ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

The researchers would like to take this opportunity express their inmost gratitude to the

people who have devoted their time to help them in doing this research. Their patience, love and

support are worthy admiration. In particular, the researchers are wholeheartedly thankful to the

following:

To their dearest research adviser, Miss Karen Nalliw, for giving them an opportunity to

conduct this study. They are grateful to her for without her guide this study will not be

successful.

To the researchers’ parents, for the support they have show them they are thankful to

them not just because of their words of encouragement to continue doing this research but

especially for their financially support.

To their friends, for their never-ending support, motivation and understanding especially

when the researchers were in their hard times and they were not able to go out with them.

To their respondents who answered their questionnaires honestly without hesitation.

Without their participation researchers will not be able to complete the study.

And lastly to the Almighty God, for serving as their shoulder to cry on when they are

about to give up. The researchers would never overcome their struggles while doing this research

without His guidance and love.

- The Researchers

1
 Dedication

We, the researchers, dedicated this study to the people who seek awareness about their

personality traits especially the psychology senior students who became the participants of this

study. In addition, we also devote this to the people who wholeheartedly helped and supported us

to finish this study.

As researchers who experienced hard times while doing this study and invested a lot of

effort and time, who wanted to give honor to God as our creator. Also to the encouragement of

our parents, guidance of our psychology instructor and support of our friends who led us to the

completion and succession of this research.

- The Researchers

2
 Abstract

This study aims to analyze The Impact of Socio-Demographic Status including age, sex,

and monthly family income towards the Personalities of Psychology Students using the four

dimension of basic temperaments constructed by Hans Eysenck (1958) known as Melancholic

(Introversion-Unstability), Choleric ( Extraversion-Unstability), Sanguine (Extraversion-

Stability), and Phlegmatic (Introversion-Stability). The respondents of this study were 18-26

years old Psychology students from Central Luzon State University. The participants composed

of thirty-five (35) females and fifteen (15) males with total of fifty (50) respondents were given

survey-questionnaires to gather relevant data that will be beneficial to future researchers.

Through this method, the researchers gained that socio-demographic status (age, sex, and

monthly family income) have significant relationship towards the personalities of Psychology

students.

3
 Introduction

An individual’s personality is the combination of traits and patterns that influence their

behaviour, thought, motivation, and emotion. It drives individuals to consistently think, feel, and

behave in specific ways; in essence, it is what makes each individual unique. Over time, these

patterns strongly influence personal expectations, perceptions, values, and attitudes.

The PEN model is a biological theory of personality developed by influential

psychologist Hans Eysenck (1916-1997). The model focuses on three broad personality factors:

psychoticism, extraversion and neuroticism (PEN).

Hans Eysenck created this model for the people to be able to classify themselves where

personality trait do they belong. It also helps people in a way that once they assess their

personality trait; people will also be able to change or improve the trait that they are weak or to

strengthen the so-called trait.

Psychologists emphasize that one of the important sources of individual differences nests

in personality trait theory (McCaulley, 1990; Myers, 1980; Slaats, Van der Sanden, &Lodewijks,

1997; Verma & Sheikh, 1996; Wang & Newlin, 2000). Personality trait is defined as a fairly

fixed characteristic of an individual. It determines how an individual deals with new information

and views situations (Jung, 1971; Myers &McCaulley, 1989). These traits are static and are

relatively inbuilt features of the individual (Verma& Sheikh, 1996).

Swiss psychologist Carl Jung stated that “differences in behavior, which seem so

obvious to the eye, are a result of preferences related to the basic functions our personalities

perform throughout life” (as cited in Kroeger&Thuesen, 1988, p. 11). Preferences occur early in

life, creating the underpinnings of our personalities (Myers,1980). According to Jung (1971),

4
perception is understood to be the ways people become aware of their environment, other people,

and occurrences, while judgment is considered the method employed by people to form

conclusions about experiences perceived. In addition to perception and judgment, Jung’s model

includes the dominant functions of extraversion and introversion. “Extraversion and introversion

relate to the balance of a person’s orientation toward the external world of objects and people or

toward the internal world of concepts and ideas” (McCaulley, 1990, p. 39). Four functions of

thought were also hypothesized: (a) sensing, (b) thinking, (c) feeling, and (d) intuiting (Jung). In

combining the orientations and functions, Jung identified eight personality types.

