S.

No
5 3

INTRODUCTION

Personality
Simply stated, personality refers to a person's style of interacting with the environment, especially the social environment. Personality is often considered to be relatively stable across time and from situation to situation.

“ Personality development”
Personality is defined as the enduring personal characteristics of individuals. Although some psychologists frown on the premise, a commonly used explanation for personality development is the psychodynamic approach. The term psychodynamic
5 3

describes any theory that emphasizes the constant change and development of the individual. Perhaps the best known of the psychodynamic theories is Freudian psychoanalysis. Freud's Psychoanalytic theory It has been suggested that this article or section be merged into Psychoanalytic theory. (Discuss) Drives Freud believed that two basic drives- sex and aggression- motivate all our thoughts and behaviors. He referred to these as Eros (love) and Thanatos. Eros represents the life instinct, sex being the major driving force. Thanatos represents the death instinct (characterised by aggression), which, according to Freud, allowed the human race to both procreate and eliminate its enemies.

THE STRUCTURE OF PERSONALITY
Freud conceived the mind as only having a fixed amount of psychic energy (libido). The outcome of the interaction between the id, ego and the superego (each contending for as much libidinal energy as possible) determines our adult personality.

The tripartite personality Freud believed that personality had three parts- the id, ego, and superego- referring to this as the tripartite personality. The id allows us to get our basic needs met. Freud believed that the id is based on the pleasure principle i.e. it wants immediate
5 3

satisfaction, with no consideration for the reality of the situation. As a child interacts more with the world, the ego begins to develop. The ego's job is to meet the needs of the id, whilst taking into account the constraints of reality. The ego acknowledges that being impulsive or selfish can sometimes hurt us, so the id must be constrained. The superego develops during the phallic stage as a result of the moral constraints placed on us by our parents. It is generally believed that a strong superego serves to inhibits the biological instincts of the id (resulting in a high level of guilt), whereas a weak superego allows the id more expression (resulting in a low level of guilt). Defense Mechanisms The ego having a difficult time trying to satisfy both the needs of the id and the superego, employs defense mechanisms. Repression is perhaps the most powerful of these. Repression is the act by which unacceptable id impulses (most of which are sexually related) are "pushed" out of awareness and into the unconscious mind. Another example of a defense mechanism is projection. This is the mechanism that Freud used to explain Little Hans' complex. Little Hans is said to have projected his fear for his father onto horses, which is why he was afraid of horses.

Psychosexual Stages It has been suggested that this article or section be merged into Psychosexual development. Freud believed that at particular points in the child's development, a single part of the body is particularly sensitive to sexual stimulation. These eurogenous zones are the mouth, anus and the genital region. At any given time, the child's libido is focused on the primary eurogenous zone for that age. As a result, the child has certain needs and demands that are related to the eurogenous zones for that stage. Frustration occurs if these needs are not met, but , a child may also become overindulged, and so may be reluctant to progress beyond the stage. Both frustration and overindulgence may lead to fixation- some of the child's libido remains locked into that stage. If a child is
5 3

fixated at a particular stage, the method of obtaining satisfaction that characterised that stage will dominate their adult personality.

Stages
It has been suggested that this article or section be merged into Psychosexual development. Oral stage (0-18 months) This stage begins at birth, when the mouth is the primary source of libidinal energy. A child who is frustrated at this stage may develop an adult personality that is characterised by pessimism, envy and suspicion. The overindulged child may develop to be optimistic, gullible, and full of admiration for others. Anal stage (18 months-3 yrs) The child's focus on pleasure on this stage is on eliminating and retaining faeces. This represents the conflict between the id, which derives pleasure from the expulsion of bodily wastes, and the super-ego which represents external pressure to control bodily functions. If the parents are too lenient in this conflict, it will result in the formation of an anal expulsive character who is disorganised, reckless and defiant. Conversely, a child may opt to retain faeces, thereby spiting his parents, and may develop into an anal retentive character who is neat, stingy and obstinate. Phallic stage (3-6 yrs)

5 3

During this stage, boys develop unconscious desires for their mother and become rivals with their father for her affection. This is reminiscent with Little Hans' case study. So the boys develop a fear that their father will punish them for these feelings (castration anxiety) so decide to identify with him rather than fight him. As a result, the boy develops masculine characteristics and represses his sexual feelings towards his mother. This is known as the Oedipus complex. During recent years, it is now believed that girls go through a similar process. This is called the electra complex. Freud believed that the resolution of this female conflict comes much later and is never truly complete.

Latent (6 yrs-puberty) The latency period is not a psychosexual development as such, but a stage when sexual drives lie dormant. Freud saw latency as a period of unparalleled repression of sexual desires and eurogenous impulses.

Genital stage (puberty onwards) This stage begins at puberty, when sexual urges are once again awakened. Interest now turns to heterosexual relationships. The less fixation the child has in earlier stages, the more chance they have of developing a "normal" personality, and thus develop healthy meaningful relationships with those of the opposite sex. Although many people view Freud's descriptions of personality development as pure fantasy, his ideas have endured and have had far reaching influences both in and outside psychology. Freud has changed the way we think about the importance of childhood, and also made us aware of the unconscious elements of our psyche that are essential for development.

Personality

5 3

Simply stated, personality refers to a person's style of interacting with the environment, especially the social environment. Personality is often considered to be relatively stable across time and from situation to situation.

Trait Theories
Unlike states (which are considered to be temporary, such as hunger or thirst), a trait is a relatively stable tendency to behave in a certain way. Although the trait may require some environmental trigger to release the behavior, the trait is considered to be part of the person, not the environment. For example, a person who has the trait of high aggressiveness probably behaves aggressively only in certain situations, situations in which less aggressive persons do not show aggressive behavior. Traits are generally considered to be continuously distributed, not all or nothing characteristics. You and I may both be aggressive, but you more so than I. The goal of trait theories to construct a relatively small number of personality dimensions that is useful for summarizing the differences between individuals. Gordon Allport, one of the major figures in the study of personality, found that the English language contains at least 18,000 words that describe personality characteristics. For example, consider these: Friendly, agreeable, amiable, cordial, kind, sociable, warmhearted. Clearly we need to reduce the number of words in our vocabulary of personality. Surface Traits are those that are inferred from individual differences in specific behaviors. To identify surface traits, personality researchers collect data on a large number of behaviors from a large number of persons and use statistical techniques to identify clusters of behaviors that correlate well with one another within each cluster. Central Traits are those which are inferred from surface traits. Statistical techniques are employed to identify clusters of surface traits that correlate well with one another but not with the surface traits in other clusters.

