Introduction to Psychological Science: Integrating Behavioral, Neuroscience and Evolutionary Perspectives - William J. Ray 2021

Personality

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

✵ 15.1 Describe the historical influences on the early study of personality.

✵ 15.2 Summarize the main ideas of the psychodynamic perspective on the development of personality.

✵ 15.3 Summarize the main ideas of the existential-humanistic approach to personality.

✵ 15.4 Summarize the main ideas of the social cognitive theories of personality.

✵ 15.5 Summarize the main ideas of the current perspectives on personality.

✵ 15.6 Define the concept of self.

Niccolò di Bernardo dei Machiavelli (1469—1527) was an Italian diplomat who lived in Florence. As he watched the comings and goings of rulers, he begins to develop a sense of how to achieve and retain power. These observations were written in a small book titled The Prince (Machiavelli, 1513/1947). The Prince describes how to obtain and maintain power with examples from both ancient and times current to Machiavelli.

He wrote of a previous king of Syracuse: “When he was secure in this rank, he made up his mind to become a prince and to hold by force and without obligation to others what had been given him by agreement” (Machiavelli, 1513/1947, p. 23). He also wrote of some more current rulers: “Nonetheless we have in our times seen great things accomplished by many princes who thought little of keeping their promises and have known the art of mystifying the minds of men” (Machiavelli, 1513/1947, p. 50). It looks like politicians for a long time have broken agreements and told us what we want to hear.

Machiavelli also suggested, “Men are so simple and so much inclined to obey immediate needs that a deceiver will never lack victims for his deceptions.” It is the idea of manipulation to which Machiavelli’s name has been attached. In the 1970s, two psychologists, Richard Christie and Florence Geis, developed a questionnaire designed to measure the degree to which an individual followed Machiavellian principles (Christie & Geis, 1970). It included such items as “The best way to handle people is to tell them what they want to hear.” “Never tell anyone the real reason you did something unless it is useful to do so.” The scale also contained items portraying the opposite characteristics such as “Honesty is the best policy in all cases.” Overall, the measure of Machiavellianism is composed of four factors: distrust of others, amoral manipulation, desire for control, and desire for status. This personality factor has been used to classify people in terms of business success, an understanding of others, social relationships, and psychological reactions from others. Personality psychologists seek to find enduring individual differences that have existed in our human history and scientifically study these personality factors.

Personality

Generally, we think of personality as that which gives individuals a particular “flavor”—is the person more outgoing, more shy, more concerned with others, more concerned with their own image, seeking excitement, liking detail, and so forth. On a basic level, personality refers to these behaviors, thoughts, feelings, and approaches to life that are more enduring over time on the part of the person.

Two important researchers in the study of personality—Paul Costa and Robert McCrae—define personality in terms of individual differences between people in characteristic thoughts, feelings, and behaviors (McCrae & Costa, 1995). As such, the study of personality is the study of internal dispositions or ways of being. Another way of thinking about personality is to consider what we value. Do you value good design, logic, accomplishing things, and so forth? For example, what do you notice when you walk into a room or meet with new people? These are some of our predispositions to see the world in a certain way. Of course, all of us are influenced by situational factors, as we saw in the last chapter on social psychology. In certain situations, we may even act very differently than we generally do. However, personality psychologists focus more on those aspects of ourselves that can be seen across a number of different situations.

Historical Aspects of the Study of Personality

Historical characteristics of personality and temperament have been described in early Indian, Babylonian, and Egyptian cultures. These ideas were systematized by the Greeks (Millon, 2012; Dumont, 2010). Hippocrates (c.460—c.375 BC) suggested that the four humors—choleric, sanguine, phlegmatic, and melancholic—influenced an individual’s personality and temperament. These four humors were connected to four elements. The Greeks believed, as most scientists do today, that complex processes can be understood by breaking them down into their parts. The Greeks suggested that all things in the world, including personality and temperament, can be understood in terms of just four elements—earth, air, fire, and water. In the body, they thought that these four elements were connected with the humors—yellow bile (fire), blood (air), phlegm (water), and black bile (earth) (see Figure 13-1). Blood was associated with the heart, black bile with the spleen, yellow bile with the liver, and phlegm with the brain.

Figure 13-1 Four humors and their connection with body fluid (blood, phlegm, black bile, and yellow bile) and the four elements (earth, fire, air, and water).

Those individuals quickly aroused defined the choleric personality, which was associated with the circulatory system and blood. Easygoing and sociable individuals are sanguine and associated with yellow bile. Calm, controlled individuals are referred to as phlegmatic and associated with phlegm in the body. Melancholic individuals are those who are serious and worried and represented by black bile.

About 100 years after Hippocrates, Theophrastus (c.371—c.387 BC) wrote a series of personality sketches he referred to as “characters.” Each of the characters described one or more psychological traits. These included the flatterers, the garrulous, the penurious, the tactless, the boors, and the surly (Millon, 2012).

In the early part of the 20th century, Carl Jung invented the terms introversion and extraversion to describe a person’s approach to the world. Extraversion was seen as a flow of energy outward to the world, whereas introversion was seen as a flow inward toward a person’s inner world (Jung, 1989). In this way, extraverts are more concerned with the external world. That is, they focus on their actions that involve other people and things. On the other hand, introverts focus on their internal thoughts and feelings.

Jung further talked about personality in terms of a particular sensitivity that an individual had. If you went into a roomful of people, what would you pay attention to? Who was there? What they wore? The purpose of the event? The way the room was designed or decorated? Or what the event meant to you? These are all different perspectives that, for Jung, represented a sensitivity that directs one’s values in the world.

Jung described personality in terms of a sensitivity in four different realms—intellect, feeling, sensation, and intuition. Intellect sees the world through analysis and asks what something is. Feeling asks the question of whether something is agreeable. Sensation asks the question of how it works. And intuition asks the question of what pattern is represented in a series of events. Each of these four represents a different way of understanding ourselves and the world. Jung further suggests that these four sensitivities can refer to the external world or the internal world, that is, extraversion and introversion. The four realms combined can be expressed in an extroverted or introverted way to form eight different personality styles. For example, a person who is sensitive to the way the external world appears (feeling) would be interested in design or decorating. An introverted feeling type might find poetry or musical composition important to them.

Also in the 20th century, Ernst Kretschmer in Germany and later William Sheldon in the United States sought to develop a personality system that combined physical body type with temperament. Sheldon suggested that an individual could be described in terms of three types. The endomorph body type is soft and round with a relaxed and sociable temperament. The mesomorph body type is muscular, strong, and low fat with an energetic and assertive temperament. The ectomorph body type is long and thin with more of a cerebral and introverted temperament. Although body type approaches have endured, research relating it to personality and psychopathology has produced mixed results (Ikeda et al., 2018).

Later in the 20th century, Hans Eysenck translated the idea of Greek humors into modern psychological language in terms of two dimensions. He was also influenced by Jung, Kretschmer, and Pavlov (Millon, 2012). Eysenck factor-analyzed the responses of participants on personality measures and identified two larger dimensions that were not correlated with each other. The first dimension ranged from extroversion on one end to introversion on the other. The second dimension was stability, which ranged from stable to unstable. This second dimension also included the idea of emotionality in that unstable was seen as including negative emotionality and neuroticism. Eysenck’s perspective can be seen in Figure 13-2. A variety of factor analytic studies consistently demonstrated the dimensions of extroversion and stability to exist across a variety of cultures.

Figure 13-2 Personality factors seen in terms of two dimensions (stability and extroversion), as developed by Hans Eysenck.

Note: extroversion and extraversion are different spellings of the same concept.

CONCEPT CHECK

1. The definition of personality has been conceptualized differently across human history. Describe the following historical conceptions of personality:

a. The ancient Greeks’ humors and elements

b. Theophrastus’ characters

c. Jung’s sensitivity in four different realms

d. Kretschmer’s and Sheldon’s body types

e. Eysenck’s dimensions

2. What unique contribution does each of the historical perspectives above make to our understanding of personality today?

Myths and Misconceptions: Astrology

We learned in school that the moon influences the tides. It is a scientific fact, and this relationship has been demonstrated. For many, the moon, sun, and planets are also thought to influence human personality and behavior. This approach is referred to as astrology. The approach most commonly used is to refer to the placement of the solar system at the time of your birth. This is generally presented in the form of an astrologer’s horoscope, which uses the relative positions of planets and signs of the zodiac at a specific time in inferring an individual’s character and personality traits and in foretelling the events of a person’s life. Today, many people look to horoscopes in newspapers and online. Further, people from around the world have used horo-scopes to make business deals, buy stocks, and even choose dates or marriage partners. Numerous books and websites can be found related to astrology.

How do people understand astrology? In one large-scale European study, more people thought that astrology was scientific than thought that economics was based on science (Allum, 2011). However, this same group of people thought that horoscopes were even less scientific than both astrology and economics.

In some ways, personality traits and astrological traits are similar in that both are considered to be relatively stable. If we know how someone scores on a personality test or what their astrological sign is, we tend to see them in those terms. However, could you recognize your own personality profile or astrological characteristics? This question was approached by Alyssa Wyman and Stuart Vyse (Wyman & Vyse, 2008). They asked 52 college students to identify their personality based on computer-generated astrology reports and traditional personality tests (Five-Factor Model). In this study, the participant had to choose between an accurate report and a false report as reflecting their personality. The participants were able to choose their accurate five-factor personality report better than by chance, whereas this was not the case with the astrological report. Overall, when asked to choose the most accurate five-factor personality report, 55% chose the real report and only 10% chose the bogus report. On the other hand, the true and bogus astrological reports were chosen as most accurate at about the same rate (20% and 16%).

