lex ical approach has found strong
evidence for six factors, rather than five (Ashton et al., 2004; Saucier et
al., 2005). The new sixth factor - honesty -humility - indicates a major
discovery.
Thus, in summary, further indigenous tests are needed to determine
whether the five -factor trait model of personality structure is universal or
not. Based on the existing data, we can conclude that trait terms appear to
be present in all languages. Using the more rigorous standard of munotes.in

Page 163

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - II
163 instruments developed indigenously, f our of the five factors emerged
consistently across cultures. The fifth factor is somewhat variable across
cultures and therefore may reflect an important lack of universality of
personality trait structure.
CHECK YOUR PROGRESS:
 What is the Five -Factor Mo del of personality?
8.2 STRESS, COPING, ADJUSTMENT AND HEALTH
AIDS: Its cause is a virus; its transmission is through specific behaviours.
For example, unsafe sex practices (For example, not using condoms) and
sharing intravenous needles by drug addicts. Psychologists are searching
for the best ways to change people's high -risk behaviour. This is one
example of the importance of behaviour in understanding illness. In earlier
centuries, most of the serious illnesses that afflicted humans were caused
by micr obe infection, For example, Tuberculosis. As Modern medicine
developed effective vaccines, these Microbial diseases disappeared as
major causes of death (at least in the United States). Today, many of the
leading causes of death and disease are related to lifestyle factors, such as
smoking, poor diet, inadequate exercise, and stress.
The fact that psychological and behavioural factors can have important
health consequences, has given rise to the field of health psychology.
Researchers in this area of psycho logy study the relationship between the
mind and the body, and the ways, in which these two components respond
to challenges from the environment (For example, stressful events, germs)
to lead to either illness or health. Many of the psychological variable s of
interest have to do with stable patterns of behaviour – for example,
whether a person copes well with stress, exercises some or not at all, etc.
Life-span studies tell us that personality can have lifelong effects on
health, though the effects differ depending on the traits being considered
(Aldwin et al., 2001) or the specific health outcomes under investigation,
such as the cancer -prone personality is characterized by being unassertive
and emotionally inhibited, the coronary -prone personality is char acterized
by being hostile and aggressive.
8.2.1 Models of Personality -Illness Connection:
Stress is the subjective feeling produced by events that are not controllable
or threatening. It is important to understand that stress is a response to the
perceive d demands in some situations. Stress is not in the situation; stress
is how people respond to a particular situation.
An early model of the personality health relationship is called the
Interactional Model, which suggests that personality factors determine the
impact of objective events by influencing people's ability to cope.
Personality has its effects on coping responses – that is, on how people
respond to the event. munotes.in

Page 164

Personality Psychology
164 It is called the Interactional Model because personality is thought to
moderate (influen ce) the relationship between stress and illness. Events
such as exposure to microbes or chronic stress cause illness, but
personality factors make a person more or less vulnerable to those events.
For example, if a person were infected with a cold virus bu t had a hard -
driving, competitive personality, such that the person would not rest,
would not take time off from work, and would not do other behaviours
necessary to quickly recover from a cold, this person could become very
ill, with the cold turning into pneumonia, because the person's personality
influenced how well he or she coped with the viral infection.
One limitation of the above model was that researchers could not find
stable coping responses that were adaptive or maladaptive. Then, this
model got developed into a realistic model, that is the Transactional
model . According to this model, personality has these effects:
1) It can influence coping,
2) it can influence how the person appraises or interprets events,
3) it can influence the events themselves.
In this model, we can see that it is not the event itself that causes stress but
how the event is appraised, or interpreted, by the person. The third point
on the transactional model at which personality can have an impact
consists of the even ts themselves, that is people do not just respond to
situations; they also create situations through their choices and actions. As
we saw in the earlier unit, people choose to be in certain kinds of
situations, they evoke certain responses from others in t hose situations.
These two parts of the Transactional Model – Appraisal and the Person's
influence on events – are why the model is called Transactional. These
two elements of the model imply that stressful events do not just influence
persons; persons als o influence events. And this influence comes through
the appraisal of events, as well as the selection and modification of events.
This reciprocal influence of persons and events makes this a more
complicated, though perhaps more realistic, model of how th is process
actually works.
The third model is Health Behaviour Model, which adds another factor
to the transactional model. It says personality does not directly influence
the relationship between stress and illness. Instead, personality affects
health ind irectly, through health -promoting or health -degrading
behaviours. Everyone knows that poor health behaviours, such as eating
too much fat, and smoking, increase the risk of developing certain
illnesses. Personality affects the degree to which a person enga ges in
various health -promoting or health -degrading behaviours. For example,
individuals who are low in the trait of conscientiousness engage in a
variety of health -damaging behaviours, including smoking, unhealthy
eating habits, dangerous driving, and lac k of exercise (Bogg & Roberts,
2004). munotes.in