Messick (1994) indicates that personality trait can help or hinder performance depending

on the “nature and intensity of the personality characteristics” (p. 1). In a distance education

setting, the dominant orientations of extraversion and introversion may be particularly useful in

determining performance. Without face-to-face contact in distance learning, students with

introverted preferences have outperformed students with extraverted preferences because the

environment itself relies on the absence of nonverbal communication (Bayless, 2001). Similarly,

the perceiving and judging orientations might be indicative of individual performance because of

the student’s ability to maintain deadlines without immediate face-to-face interactions. This

being the case, personality trait theory becomes an important source for the understanding of

individual differences in learning. Personality traits “seem suitable as underlying factors that

explain different typical learning patterns, thus providing valuable additional constructs”

(Vermetten, Lodewijks, & Vermunt, 2001, p. 153).

5
 In summary, the personality make-up of an individual influences the way he or she views

situations and processes information (Lavanya & Karunanidhi, 1997; Myers & McCaulley,

1989).

Objectives

The objectives of the researchers will be as follows: to identify the socio-demographic

status of Psychology students, and to determine the dominant personality of Psychology students

in each socio-demographic status.

Statement of the Problem

This study aims to determine the dominant personalities of Psychology students

according to Hans Eysenck Theory of Personality.

Specifically, it answered the following questions: What is the socio-demographic status

of Psychology students in terms of: age, gender and social status. How may the personalities of

the respondents differ from each other in terms of; age, gender and social status. What

personality is dominant among all Psychology students.

Hypotheses of the Study

This study answered the following alternative hypotheses: There is no significant

relationship among the socio-demographic status of Psychology students in terms of age, gender;

and social status and their personality. There is no dominant personality trait among all

Psychology students.

6
Significance of the Study

The findings revealed by the study may improve some insights to the information

regarding the personalities of CLSU Psychology students to the following:

Students. This study will help the students to determine the differences of the

personalities of CLSU Psychology senior students based on Personality of Theory based Hans

Eysenck.

Researchers themselves. This study will help the researchers to gain knowledge regarding

the differences of personalities. Moreover, this research will also help them to determine their

personalities.

Future researchers. This study will be beneficial to the future researchers in a way that

they will be able to have an idea about the differences of personalities in terms of age, gender,

course year, and social status. Furthermore, this study will also widen their knowledge and it can

be used as framework for their study about personalities.

School. This study will benefit the school through having additional references regarding

personalities based on Hans Eysenck Theory of Personality.

Scope and Delimitation

This study focused on identifying the differences of Psychology students' personalities

based on Hans Eysenck Personality Theory and was confined in Central Luzon State University.

Researchers administered questionnaires to fifty (50) students of Psychology Department.

7
 The study was delimited to the quantitative method of research by the use of

questionnaires as major source of extracting data that was supported by discussion and

interpretation.

Definition of Terms

Choleric

: easily moved to often unreasonable or excessive anger : hot-tempered

Melancholy

: an abnormal state attributed to an excess of black bile and characterized by irascibility

or depression

Personality

: the complex of characteristics that distinguishes an individual or a nation or group

Phlegmatic

: having or showing a slow and stolid temperament

Sanguine

: derives from sanguineus, Latin for "blood" or "bloody," and over the more than 600

years it's been in use it has had meanings ranging from "bloodthirsty" and "bloodred"

: confident, optimistic

Trait

: an inherited characteristic

8
 Conceptual Framework

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework

The PEN model is a biological theory of personality developed by influential

psychologist Hans Eysenck (1916-1997). The model focusses on three broad personality factors:

psychoticism, extraversion and neuroticism (PEN).

Eysenck believed that biological factors, including cortical arousal and hormone levels,

along with environmental factors, such as behavior learned through conditioning, influence a

person’s score on these personality dimensions.

The sanguine type is cheerful and optimistic, pleasant to be with, comfortable with his or

her work. According to the Greeks, the sanguine type has a particularly abundant supply of

blood (hence the name sanguine, from sanguis, Latin for blood) and so also is characterized by a

healthful look, including rosy cheeks.

9
 The choleric type is characterized by a quick, hot temper, often an aggressive nature. The

name refers to bile (a chemical that is excreted by the gall bladder to aid in digestion). Physical

features of the choleric person include a yellowish complexion and tense muscles.

Next, we have the phlegmatic temperament. These people are characterized by their

slowness, laziness, and dullness. The name obviously comes from the word phlegm, which is

the mucus we bring up from our lungs when we have a cold or lung infection. Physically, these

people are thought to be kind of cold, and shaking hands with one is like shaking hands with a

fish.

Finally, there’s the melancholy temperament. These people tend to be sad, even

depressed, and take a pessimistic view of the world. The name has, of course, been adopted as a

synonym for sadness, but comes from the Greek words for black bile. Now, since there is no

such thing, we don’t quite know what the ancient Greeks were referring to. But the melancholy

person was thought to have too much of it.

