Personality: © Simon Moore Complete Psychology Published by Hodder Education

Personality
© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

Definition of personality
• Mischel (1986) defines personality as ‘the
distinctive patterns of behaviour (including
thoughts and emotions) that characterise
each individual’s adaptation to the situations
of his or her life’.
• Child (1983) described personality as the
‘more or less stable, internal factors that
make one person’s behaviour consistent from
one time to another, and different from the
behaviour other people would manifest in
similar situations’.
Attributes of personality
Personality as a construct, therefore, has a number of
attributes (Peterson, 1992). In essence, these are:
1. It is an integrated part of an individual – it is something a
person is, does or has. People bring their personalities to
situations and take them away with them when they leave
2. It is psychological – it refers to the individual (actions,
thoughts, feelings) and not to material things such as
possessions or status
3. It is made up of smaller units called characteristics (the
combination of these individual characteristics creates a
unique psychological signature)
4. It can be functional or dysfunctional – that is, our
characteristics can help us succeed and prosper in some
situations but they can also disadvantage us or make us
vulnerable in others.

Determinants of personality

Two approaches to studying ID
Academic (nomothetic):
• Research focused on variations in personality studied in
the population at large
• Personality can be categorised on the basis of
personality dimensions that we share
• Assumes particular trait dimension or set of trait
dimensions are universally applicable to all persons
• Assumes individual differences are to be identified with
different locations on those same dimensions.
• Person seen as unique in terms of the combination of
locations on common dimensions.

Clinical (idiographic):
• Studying the individual in detail as a unique
and integrated whole
• Research focuses on pattern/organisation of
traits within the individual (intrapersonal)
• Emphasises and aims to identify the unique
combination of personality dimensions that
best account for personality of a single
individual
• People seen as unique in terms of their
personality structure. Some traits (e.g. Allport’s
cardinal traits) are more important in
understanding the personality structure of
person A than person B.
Idiographic
+ More complete and global understanding of an
individual
– Difficult to generalise findings
– More unreliable and unscientific (e.g. subjective
and non-standardised procedures)
Nomothetic
+ Useful in predicting behaviour
+ More reliable and scientific
– Superficial understanding of any 1 person

Domains guiding research
Characteristics Main theories Paradigm
Psychodynamic Sigmund Assumes individuals’ personalities are
Freud motivated by unconscious emotional
conflicts (mainly originating in childhood)
Carl Jung Seeks understanding via case studies (in
terms of dreams, free association and
creativeness)
Alfred Adler
Aims to change individuals by freeing the
energy devoted to neurotic symptoms
Anna Freud and therefore allowing the development
of a more positive personality
Erik Erikson E.g. a childhood experience that may be
buried in the unconscious and that
affects negatively how an individual
might relate to others

continued
Humanistic Abraham Interested in personality in terms of how
Maslow people’s conscious experiences and drives
help or hinder their ability to reach their full
potential
Carl Rogers
Criticises scientific psychological methods in
trying to measure personality in that such an
George Kelly approach is too mechanical and misses the
essence of individuals; case studies have
been used by some humanistic personality
theorists as the favoured method of study
However, it remains mostly empirically
unsubstantiated and is criticised for this
reason
E.g. success in family life may give an
individual happiness, contentment, reward
and satisfaction, which they may take to
other parts of their life, or vice versa
continued
Trait Gordon Assumes that individuals have stable
Allport personality characteristics evident in
behaviour across a multitude of situations
Raymond Tries to describe and predict how individuals
Cattell might behave based on their personality
traits
Measures personality via questionnaires
Hans
Eysenck E.g. using Eysenck’s Personality Inventory
(EPI), which measures introversion–
extroversion to predice music-listening
Costa and choices
Macrae

continued
Cognitive- Albert Assumes people’s thoughts and beliefs are
behavioural Bandura central to personality
Seeks to measure these thoughts/beliefs and to
see how they lead to behaviour in specific
Julian Rotter
situations (personality), and how the expression
of personality through behaviour shapes future
George Kelly cognitive processes
Seeks to measure and understand personality
Walter using self-report measures and in some cases
Mischel via observation
Aims to facilitate harmony between individuals
and the world around them (by changing either
the individual or the environment)
E.g. if a child learns that tantrums achieve a
desired result, the rewards for such behaviour
condition and establish a set of behaviours that
will probably be used in later life