Why individuals accept astrological reports has been a topic of psychological interest and research. A number of factors come into play. First, astrological statements are typically general in nature. Second, humans seek to make sense of whatever information they are presented even when it is not complete. And third, astrological reports are described as specific to your birthday.

To study this last point, three conditions were used in which each person was interacted with individually (Snyder, 1974). In the first condition, the participants were told that the purpose of the study was to examine people’s feeling about horoscopes. In the second condition, each participant was asked the year and month in which they were born. And in the third condition, participants were asked the year, month, and day on which they were born. In each condition, the experimenter left the room for 10 minutes to suggest that the horoscope presented was constructed individually for the person. After 10 minutes, the person was given the following:

You have a very practical bent and enjoy earning money, but sometimes your deep desire to be a creative person triumphs over your practicality. You lead other people with your innovative ideas, or could do this if you felt more sure of yourself. Insecurity is your greatest weakness, and you would be wise to try to overcome this. Your deep sense of humor and warm, understanding nature wins you true friends, and although they may not be numerous, you share a rather intense loyalty to each other. With your innovative mind, you rebel against authority, either inwardly or openly. Even though you could make a stable businessman, you would be a very idealistic one, finding it hard not to defend the underdog or try to settle arguments that arise. You like to think of yourself as unprejudiced, but periodically examine yourself to make sure you aren’t overlooking some harmful judgments. You will live a long, full life if you take care of yourself. You love to have freedom in whatever you’re doing, and this makes you dislike monotonous tasks and being in large crowds where you can’t seem to move freely. If someone pays you a well-deserved compliment, you enjoy hearing it, but you may not show that you do. Sometimes you find that the actions you take do not accomplish as much as you’d like them to, especially in dealing with people. You have a real grasp on how people are feeling or what they are thinking without their necessarily telling you.

Does this sound like you? If you say yes, then you are like the people in the study who saw the personality description as “fairly accurate.” Further, the more that the participants believed that the report was based on their specific information in groups two and three, the higher they rated the astrological report.

At this point, reviews of more than 100 controlled studies involving various aspects of astrology suggest that there are trivial results to support any aspect of astrology scientifically (Kelly, Janzen, & Saklofske, 2012). There is, of course, lots of evidence to suggest that we as humans accept self-description from external sources as accurate (Snyder & Larson, 1972). We also make sense of our world and fill in gaps. As Shakespeare reminds us, it is truly not in our stars but in ourselves.

Thought Question: What are three characteristics about the horoscope presented above that make it seem applicable to so many people? What can you do, as an educated consumer, to read such horoscopes more critically?

Psychodynamic Perspectives on the Development of Personality

Sigmund Freud (1856—1939) was initially trained as a zoologist before he completed medical school. The nature of the neuron was just being discovered, and Freud based his early theories on the neuroscience of his day. One of Freud’s important ideas for his time was that humans can be influenced by unconscious processes. One of his early books focused on understanding the meaning of dreams and how dreams reflect a person’s psyche (Freud, 1900). Freud was very influential by creating a system for understanding human behavior and experience that has been applied to a number of different disciplines ranging from psychology to literature.

Freud was an enthusiastic reader of Darwin and credited his interest in science to an early reading of Darwin. A number of Freud’s ideas can be seen as coming from Darwin (Ellenberger, 1970; Sulloway, 1979). In fact, Freud quotes Darwin in many of his written works (Sulloway, 1979). With some topics, such as the development of emotions, including fears, in children, Darwin and Freud followed parallel tracks. One important theme in both of their work was the role of instinctual processes in child development. Darwin emphasized two main instinctual processes—self-preservation and sexual selection. Similarly, Freud said that he began his studies with the idea that hunger and love are what move the world. However, in his writings Freud emphasized sexual processes over those of self-preservation. In fact, in later writing, Freud combined the sexual and self-preservation instincts into a life-force instinct.

For Freud, the sexual instinct becomes the major driving force for human life and interaction. He was also influenced by the suggestion of the neurologist Hughlings Jackson that in our brains we find more primitive brain areas underlying more advanced ones. Thus, it is quite possible for the psyche to be in conflict with itself or at least to have different layers representing different processes.

The Structure of Personality

Freud divides the mind into three parts. Although Freud used the German equivalents of the English “I” and “it,” when his work was translated into English, the translators used the Latin terms, id, ego, and superego.

The id is present at birth. It represents those instinctual processes that help us to obtain our basic needs. From a developmental perspective, the life of an infant for Freud was governed by the pleasure principle. That is, the infant seeks those things that are pleasurable and avoids those that are not. It is the “id” or “it” that directs this instinctual period.

Beginning at about 3 years of age, the child learns to mediate his or her desires and the rules of the external reality. This is referred to as the reality principle by Freud. This reflects the development of an “I” or “ego” that helps the child to live in the world. The ego is seen to be part of personality that helps us navigate the demands between external requirements and our internal experiences.

At a later point, an individual develops a moral sense, which directs our behaviors with one another. The structure is referred to as the “superego” and reflects perspectives we learn from our parents and our culture as well as our own moral development.

The three parts of the psyche, the id, ego, and superego, can direct a person in very different directions. That is, your ego may know that you need to be in class, but you feel hungry and have the desire to eat something immediately. Often, you come up with a strategy that allows you to put off eating until after class or buy something on the way to class. From a superego perspective, you know that stealing someone else’s food is not the way to go. Freud suggested that many of the id impulses are working outside of our awareness. Further, many of these impulses may not be acceptable to society. Freud’s imagery is also shown as an iceberg with only the ego shown above water, suggesting we are not aware of our id impulses.

Freud described three types of consciousness. One type is what we are aware of, which is generally referred to as conscious awareness. There is also information such as your telephone number, which at any moment you could bring into consciousness. Freud referred to this as latent consciousness or pre-consciousness. The third type of consciousness contains information we are not aware of and find difficult to bring into consciousness. However, this state, referred to as unconscious processes, according to Freud can still influence our thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. If, for example, you were bitten by a dog as a child, you might not remember this event but feel anxious or fearful when you see dogs as an adult.

Psychosexual Development

In addition to the internal structures of the psyche, Freud also suggested there are stages of development that are often referred to as psychosexual development. At each of these stages there is a physical focus and a psychological theme. The first stage is referred to as the oral stage. During the first 18 months of life, the physical focus for an infant is the mouth, lips, and tongue. Psychologically, the infant is dependent on those around him or her. From 18 months to about 3 and a half years of age, the child begins to walk and learn self-control. It is during this period that toilet training begins. Freud suggests that parental interactions around learning bodily self-control can influence future interactions. This stage is referred to as the anal stage of development. The next stage is referred to as the phallic stage, which lasts from 3 and a half to 7 years of age. This is a period of initial development of the sexual organs and the beginning of gender identity. This is also the period when emotions such as love, fear, and jealously develop. This is followed by the latency phase, which last from 7 years of age to puberty. The final stage is the genital phase and represents an understanding of one’s sexuality and the development of mature relationships.

Not everyone passes through these stages in a successful manner. Freud suggested that if someone does not resolve the psychological issues associated with a particular stage, then he or she will continue to have problems related to that stage even as an adult. Individuals with problems in the oral stage will have problems related to dependency. The adult anal character will remain overly concerned with order and detail. Problems during the phallic stage are seen to result in either a rigid moral code or the opposite. Although these character descriptions have been used in a variety of areas, they have never been examined with strong research studies.

To understand the nature of our more primitive processes, Freud looked to the description of dreams and wish fulfillment. During dreams, we have less rational considerations and more emotional considerations. Likewise, our daydreams or wish fulfillment reflects our desires and instinctual processes. Freud referred to these as primitive processes in that they reflect basic needs and desires.

The Project for a Scientific Psychology

One of his works, The Project for a Scientific Psychology, utilized these ideas and sought to place psychology on a firm scientific basis. The Project was based on three separate ideas. The first was reflex processes. For example, organisms physically withdraw when confronted with unpleasant stimuli. Freud extended this idea to cognitive and emotional processes to suggest that, mentally, humans avoid ideas or feelings that are unpleasant to them. The second principle Freud used was associationism. That is to say, ideas that are presented together in time will be mentally called forth together. Freud suggested that if as a child you experience a fearful situation such as falling out of a car, then riding in a car could make you feel fearful or anxious, even if you did not know why. The third idea is that the nervous system is capable of retaining and discharging energy. This energy was initially called “Q,” but Freud later identified it as libido or sexual energy.

As Freud described in his early work, he viewed libido as a form of biological energy that could build up unless it was in some way expressed. The lack of expression of sexual energy, for example, was seen to be the basis of various types of psychopathology. Likewise, the experience of sexual and self-preservation instincts, when met with restrictive rules of a particular society, were seen to lead to anxiety. Overall, Freud saw neurosis as an attempt by individuals to treat the problem they were experiencing. For example, anxious individuals often worry too much about problems or events that could happen in the future. Although consideration of future problems may be helpful in problem-solving, constant consideration or worry is not.

The Project sees the brain as basically a blank slate upon which experiences become connected with one another driven by instinctual processes of sexuality and self-preservation. Some see Freud’s ideas in the Project as anticipating Donald Hebb’s concept that use modifies neuronal connection in the brain (Schott, 2011). The human, for Freud, becomes the real-life laboratory in which nature and nurture struggle. The Project was finished in 1895. After this period, Freud mainly spoke of mental illness in terms of psychological processes and did not return to brain-based ideas.

