LB

 CH  1  and  2   3.  What  are  the  5  standards  for  evaluating  personality  theories?    Explain  briefly.  
1.  What  is  personality?  Explain  with  focusing  on  one  of  the  definitions.   1.  Comprehensiveness:  Does  the  theory  explain  most  or  all  of  the  facts  and  
  Personality  is  the  set  of  psychological  traits  (manipulative,  sensitive,  etc.)    and   observations  within  its  domain?    
mechanisms  (how  this  is  work,  how  people  get  this  traits,  nature  or  nurture,  etc.)   Theories  that  explain  more  empirical  data  within  their  domains  are  generally  
within  the  individual  (based  on  individual)  that  is  organized  and  relatively   superior  to  those  explain  fewer  findings.    
enduring  (it  last  for  time,  for  example  you  cannot  sensitive  just  for  one  day,  and   2.  Heuristic  Value:  Does  the  theory  provide  a  guide  to  future  research?  Is  it  useful?    
rest  of  time  no  show  any  sensitivity)  and  that  influences  his  or  her  interactions   Good  personality  theories  will  guide  personality  researchers  to  make  discoveries  
with,  and  adaptations  to,  the  environment  (it  is  important  because  it  is  effecting   that  were  previously  unknown  more  superior  to  the  ones  that  fail  to  provide  such  
their  life,  their  career,  their  performance,  their  relationships  with  the  environment).   guidance.    
-­‐Psychological  traits  are  characteristics  that  describe  ways  in  which  people  are   3.  Testability:  Falsifiability.  Does  the  theory  can  be  tested  empirically  by  personality  
different  from  each  other.  Personality  is  useful  because  it  describes  psychological   psychologists?  
traits,  which  is  useful  in  describing,  explaining,  and  predicting  differences  between   As  a  general  rule,  the  testability  of  a  theory  rests  with  the  precision  of  its  
individuals.     prediction.  If  a  theory  does  not  lend  itself  to  being  tested  empirically,  it  is  generally  
-­‐Psychological  mechanisms  refers  processes  of  personality.  In  which  conditions,   judged  to  be  poor  theory.    
personality  presents  itself.     4.  Parsimony:  Is  the  theory  summarizable  or  not?  Is  it  short-­‐or  long?    
-­‐Within  the  individual  means  that  personality  is  something  a  person  carries  with   Parsimony  refers  to  preferring  the  simpler  of  two  otherwise  equally  adequate  
himself  overtime  and  from  one  situation  to  the  next.     theories,  because  it  is  useful  in  many  fields,  and  such  theories  are  superior  than  the  
Thus,  the  definition  of  personality  stresses  that  the  important  sources  of   ones  that  explain  the  same  things  with  many  premises.    
personality  reside  within  individual,  and  are  at  least  somewhat  stable  overtime  and   5.  Compatibility  and  integration  across  domains  and  levels:  
consistent  with  other  situations.     A  personality  theory  in  one  domain  that  violated  well-­‐established  principles  in  
-­‐Organized  means  that  the  psychological  traits  and  mechanisms  for  a  given  person   another  domain  would  be  judged  highly  problematic.  Also,  consistent  with  what  is  
are  not  simply  random  collection  of  elements.  Our  personalities  are  organized  in   known  in  other  domains;  can  be  coordinated  with  other  branches  of  scientific  
the  sense  that  they  contain  decision  rules  that  govern  which  needs  are  activated,   knowledge.    
depending  on  the  circumstances.     2.  What  are  6  domains  of  knowledge  about  human  nature?  Select  2  and  explain.  
For  example,  you  cannot  be  sensitive  for  just  one  day,  you  should  have  same   They  are  (1)  Dispositional  domain,  (2)  Biological  domain,    
sensitivity  in  same  circumstances.     (3)  Intraphysic  domain,  (4)  Cognitive-­‐Experimental  Domain,    
-­‐Psychological  traits  are  also  relatively  enduring  over  time,  consistent  over   (5)  Social  and  Cultural  Domain,  (6)  Adjustment  Domain.    
situations.  Persons  who  are  talkative,  for  example,  may  remain  quite  during  lecture.     -­‐Dispositional  Domain:  It  deals  with  the  ways  in  which  individuals  differ  from  one  
-­‐Influential  forces  of  personality  means  that  personality  traits  and  mechanisms  can   another,  and  so  cuts  across  all  other  domains.    
have  an  affect  on  people’s  life.  Personality  plays  a  key  role  in  affecting  how  people   -­‐Dispositional  domain  focuses  on  number  and  nature  of  fundamental  dispositions.    
shape  their  lives,  how  we  think,  how  we  act,  how  we  feel.     -­‐The  main  goal  in  this  domain  is  to  identify  and  measure  the  most  important  ways  