5 3

The hierarchical nature of specific behaviors, surface traits, and central traits is illustrated in Gray's

Can you describe specific behavior that might be included in the surface cluster "pugnaciousness" (prone to physical fighting) or "competitiveness?" Do note that the inclusion of "argumentativeness," "pugnaciousness," and "competitiveness" under the central trait of "aggressiveness" is based on empirical grounds -- if our research were to find that there is not a good correlation between verbally sparring and physically sparring, then those two surface traits would not be included in the same central trait. Raymond Cattell developed a personality questionnaire called the 16 PF. Cattell reduced the 18,000 personality adjectives in English to about 170 surface traits and then clustered these into 16 Personality Factors (central traits). A person taking this questionnaire responds "yes, occasionally, or no" to about 200 statements such as "I like to go to parties." From these responses, a score is computed for each of the 16 central traits. Hans Eysenck developed a model in which there are only three central traits:
1)

Introversion - Extroversion: Introverts try to avoid (social) stimulation while extroverts seek it.

5 3

2) 3)

Neuroticism - Stability: Neurotics get emotionally upset and thus are moody, anxious, impatient, etc. Psychoticism - Nonpsychotism: Psychotics are aggressive and lack concern for others.

The Big Five Theory proposes the following five central traits:
1) 2) 3) 4) 5)

Introversion - Extroversion: As above Neuroticism - Stability: As above Openness to Experience - Nonopenness: Open folks are imaginative, independent, curious, interested in many things, etc. Agreeableness - Antagonism: Being courteous, selfless, trusting, and cooperative going along with agreeableness Conscientiousness - Undirectedness: The conscientious are careful, reliable, diligent, ambitious, etc.

Stability of Traits. The research here involves testing the personality of many people at various times throughout their lives. These measurements may involve the subjects taking personality tests and/or may involve having others rate the subjects' personalities. The Big Five traits are remarkably stable across time, at least after the age of about 30. Correlations between one administration and another run between . 50 and .70, even when there are many years (30 or more) between measurements, and even when the persons rating the subjects differ between one time and the other. Maturation. There are some common changes with increasing age. For example, as we get older we tend to get less neurotic (thankfully!), less extroverted, less open to experience, more conscientious, and more agreeable.

Predicting Behavior. There is considerable evidence that knowing an individual's personality test scores helps us predict his or her behavior. For example, persons who score high on Extroversion are, compared to introverts, less disturbed by intense stimuli, more likely to choose to live and work with many people, more adventuresome in their sexual behaviors, more likely to look a person in the eye when speaking with em, and more likely to talk a lot at group meetings. Sometimes we can even predict adult behavior from personality tests given during childhood. For example, children who were at age 3 identified as having low
5 3

self-control were, at age 21, more likely to have been fired from a job or convicted of a crime. We should keep in mind that individual differences in personality may often be masked by social forces. In a familiar social situation, persons all acting in the same social role may all act pretty much the same -- but observe them in a novel, ambiguous, or stressful situation and individual differences related to personality are likely to emerge. Walter Mischel has argued that we could predict behavior much better if we measured situation specific dispositions rather than global traits. Mischel et al. observed, repeatedly, 19 different types of behavior which would reasonably be considered to be related to the global characteristic of conscientiousness. They found high consistency within each of these 19 different types of behavior but much lower consistency across categories. For example, a student who was likely to prepare very neat notes for one class was also likely to do the same for e's other classes, but that student was not much more likely than average to keep e's bed nicely made every day.

The Physiology of Personality. Individual differences in central traits can be related to individual differences in physiology. For example, Eysenck suggested that the brains of introverts are more easily aroused than those of extroverts. He also suggested that all persons try to achieve an optimal level of arousal. Accordingly, to achieve such an optimal level of arousal introverts would be expected to avoid highly stimulating environments while extroverts would be expected to seek great stimulation. Evidence supporting Eysenck's suggestions include the following: o Introverts outperform extroverts on tasks that require focused concentration in situations where there is little stimulation. o Extroverts do better in tasks that require attending to many stimuli in an arousing environment. o Introverts show a greater physiological response to a sudden noise

5 3

o Introverts' performance on a learning task is more affected by a distracting noise than is extroverts' performance. o Introverts are less tolerant of painful electric shock than are extroverts. o In a quiet situation, PET scans show that the frontal lobes of introverts are more active than are those of extroverts. o A stimulant drug (caffeine) worsened performance on a learning task for introverts, but facilitated performance for extroverts. o And introverts even salivate more when lemon juice is squired in their mouths than do extroverts. The Genetics of Personality. There is considerable evidence of heritability of personality traits. For example, identical twins (even when reared apart) are much more similar in personality than are fraternal twins. For most traits that have been evaluated, including all of the Big Five, heritability estimates range from about .40 to about .50. Heritability has even been found to be high in traits that one would think are greatly influenced by environmental factors. Consider Traditionalism (conservative values and respect for discipline and authority), for example -- heritability for this characteristic has been estimated to be about .60. As another example, the heritability of one's attitude about the death penalty has been estimated to be about .50. I expect that most genetic effects on personality are polygenic rather than resulting from the action of a single gene. There is, however, some evidence of single gene effects. For example, there is a significant relationship between neuroticism and the presence of a singe allele that increases the action of serotonin. Likewise, there is a significant relationship between the trait of novelty seeking (impulsiveness, excitability, and extravagance) and another single allele, one that decreases the action of dopamine.