Although many people think of Freud as being outdated, there is currently a resurgence of interest in the interface between dynamic approaches and neuroscience. Eric Kandel, who won the Nobel Prize for his work on learning and memory, described his interest in Freud and the manner in which dynamic principles can be viewed in terms of brain functioning (Kandel, 1998, 1999, 2005). Freud’s ideas have also been updated in terms of the brain networks discovered using current brain-imaging techniques (Carhart-Harris & Friston, 2010; Rizzolatti, Alberto Semi, & Fabbri-Destro, 2014). One important concept in both Freud’s Project and current neuroscience research is the manner in which the brain conserves and uses energy to perform psychological functions including the development of mental illness.

Defense Mechanisms

In the same way that any animal, including humans, will pull away from a painful stimulus, Freud suggested that we also pull away from, or repress, painful ideas or thoughts. We also seek to pull away from external stresses. Freud suggested there were patterns of avoidance that are defense mechanisms. Defense mechanisms not only minimize anxiety, but they also protect the ego. That is, they seek to keep intact our image of our self.

This psychic manipulation of energy allowed for the possibility that higher cortical processes could inhibit the experience of lower ones, a process that would come to be called repression. Anxiety for Freud is the result of society and culture having inconsistent rules for the expression of sexuality and aggression. This anxiety and our inability to acknowledge these instinctual experiences lead to defense mechanisms to reduce neurotic anxiety. Thus, repression, or the process of inhibiting anxiety-producing ideas, underlies all defense mechanisms.

One common defense mechanism is rationalization. Rationalization is the use of a plausible but false excuse. If you forgot to do something that was important, you might rationalize that you had a headache that made you forget. In another situation, someone might remind you of a time you broke something important to another person. If you avoid the anxiety associated with remembering the event by saying “that never happened” you are using the defense mechanism of denial. With the defense mechanism of projection, you take characteristics of yourself that you do not like and attribute them to others. Sometimes you might hear a leader in an organization who is experiencing difficulties say, “I am surrounded by stupid fools.” Reaction formation is the converting of a socially unacceptable impulse into its opposite. For example, an angry person might show an exaggerated effort to show how peaceful and tolerant they are. Sublimation is the converting of basic impulses such as anger or sexuality into more acceptable choices such as art, playing music, playing sports, or physical exercise. The use of defense mechanisms is a normal process seen in all humans. However, it would be a problem if a person uses the same defense mechanism in every situation. Several common defense mechanisms are listed in Table 13-1.

Other Psychodynamic Approaches Influenced by Freud

During Freud’s time, there were a number of professionals who took a psychodynamic approach. Psychodynamic psychology is based on the idea that thoughts and emotions basically learned in childhood can influence your behavior and experiences. Others adopted or modified Freud’s ideas in their theories and the treatment of their patients. For example, Alfred Adler emphasized social processes, especially in childhood, as important for personality development (Adler, 1924). Adler further suggested that part of feeling that one’s life is worthwhile is having the experience that you are useful to others. Adler also created the concept of an inferiority complex.

Overall, a number of individuals believed that Freud overemphasized the role of instincts and our reaction to them. One group emphasized ego psychology. This group, which included Freud’s daughter, Anna Freud, placed more emphasis on the ability of the ego to live life and adapt to the demands of life. Another group emphasized object relations. The common term for object relations is attachment, which you learned about in the developmental chapter. Their view, which is similar to John Bowlby’s, is that early relationships with significant people in one’s life constitute a powerful role in relation to many personality factors. Two others who expanded the psychodynamic perspective were Carl Jung, who emphasized the evolutionary aspects of development, and Karen Horney, who emphasized social aspects of personality development. Both of these individuals made contributions that were later incorporated into the existential-humanistic perspective, which will be discussed later in this chapter.

Whereas Freud emphasized the drives of the sexual and self-preservation instincts within the context of experience, Carl Jung, a Swiss psychiatrist and a colleague of Freud, viewed human behavior and experience in much broader terms. Jung asked this question: In the same way that there is an evolutionary history of the body, is there also an evolutionary history of consciousness? He spent a great amount of time examining old myths, stories, and artifacts in an attempt to reconstruct a history of the psyche. Jung was particularly interested in the close connection between instinctual processes and the environmental factors that influence them.

Like Darwin, Jung examined human universals. He spent time in Africa, the American Southwest, and other non-European areas to determine whether the psychic structure of all humans was similar. For example, one question that Jung asked was the following: Do individuals throughout the world have similar dream patterns? He answered this question in the affirmative and suggested that humans worldwide showed similar cognitive, emotional, and reflexive patterns. One important aspect of therapy for Jung was to bring together discrepant aspects of one’s personality to create a unified self, which would give meaning to one’s life. Jung also introduced the terms introversion and extraversion to reflect a person’s tendency to value internal or external information. By noting that introversion in itself is not a sign of mental illness, Jung helped to set up the valuing of internal experience that existential-humanistic therapy focuses on.

Karen Horney, a German-born psychoanalyst, felt that Freud’s approach did not fully present a psychology that applied to women as well as men. Overall, for both men and women she differentiated between healthy growth in which a person developed to her full potential and neurotic growth in which a person limited her development by unrealistic ideas and feelings. These ideas would include ideas such as “everyone should love me,” “I should never make mistakes,” or “the world should always give me what I want.”

Horney’s (1950) final book, Neurosis and Human Growth, described how these types of unrealistic ideas along with an idealized self-image leave the person feeling out of touch with herself and others. In contrast to an idealized self-image in which one is always perfect and loved by everyone, Karen Horney created the concepts of self-realization and a real self. A real self includes who one is and what one appreciates. It is this real self that should be the focus of development referred to as self-realization. It is the alienation from the real self that is seen to constitute a key process of neurotic development. It also requires energy to present a false self. That is, if you are always trying to make yourself look good, you will pay less attention to other parts of yourself, and you will have fewer resources for developing healthy human growth. Her ideas were echoed later in the 20th century by Abraham Maslow and more recently in the concept of a true self in social psychology (Strohminger, Knobe, & Newman, 2017).

Using Internal Processes to Understand Personality

If we see personality as a way of thinking and feeling, then it could be assumed that a person would approach different ambiguous situations in a similar unconsciousness manner. One method for studying this in the history of psychology is the projective technique. It is called projective since the person projects onto an image certain ideas and emotions. Projective instruments are assessment tests composed of ambiguous stimuli. They can range from seemingly random patterns such as an inkblot to ambiguous drawings or photos of individuals or objects. The individual is asked to describe what the patterns look like, what they remind him or her of, or what is being depicted in the drawing.

The basic idea of projective testing is based on the theoretical ideas of Sigmund Freud and others who sought to understand the dynamics of the mind. One important distinction Freud made was between types of thinking (see Erdelyi, 1985; Westen, 1998, for overviews). Primary process thought, which is seen in dreams or letting your mind wander, is not organized logically but in terms of associations between thoughts and feelings. On the other hand, secondary process thought is logically organized. Freud suggested that it was possible to understand the cognitive and emotional connections of a person’s mind in terms of primary process. His techniques for exploring these connections were free association and dream analysis.

Projective techniques were formally introduced in the first half of the 1900s as a means of detecting primary process types of thinking and feeling, including instinctual and motivational processes. Since there were few techniques for understanding the connections in one’s mind at this time, professionals saw projective techniques as having potential for understanding how thoughts and feelings formed a cognitive network. It was assumed that projective techniques would give a window into the thought processes of those with mental disorders and how they differ from the thought processes of healthy individuals. It was also assumed that projective techniques would give insight into one’s personality.

Two of the most well-known projective techniques are the Rorschach inkblot and the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT). Both of these tests have a long history of use, although various researchers have been critical of the Rorschach and other projective techniques and suggest clinical situations in which these types of techniques are not useful (Garb, Wood, Lilienfeld, & Nezworski, 2005).

Rorschach Inkblots

During the early part of the 1900s, Herman Rorschach, a Swiss psychiatrist, experimented with using inkblots. The Rorschach inkblots were made by simply dripping ink on a piece of paper and then folding it in half to create a symmetrical design. Some of the inkblots were in black-and-white and others were in color (see Figure 13-3). He initially gave his inkblots to a large number of schoolchildren (Ellenberger, 1970). Rorschach was interested in the sensory processing of these images, which he connected with Carl Jung’s idea of introversion and extraversion.

Figure 13-3 When you look at this, what do you see? An example of a color Rorschach inkblot.

Rorschach saw introversion as focusing on the inner world of kinesthetic images and creative activity. Extraversion, on the other hand, was a focus on color, emotion, and adjustment to reality. For Rorschach, the content of what was seen in the inkblot was less the focus of the interpretation than the elements used, such as whether the person saw whole images or focused on small details of the blot. Viewing the image as containing movement and the use of the colors was also seen as important. A limited number of ten plates was selected, and Rorschach published a book in German, Psychodiagnostics, in 1921. He died some months later at age 37. His book was translated into English in 1942 (Rorschach, 1942).

Following his death, various clinicians used the Rorschach in their clinical practice. For a number of years, there was little scientific data concerning the reliability and validity of the measure. Since the late 20th century, there has been a movement to standardize the presentation of the test and the manner in which it is scored. Exner (1993) offered one such system. Various studies have examined the reliability and validity of the measure with specific diagnostic groups and theoretical constructs (see Hunsley & Mash, 2007; Meyer, 2001; Meyer & Archer, 2001, for overviews). In 2001, a special issue of the journal Psychological Assessment was devoted to clarifying the utility of the Rorschach, along with its problems, from an evidence-based position. In order to address questions of reliability and validity, a series of norms using the Exner system based on more than 5,800 people from 17 countries has been published (Meyer, Erdberg, & Shaffer, 2007). This review showed consistency across samples for adult Rorschach responses but problems with data from children. Overall, the Rorschach and its scoring is a complicated process that continues to be the focus of scientific debate.