10
 Research Methodology

This chapter presented the methods that were used by the researchers to collect data for

the research about the dominant personalities of CLSU Psychology students in terms of age,

gender, and social status. These methods included research design, participants, instruments, data

gathering procedure and data analysis.

Research Design

In this study, quantitative research design was used. According to Rhodes (2014),

quantitative analysis oriented in gathering information focuses on describing a phenomenon

across a larger number of participants thereby providing the possibility of summarizing

characteristics across groups or relationships.

Relatively, the research method and design was appropriate to the study since the

researchers aimed to observe and to determine the dominant personalities of Psychology

students. In addition, the researchers used independent variables including the age, gender and

social status.

Participants

The participants of this study will be fifty (50) students from CLSU Psychology

Department and under the criteria of: must be 18-26 years old, Psychology student and studying

at Central Luzon State University

The participants of this study were based on purposive sampling. Purposive sampling

technique, also called judgment sampling, is the deliberate choice of a participant due to the

qualities the participant possesses, (Ilker Etikan et al., 2015). Purposive sampling was

11
appropriate in this study because it is efficient in a way that it focused only to the scope of the

study.

Instrumentation

The researchers administered a questionnaire. The questionnaire enveloped all the necessary

information that should be gathered by the researchers. The researchers used a self-made

questionnaire that includes the socio-demographic characteristics and information about the

participants. For each personality, there are 16 questions and the questions will follow an

alternate system.

Data Gathering Procedure

The researchers chose 50 respondents from the Psychology senior students and the data

was collected one at a time through administering questionnaires. After gathering data from the

participants, it was tallied, computed and interpreted by the researchers.

Data Analysis

The data will be analyze according to the answers needed by the statement of the

problem. Measures of Central Tendency (MCT) and Percentages will be used accordingly. Data

analysis was done using Microsoft Excel or Spread sheet

12
 REPORTING AND SHARING OF FINDINGS

A. Discussion of Results of the study

i. Age

Table 1. Age Differences

Table 1 show the most frequent personality trait based on Hans Eysenck’s Personality

Trait Theory among the 50 Psychology students of Central Luzon State University. Phlegmatic

dominates the ages 18, 20, 21, and 23; Melancholic controls the students whose ages are 19, 20,

22, 24, and 26; and Choleric was seen on students with ages 22 and 23.

13
 ii. Family Income

Table 2. Family Income

Table 2 shows those students whose monthly family income range from 0 Php to 11,914

Php tends to be Phlegmatic with a mode of 10; students from family whose monthly income

11,915 Php to 49,999 Php are likely to be Melancholic; and those who have family monthly

income of 50,000 and up are Phlegmatic.

iii. Sex

Table 3. Sex

Table 3, shows those females are likely to be Melancholic with 32% of the female

respondent. Male tends to be Phlegmatic with an average of 56% of the male respondents.

B. Test of Hypothesis

Note that the hypotheses are tested using the value in the null and alternative

14
hypothesis and the results

Hypothesis 1:

Null Hypothesis: There is no significant relationship among the socio-demographic

status of Psychology students in terms of age, gender; and social

status and their personality traits.

Alternate Hypothesis: There is a significant relationship among the socio-demographic

status of Psychology students in terms of age, gender; and social

status and their personality traits.

Apparently, the result of the study shows that there is a significant relationship among the

socio-demographic status of Psychology students in terms of age, gender and social status and

their personality trait. There is a significant relation in age in a way that when a student from age

18-26, their personality were different from each other. The sex of the respondents really affects

their personality, the study shows that when a respondents was female, their attitude was

melancholic and melancholic has the attitudes of being moody, anxious, rigid, pessimistic,

unsociable and quiet, some of those traits are most likely to be seen on female while on male,

they have the attitude of phlegmatic, phlegmatic has the attitude of being passive, thoughtful,

peaceful, controlled, reliable and calm which describes most of the male. In family income, the

income from 0 Php to 11,914 Php and 50,00 and up are phlegmatic while the students whose

family income is 11,915 Php to 49,999 Php are likely to be Melancholic.

15
Hypothesis 2:

Null Hypothesis: There is no dominant personality trait among Psychology

students.

Alternate Hypothesis: There is a dominant personality trait among Psychology

students.

The study shows that there is a dominant personality trait among the Psychology students

and that trait is the melancholic and phlegmatic in a way that 17 of the students has the

personality of melancholic while the other 17 has the personality of phlegmatic, while the rest of

the respondents answered the another way.