Ultimate Explanations of Individual Differences in Personality
1. Why are there individual differences in personality? 2. Why hasn’t natural selection simply given us all the one best set of personality traits? 3. Even in many nonhuman animals, there is considerable diversity in behavioral styles. What is the adaptive value of such diversity? Diversified Investment. One answer to these questions has to do with a parental strategy that is similar to diversification in one’s investment portfolio. As you are no doubt aware, at any given time some investments will do very well, some
5 3

investment so-so, and others will do very poorly. At other times the investments that did poorly at an earlier date might do marvelously, and those that did well earlier might do poorly later. If you put all of your assets into one type of investment, you risk loosing it all during a time when that type of investment crashes and burns. On the other hand, if you diversify your investments, then you greatly reduce your risk of loosing it all. From the genetic perspective, producing offspring is an investment in the future. If those offspring prosper and multiply, our genes live on. If those offspring crash and burn, our genes disappear. If our environment were unchanging, it might be possible to construct the perfect personality for that environment. In that case, the best strategy would be to produce only offspring with that perfect personality. But our environment is not constant. When our environment is constantly changing, the perfect personality is a moving target. If we were to give all our children the wrong personality for the environment in which they will reach reproductive age, then we might loose all. A safer strategy might be to diversify our investment by producing children with a variety of personalities. In that way, it is more likely that at least some of them will survive and thrive, those who happen to have the personalities best to take advantage of the environment as it is when they mature. Filling Different Niches. A niche is a role that an organism can adopt in a dynamic biological system. In a typical biological system there is a variety of different niches. Each niche has a limited capacity -- that is, it can support only so many individuals living in that niche. Genetic diversity among organisms may allow them better to exploit all the possible niches in an environment. This may be true even within a single species. Gray uses the example of pumpkinseed sunfish. One niche available to them is to stick close to the shore, hiding among the vegetation there, and not moving about much. A quite different niche also exploited by these fish is that in the open water, where the fish who does not move about quickly will be eaten by predators. Pumpkinseeds that occupy these different niches tend to differ on both physical and behavioral characteristics. Diversity in the species allows it to be more successful in exploiting the environment, with some individuals specialized for the one niche, while other individuals are specialized for the other niche. The environments of humans (including their social environments) provide them with a multitude of niches to be filled. It is almost certain that the best personality to fill one niche is different from the best personality to fill a different niche.

5 3

Accordingly, producing humans with diversity of personalities may enable our species to more successfully exploit its environment. Intra-familiar Diversity. If we compare the personalities of individuals who live in the same family, we find that they are not much more similar than are equally related individuals who live in different families. For example, the correlation between the personalities of brothers that live in the same family is about the same as that of brothers who have been reared apart. Some have interpreted this to mean that the family has little effect on personality development, other than by the sharing of genes. Others have pointed out that siblings raised in the same family do not really share identical environments. Family environments change with time. For example, consider my family. I was born in to a family that was, in many ways, a typical working class family, lower middle class. My father who worked in a glass factory, received a lot of promotions during his lifetime, which caused a considerable change in the family environment across the years. By the time my younger brother was born ten years later, our family was solidly middle executive class. After I left home to make my own life, my younger siblings moved with my parents to Paris, where my father headed the European division of Corning Glass Works. This was an environment totally foreign to me. In many ways they were raised in a family quite different from that in which I was raised. Sibling Diversity. Within a single family with two or more children, there may be additional factors that promote diversity in personality. Consciously or unconsciously, both children and parents may act in ways that increase diversity in personality among the children within a family. If all the children try to fill the same niche, then sibling rivalry may become dangerously high. If each child can find a niche that is his or hers alone to exploit, then there is likely to be less competition among siblings and each child can the best within e’s own niche. Birth Order. Clearly the family environment for first born children would be expected to be different from that of later born children. There have been many studies of the effect of birth order on personality and other characteristics. In my opinion, the demonstrated effects of birth order have been neither clear nor large. Gray discusses Frank Sulloway’s research on effects of birth order. He argues that first-borns are, for a while, the only child in the family, and this leads them to identify with the parents, to fill the niche that the parents most support.
5 3

As a result, first-borns tends to be more conscientious, achievement oriented, conservative, traditional, and respectful of authority than are later-borns. Later born children cannot compete effectively within the niche that the first born has exploited, so they must carve out their own niches, adopting alternative roles in which they can excel. This causes later-borns to be more open to new experiences and more friendly than first-borns. Gender Differences. Women score, on average, about one standard deviation higher than men on measures of friendliness. This is considered to be a very large difference, equivalent in magnitude to a 200 point difference in total SAT score. This gender difference is found across cultures. Women also tend to score higher on measures of anxiety and conscientiousness, but the magnitude of these differences is considerably smaller. Men score higher on measures of sensation seeking, although the difference between men and women tends to decline with age. Gender, Personality, and Life Satisfaction. Persons whose personality is atypical for members of their gender are likely to be less satisfied with life than are those who fit the stereotype. For example, young men who are shy tend to be emotionally distressed and unhappy, but there is no such association between shyness and unhappiness in young women. Likewise, women who have competitive personalities tend to have low self-esteem, but in men competitiveness is associated with high selfesteem. Natural Selection and Gender Differences. One can argue that men and women have faced different reproductive challenges over many generations, and that natural selection has accordingly equipped men and women with different personalities, each best suited to the type of challenges typically encountered by gender-mates. For example, women are specially equipped (with breasts) to take care of infants, and accordingly they are also equipped with traits of nurturance, cooperation, and caution. Men, on the other hand, have had to compete with one another for access to women and other reproductive resources, and accordingly they have been equipped with traits of competitiveness, aggressiveness, and risk-taking. There even appears to be a hormonal basis for sex differences in personality, with oxytocin causing greater friendliness in women and testosterone causing greater aggressiveness in men. Culture and Gender Differences. An opposing viewpoint is that culture has been a greater force than natural selection in the shaping of gender differences in personality.
5 3

According to this theory, biological differences between the sexes may have shaped different cultural expectations for men and women very early in our species’ history, with these cultural expectations then causing even greater differences between men and women. Across the generations these gender differences caused by cultural expectations may have become greater and greater, by a sort of positive feedback loop -- when men and women differ in personality, that reinforces the cultural expectation of gender differences, which may create even greater gender differences, and so on. Gender versus Sex. These days it can be confusing to know when to use the term “gender” and when to use “sex.” In general, it is appropriate to use the term “sex” when referring to characteristics that are more influenced by biology and “gender” when referring to characteristics that are more influenced by culture. It is not, however, always very clear to me whether a particular characteristic really is more influenced by culture than by biology or vice versa. See my document Sex/Gender/Whatever for more on this.