Page 165

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - II
165 A fourth model is Predisposition Model , which is completely different
and holds that personality and illness are both expressions of an
underlying predisposition. It suggests that associations exist between
personalit y and illness because of a third variable, which is causing them
both. For example, enhanced sympathetic nervous system reactivity may
be the cause of further or subsequent illnesses, as well as the cause of the
behaviours and emotions that lead a person t o be called neurotic.
The Predisposition Model has not been the topic of many studies, though
it seems likely that this model will guide investigators interested in the
genetic basis of illnesses. Some genetic predispositions are expressed both
in terms of a stable individual difference and in terms of susceptibility to
specific illnesses (Bouchard et al., 1990). For example, some researchers
speculate that there is a genetic cause of novelty seeking (a trait like
sensation seeking) and that this genetic se quence also causes, or increases
the probability of a person more likely to develop, an addiction to drugs
(Cloninger, 1999). Consequently, the correlation between the novelty -
seeking personality trait and addiction to drugs such as cocaine, meth, or
heroi n may be due to the reason that these two variables are both
independently caused by a third variable – genes. This simple model may
be useful as the human genome project progresses from mapping the
genome to understanding what specific genes control.
The final and fifth model is the Illness -Behaviour Model , in which illness
is defined as the presence of an objectively measurable abnormal
physiological process, such as fever, high blood pressure, or a tumour.
Illness behaviour is the action that people take when they think they have
an illness, such as complaining to others about their symptoms, going to a
doctor, taking the day off from school or work, or taking medication.
Illness behaviours are related to actual illnesses, but not perfectly. Some
individu als may tough out an illness, refusing to engage in illness
behaviours (For example, refusing to take a day off from work when ill).
Other people engage in all sorts of illness behaviours even in the absence
of true illness.
Personality influences the deg ree to which a person perceives and pays
attention to bodily sensations and interprets and labels those sensations as
an illness. The way, in which a person perceives and labels those
sensations, then, influences the person's illness behaviours, such as
reporting the symptoms and going to a doctor. For example, the
personality trait of neuroticism is associated with a tendency to complain
about physical symptoms.
It is important to note that these models linking personality to physical
health are not mutual ly exclusive, that is they may all apply depending on
the personality trait and the illness under consideration. For example,
hostility may be associated with heart disease because it is a manifestation
of the same underlying process (the predisposition mo del),
conscientiousness may relate to illness through specific health behaviours
(the health behaviour model), and neuroticism may relate to ill health munotes.in

Page 166

Personality Psychology
166 through its effects on stress appraisal and stress exposure (the transactional
model).
CHECK YOUR PROGR ESS:
 What are the Interactional and Transactional Models of personality?
8.2.2 The Concept of Stress:
Events that cause stress are called stressors also appear to have several
common attributes:
1. Stressors are extreme - They produce a state of feeling overwhelmed
or overloaded, that one just cannot take it much longer,
2. Stressors often produce opposing tendencies , such as wanting and not
wanting an activity or object – as in wanting to study but also wanting
to put it off as long as possible,
3. Stressors are uncontrollable and are outside our power to influence,
such as an exam we cannot avoid.
Stress response: When a stressor appears, people experience a pattern of
emotional and physiological reactions. You experience some startle, your
heart beat s faster and your blood pressure goes up, and your palms and the
soles of your feet begin to sweat. This pattern of reaction has been called
the fight -or-flight response. This physiological response is controlled by
an increase in sympathetic nervous syste m activity. These physiological
reactions prepare you for actions, such as running away or holding a
weapon. This physiological response is usually very brief, and, if the
stressor is as minor as someone honking a car horn to see you jump, then
you return to your normal state in a minute or so.
If, however, a person is exposed to a particular stressor day in and day out,
then this physiological fight -or-flight response is just the first step in a
chain of events termed the General Adaptation Syndrome (GAS) by Hans
Selye (1976), a pioneer in stress research.
 ALARM STAGE is a Fight -or-flight response of the sympathetic
nervous system and the associated peripheral nervous system’s
reactions. They involve a release of hormones that prepare the body
for the chal lenge.
 RESISTANCE STAGE occurs if the stressor from the Alarm stage
continues, The body is using its resources at an above -average rate,
even though the immediate fight -or-flight response has subsided. At
this point, stress is being resisted, but it is ta king a lot of effort and
energy.
 EXHAUSTION STAGE occurs if the stressor continues, people enter
this stage. This is the stage in which a person is most susceptible to
illness, as his or her physiological resources are depleted. munotes.in