Other researchers have begun to use neuroscience techniques such as brain imaging and electrophysiology to understand physiological processes underlying Rorschach responses. For example, Giromini and his colleagues examined movement responses on the Rorschach and how these were reflected in the EEG (Giromini, Porcelli, Viglione, Parolin, & Pineda, 2010).

Thematic Apperception Test (TAT)

The Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) is composed of 30 black-and-white drawings of various scenes and people (see Figure 13-4 for an example). The instrument was developed by Christiana Morgan and Henry Murray in the 1930s. Typically, an individual is shown 20 of the cards, one at a time, and asked to create a story about what is being depicted on the card. The basic idea is that by noting the content and emotionality of the individual’s responses, it is possible to gain insight into his or her thoughts, emotions, and motivations including areas of conflict. For example, if an individual described many of the cards in terms of someone leaving another person, the clinician might ask if abandonment was an important issue for the person. Although the TAT technique may be useful to gain additional information concerning a person such as suicidal thoughts, it lacks scientific evidence to make it useful in obtaining a formal diagnosis. Similar problems of reliability and validity exist with the TAT as with the Rorschach.

Figure 13-4 What is happening in this picture? Example of a TAT drawing. The person being evaluated is asked to create a story about the picture.

Source: Murray et al. (1938, p. 622). By permission of Oxford University Press, USA.

Overall, projective techniques have been the subject of great debate and controversy. Frick, Barry, and Kamphaus (2010) presented some of the major pros and cons concerning the use of projective techniques. Some professionals see their value not in terms of giving exact diagnoses but in their ability to allow a professional to see how an individual responds to ambiguous stimuli—especially in terms of suicidal ideation as well as disorganized thought processes. This may lead to further discussions of areas that a professional would not normally discuss. The major disadvantage of projective techniques centers on questions of validity in terms of both the tests’ ability to identify specific mental disorders and personality processes.

CONCEPT CHECK

1. How were Sigmund Freud’s ideas influenced by Charles Darwin and Hughlings Jackson?

2. Freud divides the mind into three parts: ego, id, and superego. Describe the role each of these parts plays in the psyche. How do the parts work together? How do they conflict?

3. Freud was interested in an individual’s psychological development.

a. He developed the pleasure principle and the reality principle to talk about an individual’s development. Describe the two principles.

b. He proposed stages of psychosexual development. Identify the stages and describe what is happening in each of them.

4. Freud describes three types of consciousness. Describe them and give an example of each.

5. In his book The Project for a Scientific Psychology, Freud introduced three ideas. What are these ideas, and, from Freud’s perspective, what role do they play in psychological health and psychological problems?

6. Other researchers have expanded on Freud’s psychodynamic perspective. What contributions have the following researchers made to our understanding of personality?

a. Alfred Adler?

b. Anna Freud?

c. The “object relations” group?

d. Carl Jung?

e. Karen Horney?

7. Describe projective techniques in the study of personality including the following questions:

a. What is their focus?

b. How do they work?

c. What are two well-known projective techniques?

d. What can we learn from them?

e. What are some pros and cons in using projective techniques?

The Existential-Humanistic Approach to Personality

In the middle of the last century, a group of psychologists began to explore alternatives to the Freudian emphasis on unconscious motivations, as well as to the Skinnerian emphasis on learning as the basis of all human processes. Both Freud and Skinner deemphasized the role of choice in a person’s life. One alternative approach was based on existential and humanistic concerns.

The existential movement began in Europe in the 1800s and gained followers after World War II. The major focus of existentialism was the nature of human nature and the meaning of life. One critical question of existentialism focused on the basic experience of being alive and living life. This movement was combined with humanistic psychology in the United States in the 1950s and 19060s.

One important aspect of the humanistic tradition was an emphasis on choice. Throughout our lives, we all make critical choices that determine who we are and how we live our lives. In this way, we express our personality by the choices we make. For the humanistic psychologists, these choices can lead to positive as well as negative outcomes. One critical aspect of these choices according to the existential-humanistic approach is our ability to be true to one’s self. One emphasis was how to live in the present and consider one’s choices. This is sometimes contrasted with being a “company person” who just does what they are told in their job without thinking about themselves or their own values. Other psychologists such as Rollo May spoke of the courage required to live life to the fullest.

What makes life worth living? One researcher who has focused on moment-to-moment experience is Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi (1990) (https://www.ted.com/talks/mihaly_csikszentmihalyi_on_flow). One of his questions was what makes life worth living? In order to answer this, Csikszentmihalyi examined the experiences of artists, writers, athletes, and others to see what they enjoyed the most. What he found was that many of the experiences they enjoyed, they performed for their own sake. The subjective experience of these activities he referred to as being in the flow. When one is in a flow state, there is no problem with concentration, that is, a lack of distraction, and little notice of the passing of time. Playing music, playing tennis, or even playing video games can produce the flow state in some individuals.

Your experience takes place on a number of levels, including your biology, your culture, and your psychology. Maslow, as you learned previously, suggested that certain needs must be met before one can make psychological decisions. Maslow emphasized the possibility of self-actualization or fully being who one really is. Within this view is the possibility of growth. For Maslow, this growth does not come from a deficit or lack as suggested by Freud and Skinner. Rather, growth is an important human motivation in itself.

Carl Rogers also emphasized that each of us has the basic tendency to actualize (Rogers, 1951). Although different in specifics, this tendency to actualize is a motivating factor similar to Freud’s suggestion of a life drive. This drive for Rogers was toward becoming a fully functioning person who is authentic in relation to their internal and external environment.

Social Cognitive Theories of Personality

Social cognitive theories of personality are also referred to social learning theories. These theories emphasize a person’s view of the world, that is, the person’s cognitive understanding of their environment. The social aspect is that many of these beliefs are the result of our interactions with others. In this sense, they are learned through our interactions. The research related to the social cognitive theory of personality typically focuses on how a person’s cognitive views of the world interact with situational variables to produce different behaviors.

One researcher associated with the social cognitive approach is Julian Rotter. Rotter also wrote the first book that described a social cognitive approach to personality, Social Learning and Clinical Psychology (Rotter, 1954). For example, would you more likely buy a lottery ticket if there was a 2-to-1 chance of winning $10 or a 100-to-1 chance of winning $1,000. Most people would choose the $10 since your odds are better. In this way, our expectations are more a factor of our choices than the actual reward. Thus, what we expect to happen is a critical factor.

Following this line of reasoning, Rotter was able to show that a person’s behavior in solving a problem depended on whether they believed that it was based on skill or on luck. If the person thought it was based on skill, they would work harder at the task than if they thought it was based on luck. Rotter referred to this tendency as locus of control. Those with an internal locus of control believe that their environment is more in their control. Those with an external locus of control see events as more outside of their efforts and more the result of chance. Rotter saw locus of control as an enduring perspective or personality trait on the part of the person.

A related concept referred to as self-efficacy was developed by Albert Bandura at Stanford University (Bandura, 1977). If you believe that you can perform a certain task, then you have high self-efficacy, whereas if you do not believe you can do the task, you have low self-efficacy. Bandura performed a number of studies showing that by increasing self-efficacy, actual performance on a task would improve. In terms of therapy, Bandura was able to show that if someone who was afraid of snakes could come to believe that it is possible to reduce this fear, then actual change could be seen with an actual snake (Bandura, 2019; Bandura et al., 1980). Just coming to believe that you could be chosen for a job will actually increase your interview performance.

Although self-efficacy and locus of control may seem similar, there are theoretical differences. Rotter emphasized the general expectation that it is possible to accomplish a goal through your efforts. Bandura, on the other hand, emphasized whether you actually had the ability to accomplish the task. At times, one may show both an internal locus of control and high self-efficacy. However, it is also possible that you believe that you have the ability but that the situation prevents you from succeeding. That is, you believe you can accomplish a task at work but your boss will not follow your suggestions. In this case you would have high self-efficacy but an external locus of control. Further, Bandura’s research suggested that it was possible to change one’s level of self-efficacy in a given situation, whereas Rotter tended to see locus of control as a global personality trait.

Current Perspectives on Personality

Current perspectives on personality have tended to focus on the stability of personality traits. This is not to suggest that we do not act differently in very different situations. What personality does focus on is our long-term ways of relating to the world. As individuals move into adulthood and become employed, for example, there are changes in approaches to one’s environment. However, like intelligence, we can note differences between individuals as these changes take place. This section will focus on how psychologists currently approach the topic of personality.

Typical Personality Traits

In the early part of the 20th century, most psychologists who discussed personality used a theoretical perspective that emphasized the descriptive nature of specific traits. One of the first psychologists to study personality was the Harvard University professor Gordon Allport (1897—1967). Allport emphasized traits as the basic units of personality. He saw traits as “generalized and personalized determining tendencies—consistent and stable modes of an individual’s adjustment to his environment” (Allport & Odbert, 1936). He further suggested that traits are based in the nervous system. Although Allport studied personality traits, he also emphasized the uniqueness of the individual.

Allport asked his assistant, Henry Odbert, to count all of the words in an English dictionary that could be used to describe characteristics of personality. Sometime later in 1936 Odbert returned with some 17,953 words. These included words such as shy, arrogant, warm, reliable, manipulative, and conscientious. These terms were analyzed to determine more basic traits and the components that underlay these.

Researchers during the first half of the 20th century tended to focus on only a few traits. Outgoing individuals were described in terms of extraversion, for example. Those who frequently took risks in activities such as skydiving were referred to as sensation seekers. The problem was that there were far too many personality terms to describe a person’s behavior and experience. This made it difficult to create a coherent theory of personality.