SUMMARY

1. The null hypothesis is rejected. There is a significant relationship between the socio-

demographic status of the students and their personality.

2. The null hypothesis is rejected. There is a dominant trait among psychology students.

C. Conclusion

1. There is a significant relationship between the socio-demographic status of the

students and their personality.

The thought of there is no significant relationship between the socio-

demographic status of the students and their personality was being rejected because

according to the respondents, their age, family income and sex affects their personalities.

16
 2. There is a dominant personality trait among psychology students.

The participants really showed that there is a big difference between male and

female and that is the trait that they have. They are literally different from each other.

Recommendations for Further Work

The research that has been undertaken for this project has highlighted a number of topics on

which will be beneficial for the future researchers. This includes the following:

• Try to add more options in terms of gender for the respondents that may be a member of

the LGBTQ++ community.

• Expound the range of respondents from 50-200 Psychology students, not just on the

senior students.

• Try to expand the colleges in Central Luzon State University in terms of respondents.

17
 RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE

Name (optional):___________________________________________ Sex: ______

Monthly income: Age: ______

_____ ₱0 - ₱11 914 _____ ₱11 915 - ₱49 000 _____ ₱50 000 and up

This study is being conducted by 1st year college students of CLSU as part of their
requirement in Psychology 1100. The aim of the study is to know the different personalities of
Psychology senior students and determine the dominant personality.

Please read the statements carefully. Rate the statement according to your usual way of acting or
feeling. Put check (√) in the box.

5 – Always 2 - Rarely
4 – Often 1 – Never
3 – Sometimes

5 4 3 2 1
1. My moods go up and down.
2. I lose my temper and get angry easily.
3. I make friends easily.
4. I allow things that are happening in my life without
resistance.
5. I feel “just miserable” for no good reason.
6. I am easily hurt when people find fault in me and
my work.
7. I am confident when I am with other people.
8. I accept others’ decisions without trying to change
anything.
9. I worry a lot about the things that may happen.
10. I find it hard to sleep due to ideas running through
my head.
11. I become unhappy when I do not see my friends.
12. I’m careful about the decisions I make.
13. I worry about things that I should have done/said.
14. I can’t feel relaxed because of nervousness and
boredom.

18
15. I enjoy myself at lively party.
16. I think before I act to avoid possible harm and
danger.
17. I perceive things I want it to be.
18. I fight for what I believe in.
19. I like talking so much that I can even talk to
strangers without feeling shy.
20. I think about others’ feelings before mine.
21. I am not willing to change my behavior for others.
22. I confront other people whom I have a problem
with.
23. I do gossips.
24. I try to help when I feel like my friend is not okay.
25. I am a serious type of person.
26. I look forward to something new every day.
27. I do things on the spur of the moments.
28. I feel contented with my life.
29. I think things over before doing anything.
30. I feel excited when I see or learn something
interesting.
31. I can easily think of a response to certain
situations.
32. I don’t get involved in any conflict.
33. I think negative about myself.
34. I tend to like someone today and dislike him/her
the other day.
35. I consider myself a happy-go-lucky type of person.
36. I can control my temper.
37. I tend to think that my actions will lead to negative
results.
38. My thoughts are not constant.
39. I don’t make my problems a big deal.
40. I am not easily angered.
41. I am not comfortable with sharing my thoughts and
emotions to other people.
42. I decide without thinking.
43. I long for excitement.

19
44. I feel comfortable when my friends talk about their
problems with me.
45. I’d rather stay at home than go out with others.
46. I make actions I will regret.
47. I feel energetic.
48. I am always willing to help others.
49. I am comfortable with being alone.
50. I believe that something good will always happen.
51. I feel free from anxiety and responsibility.
52. I am not easily annoyed when others tease me.
53. I become shy when I’m talking to strangers.
54. I am confident that I will be successful in the
future.
55. I don’t worry too much.
56. I am patient in waiting.
57. I am quiet when I’m with other people.
58. I want to be a part of groups and organizations.
59. I am always assigned as the leader of the group in
our class.
60. I can remain calm even if I’m actually nervous.
61. I’d rather search than ask someone when there is
something I want to know.
62. I like to participate in activities in our school.
63. It is easy for me to lead other people.
64. I don’t show my emotions to others.

Researchers:

Ruth Anne Balagtas

Clarizze Buensuceso
Hana Joy Castro
Winnie Alexa Crisanto
Eliza Fe Cruz I
Vercita Ramo

20
 REFERENCES

https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/courses-images-archive-read-only/wp-

content/uploads/sites/902/2015/02/23225022/CNX_Psych_11_04_Quadrants.jpg

https://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/eysenck.html

21