Page 167

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - II
167 4. Major life events:
Holmes and Rahe (1967) studied various major life events that require
people to make major adjustments in their lives. Holmes and Rahe wanted
to estimate the potential stress value of a wide variety of life events. They
started with a long list of events such as the death of a family member,
loss of a job, or being put in jail. They then had a large number of subjects
rate each of the events for how much stress each was likely to provoke.
Each event was then associated with so many stress "points" and, by
counting up the events a person had experienced, and adding up the stress
points for all of those events, a good estimate of the amount of stress
experienced by that person could be achieved. They also developed a
“Stressful event schedule." For high levels of str ess, there are several
things you can do like monitoring for early signs of stress, recurring
stomachaches or headaches. Avoid negative thinking, pessimism, or
catastrophizing, practising relaxation techniques regularly. Consider your
friends and relatives for support. Holmes and Rahe tallied up the stress
points that each of the research participants had accumulated in the prior
year. They found that the persons with the most stress points were also the
most likely to have a serious illness during that yea r. This research was
among the first systematic demonstrations that elevated stress – a
psychological phenomenon – was associated with the elevated risk of
developing an illness.
Cohen, Tyrrell, and Smith (1997) obtained reports of stressful life events
for a group of volunteers and were able to score each participant along the
lines of Holmes and Rahe's criteria for stressful points for various events.
These researchers then tried to infect half of them with a cold by giving
them nose drops containing the cold virus. The other half of them were
given plain nose drops; they served as the control group in this
experiment. The participants with more negative life events in the
previous year like a lot of stress were more likely to develop a cold after
being gi ven the cold virus than the participants who had fewer stressors in
life (Who were more resistant to a cold virus).
The researchers interpreted this finding as consistent with the General
Adaptation Syndrome: persons under chronic stress eventually deplete
bodily resources and become vulnerable to microbial infections. Stress is
thought to reduce/lessen the functional ability of the immune system to
mount an effective response to the presence of microbes, thereby leading
to lowered immunity to infection and resulting illness.
5. Daily Hassles
Although only minor, daily hassles can be chronic and repetitive. For
example, having too much to do all the time, having to fight the crowds
while shopping, getting stuck regularly in heavy traffic, waiting in lines all
the time, unpleasant boss at work, and having to worry over money. They
can be chronically irritating, though they do not initiate the same general
adaptation syndrome evoked by some major life events. People with a lot munotes.in