Using mathematical techniques that compared the similarity of responses between the different measures offered an alternative to a purely descriptive approach. This was the approach chosen by Raymond Cattell (1905—1998). He used factor analysis, which seeks to find similarities among a large number of individual terms. He began with the 17,953 words that Allport and Odbert had used. From this Cattell created 170 personality descriptions, which he then reduced to 16 personality factors. These are shown in Table 13-2.

The next development continued the factor analytic approach and was directed by Robert McCrae and Paul Costa (1987; see also McCrae, Gaines, & Wellington, 2013, for an overview). They used a factor analytic approach to personality, which suggested five major personality dimensions. This is referred to as the five-factor model (FFM), often called the Big 5. These five dimensions include extraversion, neuroticism, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness.

Extraversion is associated with sociability, cheerfulness, energy, and a sense of fun. This dimension ranges from being passive, quiet, and inner-directed to being active, talkative, and outer-directed. Neuroticism is associated with a tendency to express distressing emotions and difficulty experiencing stressful situations. This dimension ranges from being calm, even-tempered, and comfortable to being worried, temperamental, and self-conscious. Openness as a personality trait is associated with curiosity, flexibility, and an artistic sensitivity, including imaginativeness and the ability to create a fantasy world. This dimension ranges from inventive and curious to cautious and conservative. Agreeableness is associated with being sympathetic, trusting, cooperative, modest, and straightforward. This dimension ranges from being friendly and compassionate to being competitive and outspoken. Conscientiousness as a personality trait is associated with being diligent, disciplined, well-organized, punctual, and dependable. This dimension ranges from being efficient and organized to being easygoing and careless. These five dimensions are shown in Table 13-3.

Scores are determined by asking individuals a number of questions about what they like to do and how they experience the world. If someone says they worry a lot, then he or she would score higher on the factor of neuroticism. Are personality scores of any value? It turns out from a number of studies that how people score on personality dimensions can predict how they will behave, especially if the behavior is sampled across a number of different situations over time (McAdams & Olson, 2010; Soto, 2019).

A meta-analysis of studies examining agreeableness, conscientiousness, and emotional stability (opposite pole of neuroticism) found these variables to be related to a positive investment in work and family (Lodi-Smith & Roberts, 2008). Another review reported that longevity was related to extraversion and consciousness. Overall, factors of the five-factor model were also related to family relationships and occupational satisfaction and performance (Ozer & Benet-Martinez, 2008). Further, meta-analyses link optimism, extra-version, conscientiousness, and openness to better coping and neuroticism to poorer types of coping (Carver & Connor-Smith, 2010).

Solid research on the FFM has also demonstrated that there is a consistency of results across a variety of cultures (McCrae, 2009). However, there are changes across the lifespan. In one study, McCrae and colleagues (1999) gave personality measures to individuals in five countries. They found that there were some changes in the levels of the five factors over the lifespan. These differences were found in all of the cultures studied (McCrae et al., 1999). Overall, lifespan data suggest that from age 18 to 30, individuals show declines in neuroticism, extraversion, and openness to experience and increases in agreeableness and conscientiousness. McCrae and Costa (1996, 1999) suggested that the five factors of personality be considered as biologically based tendencies, as opposed to culturally conditioned characteristic adaptations. Genetic research has supported this perspective. Additional research from around the world shows that individuals become more agreeable, more conscientious, and less neurotic during early adulthood (Bleidorn et al., 2013). These authors suggest that these changes in personality traits are the result of making the transition to adult roles.

Evolutionary Perspectives on Personality

Darwin set the stage for looking at personality traits in his discussion of the traits of animals and the manner in which they can be modified by selective breeding. Evolutionary researchers have also noted the way in which dogs became domesticated over the past 100,000 years. The value of looking at personality traits in animals is that it helps to better understand the role of genes and adaptations seen in human processes. Since many human processes have been shown to be built upon earlier ones seen in a number of different animals, it is possible to ask the same question concerning personality. The feature “Applying Psychological Science: Personality in Animals” focuses on this aspect of personality research.

Focusing on humans, Daniel Nettle (2006) has examined the McCrae and Costa dimensions of five factors in relation to an evolutionary perspective. He suggests that each of the dimensions has a particular advantage given certain environmental conditions. Extraversion, for example, is associated with success in mating, having social allies, and exploration of the environment. Neuroticism, on the other hand, is associated with greater vigilance and labeling situations as dangerous. In times of little stress, extraversion would be a successful strategy. However, in dangerous times, it may not afford the necessary caution as would be found with neuroticism. Nettle’s summary of the costs and benefits of each of the Big 5 factors is presented in Table 13-4.

Some individuals form routines and display consistent behavior even when changes to the task are made. We all know humans who develop routines and rarely change their behaviors even when the world around them is changing. A critical question for an evolutionary psychology is why do responsive and unresponsive individuals coexist within a population. A second related question is why do some individuals show this consistency over time and situations. If we think about being responsive to the environment, we realize that this involves some costs in the form of effort and the inability to spend the energy in other ways. However, we can also imagine that paying attention to, and being influenced by, the environment could bring us some benefits.

Wolf and his colleagues suggest that for responsiveness to spread throughout a population, the benefit of the behavior must be greater than the cost. Otherwise, unresponsiveness would spread. Further, responsiveness appears to spread when it is rare but not when it is common. One example of this is a store having a sale. If only a few individuals pay attention to the sale, then their effort pays off. Indeed, this would support future efforts to pay attention to sales. However, if everyone in a population pays attention to the store’s announcement of a sale, then the effort would not pay off in terms of long lines and limited goods. These individuals would be discouraged from going to future sales.

Another question is what leads to the stability of personality traits across generations. One possible mechanism suggested by a variety of environmental researchers is assortative mating. Assortative mating suggests that humans do not randomly choose partners but choose partners who are like themselves on some selected trait. If those traits could be represented by the personality characteristics of the five-factor model, then the traits would be more likely to be passed on to the couple’s children. That is to say, if extraverts found themselves attracted to other extraverts, then the genetic predisposition for the temperament associated with extraversion would be passed on. The data related to what one finds attractive in others according to the five-factor model shows mainly positive correlations between one’s own traits and those they find attractive in others. This supports an assortative mating model.

The actual manner in which personality develops appears to be a complicated question. Most theoretical explanations suggest that by the age of 5 or 6, personality characteristics are becoming stable. McCrae and Costa suggest that the five factors develop out of temperament and that this development is not influenced by environmental influences. An alternative model would suggest that personality is like language in that the basic predispositions are present, which carries with it a universal grammar, but that the environment influences which domains of personality become predominantly activated for a given individual. The research on attachment suggests one way in which environmental factors can lead to more enduring traits. In either case, having a variety of styles available would ensure survival in a great variety of situations. An interesting question is whether personality can also be seen in animals, as described in the box: Applying Psychological Science: Personality in Animals.

Applying Psychological Science: Personality in Animals

Is your cat agreeable like your dog, and are some cats or dogs more agreeable than others? Most of us who have had pets would say yes, we see differences within species in terms of behaviors. In the last 20 years, a number of researchers have begun to explore individual differences in animals, which is referred to as animal personality (Carere & Maestripieri, 2013; Pennisi, 2016; Stamps & Groothuis, 2010; Wolf & Weissing, 2010). Personality is used with animals in the same way as with humans. That is, behaviors that are consistent over time is the focus of study. Animal personality traits have been documented in many vertebrates including salamanders, fish, lizards, birds, rodents, minks, sheep, nonhuman primates, and other mammals. For example, not unlike humans in performing tasks, some bees when collecting nectar are fast and inaccurate while others are slow and accurate (Burns & Dyer, 2008).

One important question is the manner in which personality in animals is related to mating patterns (Schuett, Tregenza, & Dall, 2010). That is, does the expression of particular personality factors make one animal of a species more attractive in sexual terms to another animal? For example, female zebra finches who are exploratory prefer to mate with male finches who are highly exploratory. Female finches who are not exploratory show no preference. Likewise, male great tits showed preferences for females who showed exploration styles similar to themselves. In one review of the literature, it is suggested that the relationship between personality variables in animals that combine to represent a personality is quite convincing (Schuett, Tregenza, & Dall, 2010).

A number of researchers have sought to describe personality traits of animals including applying the five-factor model to animals (Bouchard & Loehlin, 2001; Gosling, 2001; Pennisi, 2016). One aspect of this is the value that different personality traits may have. For example, stickleback fish can be described in terms of boldness and activity level. Boldness clearly helped the fish to survive in groups as they competed for food. However, the shy fish that were alone also survived, whereas bold fish when alone became the target of predators as they were more obvious. In general, it is suggested that personality factors can play an important role in evolution.

Thought Question: How do personality factors (for example, in the five-factor model) help us understand how well an individual animal adapts to its environment? What are some differences to consider within a species? What are some differences to consider across species?

CONCEPT CHECK

1. How is an existential-humanistic approach to personality different from Freud’s psychodynamic approach and from B. F. Skinner’s learning approach?

2. What are the fundamental characteristics of a social cognitive theory of personality?

3. How is Julian Rotter’s concept of locus of control similar to as well as different from Albert Bandura’s concept of self-efficacy?

4. If traits are the basic units of personality, how many different traits are there? Describe the process of how psychology moved from Allport and Odbert’s 17,953 to Cattell’s 170 (later reduced to 16) to McCrae and Costa’s 5 dimensions. What was the primary driver of this process?

5. Describe McCrae and Costa’s five-factor model (FFM) of personality, including:

a. Identify the five dimensions, including a description of the range of each dimension.

b. How it is used to assess an individual’s personality.

c. Examples of predictive value in other areas of individual behavior.

d. Consistency of results (1) across an individual’s lifespan; (2) across generations; and (3) across cultures.

6. Daniel Nettle was interested in whether he could explain the existence of individual personalities from an evolutionary perspective.

a. What evolutionary advantage did he conclude that personality provides?

b. How did he explain the existence of both individuals who readily adapt to changing conditions as well as those who remain consistent in the face of change?

Genetic Factors in Personality

With the extensive research on the five-factor model of personality, the contribution of genetics has become important (Knopik, Neiderhiser, DeFries, & Plomin, 2017). Since the FFM has been shown to be stable over time, these traits could help us understand the genetics of personality (Turkheimer, Pettersson, & Horn, 2014). Over the last 40 years a number of studies have shown consistent results on the heritability of the major five personality traits (de Moor et al., 2012). Twin, adoption, and family studies have convincingly shown that each of the five personality traits is heritable in the range of 33% to 65%. Initial studies often focused on extraversion and neuroticism.

John Loehlin examined 24,000 pairs of twins from five different countries (Loehlin, 1992). As can be seen in Table 13-5, the highest correlations of about.5 are seen for twins reared together. The next highest correlations (.38) are for twins reared apart. These correlations drop to about.20 for fraternal twins reared together. The lowest correlations are for adoptive parents and their offspring, which are almost zero. These results suggest that personality is influenced by genetic factors.

At this point, every review for more than 30 years of the genetics of personality using all five factors of the FFM have concluded that identical twins are more similar for personality traits than are fraternal twins. Likewise, the personalities of adopted children are more similar to the personalities of their biological parents than to those of their adoptive parents (Turkheimer, Pettersson, & Horn, 2014). This also suggests that personality traits are less influenced by the shared family environment in which children are raised. Of course, any one child can be influenced by a number of environmental factors such as losing a parent or frequent changes in home life. Thus, environmental influence tends to be child-specific.

Physiological Factors Related to Personality

The case of Phineas Gage described previously helped professionals realize that brain changes can influence personality. Specifically, the frontal lobes were seen to play an important role in personality factors. In this century, research suggested the importance of genetic factors related to the five-factor model as shown through twin studies. Given the genetic components of the five-factor model, we might also expect that there would be particular cortical networks and brain areas involved.

Using brain-imaging techniques, an initial study examined volume of brain areas associated with each of the five factors (DeYoung et al., 2010). Extraversion was associated with the volume of the medial orbitofrontal cortex. This is an area associated with the reward value of events. Given that those who are high in neuroticism see the world in an anxious and negative manner and are sensitive to threat, it is not surprising that limbic areas show greater volume. There was also reduced volume in the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex. This area is associated with evaluation of self and emotional regulation. Agreeableness is associated with areas of the brain associated with socialness and understanding the actions of others. Conscientiousness was associated with volume in the areas involved in planned actions and guiding behavior. Similar results have been found in other studies. There were no consistent regions for openness.

Cultural Factors in Personality

Cultural factors in behaviors are easy to see. If you travel in different parts of this country, you quickly hear different ways of speaking English including the words that are used. If you want to order a soft drink, in some places you ask for a coke, in others a pop, or even a soda pop. Behaviors that some may see as rude, such as stepping in front of another to get into a store, would be seen as normal by others. If you watch people come to a traffic light, some will wait for the walk/don’t walk sign to change while others will cross the street if no cars are coming. In some parts of the country, if you come to a four-way stop in a car, the others there may signal for you to go first, while in other parts of the country, everyone tries to be the first to go. In our popular view of the world, we see the people of some cultures such as the Southern Mediterranean of Europe as more friendly and Northern Europeans as calmer and more stoic. In Middle Eastern countries, men may hold hands with their male friends while in the West they do not. Culture also plays a role in how personality is expressed.

Cultures can be described in terms of being collective or individual oriented. Collective cultures emphasize the manner in which each person is related to the group. There are duties that you are expected to show to your family, people you work with, and your community. China and some South American countries emphasize the collective aspects of their culture. Individual cultures on the other hand place more emphasis on the individual and his or her achievements. The United States, Australia, and part of Western Europe emphasize individualism. Thus, in individualistic cultures standing out is important, whereas in collective cultures, not standing out is important. This results in different cultures describing significant personality dimensions in very different terms. These dimensions also have important implications for how personality traits are expressed.

One worldwide study of personality examined the five-factor model in 56 nations (Schmitt et al., 2007). This study of 17,837 individuals sought to determine whether any differences exist across cultures. One important result of this study was that individuals across the world give similar answers to the same question when asked on different occasions. This suggests that the five-factor model can be understood worldwide. Further, the five factors are related to one another in similar ways around the world.

In terms of extraversion, there was similarity of levels in major regions except East Asia, South Asia, and South America, which had lower levels of extraversion. Neuroticism also was found at similar levels except for South America, Southern Europe, and South Asia, which had higher levels. Those in Africa reported lower levels of neuroticism. Openness was also similar in all regions except for South America in which it was higher, Africa in which it was slightly lower, and East Asia in which openness was much lower. As shown in Figure 13-5, agreeableness varied by region. This was also true for conscientiousness (Figure 13-6).

Figure 13-5 Agreeableness by world region.

Source: Schmitt, Allik, Mccrae, and Benet-Martínez (2007).

Figure 13-6 Conscientiousness by world region.

Source: Schmitt, Allik, Mccrae, and Benet-Martínez (2007).

In another study, Robert McCrae and his colleagues examined the five-factor model in 51 countries with 12,156 individuals (McCrae et al., 2005). These researchers conclude that their results were not related to the economic development of each country. Looking at the five factors by country, there is a similarity of results. However, some regions show differences, as found in other studies. One type of analysis performed shows the relationship between items used in the five-factor model by country. Figure 13-7 shows how similar the countries are on two factors, extraversion and emotional stability (neuroticism). For example, the African countries cluster on introversion, whereas the European countries and America cluster on extraversion.

Figure 13-7 Graph of how different countries cluster on the measures of extraversion and neuroticism.

Source: McCrae, Terracciano, and Personality Profiles of Cultures Project (2005).

Both studies of personality around the world show striking similarities in the responses on the five-factor model. Within these similarities, it is possible to mathematically highlight the differences between countries as was the case with the circular placement of countries. Overall, this suggests that personality is part of the human condition worldwide. If personality is part of the human condition, then we should see it expressed in other ways than answering questions on a personality test. An alternative approach is described in the box: The World Is Your Laboratory: Knowing Personality by What You See.

The World Is Your Laboratory: Knowing Personality by What You See

Personality as measured by psychologists typically is determined by how you respond to items on a questionnaire. “I like to be with lots of people.” “I avoid difficult situations.” “People don’t take care of each other.” These types of questions ask how we experience ourselves. However, what if there was a personality test based on your bathroom or bedroom? Sam Gosling and his colleagues asked this very question (Gosling, Ko, Mannarelli, & Morris, 2002).

These researchers described their research in an article titled “A Room with a Cue: Personality Judgments Based on Offices and Bedrooms.” In two separate studies, the researchers first examined the perceptions of participants concerning their own office space and another set of participants in terms of their own bedrooms. Besides participants, a team of observers who did not know the participants made personality ratings based entirely on the occupants’ personal environments. The observers could note whether the person had an organized office or bedroom, were there lots of books available, what was the nature of the color of the décor, and so forth. From that, one could also note a personality dimension. For example, if there were lots of memorabilia in the room, you might guess the person to be sentimental. Organization would suggest more conscientiousness. A snowboard in the room might suggest sensation seeking. Since each of the five factors is made up of underlying dimensions, it was also possible to obtain a rating for each of the factors—extraversion, agreeableness, consciousness, emotional stability, and openness to experience. Further, the observer’s ratings could also be correlated with the participant’s actual score on a measure of the five-factor model.

What did they find? Sam Gosling and his colleagues found that indeed one’s environment does reflect one’s personality. Although the results were similar, bedrooms revealed more information about the person than did offices. The observers showed the most agreement in terms of openness and conscientiousness. Openness was reflected in terms of the use of space and decoration and the variety of books and CDs. Conscientiousness was reflected in the use of space, being clean, organized, and not cluttered. In bedrooms, agreeableness was associated with the room being cheerful, colorful, clean, organized, neat, comfortable, and inviting. Overall, this research suggests that the five-factor model reflects not only how you see yourself, but also how you organize your world.

Thought Question: Take the opportunity to be a personality researcher: Invite other students to rate your personality by looking at your bedroom using the dimensions listed above. How much do the others agree? Do they agree with your own rating of your personality?

CONCEPT CHECK

1. What can we say about the influence of genetics and environment on personality? What kinds of studies are used to tease out these influences?

2. What have we learned from brain-imaging studies about different areas in the brain being associated with specific personality factors from the five-factor model?

3. A number of research studies have looked at personality across cultures. List three important findings from this research on the similarities and differences in personality traits in different cultures.

4. How has research characterized our ability to judge the personality of others? In what ways does this surprise you?

Self

The self has been an important concept in psychology. Yet, the term has been used in a number of different ways. In his Principles of Psychology published in 1890, William James points out a number of these. One of these is to distinguish between “I” and “me.” Me is that part of ourselves that we observe and describe. I, on the other hand, is more difficult to comprehend since it is the process that does the observing and describing. When you are asked to describe yourself on a personality measure such as the five-factor model, it is the “me” that you are describing.

At times, we do not like what we see when we look at ourselves. Karen Horney made a distinction between the “real self” and the “ideal self.” The real self is who we actually are. It is this real self that Maslow saw as capable of self-actualization. The ideal self is who we believe we should be or want to be. This could include the idea that everyone should love us, that we should not make mistakes, and so forth. Horney suggested that it required considerable psychic energy to keep this ideal world intact and thus would limit growth of the real self. Jung also suggested that acting or believing that one was different from their true self could cause distress.

Self-Concept

Social psychology adopted the “I” and “me” distinction as it developed a theory of self-concept (Gecas, 1982; Markus & Kitayama, 2010). Self was seen as a process that develops as we relate to others in social interactions. We see ourselves with our friends, playing sports, walking in the woods, and all the other experiences you had as you grew up. As such, our self-concept includes our body, our emotions, and our thoughts. These “me” aspects typically include our experienced gender, physical appearance, how we relate with others as well as the types of music, movies, and books we like. It is my “me,” which is at the center of my experiences.

The self is seen as an adapting process that develops in terms of the social environment in which one lives. As such, the self requires a larger social context that includes values, practices, and social interactions. Social psychologists see the self-involved in all aspects of human behavior (Markus & Kitayama, 2010). It even has a special place in our attentional world. For example, if you are at a party, you tend to ignore others that you are not directly interacting with. However, if your name is mentioned in another conversation across the room, you quickly notice it.

Our self-concept is storied in network memory systems that reflect our past experiences, as shown in Figure 13-8. This information is referred to as our self-schema. Some of these characteristics can have very strong connections with the idea of self, while others may be less strongly connected. You can ask yourself which characteristics strongly describe you at this moment. New experiences such as going to college can produce changes in our self-concept.

Figure 13-8 Our self-concept includes how we see our self, which involves our memories of our past interactions.

The self has also been studied in different cultures (Markus & Kitayama, 2010). There are different expectations of the self in different cultures. The nail that sticks out is likely to be hammered down in Japan, whereas the squeaky wheel attracts grease and attention in the United States. Likewise, American students are expected to speak out in class in comparison to Korean students who are not. Those who compete for Olympic medals in Japan are more likely to describe their failures than are American Olympic medalists. Further, Western Europeans are less likely to associate happiness with personal achievement than are North Americans.

A related term is self-esteem, which relates to the evaluation of the self. That is, self-esteem refers to the way we value and accept ourselves. Aspects of self-esteem are thus more affective than cognitive. As humans, we want to be told we are good—a good student, a good person, a good romantic partner. A desire for self-esteem has been seen as a motivating factor in humans, as noted by both philosophers and psychologists (Greenberg, 2008).

Self-esteem involves the subjective feelings of self-acceptance and self-respect. However, individuals seeing themselves as superior to others just because they have high self-esteem is not part of the concept of self-esteem. Seeing oneself as superior and much better than others is better described as narcissism. Narcissism includes having a grandiose view of one’s self and one’s talents.

Ulrich Orth and his colleagues conducted two long-term studies examining the development of self-esteem (Orth, Robins, & Widaman, 2012; Orth, Maes, & Schmitt, 2015). These studies suggest self-esteem increases beginning at about 16 years of age and peaks in a person’s 50s to 60s. It then decreases into old age, although not every study finds a decline (Orth & Robins, 2014). The increase in self-esteem from adolescence to middle age is seen for both males and females. Further, in the lifespan studies, self-esteem is more of a variable trait in that individual scores appear to remain stable in relation to others over time (Trzesniewski, Donnellan, & Robins, 2003).

What are the advantages of having self-esteem? This question has been asked in a number of studies. Overall, self-esteem is predictive of a person’s success in a number of critical domains (Orth & Robins, 2014). These experiences include satisfaction in marriage and close relationships as well as job success and job satisfaction. Higher self-esteem is also predictive of physical and mental health.

Not only are there advantages to having higher self-esteem, but there are disadvantages associated with lower self-esteem. In three different studies involving participants from both New Zealand and the United States, low self-esteem was associated with aggression, antisocial behavior, and delinquency (Donnellan, Trzesniewski, Robins, Moffitt, & Caspi, 2005). Further, a meta-analysis of 77 studies of depression and 18 studies of anxiety showed a relationship of low self-esteem with these affective problems (Sowisto & Orth, 2013).

The positive and negative consequences related to self-esteem have created a self-help industry. There are numerous books on how to boost your self-esteem. As such, the concept of self-esteem has developed a life of its own (Orth & Robins, 2014), and the development of self-esteem has been implemented in the classroom, sports competitions, the workplace, and a number of other life situations. However, these endeavors have been largely untested.

Neuroscience of Self

Paying attention to ourselves has raised a number of questions for those interested in neuroscience (Heatherton, 2011; Sui & Gu, 2017). How can we understand what it means for “I” to watch “me,” and is this different from watching other processes? Further, how does watching our relations with others lead to changes in behaviors and brain processes? Clearly, we must both regulate ourselves and inhibit certain processes.

From an evolutionary perspective, the brain has evolved distinct mechanisms for knowing ourselves, knowing how others respond to us, detecting threats from within the social group, and regulating actions in order to avoid being excluded from those groups (Krendl & Heatherton, 2009). Knowing ourselves is a critical process. This relates to our self-concept, which draws on memory systems and prior learning.

One important brain area for self-knowledge is the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC). Increased activation is seen in the mPFC when individuals think about themselves as opposed to other people (Goldberg et al., 2006; Sui & Gu, 2017). This was also true for remembering what happened to them in the past (Cabeza et al., 2004).

This research also helps us understand cultural perspectives as to whether the self is seen as just belonging to me or whether my definition of self involves others. In one fMRI study, Chinese participants who are more collective in orientation showed mPFC activation when thinking about themselves and significant others in their lives. American participants who are more individualistic only showed mPFC activation when thinking of themselves (Zhu et al., 2007).

Additional research focusing on self-esteem has shown different parts of the frontal areas involved in terms of type of social processes (Yang, Xu, Chen, Shi, & Han, 2016). In particular, feedback concerning social relationships shows fMRI activation in the mPFC, whereas self-reflection involves the orbitofrontal cortex. Further, activity in these areas was positively correlated with self-esteem.

The Characteristics of a Healthy Self

In the next chapter, you will learn about personality disorders. In the process of creating definitions of personality disorders, the American Psychiatry Association sought to define what a healthy personality would look like. That is, what is a healthy self? One conceptualization suggested in DSM-5 (APA, 2013) is to consider the healthy self in terms of a “Self and Interpersonal Functioning Continuum.”

The first aspect of this continuum is identity. In terms of identity, the healthy person would see herself as a unique person with stable boundaries between herself and others. The self would have a history that the person understands. The person would also have an accurate sense of who she is and what she can do.

Another aspect of the self is self-direction. Healthy self-direction reflects the ability to have both meaningful short-term and long-term goals consistent with one’s identity. Self-direction also includes a sense of what would be productive for society and how to interact with others. Internally, healthy self-direction also includes the ability to reflect on one’s life in a productive manner.

The healthy personality also suggests the ability to have positive interpersonal relationships. One aspect of this is empathy. This includes understanding how another person experiences his life and what that person might want to accomplish. It also includes the ability to experience and accept different perspectives toward life and goals and how one’s own behavior may influence others. In healthy relationships, intimacy is also critical. Intimacy includes having a relationship with another person that includes mutual connectedness and a valuing of that other person. The healthy personality values closeness and seeks it when appropriate.

Thus, a person can develop a stable self that has an identity and has the ability for self-direction and the fulfillment of goals. This person can also have positive interpersonal relationships in which she relates to others in an intimate and empathetic manner. This person we would describe as healthy.

Not having a stable self and the ability to have intimate and empathetic relationships with others is a significant part of a personality disorder (Kernberg, 1984). One consideration for a future version of DSM is to place personality disorders on a continuum in terms of the person’s disturbance of self and others as just described (Bender, Morey, & Skodol, 2011). That is, you could rate the person’s level of identity, self-direction, empathy, and intimacy on four scales. This would more clearly reflect those areas in which there are fundamental personality disturbances.

Another way to consider these relationships is from an evolutionary perspective by viewing personality disorders as a failure to solve adaptive life tasks relating to identity or self, intimacy and attachment, and prosocial behavior (see Livesley, 2007; Millon & Strack, 2015, for overviews). From this perspective, it has been the evolutionary task of a human to perform on three levels. The first level is the individual level and the development of a self. The second level is the interpersonal level, which reflects attachment processes. And the third is the group level and involves prosocial behavior, altruism, and the cooperation needed for the functioning of society.

CONCEPT CHECK

1. What can we say about the influence of genetics and environment on personality? What kinds of studies are used to tease out these influences?

2. What have we learned from brain-imaging studies about different areas in the brain being associated with specific personality factors from the five-factor model?

3. A number of research studies have looked at personality across cultures. List three important findings from this research on the similarities and differences in personality traits in different cultures.

4. How has research characterized our ability to judge the personality of others? In what ways does this surprise you?

5. The self has been an important concept in psychology. Yet, the term has been used in a number of different ways. What contributions did the following researchers make to the evolving concept of the self:

a. William James?

b. Karen Horney?

c. Markus and Kitayama?

d. Ulrich Orth and colleagues?

6. Neuroscience is just beginning to study how the brain is involved in focusing on the self. Briefly describe three findings that begin the process of understanding the connections between the brain and the self.

7. Describe the five characteristics of a healthy self as defined by the American Psychiatry Association. What led them to develop a definition of a healthy self?

Summary

Learning Objective 1: Describe the historical influences on the early study of personality.

The study of personality is the study of internal dispositions or ways of being.