-­‐Person-­‐environment  interaction:  Perception  refers  how  we  see  or  interpret   in  which  individuals  differ  from  one  another.    
environment.  Two  people  may  be  exposed  to  the  same  objective  event,  but  their   -­‐It  is  also  interested  in  the  origin  of  individual  differences  and  how  these  develop  
interpretation  might  be  different.  This  difference  because  of  their  personality.     over  time.    
-­‐Adaption  conveys  the  notion  that    a  central  feature  of  personality  concerns   -­‐Biological  Domain:  Core  assumption  of  biological  approaches  to  personality  is  that  
adaptive  functioning  –accomplishing  goals,  coping,  adjusting,  and  dealing  with   humans  are  collections  of  biological  systems,  and  these  systems  provide  building  
challenges  we  go  through  life.     blocks  for  behavior,  thought,  and  emotion  
-­‐Environment  often  poses  challenges  for  people.  Our  social  environment  also  poses   -­‐Biological  approach  refers  that  genetics,  psychophysiology,  and  evolution  have  
adaptive  challenges.  Good  job,  etc.     shaped  human  psychological  functioning.      
-­‐In  addition  to  our  physical  and  social  environments,  we  have  intrapsychic  (within   -­‐Intraphysic  domain:  It  deals  with  mental  mechanisms  of  personality,  many  of  
the  mind)  environment.  We  have  memories,  dreams  desires  etc.  We  are  influenced   which  operate  outside  of  conscious  awareness.    
by  them.     -­‐The  predominant  theory  in  this  domain  is  Freud’s  theory  of  psychoanalysis.    
  -­‐Instinctual  system  (sexual  and  aggressive  forces)  that  are  presumed  to  drive  and  
A  Fissure  in  the  Field   energize  much  of  human  activity.    
-­‐Gap  within  personality  psychology  has  not  yet  been  successfully  bridged—the   -­‐  Classic  and  modern  versions  of  Freud’s  theory  of  psychoanalysis,  including  work  
gap  between  the  human  nature  level  of  analysis,  and  the  analysis  of  individual   on  repression,  denial,  projection,  and  motives  for  power,  achievement,  and  
and  group  differences   affiliation  
-­‐This  translates  into  a  gap  between  grand  theories  of  personality  (human   -­‐Cognitive-­‐Experimental  Domain:  It  focuses  on  cognition  and  subjective  experience,  
nature  level  of  analysis)  and  contemporary  research  in  personality  (individual   such  as  conscious  thoughts,  feelings,  beliefs,  and  desires  about  oneself  and  others.  
and  group  differences  level  of  analysis)   -­‐  Self  and  self-­‐concept,  Goals  we  set  and  strive  to  meet,  Emotional  experiences,  in  
Grand  Theories  of  Personality   general  and  over  time  
-­‐Attempt  to  provide  universal  account  of  the  fundamental  psychological   -­‐Social  and  Cultural  Domain:  The  main  assumption  is  that  personality  affects,  and  it  
processes  and  characteristics  of  our  species   is  affected  by  the  cultural  and  social  contexts.    
-­‐Statements  about  the  universal  core  of  human  nature  lie  at  the  center  of   -­‐So,  this  domain  works  much  on  cultural  differences  between  groups.    
grand  theories  of  personality,  such  as  Sigmund  Freud’s  psychoanalytic  theory   -­‐It  contains  also  much  work  on  individual  differences  within  cultures  –how  
Contemporary  Research  in  Personality   personality  plays  out  in  the  social  sphere,  including  work  on  sex  and  gender  
-­‐Most  current  personality  research  addresses  ways  in  which  individuals  and   differences  in  personality  processes,  traits  and  mechanisms.    
groups  differ,  not  human  universals   -­‐All  human  have  common  set  of  concerns  they  struggle  with  in  the  social  sphere.    
-­‐Personality  psychologists  specialize  in  a  particular  domain,  such  as  biological   -­‐  Adjustment  Domain:  It  refers  to  the  fact  that  personality  plays  a  key  role  in  how  
aspects  of  personality  or  how  culture  impacts  personality.   we  cope,  adapt,  and  adjust  to  the  ebb  and  flow  of  events  in  our  day-­‐to-­‐day  lives.    
-­‐Important  problems  in  coping  and  adjustment  can  be  traced  to  personality.    
  -­‐In  this  domain,  certain  personality  features  are  related  to  poor/strong  adjustment  
The  Role  of  Personality  Theory  
and  have  been  designated  as  personality  disorders  or  resilience.    
Personality  research  is  often  informed  by  personality  theory  
-­‐Personality  plays  key  role  in  how  we  cope,  adapt,  and  adjust  to  events  in  daily  life  
>Theory  has  several  key  purposes:    
-­‐Personality  linked  with  important  health  outcomes  and  problems  in  coping  and  
-­‐Serves  as  a  guide  for  researchers  
adjustment.  
-­‐Organizes  known  findings  
 