Psychodynamic Theories
These theories emphasize the role of mental forces in determining personality. The founding father of these theories was Sigmund Freud. Freud was not a psychologist. He was a medical doctor practicing in Vienna, Austria in the late 1800’s. Freud came to believe that many of the problems which his patients presented were not caused by diseases of the body but rather by mental conflicts. Freud theorized that the most basic instincts or drives of humans are related to sex (eros) and death or aggression (thanatos). These drives live in the unconscious id. Is his native German, the word Freud used was "es," which means "it" -- that animal thing down there that drives me towards eros and thanatos. When translated to English, somebody decided to use the term "id" instead. I guess the third person generic pronoun was just not mysterious enough for the translator. The id's eros and thanatos motivate us to think about and even act out behaviors that are socially unacceptable. If these bad thoughts from the id break through to consciousness, they make us anxious. Accordingly, he conscious part of our mind needs somehow to manage to keep id-motivated thoughts from breaking through to consciousness. We employ a variety of ego defense mechanisms for that purpose. The ego ("ich" in the original German, which means "I"). While the id operates on the "pleasure principle" (do
5 3

what feels good and do it now regardless of any consequences, the ego operates on the "reality principle" (try to satisfy the id in ways that not destructive to the self and society). A third part of the mind, not mentioned by Gray, is the superego ("uber ich" in the original German), which operates according to the morality principle -- it makes us feel bad when we behave contrary to accepted norms. According to Freud,” individual differences in personality are caused by differences in our unconscious motives, how they are manifested, and how we defend against them”. Repression is the most basic of the ego defense mechanisms. It operates by putting up mental barriers to prevent socially undesirable thoughts from entering consciousness. This is done without our awareness of the construction of barriers. But these barriers are not perfect. Bad thoughts may slip through. When they do, we employ other ego defense mechanisms to distort those bad thoughts in ways that make them seem not so bad. I shall discuss only a few of the more common ego defense mechanisms here. Suppression involves the conscious avoidance of thinking about unpleasant things. This differs from repression in that we are aware that we are erecting barrier to the unpleasant thoughts. Projection involves our attributing the undesirable motives or characteristics to others rather than to ourselves. As an example of projection, consider research done by Robert Sears. He asked fraternity members to rate themselves and their fraternity brothers on various characteristics, such as stinginess. He found that men who were rated as high in such a characteristic but who denied having it themselves tended to rate their brothers as high in that characteristic -- projecting their own characteristics onto others. Reaction Formation is when we turn a bad thought or motive into its good opposite thought or motive. As an example, consider homophobia, the irrational fear and hatred of homosexuals. It has been argued that homophobia results from a reaction formation -- that is, persons who have unconscious desires to engage in homosexual activity become very anxious about that when these desires start leaking into consciousness, so they think very contrary thoughts.
5 3

One research study testing this hypothesis measured male subjects’ homophobia (by a questionnaire) and then directly measured engorgement of their penises while they were watching videos of men engaging in homosexual activities. Despite admitting to feeling any arousal while watching such videos, homophobic men’s penises became significantly more aroused than then those of non-homophobic men. Displacement occurs when the energy from a bad desire is redirected to an acceptable behavior. For example, the boy whose id wants to kill his father (to remove the primary rival for his mother’s love) may displace the energy from that bad motive into boxing, football, or rugby. Interestingly, the basic idea of displacement is also found in some theories of nonhuman animal behavior -- for example, an animal who really wants to bite his rival may funnel that energy into less dangerous behaviors, such as grooming itself or pawing the earth repeatedly. Sublimation is just a special case of displacement in which the substitute activity is not only acceptable but also highly meritorious. For example, a man with the id of Jack the Ripper might become a first-rate surgeon. Rationalization is my favorite sort of defense mechanism. Here we come up with socially acceptable reasons for our behavior or our thoughts, but they are not the real reasons. For example, I convince myself that my great interest in the study of sexual behaviors is because I am a scientist interested in the effects of natural selection on behavior, and reproductive behaviors are those which are most likely to be greatly affected by natural selection. Yeah, sure -- that is what I say, even what I think myself, but the truth is to be found in my horny id! I should note that there are other psychodynamic theories that do not hypothesize that sex and aggression are the most basic human drives. Karen Horney emphasized the drive for security, stemming from the child’s dependence on its parents for survival. Alfred Adler stressed the drive to achieve. Object Relations Theorists stress the conflicting drives of attachment versus autonomy. I should also note that all of these psychodynamic theories suppose that the first few years in life are the most critical years for the formation of one’s personality.Social/Cognitive Theories These theories suppose that it is learned beliefs and habits that shape one’s personality. Here to there may be unconscious elements, but here they are not from repressed bad motives but rather from habits that have been practiced so much that they become automatic, executing without consciousness.
5 3