continued
Biological William Assumes people’s personality characteristics
Sheldon are either inherited and/or are biologically
influenced by hormones
Seeks to understand personality via work with
Robert
twins and through neurological research
Plomin
Aims to improve personality through medication
or gene manipulation/selection
Hans E.g. finding a relationship between the
Eysenck existence of a specific gene and a personality
trait, such as anxiety
C. Robert
Cloniger

continued
Behavioural Burrhus Forces of conditioning and reinforcement have
Skinner shaped personality
Seeks to understand personality by observation
John Dollard Emphasises the role of learning in development
and Neal of personality and aims to enhance positive
Millar personality characteristics through reward and
punishment
E.g. if a child learns that aggression in the
playground will bring immediate gratification of
a need or goal then it is likely that aggression
will be reinforced and used more often; if such
aggression is punished, however, its use as a
strategy should diminish

Personality: a conscious or
unconscious process?
• The interpersonal (psychodynamic) approach
contends that some elements of personality
manifestation (particularly problem behaviour)
reside in the person’s unconscious (the part of
the mind outside of the individual’s immediate
awareness).
We will consider:
• work of Sigmund Freud and psychodynamic
theorists
• object relation theory.
Freud and psychoanalysis
• Sigmund Freud (1856–1939) is credited as the
father of psychoanalysis. He suggested that
unconscious mental processes and experiences
can shape the development and manifestation
of personality.
• He conceptualised the mind as being composed
in a way similar to an iceberg. The smallest part
of the mind, the tip of the iceberg, is composed
of conscious thought processes – those mental
abilities that we are fully aware of.

Freud’s model of the human mind

Stages of personality development
Adult signs of Defining features Psychosexual stage
fixation
Oral First year after birth. Problems arise when
The mouth is the centre oral needs are either
of pleasure at this stage. under- or over-
Babies use their mouths stimulated. So early or
to eat and explore late weaning may lead to
everything around them. adult behaviours such as
overeating, smoking and
drinking to excess. Over-
dependence on others is
also, according to Freud,
a by-product of fixation
at this stage.

continued
Adult signs of Defining features Psychosexual stage

fixation
Anal During the child’s Fixation at this stage can
second year. occur when toilet training
Here, according to is too harsh or starts too
Freud, there is a clash early or too late.
between free bowel Associated adult
movements at will and behaviours might be
parental demands for excessively concerned
appropriate toilet with control and
training. cleanliness, or they
Thus it is at this stage might be reckless or
that the ego starts to impulsive.
develop.

continued
Adult signs Defining features Psychosexual stage

of fixation
Phallic Between the ages of 3 and 6. Freud believed that
Focus of attention diverts to the fixation at this stage
genital area. Here, according to could lead to problems
Freud, boys develop sexual later in life via
feelings for their mothers and unresolved conflicts with
form a desire to eliminate the one’s same-sex parent.
competing affections of the These could be
father (known as the Oedipus manifested by
complex). Girls develop penis aggression, difficulty
envy and try to compensate for with authority, inability to
their lack of a penis by hold down a stable
identifying with the father (the relationship and, in
Electra complex). Here the extreme cases, socially
superego starts to develop. disapproved-of sexual
behaviour.
continued
Adult signs Defining features Psychosexual stage

of fixation
Latency Following on from phallic stage
period through to the onset of puberty.
Here the ego represses sexual
instinct internally, and this is
reinforced externally by parents’
and teachers’ suppression of
sexual matters. Child learns
values of family and culture.
Genital At puberty, during adolescence Individuals reach this
and spanning the rest of the stage only when they
individual’s life. Via hormonal have successfully
changes, sexual impulses resolved the conflicts
reappear. The genitals again at the prior stages.
become the focus of pleasure.