-­‐Makes  predictions  about  behavior  and  psychological  phenomena  that  not  one  
has  yet  documented  or  observed   Three  levels  of  Personality  Analysis:    
-­‐Scientific  theories  need  to  be  distinguished  from  beliefs.  Beliefs  are  based  on   1.  Like  all  others  (human  nature  level),  e.g.  need  to  belong,  love      
leaps  of  faith,  not  on  reliable  facts  and  systematic  observations,  whereas   Traits  and  mechanisms  of  personality  that  are  typical  of  our  species  and  possessed  by  nearly  
everyone.    
theories  are  based  on  systematic  observations  that  can  be  repeated  by  others  
2.  Like  some  others  (level  of  individual  and  group  differences)  e.g.  men  more  
to  yield  similar  conclusions  
physically  aggressive  than  women.    
  Individual  differences  refer  to  ways  in  which  each  person  is  like  some  other  people  (e.g.,  
extraverts,  sensations-­‐seekers,  high  self-­‐esteem  persons)  
  Group  differences  refer  to  ways  in  which  the  people  of  one  group  differ  from  people  in  
another  group  (e.g.,  cultural  differences,  age  differences)  
  3.  Like  no  others  (individual  uniqueness)  .e.g.  Santion’s  unique  way  to  expressing  
  aggression    
-­‐Individual  uniqueness  refers  to  the  fact  that  every  individual  has  personal  and  unique  
  qualities  not  shared  by  any  other  person  in  the  world  
  -­‐Individuals  can  be  studied  nomothetically  or  ideographically  
Sources  of  Personality  Data   4.  Explain  naturalistic  and  artificial  observation  and  give  example  to  one  of  them.  
1.Self-­‐Report  Data   Naturalistic  Observation:  Observers  witness  and  record  events  that  occur  in  the  
-­‐Information  provided  by  a  person,  such  as  through  a  survey  or  interview   normal  course  of  lives  of  participants.    
-­‐Individuals  have  access  to  a  wealth  of  information  about  themselves  that  is   -­‐It  has  advantage  of  being  able  to  secure  information  in  realistic  context  of  a  
inaccessible  to  anyone  else   person’s  everyday  life,  but  it  is  not  able  to  control  events  witnessed.    
-­‐>  S-­‐data  personality  tests   Artificial  Observation:  It  occurs  in  artificial  settings  or  situations.    
+Unstructured  items—open-­‐ended  (e.g.  Twenty  Statement  Test)   -­‐It  has  the  advantage  of  controlling  conditions  and  eliciting  relevant  behavior,  but  
+Structured  items—response  options  provided  (true/false)   sacrifices  realism.    
-­‐Limitations  of  S-­‐data   Example:  John  Gottoman  and  Robert  Levanson  have  had  married  couples  go  to  
+People  may  not  respond  honestly   their  laboratory  and  ask  them  discuss  a  topic  on  which  they  disagree;  then  they  
+People  may  lack  accurate  self-­‐knowledge   observed  their  discussions.    
  The  way  in  which  a  couple  conducts  an  argument  can  predict  the  likelihood  that  
2.Observer-­‐Report  Data  (O-­‐Data)   they  will  remain  married  or  get  divorced.    
-­‐Information  provided  by  someone  else  about  another  person   Evaluation  of  Personality  Measures  
-­‐>  Key  features  of  O-­‐data   1-­‐Reliability:  Degree  to  which  measure  represents  “true”  level  of  trait  being  measured  
+Observers  may  have  access  to  information  not  attainable  through  other  sources   -­‐Types  of  reliability:  Test-­‐retest  reliability,  Inter-­‐rater  reliability,  Internal  consistency  reliability  
(e.g.:  observers  can  report  about  the  impressions  a  person    makes  on  others,  his  or  her  social   2-­‐Validity:  Degree  to  which  test  measures  what  it  claims  to  measure  
reputation,  his  relative  status  within  group  hierarchy)     -­‐Types  of  validity:  Face  validity,  Predictive  or  criterion  validity,  Convergent  validity,  
+Multiple  observers  can  be  used  to  assess  a  person  (inter-­‐rater  reliability)     Discriminant  validity,  Construct  validity  
3-­‐Generalizability:  Degree  to  which  measure  retains  validity  across  different  contexts,  
 
including  different  groups  of  people  and  different  conditions  
-­‐>  Selecting  observer  (Personality  researchers  have  2  strategies  to  select  observers)   -­‐Generalizability  subsumes  reliability  and  validity  
+One  strategy  is  to  use  professional  personality  assessors  who  don’t  know  the   -­‐Greater  generalizability  not  always  better;  what  is  important  is  to  identify  empirically  
participant  in  advance.     contexts  in  which  a  measure  is  and  is  not  applicable  
+The  other  strategy  is  to  use  people  who  actually  know  the  target  person.   5.  What  is  validity?  Describe  2  different  types  of  validity.  
Advantages  of  the  second  strategy:     Validity  is  the  extent  to  which  a  test  measures  what  it  claims  to  measure.    
*Often  in  better  position  to  observe  target’s  natural  behaviors  than  professional   There  are  5  types  of  validity:  (1)  Face  validity,  (2)  Predictive  validity,  (3)  Convergent  
personality  assessors   validity,  (4)  Discriminant  validity,  and  
*Allows  for  assessment  of  multiple  social  personalities.  (Each  of  us  displays  different   (5)  Construct  validity.    
sides  of  ourselves  to  different  people.  The  use  of  multiple  observers  provides  a  method  for  
-­‐Face  validity:  It  refers  to  whether  the  test,  on  the  surface,  appears  to  measure  
assessing  the  many  aspects  of  an  individual’s  personality)  
what  is  supposed  to  measure.    
Drawbacks  of  the  second  strategy:  
-­‐Predictive  validity:  Whether  the  test  predicts  the  criteria  external  to  the  test.  Thus,  
*Because  of  relationship  to  target,  however,  observer  may  be  biased  
it  is  called  also  criterion  validity.  For  example,  a  scale  created  to  measure  
 
conscientiousness  should  predict  which  people  actually  show  up  on  time  for  
3.Test-­‐Data  (T-­‐Data)  
meetings  and  follow  rules.  Scales  that  successfully  predict  what  they  should  predict  
-­‐Information  provided  by  standardized  tests  or  testing  situations  
have  high  predictive  validity.    
-­‐Idea  is  to  see  if  different  people  behave  differently  in  identical  situations  
For  example,  if  the  test  measures  the  risk-­‐taking  level  of  a  person,  we  can  predict  
-­‐Situation  designed  to  elicit  behaviors  that  serve  as  indicators  of  personality  
-­‐Elicited  behavior  “scored”  without  reliance  on  inference   that  the  person  would  do  risk  taking  behavior  such  as  bungee-­‐jumping.    
-­‐Convergent  validity:  It  refers  to  whether  a  test  correlates  with  other  measures  that  
-­‐>  Limitations  
it  should  correlate  with.  For  example,  if  a  person  has  high  score  on  IQ  test,  s/he  will  
+Participants  might  try  to  guess  what  trait  is  being  measured  and  then  alter  their  
behavior  to  create  certain  impressions   most  probably  get  high  score  on  SAT.    
-­‐Discriminant  validity:  It  refers  to  what  a  measure  should  not  correlate  with.  Part  of  
+Difficult  to  know  if  participants  define  testing  situation  as  intended  by  
knowing  what  a  measure  actually  measures  consists  of  knowing  what  it  does  not  
experimenter  
+Researcher  might  influence  how  participants  behave   measure.  For  example,  verbal  ability  has  low  correlation  with  mathematical  ability.  
It  can  be  expected  that  if  a  person  does  well  score  in  verbal,  s/he  won’t  do  well  
 
math.  Low  correlations  would  be  evidence  of  discriminant  validity.    
-­‐Mechanical  recording  devices:  e.g.,  “Actometer”  used  to  assess  children’s  activity  
-­‐Construct  validity:    It  defined  as  a  test  that  measures  what  it  claims  to  measure,  
+Strengths:  Not  hampered  by  biases  of  human  observer,  May  be  used  in  
correlates  with  what  it  is  supposed  to  correlate  with,  and  does  not  correlate  with  
naturalistic  settings  
what  is  not  what  it  is  not  supposed  to  correlate  with.    
+Disadvantage:  Few  personality  dispositions  lend  themselves  to  mechanical  
Thus,  construct  validity  is  the  broadest  type  of  validity,  subsuming  face,  predictive,  
assessment  
convergent,  and  discriminant  validity.  
-­‐Physiological  data:  
 