Some psychologists even argue that the majority of human behavior is controlled by such unconscious learned habits. For example, when I drive to work, I don’t think about what I am doing -- I am on auto pilot, I think about other things, but my unconscious does the driving. Likewise, when you interact socially with others, you don’t have time to stop and think about every thing to say -- you are on automatic pilot there too. Sometimes you may later ask yourself “What was I thinking when I said ‘so and so.’” The truth is, you weren’t thinking at all, you were on auto-pilot! Julian Rotter was a pioneer in the development of social/cognitive theories of personality. He is best known for his work on Locus of Control. The basic idea here is that individuals have different beliefs with respect to the extent to which they are in control of the rewards that they get or don’t get in life. The person with an external locus of control believes that it is mostly luck and the influence of powerful others that control whether you get rewards or not. Persons with an internal locus of control believes that they themselves control whether they get rewards or not, through their ability and their effort. There is considerable evidence that persons with an internal locus of control are more likely to take charge of their lives and be less anxious and more content with life than are those with an external locus of control, but the effects of locus of control are often not very impressive in magnitude. Rosina Chia and two of her colleagues in our department have conducted numerous research projects involving locus of control, both in this country and several other countries. My first exposure to Rotter’s locus of control instrument was as a freshman at Corning (NY) Community College. I had just gotten out of the military and was going through all these moronic activities for freshman orientation. One of the things they did was to sit us down and make us fill out some questionnaires. One of them was Rotter’s scale. I hated it, because of its forced-choice format (see Table 15.3 on page 600 of our text for some example items). On nearly every item I thought “how can I choose one of these two extreme alternatives, the truth is somewhere in between.” Well, a couple of weeks later I was asked to see one of the school psychologists. He explained that they had reason to believe that I was doomed to failure at school unless I got some counseling. He did not tell me how he knew my fate, but I later learned it was because I scored extremely external on Rotter’s scale -- duh, I just got out of the military, where it

5 3

seemed like some Arschloch (that is German for “powerful other”) was telling me what to do every minute. Well, external that I was, I consented to the counseling when asked to do it by a powerful other. Near the end of the semester the psychologist asked me to fill out a questionnaire. It was Rotter’s scale, again. I asked if this was the same questionnaire that I had filled out during freshman orientation. He said “yes.” I said that I had the feeling that he wanted me to answer these questions quite differently than I had during freshman orientation and I asked him if that were true. Without saying “yes,” he indicated that I was correct. Again, being the true external that I was, I consented to his request and scored highly internal. He was happy, especially since I had very high grades that semester. I gave him data that suggested that his program of counseling was effective in modifying the locus of control of external students who would otherwise have failed in school. Philosophically I am still very much external in locus of control. I am a strict determinist, one who thinks that nothing happens without a cause -- and ultimately the causes of every action one takes, every thought one has, and every decision one makes can be traced to events that have taken place outside of one self. I have argued earlier that I think that “free will” is a delusion, but a useful one, one that makes it more likely that the individual will try to take charge of his or her life and make something out of it. Albert Bandura stressed individuals’ self-efficacy, their beliefs about their ability (or lack of ability) to accomplish specific tasks. This sounds a lot like Rotter’s locus of control, but it differs in you can think that you are quite able to accomplish some specific task but not think that doing so will necessarily bring you rewards. For example, you might have very high self-efficacy with respect to doing college work but an external locus of control with respect to being able to get a good, satisfying job after graduation -- after all, who know what the economy will be like then, how lucky you will be in your job search, what powerful others may help or hinder you, and so on. Research on the topic of self-efficacy indicates that thinking that you can accomplish some task may actually help you accomplish the task. After all, if you are not capable of doing it, why waste your time trying? Both parents and teachers might be more successful at their jobs if they were to spend a little time convincing their children and their students that they are capable persons.
5 3

Optimism vs Pessimism. I have often said that pessimism is the better strategy because the pessimist is either going have the satisfaction of seeing that he is right or will be pleasantly surprised that he was wrong. I, however, am the sort of pessimist who expects things to go bad, but who works very hard to try to prevent that from happening. There is no doubt that I have paid for that by suffering more from anxiety than I would if I were an optimist, but my pessimism has not prevented me from leading a very productive life. Pessimism can be counterproductive, however, in those who decide that there is no sense in even trying if everything is bound to go wrong. Optimism may motivate one to take charge and work hard, but in some it can be counterproductive -- the person who thinks that nothing bad can come to him (Alfred E. Newman’s “What, me worry?”) is likely to act in ways that increase the chances that bad things will come to him.

Humanistic Theories
These theories stress the uniquely human (or so we think) ability to perceive ourselves as apart from the rest of the world. I happen to think that we share this ability with some other animals, but this is not the time for that discussion. Humanists speak of one’s “phenomenological reality.” This phrase refers to an individual’s conception of self and world. Similar to Kantian transcendentalism, the notion of a phenomenological reality may include a recognition that we cannot be directly aware of any concrete reality, that “reality” in human experience is a mental event and a very personal thing, something that we each construct from our sensory and social experiences. Our personalities differ because we have constructed different phenomenological realities. Kant might add that they don’t differ all that much, because we all have common intuitions (Anschauungen). Carl Rogers stressed the role of self-concept. His patients seemed to obsessed with “finding their true selves” and “becoming their true selves.” Whether this is something common to humans or just common to the sort of clients who sought treatment to Rogers can be disputed. In any case, Rogers argued that when people find their true selves (or are deluded into thinking they have), they are happier and more productive, felling like they are in charge of their lives rather than being told what to do by others. Hmmm, sounds a bit like locus of control and the delusion of free will, doesn’t it? Abraham Maslow stressed the importance of “self-actualization” as the highest level need in a hierarchy of human needs, from the very basic (like having enough to eat and drink, shelter from the elements and predators), to the nice (being loved and
5 3

feeling good about oneself), to the ultimate achievement of self-actualization in which one has become all he can and is at one with the world. Maslow argued that the needs lower in the hierarchy must be satisfied before one is motivated to achieve the higher level needs. This always makes me think of the starving artist or musician who sacrifices his or her basic needs in exchange for opportunities to excel artistically.

Cultural Relativity of Personality Theories
All of the theories we have discussed were created by, and validated with, Western European or North American people. Do they do an adequate job of describing and explaining individual differences in personality in persons from other cultures? There is some evidence that they do not. Those interested in this question are encouraged to check out the literature in cross-cultural psychology.