The Greeks suggested that all things in the world, including personality and temperament, can be understood in terms of just four elements—earth, air, fire, and water. In the body, they thought that these four elements were connected with the humors—yellow bile (fire), blood (air), phlegm (water), and black bile (earth). About 100 years after Hippocrates, Theophrastus wrote a series of personality sketches he referred to as “characters.” Each of the characters described one or more psychological traits. These included the flatterers, the garrulous, the penurious, the tactless, the boors, and the surly.

In the early part of the 20th century, Carl Jung invented the terms introversion and extraversion to describe a person’s approach to the world. Extraversion was seen as a flow of energy outward to the world, whereas introversion was seen as a flow inward toward a person’s inner world. Also in the 20th century, Ernst Kretschmer in Germany and later William Sheldon in the United States sought to develop a personality system that combined physical body type with temperament. Sheldon suggested that an individual could be described in terms of three types. The endomorph body type is soft and round with a relaxed and sociable temperament. The mesomorph body type is muscular, strong, and low fat with an energetic and assertive temperament. The ectomorph body type is long and thin with more of a cerebral and introverted temperament. Later in the 20th century, Hans Eysenck translated the idea of Greek humors into modern psychological language in terms of two dimensions.

Learning Objective 2: Summarize the main ideas of the psychodynamic perspective on the development of personality.

Freud divides the mind into three parts: id, ego, and superego. The id is present at birth. It represents those instinctual processes that help us to obtain our basic needs. Beginning at about 3 years of age, the child learns to mediate his or her desires. This reflects the development of an ego. The ego is seen to be part of personality, which helps us navigate the demands between external requirements and our internal experiences. At a later point, an individual develops a moral sense, which directs our behaviors with one another. The structure is referred to as the superego and reflects perspectives we learn from our parents and our culture as well as our own moral development.

Freud also suggested there are stages of development that are often referred to as psychosexual development. At each of these stages there is a physical focus and a psychological theme. The first stage is referred to as the oral stage. The second stage is referred to as the anal stage of development. The third stage is referred to as the phallic stage, which lasts from 3 and a half to 7 years of age. This is followed by the latency phase, which lasts from 7 years of age to puberty. The final stage is the genital phase and represents an understanding of one’s sexuality and the development of mature relationships.

During Freud’s time, there were a number of professionals who took a psychodynamic approach and adopted or modified Freud’s ideas in their theories and the treatment of their patients. Alfred Adler emphasized social processes, especially in childhood, as important for personality development. Anna Freud placed more emphasis on the ability of the ego to live life and adapt to the demands of life. John Bowlby believed that early relationships with significant people in one’s life constituted a powerful role in relation to many personality factors. Two others who expanded the psychodynamic perspective were Carl Jung, who emphasized the evolutionary aspects of development, and Karen Horney, who emphasized social aspects of personality development.

Projective testing techniques were formally introduced in the first half of the 1900s as a means of detecting primary process types of thinking and feeling including instinctual and motivational processes. Two of the most well-known projective techniques are the Rorschach Inkblot and the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT).

Learning Objective 3: Summarize the main ideas of the existential-humanistic approach to personality.

The major focus of existentialism was the nature of human nature and the meaning of life. One important aspect of the humanistic tradition was an emphasis on choice. Throughout our lives, we all make critical choices that determine who we are and how we live our lives. In this way, we express our personality by the choices we make. For the humanistic psychologists, these choices can lead to positive as well as negative outcomes. One critical aspect of these choices according to the existential-humanistic approach is our ability to be true to one’s self.

Learning Objective 4: Summarize the main ideas of the social cognitive theories of personality.

Social cognitive theories of personality are also referred to as social learning theories. These theories emphasize a person’s view of the world, that is, the person’s cognitive understanding of their environment. The social aspect is that many of these beliefs are the result of our interactions with others. In this sense, they are learned through our interactions. The research related to the social cognitive theory of personality typically focuses on how a person’s cognitive views of the world interact with situational variables to produce different behaviors.

Learning Objective 5: Summarize the main ideas of the current perspectives on personality.

Current perspectives on personality have tended to focus on the stability of personality traits. This is not to suggest that we do not act differently in very different situations. What personality does focus on is our long-term ways of relating to the world. As individuals move into adulthood and become employed, for example, there are changes in approaches to one’s environment. However, like intelligence, we can note differences between individuals as these changes take place.

Gordon Allport identified traits as the basic units of personality. He saw traits as “generalized and personalized determining tendencies—consistent and stable modes of an individual’s adjustment to his environment.” McCrae and Costa used a factor analytic approach to personality, which suggested five major personality dimensions. This is referred to as the five-factor model (FFM), often called the Big 5. These five dimensions include extraversion, neuroticism, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness.

Over the last 40 years, a number of studies have shown consistent results on the herit-ability of the major five personality traits. Twin, adoption, and family studies have convincingly shown that each of the five personality traits is heritable in the range of 33% to 65%.

Using brain-imaging techniques, an initial study examined volume of brain areas associated with each of the five factors (DeYoung et al., 2010). Extraversion was associated with the volume of the medial orbitofrontal cortex. This is an area associated with the reward value of events. Given that those who are high in neuroticism see the world in an anxious and negative manner and are sensitive to threat, it is not surprising that limbic areas show greater volume. There was also reduced volume in the dorsomedial prefrontal cortex. This area is associated with evaluation of self and emotional regulation. Agreeableness is associated with areas of the brain associated with socialness and understanding the actions of others. Conscientiousness was associated with volume in the areas involved in planned actions and guiding behavior.

Culture plays a role in how personality is expressed. Cultural factors in behaviors are easy to see. If you travel in different parts of this country, you quickly hear different ways of speaking English, including the words that are used. Behaviors that some may see as rude, such as stepping in front of another to get into a store, would be seen as normal by others. In our popular view of the world, we see the people of some cultures such as the Southern Mediterranean of Europe as more friendly and Northern Europeans as calm and stoic. Cultures can be described in terms of being collective or individual oriented. Collective cultures emphasize the manner in which each person is related to the group. There are duties that you are expected to show to your family, people you work with, and your community. China and some South American countries emphasize the collective aspects of their culture. Individual cultures, on the other hand, place more emphasis on the individual and his or her achievements. The United States, Australia, and part of Western Europe emphasize individualism.

A recent development in the consideration of personality from an evolutionary perspective is the idea that humans have evolved an ability to judge the personality of others. Part of this idea is based on the variety of social psychological research studies that have shown that humans are able to make quick judgments concerning the attributes of other humans. Not only are humans able to make quick judgments but these judgments reflect an accuracy of processing that one would not expect given the limited experience with the person and the complex possibilities available.

Learning Objective 6: Define the concept of self.

The self is seen as an adapting process that develops in terms of the social environment in which one lives. As such, the self requires a larger social context, which includes values, practices, and social interactions. Social psychologists see the self as involved in all aspects of human behavior. Self-esteem relates to the evaluation of the self and refers to the way we value and accept ourselves.

Paying attention to ourselves has raised a number of questions for those interested in neuroscience. From an evolutionary perspective, the brain has evolved distinct mechanisms for knowing ourselves, knowing how others respond to us, detecting threats from within the social group, and regulating actions in order to avoid being excluded from those groups. Knowing ourselves is a critical process. This relates to our self-concept, which draws on memory systems and prior learning.

The healthy person would see herself with identity, self-direction, and positive interpersonal relationships.

Study Resources

Review Questions

1. The definition of personality has been conceptualized differently across human history. This chapter has discussed a number of different historical conceptions of personality. Describe the historical timeline of the study of personality.

2. Three different perspectives or approaches in understanding personality were presented in this chapter: (1) psychodynamic, (2) existential-humanistic, and (3) social cognitive. Answer the following questions from each of the three perspectives:

a. What are some core research questions researchers from this perspective would want to answer?

b. What are some research methods researchers from this perspective would choose to study those questions?

c. What population would researchers from this perspective focus on in their studies?

d. How would researchers from this perspective characterize a healthy personality? An unhealthy personality?

e. How would researchers from this perspective approach treatment for personality problems?

3. Traits are said to be the basic units of personality. Dimensions are also proposed as an approach to define personality.

a. What are some differences between the two approaches?

b. What are some similarities between the two approaches?

c. What are the advantages and disadvantages of each approach?

d. Is there a way to integrate them into a single perspective? If so, how would you do that?

4. Describe our current understanding of the concept of personality from the perspective of the following seven levels: cultural, social, individual, cognitive/emotional, physiological, brain, and genetic?

5. What is personality? How has your concept of the term changed from your study of this chapter?

6. The self has been an important concept in psychology. Yet, the term has been used in a number of different ways. How do the following terms—or sets of terms—expand our understanding of the self:

a. I and me

b. Real self and ideal self

c. Self-concept

d. Self-schema

e. Self-esteem

7. What is self? How has your concept of the term changed from your study of this chapter?

For Further Reading

✵ Dumont, F. (2010). A History of Personality Psychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.

✵ Sulloway, F. (1983). Freud Biologist of the Mind. New York: Basic Books.

Web Resources

✵ Flow—https://www.ted.com/talks/mihaly_csikszentmihalyi_on_flow

Key Terms and Concepts

agreeableness

animal personality

assortative mating

conscientiousness

defense mechanisms

existential-humanistic approach

existentialism

extraversion

five-factor model (FFM) or the Big 5

healthy self

humanistic neuroticism

openness

personality

projective technique

psychodynamic approach

real self

Rorschach inkblots

self-concept

self-esteem

self-realization

self-schema

social cognitive theories of personality

Thematic Apperception Test (TAT)

traits