Evaluation of Freud’s theory
• The stages of personality provided the springboard for the
field of developmental psychology.
• Provides the first comprehensive personality theory and
stimulated the development of personality assessment
techniques.
• Also drew attention to possible influence of unconscious
mental processes on the development and manifestation of
personality. Some empirical support for facets of Freud’s
work; recent research by Myers (2000) has provided support
for concepts such as a repressive coping style.
• Major critics of Freud’s theory maintain that his work:
– Is out of date and would not apply to today’s very different
society
– overemphasised the importance of unconscious principles in
respect of personality.
– is not readily open to scientific investigation.

Object relations theory
• Deals with how individuals internally conceptualise (in terms of feelings
and attitude) people and objects around them.
• One assumption is that the child’s developing relationship with others
around them (external forces) is more important than internal urges and
desires (internal forces). Children create their own unconscious mental
representation of others around them. So important others (e.g. the
mother) become internalised by the child.
• Thus children can have a relationship with this internalised object
(mother) even when she is not present (so children can still imagine what
their mothers might say if they do something they are not supposed to,
even when the mother is not physically present).
• So, in essence, object relations theorists attempt to understand
personality in terms of how children develop relationships with others
around them based on how they mentally represent this relationship.
• Melanie Klein (1964), John Bowlby (1988) and Heinz Kohut (1977)
developed their accounts of personality based on the principles of object
relations theory.

What is the function of personality?
This question allows us to explore two other paradigms
of personality research: the humanistic approach and the
cognitive-behavioural approach.
• The humanistic or phenomenological theorists see
personality as a tool for personal growth and
development, and suggest that our characteristics can
serve us in terms of seeking improvements in our quality
of life (by, for example, gaining success, friends and
satisfaction).
• The cognitive behavioural paradigm sees personality as
an interface between what we would like and what the
world will allow. In other words, personality allows us to
interact with the world, form social relationships, learn
what is right, what is wrong, and what is good and bad
for us.
The humanistic or
phenomenological paradigm
Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs (1968):
• Conceptualised individuals as being driven by needs; all needs
were hierarchically organised
• Divided human needs into five levels, with the most pressing needs
starting at the base of the hierarchy
• We must satisfy the lower needs before we can progress and
concentrate on obtaining those higher up in the hierarchy; also that
the levels develop with age – so that the first levels occur in
childhood (need for food, need for safety, etc.) and the others
develop throughout the lifespan
• Higher-level needs are not necessary for survival, so motivation to
achieve them is weaker than for more basic needs, e.g. water
• The final need stage is that of self-actualisation, where an individual
seems to know who they are and have little confusion about the
route their life should take. Our personality is a tool that we use to
gain these needs and attempt to reach this self-actualisation.

Maslow’s hierarchy of needs

The cognitive-behavioural paradigm
Cognitive-behavioural theorists see personality as a
package of behaviours that people have acquired
through learning and interaction with their
environments, and which they employ to help them
navigate their environments. They suggest that much of
personality is learned through social interaction.
So we gain both our behaviour and cognitive processes
via experience in our social worlds. We then use this
experience to survive within our environments.
So the function of personality is to test our theories of
the world around us in order that we might learn how to
survive and behave. The cognitive-behavioural
approach to personality seeks to understand how
learned cognitive thought patterns influence behaviour
and how the consequences of a behaviour inform
cognition for future actions.
Personality
A tool of social environmental interpretation?
• Bandura envisaged personality from a social-cognitive perspective. He
proposed two theories that suggested personality affects how we react to
environmental stimuli:
– cognitive social learning theory (1977)
– reciprocal determinism (1986).
• He viewed behaviour, internal personal factors and the influences of the
environment as inseparable parts of each other.
– So people’s eating habits (past behaviour) influence their eating preferences
(personal factor) which, in turn, influence how different foods (environment)
affect their behaviour.
• He proposed that personality influences how we interpret and react to
events/stimuli.
• Bandura also argued that our personalities often contribute to situations
that we react to (so if we expect someone to be rude to us, we may be
offhand to them in the first place which then causes the behaviour we
expected in the first place).
• So, in essence, personality is a sum of our internal personal factors, our
cognitions and the behaviours we use to deal with our environments.
What is personality?
• We have descriptive terms for personality, such as
dispositions or characteristics. The most widely accepted
term in personality is ‘trait’.
• ‘Personality traits are the tendencies that we use to
describe how someone thinks and behaves most of the
time’.
• Exactly how many or how few traits make up our
personality? Do we all have the same traits at the basis
of our personalities or do we have different combinations
of traits? Such questions have given rise to a fourth
paradigm of personality research – the trait approach to
understanding personality.