Page 168

Personality Psychology
168 of minor stress in their lives suffer more than expected from psychological
and physical symptoms.
6. Varieties of stress:
Acute stress is what most people relate to the term stress. It results from
the sudden onset of demands and is experienced as tension headaches,
emotional upsets, gastroint estinal disturbances, feelings of agitation, and
pressure.
Episodic Acute stress is more serious, the repeated episodes of acute
stress, such as a weekend job that is stressful or having to meet a deadline
each month. It can lead to migraines, hypertension , stroke, anxiety,
depression, or serious gastrointestinal distress.
Traumatic stress refers to a massive instance of acute stress, the effects
of which can reverberate for years or even a lifetime (For example, Bunce,
Larsen, & Peterson, 1995). Traumatic stress is different from acute stress
in terms of the symptoms associated with the stress response. This
collection of symptoms, called Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), is a
syndrome that occurs in some persons following the experience of or
witnessin g life -threatening events, such as military combat, natural
disasters, terrorist incidents, serious accidents, or violent personal assaults
such as rape. The symptoms can be severe enough and last long to
significantly impair the person's daily life.
Chron ic stress refers to stress that does not end. Chronic stress grinds us
down until our resistance is gone. Serious illnesses, such as diabetes,
decrease immune system functioning, or cardiovascular disease, result
from chronic stress. Health psychologists b elieve and think that stress has
additive effects; that is, the effects of stress add up and accumulate in a
person over time. Stress affects each person differently.
7. Primary and Secondary Appraisal:
According to Psychologist Richard Lazarus (1991), for st ress to be evoked
in a person, two cognitive events must occur. The first is the primary
appraisal, which is for the person to perceive that the event is a threat to
his or her personal goals. The second cognitive event, Secondary
appraisal, is when the pe rson concludes that he or she does not have the
resources to cope with the demands of the threatening event. If either of
these appraisals is absent – then stress is not evoked. For example, if an
event, such as an upcoming exam, is perceived as threatenin g to someone's
goals, yet the person feels he or she has the resources demanded by that
event (i.e., a person has been studying and otherwise preparing for the
exam), then the person might experience the event more as a challenge
than as stress. Or, the pe rson might feel he or she does not have the
resources demanded by the event (secondary appraisal) but might think
that the event is very important to his or her long -term goals (primary
appraisal) and, so, might not respond with stress.
munotes.in

Page 169

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - II
169 CHECK YOUR PROGRES S:
 What are the varieties of stress?
8.2.3 Coping Strategies and Styles:
Some people seem better able to cope, get over stressful events, or
somehow see such events as challenges rather than as sources of stress.
8. Attributional style:
The attributional style is a dispositional way of explaining the causes of
bad events. "Where does the person typically place the blame when things
go wrong?" The three dimensions of attribution are – i) external versus
internal, ii) unstable versus stable, and iii) specifi c versus global. Various
measures have been developed for assessing people's typical attributional
style. One such measure is the Attributional Style Questionnaire (ASQ),
developed by psychologist Chris Peterson and his colleagues (1982).
Another technique for scoring attributional style is by analyzing the
content of people's written or spoken explanations. It is possible to find
these explanations in verbatim material and to rate them along the
attributional dimensions of internality, stability, and globa lity. This
technique for measuring attributional style was also developed by Peterson
and his colleagues (1992), who called it the Content Analysis of
Verbatim Explanations (CAVE). The CAVE technique has the
advantage of allowing the researcher to study pa rticipants who are either
not available or not willing to participate in typical research, provided that
such participants have made public some material involving causal
explanations.
Peterson, who has done a great deal of research on attributional style, now
prefers the term optimism to refer to this individual difference construct
(Peterson, 2000). Persons who make stable, global and internal
explanations for bad events are seen as pessimists, whereas persons who
make unstable, specific, and external exp lanations for bad events are seen
as optimists. Optimism/pessimism is viewed as a trait -like dimension
along which people differ. Optimists think/believe that life events are
unstable and specific and that what influence they have on outcomes in
life. Pess imists believe that they are helpless when it comes to bad events,
and that bad events have long -lasting causes that adversely affect many
aspects of their lives (i.e., they blow things out of proportion). Pessimists
believe that their behaviour is not rel ated to outcomes in their lives.
Researchers emphasize dispositional optimism as the expectation that
good events will be plentiful in the future, and that bad events will be rare
in the future. Another concept related to optimism, called self -efficacy,
was developed by Bandura (1986). It is the belief that one can do the
behaviours necessary to achieve a desired outcome.
Optimists also perceive that they are at lower risk for such negative events
than the average person. Most people generally underestimat e their risks,
with an average person rating his or her risk as below what is the true munotes.in

Page 170

Personality Psychology
170 probability. This has been called the optimistic bias, and it may lead
people in general to ignore or minimize the risks inherent in life or to take
more risks than they should.
9. Optimism and Physical well -being:
Optimism in general has been shown to predict good health as measured
by self -report, ratings of general health made by the participants'
physicians, immune system functioning, and longer life (Carver et al.,
1993 ; Scheier & Carver, 1992; Scheier et al., 1999). It is found to correlate
with many positive health behaviours, such as exercising regularly,
avoiding fatty foods, drinking only in moderation or not at all, etc.
The correlations between optimism and health or health behaviours tend to
run between .20 and .30. Peterson and colleagues (1998) examined more
than 1,000 individuals over almost 50 years period. The researchers found
that the participants who scored in the more pessimistic direction were
more likel y to die at an earlier age than the optimistic participants. They
thought that the biggest difference might be in deaths due to cancer and
heart disease, and they predicted that pessimists would have more of these
lethal medical problems. This was not the case as they found that the real
difference between the optimists and pessimists, in terms of the causes of
death, was in the frequency of accidents and violent deaths, with
pessimists having more accidental deaths and deaths due to violent causes,
resulti ng in a generally shorter life span, than that of the optimists. This
effect was strong for the men in this sample.
Pessimists, especially male pessimists, have a habit of being in the wrong
place at the wrong time. This research does not actually tell us specifically
what the participants were doing when they accidentally or violently died.
The link between pessimism and a greater likelihood of mishaps appeared
to be due to a preference for potentially hazardous situations and activities
on the part of pes simists to escape a gloomy mood. Because of optimism's
obvious health benefits, psychologist Martin Seligman and his colleagues
are attempting to develop therapeutic ways to increase people's level of
optimism (2002; Seligman & Peterson, 2003). Seligman ha s introduced a
"pessimism prevention" program for use in grade schools.
10. Management of Emotions:
We sometimes try to inhibit the expressions of negative emotions under
certain circumstances and that is called emotional inhibition. Are there any
major conse quences of inhibiting one’s emotions? Some theorists suggest
that it leads to undesirable consequences. For example, Sigmund Freud
believed that most psychological problems were the result of inhibited
negative emotions and motivations, pushing undesirable wishes and
impulses in the unconscious. In other words, repression and other defence
mechanisms are mechanisms of preventing an unacceptable emotion from
surfacing and being directly experienced and expressed.
Psychoanalytic therapy, or as called “Express ive therapy” (As their goal
was to get the persons to release their inhibited feelings), was designed to munotes.in

Page 171

Socio -Cultural And
Adjustment Domain - II
171 bring unconscious emotion into conscious awareness, so that the emotion
could be experienced and expressed in a mature manner. The therapeutic
relation ship was seen as a place to experience and express emotions that
had long been inhibited.
The ability to inhibit emotions is acquired at an early age, at around 3
years, and is a major developmental achievement. What are the effects of
chronically inhibite d emotions? Psychologists James Gross and Robert
Levenson (1993, 1997; Gross, 2002) designed studies in which some of
the participants were asked to suppress the expression of any emotions
they were feeling while they watched a video designed to generate t he
emotions of happiness (a comedy routine), then sadness (scenes from the
funeral of a child, showing a distraught and highly emotional mother).
Half were assigned to a suppression condition and another half were
assigned to a no -suppression condition. Wh ile the participants watched the
video, the researchers videotaped them to determine how much they
expressed their emotions while watching it and they also asked
participants to report their feelings after each segment of the video.
It was found that the p articipants who were instructed to suppress their
emotions showed increased levels of physiological arousal, even before
the video began, compared with the no -suppression participants, meaning,
they were preparing for the effort necessary to suppress their
emotions. They showed heightened physiological activity during the
video, indicating increased sympathetic nervous system arousal, compared
with the no -suppression participants. The researchers suggested that
suppression of emotion takes effort and exert s physiological costs above
and beyond emotional arousal. The participants in the suppression
condition displayed less outward expression of emotion than the control
participants. The participants who suppressed the emotion reported
slightly less amusement in the amusement condition, but not less sadness
in the sadness condition, compared with the no -suppression participants.
Gross and John (2003) showed that the suppression of negative emotions
was also associated with diminished positive emotions later in the
experiment. Butler et al. (2003) showed that people who suppressed their
negative emotions had worse interpersonal relations and lower levels of
well-being than the more expressive persons. They said that by not
expressing themselves, suppressors disr upt what is a normal form of
communication. Brain areas associated with the successful regulation of
negative emotions were mainly in the prefrontal cortex of the brain. This
frontal part of the brain, involved in planning and executive control, is
active when people are controlling their emotions.
Problems can arise when someone who chronically and characteristically
inhibits the free expression of emotion may suffer the effects of chronic
sympathetic nervous system arousal. For example, Levy and colleagu es
(1985) have shown that people who keep their negative emotions to
themselves are more likely than expressive persons to have a higher
mortality rate, a greater probability of recurrence of cancer after treatment, munotes.in