PERSONALITY AND PATHS TO SUCCESSFUL
DEVELOPMENT
Research traditions in developmental psychology vary with respect to how much emphasis they give to successful development. Historically,most studies of personality development have been biased by the goal of seeking to understand maladjustment and behavioral problems, such asa nxiety or aggression, and have tended to overlook the study of pathways to successful utcomes. Whereas t he study of problem behavior is clearly oriented toward predicting, xplaining, and preventing social and clinical problems, the study of successful development is made more difficult because the end point (success) is more elusive and thus more difficult to operationalize and to promote.To study successful personality development one must first have a way of thinking about the course of lives and a way of assessing how adaptational processes are atterned over time. We can identify three general approaches to this conceptual problem: growth models, life-span models, and life-course models. Each of these social-developmental approaches provides a framework for understanding adaptational processes and the coherence of personality development by focusing on the distinctive ways individuals organize their behavior to meet new environmental demands and developmental challenges.rowth and stage models Growth models of personality development are not homogeneous in their orientation, but are based on different traditions and conceptual backgrounds.
5 3

For example, humanistic theories of personality development are best known for emphasizing the potential for positive development.People can take charge of their lives and direct them toward creativity and self-actualization which involves selffulfillment and the realization of one’s potential l (Maslow, 1954). In contrast, psychoanalytically oriented models tend to emphasize the growth of ego through age stages.Integrity is the goal of successful development in Erikson’s (1950) theory,as well as in Loevinger’s (1997) model of ego development and in the model of Labouvie-Vief (e.g., Labouvie-Vief, Hakim-Larson, DeVoe, and Schoeberlein, 1989) which integrates Piaget’s theory of cognitive development with emotions and social relations. Erikson’s theory covers eight stages across the life-span. Each stage involves a crisis or an age-specific challenge that should be satisfactorily resolved for optimal development.The theory states that a successful resolution of each crisis results in the refinement of a predominantly positive quality, such as trust in infancy. The psychosocial crises to be solved in adulthood concern intimacy versus isolation, generativity versus stagnation, and integrity versus despair. Common virtues or ego skills such as hope, will, purpose, and skill in childhood, fidelity in adolescence, and love, care, and wisdom in adulthood emerge as successful outcomes of the crises. Development is based on successful resolution of psychological crises leading finally to integrity in old age.The passage from one developmental stage to another is also central to Levinson’s work (1978, 1986), who has studied what he calls “life structures”: things that a person finds important in work and love, as well as the values and emotions that make these important. Life structures are subjected to change during transitional periods when people reappraiseand restructure important things in their lives. According to Levinson, people spend about half their adult lives in transitional periods.Sanford (1962), another psychodynamically influenced theorist, described a fully developed person as one characterized by high degrees of both differentiation and integration. Specifically, the fully developed person has a rich and varied impulse life, a broad and refined conscience,a strong sense of individuality, and a balance of control and expression of needs. As for when people reach this stage, Sanford placed the development of impulse control in adolescence and the development of ego, or the controlling function of personality (e.g., maturity), in adulthood. In both cases, Sanford did not presuppose that personality ever stopped changing: “The highly developed person is always open to new experience, and capable of further learning.” Life-span models Research on life-span personality development is concerned with three major influence systems (Baltes, Lindenberger, and Staudinger, 1998): (1) age-graded influences (e.g., education) which shape individual development
5 3

in relatively normative ways; (2) history-graded influences (e.g.wars) which make development different across historical periods; and (3) non-normative influences (e.g., accidents) which may have powerful effects on an individual’s development. Life-span development theories hold that psychological functioning is not fixed at a certain age. Rather, “during development, and at all stages of the life span, both continuous (cumulative) and discontinuous (innovative) processes are at work” (Baltes, 1987, p. 613). Development is defined as “selective age-related change in adaptive capacity” (Baltes, Staudinger, and Lindenberger, 1999, p. 479) and special attention is given to the developing person’s contribution to the creation of his or her own development (Brandtst¨adter, 1998). Individuals steer their physical, cognitive, social, and personality development by constructing strategies for coping with various developmental challenges, by setting goals, and by making choices. According to Brandtst¨adter (this volume), such intentional self development over the life span is geared to the realization and maintenance of normative representations that individuals construct of themselves and their future. The function and significance of goals and choices in successful development is especially apparent beyond childhood, and several chapters in this volume are explicitly concerned with these topics in their efforts to study successful development. Pulkkinen, Nurmi, and Kokko (this volume) discuss how individuals steer their development by setting goals and making choices as responses to developmental challenges. On the one hand, personal goals reflect major age-graded transitions and normative demands. On the other hand, individual differences in personal goals reflect motivational orientations, such as security seeking or aiming at personal growth, which result in intraindividual coherence in goal patterns. With data from the Jyv¨askyl¨a Longitudinal Study of Personality and Social Development, Pulkkinen and her colleagues show that some personal goals are so pervasive that they operate as unifying life themes that defie long-term successful and unsuccessful development. An agentic conception of human nature is also central in Heckhausen’s work on control. Heckhausen (this volume) proposes that humans strive to maximize primary control of their environment throughout life. However,control capacities undergo radical changes and losses and individuals have to disengage from unattainable goals and manage their own emotional responses to such loss experiences. This type of control that is directed at the internal world of the individual is referred to as secondary control. Heckhausen shows how the age-normative structure of life-course transitions allows individuals to anticipate decremental changes in the opportunities to attain developmental goals. For example, an individual can increase primary control striving when approaching “developmental deadlines” (e.g., union formation, health-maintenance in old age) and use secondary
5 3