Assumptions of trait theory
• While there are many trait theorists, they all share three
common assumptions :
1. Individuals each possess particular personality traits to either
a greater or lesser extent. Perhaps the best analogy here is
to think of individual traits as having volumes. In some people
the volumes on certain traits are high, in others they are
medium and in others they are low. So while we all possess
the same personality traits, different combinations of sound
volume across these traits create unique personalities.
2. Traits remain relatively stable across time, so a sociable
person will probably remain generally sociable throughout his
or her lifetime.
3. Traits remain stable across a wide diversity of environmental
and social situations. So someone who is competitive will
probably be competitive at work as well as on the tennis
court.

Questions guiding trait research
Trait theories are also concerned with three
questions:
1. How should traits be conceptualised? In other
words, how are traits defined?
2. How can those traits that are most important
to personality be identified among the huge
numbers of ways people differ?
3. How can all personality traits be identified?

How many traits are important
in personality?
We will consider three main theories:
• Eysenck’s three factor model
• Cattell’s 16 personality
factor test (16PF)
• Costa and McCrae’s big five.

Trait theories: Eysenck
• Top-down approach: traits came from
clinical work with patients, rather than
being data-driven.
• Two factors:
1. Extraversion–introversion
2. Neuroticism–emotional stability.
• 3rd factor added in 1976 to help
differentiate schizophrenia with
normal personality:
– Psychoticism–tender-mindedness.
Eysenck’s
three-factor
theory
structure

Eysenck
• Three broad traits: extroversion,
psychoticism, neuroticism.
• Extroverts have a high energy level and are
sociable; introverts like to spend more time
alone
• A person scoring highly on the neuroticism
dimension is anxious and can often be
depressed.
• People scoring high on psychoticism lack
empathy and have little sympathy for the
suffering of others.
Cattell
• Instead of measuring behaviours, used language
(because language must contain a description of
personality).
• Used all words in the dictionary that describe different
aspects of personality.
• Developed questionnaire containing adjectives.
Employed ‘psychometric’ approach (studying
underlying structures).
• Personality is a ‘cocktail of characteristics’.
• Surface traits: 171 surface traits, such as
conscientiousness, competitiveness, flexibility.
• Source traits: groups of surface traits:humble versus
assertive or emotional versus stable.
• Used questionnaire and objective testing.
• Factor analysis revealed 23 factors.
• 16PF = 15 factors + intelligence
• 43 million trait combinations.
• Criticisms of Cattell:
– Researchers have failed to replicate the existence
of 16 main personality traits; 3 super factors have
emerged that closely resemble ENP (Eysenck,
1991)
– There has also been criticism that the 16PF is not
applicable to all cultures, for example black mother-
tongue speakers in the South African (Abrahams,
2002).

Costa and McCrae
• A five-factor model: the ‘big 5’:
– Openness to experience: culture, intellect, receptivity
to new ideas and approaches, imaginative, seek
novelty
– Conscientiousness: thorough, reliable, self-
disciplined, competent, orderly, dutiful (Eysenck’s P)
– Extraversion: sociable, outgoing, noisy, assertive,
active, excitement seeking (Eysenck’s E)
– Agreeableness: obey rules, trusting, cooperative,
tender-minded, straight forward, modest (Eysenck’s
P)
– Neuroticism: worried, anxious, angry, hostile,
depressed, self-conscious, vulnerable (Eysenck’s
N).
• From Cattell’s 16 factors, Costa and McCrae
(1976) discovered 3 factors: E, N, O.
• They measured these factors by 6 facets
(aspects of behaviour that represent lower level
factors), e.g. hostility being a facet of
neuroticism.
• Later added 2 of Goldberg’s factors to make 5.
• Assessment of theory:
– Why add 6 facets to each factor? Arbitary number
– Some of the factors are not totally independent
because some of the facets correlate with one
another.

• Positive aspects of Costa and McCrae’s big 5:
– Developed a widely used questionnaire
– NEO-PI, 1985, 240 items, 5 factors, 6 facets, 8 items
each, 5 point rating scale (revised 1992)
– Validated the questionnaire
– Established in a number of countries
– Correlates with other questionnaires (concurrent
validity)
– Validated against behaviours, e.g. risky sexual
behaviour (predictive validity)
– Examine origins of these factors (genetic studies)
– offers comprehensive framework to integrate and
understand trait concepts of Eysenck and Cattell.
Comparing theories
• Differences stem from their use of factor
analysis.
• They do not agree on number of factors.
• Cattell included motive, Eysenck did not.
• Cattell worked at the trait level of analysis, with
larger numbers of factors, a narrower definition,
but correlated together.
• Eysenck worked at the factor level, using
secondary factors to combine traits into a
smaller number of super factors, which cover a
broader range of behaviour and tend to be
uncorrelated.
How many factors are there?
• Recently, the consensus is leaning towards
there being 5 broad dimensions of personality.
• Support comes from FA, cross-cultural research
and comparing scales with other
questionnaires.
• McCrae and Costa (1990, 1994): all 5 factors
have been shown to be reliable and valid and
stable throughout adulthood.
• They are useful in that they can be measured,
and can predict behaviour.
Biological factors and personality
• One of the most significant questions guiding
personality research is the extent to which our
personalities are influenced by biological factors
such as heredity and hormones.
• Biological approaches are founded on the
premise that psychological characteristics (such
as aggression, shyness) are based on an
underlying physiological system.
• We will consider arousal theory, the influence of
hormones, evolutionary perspectives and
genetic factors.
Arousability theory
• Eysenck first proposed that people can be described
as being either introverted or extroverted. From a
biological perspective, introversion and extroversion
have been described in terms of arousal levels. That
is, an extrovert will seek more stimulation than an
introvert because their arousal system requires more
stimulation to become aroused.
• If this is true then we should see that extroverts’
arousal levels respond less quickly to arousal than
introverts’ arousal levels. Studies by Bullock and
Gilliland (1993) and Brocke et al. (1997) have all
supported this observation.
Reinforcement sensitivity theory
• Jeffrey Gray (1985) proposed a model of
personality, which is based on two hypothesised
biological systems within the brain:
– The first is what he calls the behavioural activation
system (BAS) which responds to incentives and is
responsible for behaviour engagement
– The other is the behavioural inhibition system (BIS)
which is responsive to punishment cues.
• So personality is determined to some extent by
the balance between your BAS and BIS.

Sensation seeking
• Hebb (1955) initially suggested people are motivated to
seek out an optimal level of arousal, which they are
personally comfortable with. If they are under-aroused
relative to this level, further arousal will be considered
rewarding; if they are over-aroused, a decrease in
arousal will be rewarding.
• Zuckerman (1991) reported that police officers
volunteering for riot duty have higher sensation-seeking
scores than those who do not volunteer for such duties.
• Zuckerman proposes a physiological basis for
sensation-seeking behaviour focusing on the role of
neurotransmitters.