+Includes  information  about  a  person’s  level  of  arousal,  reactivity  to  stimuli—
Research  Designs  in  Personality  
potential  indicators  of  personality  
+Functional  magnetic  resonance  imaging  (fMRI)   1-­‐Experimental  Methods:  Used  to  determine  causality—whether  one  variable  
causes  another  
+Key  benefit  is  that  it  is  difficult  to  fake  responses  
-­‐>Two  key  requirements:  
-­‐Disadvantages:  Often  used  in  artificial  laboratory  setting,  Accuracy  of  recording  
hinges  on  whether  participant  perceives  situation  as  experimenter  intended   +Manipulation  of  variables  
+Ensuring  that  participants  in  each  experimental  condition  are  equivalent  to  each  
-­‐Projective  Techniques:    
other  
+Person  presented  with  ambiguous  stimuli  and  asked  to  describe  what  she  sees;  
2-­‐Correlational  Studies:  Correlation  is  a  statistical  procedure  for  determining  
assumption  is  that  person  “projects”  personality  onto  ambiguous  stimuli  
whether  there  is  a  relationship  between  two  variables  
-­‐Strengths:  May  provide  useful  means  for  gathering  information  about  wishes,  
-­‐Designed  to  identify  “what  goes  with  what”  in  nature,  and  not  designed  to  identify  
desires,  fantasies  that  a  person  is  not  aware  of  and  could  not  report  
causal  relationships  
-­‐Disadvantages:  Difficult  to  score,  uncertain  validity,  and  reliability  
-­‐Major  advantage  is  that  it  allows  us  to  identify  relationships  among  variables  as  
 
they  occur  naturally  
4.Life-­‐Outcome  Data  (L-­‐Data)  
-­‐Correlation  coefficient  varies  from  –1  (perfect  negative  relationships)  through  0  
-­‐Information  that  can  be  gleaned  from  events,  activities,  and  outcomes  in  a  
person’s  life  that  is  available  for  public  scrutiny—e.g.,  marriage,  speeding  tickets   (no  relationship)  to  +1  (perfect  positive  relationship)  
-­‐>  Correlation  does  not  indicate  causation  
-­‐Can  serve  as  important  source  of  “real  life”  information  about  personality  
-­‐Personality  characteristics  measured  early  in  life  are  often  linked  to  important  life  outcomes   +Directionality  problem  
several  decades  later.  In  this  sense,  life  outcomes,  such  as  work,  marriage,  and  divorce,  are,  in   +Third  variable  problem  
part,  manifestations  of  personality.   3-­‐Case  Studies:  In-­‐depth  examination  of  the  life  of  one  person  
  -­‐>  Advantages:  
Issues  in  Personality  Assessment   +Can  find  out  about  personality  in  great  detail  
>  Links  among  different  data  sources     +Can  give  insights  into  personality  that  can  be  used  to  formulate  a  more  general  
+How  closely  findings  obtained  from  one  data  source  correspond  to  findings  from   theory  that  is  tested  on  a  larger  sample  
another  data  source   +Can  provide  in-­‐depth  knowledge  about  an  outstanding  figure,  such  as  a  political  or  
>  Fallibility  of  personality  measurement   religious  figure  
+All  sources  of  data  have  limitations   -­‐>  Disadvantage:  
+Results  that  replicate  through  “triangulation”  are  most  powerful  (If  the  same   +Results  based  on  the  study  of  single  person  cannot  be  generalized  to  others  
results  are  found  with  two  or  more  data  sources,  then  researchers  can  have  greater    
confidence  in  the  credibility  of  those  findings.)    
   
When  to  Use  Experimental,  Correlational,  and  Case  Study  Designs  
-­‐Each  design  has  strengths  and  weakness;  strength  of  one  is  weakness  of  another  
-­‐Which  design  a  researcher  uses  depends  on  the  research  question  and  the  goal  of  
research  
-­‐Taken  together,  three  designs  provide  complementary  methods  for  exploring  
personality  
 
Summary  and  Evaluation  
-­‐Decisions  about  data  source  and  research  design  depend  on  the  purpose  of  study  
-­‐There  is  no  perfect  data  source  
-­‐There  is  no  perfect  research  design  
-­‐But  some  data  sources  and  some  methods  are  better  suited  for  some  purposes  
than  for  others  
 

Sbselman