control to compensate for potential negative affect and self-evaluation associated with failure to meet or resolve developmental dear Brandtst¨adter’s work (this volume) on intentional self-development is also striking in its appreciation of the tension between gains and losses in life-span development. His chapter documents that successful development hinges on the interplay between, on the one hand, activities through which individuals assimilate the actual course of personality development to their goals and, on the other hand, processes through which goals are accommodated to the feasible range. Although life-span models do not articulate what is success, some commentators have noted that developmental models that emphasize freedom of individual decision and action are plagued by a Western bias associated with an individualistic cultural base (Kagitcibasi, 1988). There isa clear need for cultural psychologists to engage lifespan researchers in testing the limits of the developmental models that have been advanced.Still, the models that have been put forth are exciting because they articulater part in these events. Life-course models Especially beyond childhood the study of successful adaptation becomes more complicated, and it may be that a purely psychological approach is insufficient for the study of personality development as the individual increasingly negotiates social roles defined by the culture. Whereas lifespan theories specify the temporal order of life stages, such as childhood,adolescence, and adulthood, life-course researchers tend to emphasize social-role demands at different ages. Social trajectories are influenced by four factors (Elder, 1998). First, they are influenced by human agency, the choices that persons make about their own lives. Second, they are influenced by the timing of lifecourse events in relation to other events in an individual’s life. Third, they are influenced by linked lives, because social changes are expressed in an individual’s life through the experiences of related others. Finally, They are influenced by historical changes.Life-span and life-course models are complementary. Biological changesacross the life span and social demands across the life course define typical life events and social roles in people’s lives. Indeed, some psychological researchers have found it useful to adopt a sociocultural perspective and to conceive of the life course as a sequence of culturally-defined, agegraded roles that the individual enacts over time (Caspi, 1987; Helson, Mitchell, and Moane, 1984).Helson introduced the concept of a “social clock project” as a framework for studying life-span development. The concept of a social clock focuses attention on the age-related life schedules of individuals in particular cultures and cohorts, and organizes the study of lives in terms of patterned movements into, along, and out of multiple role-paths such as education, work, marriage, and
5 3

parenthood. In this fashion, the life course can be charted as a sequence of social roles that are enacted over time, and adaptational processes can be explored by investigating the ways different persons select and perform different social-cultural roles. In her 30-year longitudinal study of female college seniors, who were first studied in 195860, Helson examined the personality antecedents and consequences of adherence to a Feminine Social Clock (FSC) and a Masculine Occupational Clock (MOC). For example, women who adhered to the FSC were earlier in life characterized by a desire to do well and by a need for structure; women in this birth cohort who adhered to a MOC were earlier in life more rebellious and less sensitive to social norms. Helson et al. (1984, p. 1079) were thus able to identify “culturally salient need-press configurations through time” and to show predictable and meaningful relations between personality and behavior in different social settings at different ages. Several chapters in this book either explicitly or implicitly adopt a sociocultural approach in their efforts to study successful evelopment. The chapters by Laursen and Williams and by Silbereisen, Reitzle, and Juang tackle the adolescent age period and examine how youth create sense out of their place in the larger world. Laursen and Williams (this volume) explore the role of ethnic identity, a personally and politically-charged topic that is also a profound source of strength. The authors conceive of ethnic identity as a personality variable that shapes the nature and course of successful adolescent adjustment, and describe how ethnic identity offersan important mechanism through which minority adolescents cope with the tension between the inner self and the psychological environment of the majority culture. Silbereisen and his colleagues have capitalized on a “natural experiment” – the unification of Germany during the 1990s – to examine how historical changes shape the nature of adolescent transitions.The chapters by Elder and Crosnoe and by Ryff, Singer, and Seltzer tackle a different point in the life course (midlife and old age) in order to examine the pathways to and the mechanisms in successful adjustment. Elder and Crosnoe draw on data from the Terman Study, begun in 1922, to explore how young-adult personality profiles shape the subsequent life course of men, in terms of their family life, civic involvement, career,and health trajectories. What is most remarkable is the emergence of such wide variations in life-outcomes, and in the successful negotiation of adult roles, despite the advantages enjoyed by all study participants by virtue of their intellectual prowess. Ryff and her colleagues provide an overview of their exciting research program where they track how different life challenges,both normative and non-normative, influence psychological well being. Included here are experiences of mid-life parenting, caregiving,and community relocation in old age. The authors conclude with a summary of their recent studies that link cumulative profiles of adversity and advantage to cumulative stress physiology. This work successfully links qualitative and quantitative methods as well as research on the mind and body. One criticism of research on successful development, as
5 3

studied by life-course researchers, is that it may be too value-laden and too culturebound. What, For example:is the difference between conforming to social expectations vs. successfully performing socially-valued roles? There is also a serious epistemological issue with which life-course researchers must deal: how is it possible to move from historically specific findings to a more general understanding of life-course processes? At least one historian (Zuckerman, 1993) has argued that the coupling of developmental psychology and history represents a “dangerous liaison” because it is unclear whether psychologists are willing to abandon their quest for lawlike predictions.Bouchard (1995) correctly argued that a purely sociocultural perspective on the life course “ignores the fact that life-histories themselves are complex evolved adaptations,” and suggests that an evolutionary perspective may complement the sociocultural perspective by exploring how personality variation is related to those adaptivelyimportant problems with which human beings have had to repeatedly contend. Evolutionary psychology thus focuses attention on the coherence of behavioral strategies that people use in, for example, mate selection, mate retention, reproduction,parental care, kin investment, status attainment, and coalition building (Buss, 1999). It focuses research on the geneticallyinfluenced strategies and tactics that individuals use for survival and reproduction. An evolutionary perspective on successful life-course development could thus offer a fusion of concerns in evolutionary theory, behavior genetics,and demography (Stearns, 1992). For example, using the evolutionary perspective, Draper and Belsky (1990) and Gangestad and Simpson (1990) have offered intriguing hypotheses about personality characteristics and reproductive strategies that facilitate adaptations in different environments at different ages. Although these and other specific models have not yet been tested in the context of longitudinal studies of personality development – and are not represented in this volume – they show the promise of evolutionary psychology for organizing longitudinaldevelopmental data on patterns of successful development. Ormel (this volume) tackles this problem from a somewhat different perspective and introduces social production function (SPF) theory as a heuristic for studying successful development. The theory attempts to integrate the various strengths of psychological theories and economic consumer/household production theories. It identifies two ultimate goals that all humans seek to optimize (physical well-being and social wellbeing)and five instrumental goals by which they are achieved (stimulation, comfort, status, behavioral confirmation, affection). The core notion of SPF theory is

5 3

that people choose and ubstitute instrumental goals so to optimize the production of their well-being, subject to constraints in available means of production.