Hormones and personality
• Theorists working with hormones argue that sex
differences between genders occur because each
gender has different levels of underlying hormones.
Men, for example, have on average 100 times the
amount of testosterone in their blood than females do
(Hoyenga and Hoyenga, 1993).
• Higher testosterone levels have been linked to
aggressive behaviour; Dabbs and Hargrove (1997)
reported that female prisoners with high levels of it
received more disciplinary punishments from the prison
authorities than those with lower testosterone levels.
• However, we do need to be cautious when interpreting
such research, since the vast majority of the studies of
this nature are correlational and so we cannot be sure if
the testosterone has caused the behaviour or if the
behaviour has caused increases in the hormone.
Evolutionary perspectives
• Evolutionary psychology maintains that there will be differences in
behaviour between men and women in behaviour domains where they have
faced different sorts of adaptive pressure (Buss, 1994). For example, men
and women face differing information-processing in reproductive behaviour:
– For men, there is the question of assured paternity as fertilisation
occurs internally within the female. Men who fail to solve this problem
risk investing resources into offspring that is not their own
– For women, the problem is securing reliable sources that will support
them and their child through pregnancy and immediately after.
• Evolutionary psychologists argue that these differing needs across the
genders motivate different types of personality development.
• Biological differences can also shape within-sex differences in personality,
e.g. a muscular man might be more confident using confrontational or
aggressive behaviour to achieve his goals than a skinny one (as he is
physically stronger and more intimidating).
• Through reinforcement and punishment we learn what we can and cannot
do based on our biological make-up, e.g. tall people have a greater chance
of success in basketball; a short person might be loud as they feel a need
to be heard if they cannot be seen.

Behavioural genetics
• While we all have the same genetic human code,
a small number of genes are different for
different people (e.g. hair colour). So while we
have the sequence for our DNA, we do not yet
fully understand the role these genes play in
such things as behaviour, cognitive ability and
personality.
• Work in this area attempts to determine how
much individual differences in personality are
determined by environmental or genetic factors.
It is a sensitive and political area.
Molecular genetics
• Recently, biological research into personality has
moved away from the issue of whether genes
influence personality towards a much more
focused set of questions such as how much they
influence personality and exactly which genes
influence which behaviour.
• One of the main areas is the search for genes
that are associated with genetically influenced
disorders.
• Families with a history of these disorders are
studied: blood or saliva is taken from those
members who do and do not have the disorder
so that DNA can be compared.
Other biological factors
• Research on hormones and brain hemisphere
use has also been used to investigate
influences on personality.
• For example, Compton et al. (2003)
investigated hemisphere involvement in
emotional people. Results indicated that
brooding and dwelling on the negative may be
associated with decreased left hemisphere
involvement, whereas openness to emotion
may be associated with increased right
hemisphere involvement.
Biological approach: evaluation
• The biological approach, in terms of hormone
and brain activity, offers interesting insights into
how biology is linked to the expression of
personality, but there is a danger that the
complexity of human nature may be forgotten in
such a focused area. Bunge (1990) and others
would argue that biological processes cannot
fully explain personality.
• Behaviour is rooted in a rich cocktail of influential
factors; biological indicators are one, but others
can be equally powerful, e.g. cognitive
processes or environmental pressures.
Aims of trait theories
1. Aim to discover the main dimensions of
personality and explain how people differ.
2. Aim to develop tests to measure these traits.
3. Aim to make these tests valid and reliable
across time and situations
– eg: Inventory of Driving-Related Personality Traits
(IVPE).
4. Aim to discover how individual differences come
about
– e.g. Duberstein et al (2000) –E and +N linked to
suicidal behaviour.
Generally nomothetic in application.

What are personality traits?
• Relatively enduring characteristics of a person.
• Usually conceived as predispositions to
behaviour, which are consistent over time and
across situations.
• These predispositions are assumed to be
organised on a hierarchy.
• People display consistency and continuity in
their behaviour, but there are also changes in
behaviour, thus demonstrating individual
differences (volume).
E.g. aggression:
Not at all ___________X____________Very much so
• Trait theorists are interested in these differences
between people and attempt to establish a
theory of the structure of personality that fits
everyone.
• Trait theorists share the view that people
possess broad dispositions (traits) to behave in
certain ways.
• These dispositions can be grouped together.
• Traits are fundamental to human personality.

• Trait vs. state distinction, e.g. for anxiety:
– We may not always be in a state of anxiety
– If we are in a state of anxiety, we may not
have the trait of anxiety, but may be anxious
due to the situation that we are in.
• Trait types:
– observed correlations of several traits
– e.g. lively, outgoing and sociable correlate to
make up an extraverted type.

Hierarchical structure of personality
P e r s o n a lity
S u p e r fa c to r s(tr a its)
A d v en tu ro u sess
T r a its
(g r o u p s o f h a b its)
I m p u ls iv ity
E x c ita b ilit y , s e n s a tio n s e e k in g e tc
H a b its
(s p e c ific r e s p o n s e s g r o u p e d to g e th e r to fo r m h a b its)
s h a r k w r e s tlin g
R o c k c lim b in g

How do we measure traits?
1 Questionnaires/inventories: nomothetic
(common to individuals)
2 Projective tests: idiographic (peculiar to each
individual, unique to a person)
3 Objective tests: both idiographic and
nomothetic

Projective tests

Projective tests
• Consist of deliberately vague or ambiguous
stimuli that respondents describe.
• In contrast to questionnaires that measure
variance common to all individuals, projective
tests measure peculiar or hidden aspects of
personality.
• Rationale: respondents project inner conflicts
and anxieties onto stimuli, tapping into deeper
aspects of the mind.

Projective tests: examples
• The Rorschach test (1921): 10 symmetrical
inkblots which participants describe.
• House-tree-person test (HTP) (Buck, 1970):
participants are required to draw these three
objects.
• Identify highly interesting, subtle aspects of
personality; capture in-depth, rich data.

Projective tests: comments
• Vernon, 1963:
- training required
- time-consuming
- difficult to score and to agree on score
- subjective
- contextual effects (age, sex of scorer).

Objective tests
• Fidgetometer: anxious people fidget more.
• Slow line drawing: cheat-low
conscientiousness.
• Basic metabolic rate: oxygen consumption for 6
minutes converted to calories per hour per
square metre of body area: less-extraversion
(vigorous, active).
• Lemon test?
+ Difficult to fake, social desirability removed
- Poor validity, difficult to administer
Questionnaires
• Self-report instruments
• Sets of items (questions) of any number (10–
500?)
• Items are generally statements, relevant to the
personality factor that the scale measures
• Respond by T/F, Y/N, forced choice, rating
scales
• Numerous traits could be measured
• Questionnaires are constructed by grouping
together descriptive terms of behaviours that
overlap (correlate) using factor analysis.
Examples of questions
• True or false: I am attracted to people more
when they have fewer clothes on.
• Forced choice: When I have had a stressful day
I go home and:
a) Have a nice relaxing bath
b) Play some loud music
c) Kick the hamster around the living room.
• Likert scale: I am God’s gift to the opposite
sex.
Agree 1 2 3 4 5 Disagree

What is factor analysis ?
• Statistical procedure employed to analyse a
complex phenomenon with the aim of
simplifying into more manageable patterns of
description.
• Earth:
– mud, clay, stones, rock, peat, leaves, roots etc.
– minerals, soil and vegetation
• Neuroticism: nervousness, anxiety and
worrying
• Allows quick descriptions of related items.

Advantages of personality tests
• Easy to construct and administer
• Quick, inexpensive, no training required,
administer to large groups
• Can be standardised
• Norms can be established
• Can be validated?
• Can be tested for reliability
• Have many uses (selection for school, work;
clinical diagnoses)

Disadvantages of personality tests
• Items must be short and easy to complete:
My karma is inexplicably intertwined in the
gloriousness of my fatalistic nature.
• But does this make personality too simplistic?
• Do questionnaires capture the full richness of
personality?
• Subjective, based on self-report, truth or lie?
• Cross-situational reliability?
• Semantics?

Personality: © Simon Moore Complete Psychology Published by Hodder Education

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Personality: © Simon Moore Complete Psychology Published by Hodder Education

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Personality

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

Adult signs of Defining features Psychosexual stage

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

Adult signs Defining features Psychosexual stage

Adult signs Defining features Psychosexual stage

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

© Simon Moore Complete Psychology published by Hodder Education

You might also like