How do personality differences shape successful development?
Whether one adopts a life-span or a life-course perspective, the question remains: what role do individual differences in personality play in mastering different socialdevelopmental tasks across the course of life? The starting point for such work should be a system for describing individual differences in personality dispositions and temperamental traits. This is not to suggest that these psychological constructs are the only way to study the contribution of personality differences to successful development. Indeed, motivational concepts in personality are better represented in much of the research on adult development.We do think, however, that an exciting bridge to understanding the making of success will derive from advances in the measurement of temperament and personality traits and types.Over the past 15 years, the intensity and productivity of psychological research on the dimensiona lity of adult personality has been phenomenal (Lubinski, 2000), and has influenced research in diverse fields such as organizational behavior, psychiatry, and genetics. An emerging consensus points to the existence of five important factors: Extraversion (active, assertive, enthusiastic, outgoing), Agreeableness (generous, kind, sympathetic, trusting), Conscientiousness (organized, planful, reliable, responsible), Neuroticism (anxious, self-pitying, tense, worrying), and Openness to Experience (artistic, curious, imaginative, having wide interests). Each superfactor covers a broad domain of individual differences and includes a number of more specific personality dimensions
5 3

or facets ( John and Srivstava, 1999). Some developmental researchers have noted that this Five-Factor Model of personality does not provide a theory of personality (Block, 1995), which is correct to the extent that most personality taxonomies are focused on describing rather than examining dynamic and developmental processes. Other critics have noted that researchers interested in the Five-Factor Model have not paid attention to issues of personality development (Pervin, 1994).Indeed, whereas the study of personality structure in adulthood has influencedresearch on adult development and aging, the study of personality structure in childhood has been all but neglected (McCrae and Costa,1990). But these are criticisms of what has been done, not of what can be accomplished.An especially important area of integration involves efforts to connect existing models of infant and child temperament with studies of adult personality structure (Clark and Watson, 1999). What are normally understood as personality traits may be aspects of temperament differentiated in the course of life experience. But, surprisingly, there has been virtually no contact between child psychologists who study temperament and personality psychologists who are concerned with personality differences (Diener, 2000; Shiner, 1998). Halverson and colleagues (1994) have made a strong case that research on life-span personality development will remain unintegrated unless child psychologists begin to study the structure of personality. Research linking temperament to the development of personality will be facilitated by two parallel achievements: the development of a consensual system for describing the structure of personality differences in adulthood, as noted earlier, and the development of such a system for temperamental traits. In the domain of temperament, conceptual reviews and factor-analytic studies have identified several “consensus” dimensions of infant and childhood temperament that might show influences on later developmental outcomes (Martin, Wisenbaker, and Huttunen, 1994; Rothbart and Bates, 1998). In the present volume, and in relation to the study of successful development, the chapters by Rothbart and Putnam and by Eisenberg, Fabes, Guthrie, and Reiser help to clarify several key definitional issues. For example, some researchers cling to the notion that temperament can only be assessed in the young infant and that temperament cannot be shaped by experience. However, as the two chapters in this book make clear, the key definitional component of temperament is not that it is immune from experience nor that it can be measured only in the first few months of life; rather, the key is that behaviors observed and measured should reliably index individual differences in children’s characteristic style of approach and response to the environment. Rothbart and Putnam (this volume) define temperament as “constitutionally based individual differences in reactivity and self-regulation, influenced over time by heredity and experience.” Reactivity refers to the excitability, responsivity, or
5 3

arousability of the behavioral and physiological systems of the individual, and selfregulation refers to the behavioral processes that modulate this reactivity. Importantly, Rothbart and Putnam note that such temperament differences develop and they are not immune to experience. Recent research shows that infants’ temperament is shaped by experience even before birth (e.g., fetal nutrition, fetal substance exposure, daylight during pregnancy). Moreover, behavioral genetic studies have established that individual differences in temperament,measured even during the first year of life, are only partially heritable and are influenced significantly by unique environmental events (Plomin and Caspi, 1999), suggesting that younger age of measurement does not guarantee that temperament is purely “constitutional.” The chapter by Rothbart and Putnam, along with related important research (e.g., Kochanska, 1997; Bates, Pettit, Dodge, and Ridge, 1998), points to the important ways in which socialization experiences – with parents and with peers – can shape emergent social competencies and psychologicaladjustment. Eisenberg an her colleagues (this volume) provide an overview of their ongoing efforts to differentiate theoretically and empirically among the various aspects of both emotionality and emotional regulation, which are core concepts in practically every model of temperament and personality.The authors propose that individual differences in children’s emotionality and regulation predict children’s emerging social skills and the quality of their peer relationships. Specifically, they show that children high in emotional intensity and low in attentional and behavioral regulation experience numerous problems in their interactions with peers and in peer relationships, whereas children high in regulation typically function extremely well in their social worlds. It is possible that a purely dimensional approach may yield confusing evelopmental portrits because orthogonal dimensions of temperament and personality conceal distinct types of children and adults who are characterized by unique configurations. Person-centered research may offer a promising approach for the study of paths to successful development, as demonstrated by Block (1971) and Pulkkinen (1996). The person-centered approach identifies types of individuals based on their particular configuration of attributes, and thus provides a bridge between purely nomothetic research (which emphasizes the attributes on which all individuals differ) and idiographic research (which emphasizes the unique patterning of attributes within an individual). It aims at a more holistic view of personality which “emphasizes the close dependency of ndividual functioning and individual development on the social, cultural, and physical characteristics of the environment” (Magnusson and Stattin, 1998, p. 686). In this volume, the person-centered approach is utilized in the research conduc

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful