Unit II

In Search of Personality: Trait, Learning, and Humanistic Approaches

Lead-in

1. Which of the following adjectives are positive and which are negative?

funny, unreliable, self-confident, caring, imaginative, outgoing, helpful, rude, easy-going, stubborn, cooperative, selfish, shy, disorganized, forgetful, active, lazy, loyal, arrogant, polite, responsible, decisive, bossy, energetic, ambitious, determined, careful, reserved, mean, generous, intelligent, sensitive

Positive	funny, ……….
Negative	unreliable, …………

2. Analyze the conversation printed below.

a. How many people are discussed?

b. What is characterized?

c. Are personality traits consistent across different situations?

“Tell me about Roger, Sue,” said Wendy.

“Oh, he’s just terrific. He’s the friendliest guy I know - goes out of his way to be nice to everyone. He hardly ever gets mad. He’s just so even-tempered no matter what’s happening. And he’s really smart, too. About the only thing I don’t like is that he’s always in such a hurry to get things done; he seems to have boundless energy, much more than I have.”

“He sounds great to me, especially in comparison to Richard,” replied Wendy. “He is so self-centered and arrogant it drives me crazy. I sometimes wonder why I ever started going out with him.”

Friendly. Even-tempered. Smart. Energetic. Self-centered. Arrogant.

If we were to analyze the conversation printed above, the first thing we would notice is that it is made up of a series of trait characterizations of the two people being discussed. In fact, most of our understanding of the reasons behind others’ behavior is based on the premise that people possess certain traits that are assumed to be consistent across different situations. A number of formal theories of personality employ variants of this approach. We turn now to a discussion of these and other personality theories, all of which provide alternatives to the psychoanalytic emphasis on unconscious processes in determining behavior.

Pre-reading

1. Look through Text C and find Russian equivalents to the underlined words and expressions.

2. Match the following terms with their definitions:

1. Traits	a. A single personality trait that directs most of a person's activities (e.g., greed, lust, kindness)
2. Trait theory	b. Less important personality traits (e.g., preferences for certain clothes or movies) that do not affect behavior as much as central and cardinal traits do
3. Cardinal trait	c. A statistical technique for combining traits into broader, more general patterns of consistency
4. Central traits	d. According to Cattell, clusters of a person’s related behaviors that can be observed in a given situation
5. Secondary traits	e. The sixteen basic dimensions of personality that Cattell identified as the root of all behavior
6. Factor analysis	f. A state of self-fulfillment in which people realize their highest potential
7. Surface traits	g. Enduring dimensions of personality characteristics differentiating people from one another
8. Source traits	h. A set of major characteristics that make up the core of a person's personality
9. Introversion-extroversion	i. The impression one holds of oneself
10. Neuroticism-stability	j. A model that seeks to identify the basic traits necessary to describe personality
11. Learned not-thinking	k. Learning that is the result of viewing the actions of others and observing the consequences
12.Social learning theory (of personality)	l. The theory that emphasizes people’s basic goodness and their natural tendency to rise to higher levels of functioning
13. Observational learning	m. Eysenck’s personality spectrum encompassing people from the moodiest to the most even-tempered
14. Determinism	n. The theory that suggests that personality develops through observational learning
15. Humanistic theory (of personality)	o. Dollard and Miller’s notion that unpleasant thoughts can be repressed, eliminating negative feelings that are otherwise present
16. Self-concept	p. According to Eysenck, a dimension of personality traits encompassing the shyest to the most sociable people
17. Unconditional positive regard	q. The view that suggests that behavior is shaped primarily by factors external to the person
18. Self-actualization	r. Supportive behavior from another individual, regardless of one's words or actions

3. Scan the text and suggest appropriate headings for each part (I – X):

- Factoring out Personality.

- Which Theorist’s Traits are the Right Traits?: Evaluating Trait Theories of Personality.

- Labeling Personality: Trait Theories.

- Getting Down to Basics: Allport’s Trait Theory.

- Understanding the Self.

- Explaining the Outer Life, Ignoring the Inner Life.

- Where Freud Meets Skinner.

- Evaluating Learning Theories of Personality.

- Where the Inner Person Meets the Outer One.

- Answering the right question: Which theory is Right.

Text C

Part I

If someone were to ask you to characterize another person, it is probable that you - like the two people in the conversation just presented - would come up with a list of their personal qualities, as you see them. But how would you know which of these qualities were most important in determining that person’s behavior?

Personality psychologists have asked similar questions themselves. In order to answer them, they have developed a sophisticated model of personality known as trait theory. Traits are relatively enduring dimensions of personality characteristics along which people differ from one another.

Trait theorists do not assume that some people have a trait and others do not; rather, they propose that all people have certain traits, but that the degree to which the trait applies to a specific person varies and can be quantified. For instance, you might be relatively friendly, while I might be relatively unfriendly.

But we both have a “friendliness” trait, although you would be quantified with a higher score and I with a lower one. By taking this approach, the major challenge for trait theorists has been to identify the specific primary traits necessary to describe personality - and, as we shall see, different theorists have come up with surprisingly different sets.

***

Part II

When Gordon Allport sat down with an unabridged dictionary in the 1930s, he found some 18,000 separate terms that could be used to describe personality. But which of these were the most crucial?

Allport answered this question by suggesting that there were three basic categories of traits: cardinal, central, and secondary (Allport, 1961, 1966). A cardinal trait is a single characteristic that directs most of a person’s activities. For instance, a Don Juan is motivated to seduce every woman he meets; another person might be totally driven by power needs. Most people, however, do not develop all-encompassing cardinal traits; instead, they possess a handful of central traits that make up the core of personality. Central traits, such as honest) or sociability, are the major characteristics of the individual; they usually number from five to ten in any one person. Finally, secondary traits are characteristics that affect behavior in fewer situations and are less influential than central or cardinal traits. For instance, a preference for ice cream or a dislike of modern art would be considered a secondary trait.

***

Part III

More recent attempts at discovering the primary traits have centered on a statistical technique known as factor analysis. Factor analysis is a method for combining descriptions of many different individual traits into broad, overall patterns of consistency.

Raymond Cattell (1965) suggested that the characteristics that can be observed in a given situation represent surface traits, clusters of related behaviors such as assertiveness or gregariousness. Yet these surface traits are merely representations of more fundamental source traits. Source traits are the sixteen basic dimensions of personality that Cattell identified as being at the root of all behavior. These traits are described in Table 1.

Although he also used the method of factor analysis to identify patterns within traits, Hans Eysenck (1975), another trait theorist, came to a very different conclusion about the nature of personality. He found that personality could be best described in terms of two basic dimensions: introversion-extroversion and neuroticism-stability. On the one extreme of the introversion-extroversion dimension are people who are quiet, careful, thoughtful, and restrained (the introverts), and on the other are those who are outgoing, sociable, and active (the extroverts). Independently of that, people can be rated as neurotic (moody, touchy, sensitive) or stable (calm, reliable, even-tempered); see Figure 2. By evaluating people along these two dimensions, Eysenck has been able to make accurate predictions of behavior in a number of situations.

Table 1. The sixteen trait dimensions in Cattell’s trait theory of personality

	Low Scores	High Scores
1	Sizia: reserved, detached, aloof		Affecta: outgoing, warmhearted
2	Low intelligence: dull		High intelligence: bright
3	Low ego strength: agitated, emotionally, unstable		High ego strength: calm, emotionally stable
4	Submissiveness: humble, docile		Dominance: assertive, competitive
5	Desurgency: sober, serious		Surgency: happy-go-lucky, fun-loving
6	Weak superego: ignores rules, immoral		Strong superego: conscientious, moral
7	Threctia: shy, timid		Parmia: adventurous, bold
8	Harria: tough-minded, self-reliant		Premsia: tender-minded, sensitive
9	Alaxia: trusting, accepting		Protension: suspicious, rejecting
10	Praxernia: practical, down-to-earth		Autia: imaginative, head-in-the-clouds
11	Artlessness: forthright, socially awkward		Shrewdness: astute, socially skilled
12	Untroubled adequacy: secure, self- assured		Guilt proneness: apprehensive, self-blaming
13	Conservatism: conservative, traditional		Radicalism: liberal, free-thinking
14	Group adherence: joins groups, follows others		Self-sufficiency: independent, self-reliant
15	Low self-sentiment integration: uncontrolled, impulsive		High self-sentiment integration: controlled, compulsive
16	Low ergic tension: relaxed, composed		High ergic tension: tense, frustrated

Figure 2.

***

Part IV

We have seen that trait theorists describing personality have come to quite different conclusions about which traits are the most fundamental and descriptive. The difficulty in determining which of the theories is most accurate has led many psychologists to question the validity of trait conceptions of personality in general.

Actually, there is an even more fundamental difficulty with trait approaches. Even if we are able to identify a set of primary traits, we are left with little more than a label or description of personality - rather than an explanation of behavior. If we say that someone donates money to charity because he or she has the trait of “generosity,” we still do not know why the person became generous in the first place, or the reasons for generosity being displayed in a given situation. Traits, then, provide nothing in the way of explanation of behavior, but are merely descriptive labels.

Perhaps the biggest problem with trait conceptions is one that is fundamental to the entire area of personality: Is behavior really as consistent over different situations as trait conceptions would imply?

***

Part V

While psychoanalytic and trait theories concentrate on the inner person - the stormy fury of an unobservable but powerful id or a hypothetical but critical set of traits - learning theories of personality focus on the outer person. In fact, to a strict learning theorist, personality is simply the sum of learned responses to the external environment. Internal events such as thoughts, feelings, and motivations are ignored; while their existence is not denied, learning theorists say that personality is best understood by looking at features of a person’s environment.

According to the most influential of the learning theorists, B. F. Skinner, personality is a collection of learned behavior patterns (Skinner, 1975). Similarities in responses across different situations are caused by similar patterns of reinforcement that have been received in such situations in the past. If I am sociable both at parties and at meetings, then, it is because I have been reinforced previously for displaying social behaviors - not because I am fulfilling some unconscious wish based on experiences during my childhood or because I have an internal trait of sociability.

Strict learning theorists such as Skinner are less interested in the consistencies in behavior across situations, however, than in ways of modifying behavior. In fact, their view is that humans are infinitely changeable; if one is able to control and modify the patterns of reinforced in a situation, behavior that other theorists would view as stable and unyielding can be changed, and ultimately improved. These learning theorists, then, are optimistic in their attitudes about the potential for resolving personal and societal problems through treatment strategies based on learning theory - methods.

***

Part VI

Not all learning theories of personality take such a strict view in rejecting the importance of what is “inside” the person by focusing solely on the “outside.” John Dollard and Neal Miller (1950) are two theorists who tried to meld psychoanalytic notions with traditional stimulus-response learning theory in an ambitious and influential explanation of personality.

Dollard and Miller translated Freud’s notion of the pleasure principle - trying to maximize one’s pleasure and minimize one’s pain - into terms more suitable for learning theory by suggesting that both biological and learned drives energize an organism. If the consequence of a particular behavior is a reduction in drive, the drive reduction is viewed as reinforcing, which in turn increases the probability of the behavior occurring again in the future.

According to Dollard and Miller, the Freudian notion of repression, in which anxiety-producing thoughts are pushed into the unconscious, can be looked at instead as an example of learned not-thinking. Suppose the thought of sexual intercourse makes you anxious. Freud might propose that you would deal with the anxiety by avoiding conscious thought about intercourse and instead relegating the idea to your unconscious - i.e., repressing the thought. In contrast, Dollard and Miller might suggest that “not thinking” about the topic will become reinforcing to you because you find that it leads to a reduction in the unpleasant state of anxiety that thinking about it evokes. “Not thinking,” then, will become an increasingly likely behavior.

***

Part VII

Unlike other learning theories of personality, social learning theory emphasizes the influence of a person’s thoughts, feelings, expectations, and values in determining personality. According to Albert Bandura, the main proponent of this point of view, we are able to foresee the possible outcomes of certain behaviors in a given setting without actually having to carry them out. This takes place mainly through the mechanism of observational learning - viewing the actions of others and observing the consequences (Bandura, 1977).

More so than other learning theories, social learning theory considers how we can modify our own personalities through the exercise of self-reinforcement. We are constantly judging our own behavior based on our internal expectations and standards, and then providing ourselves with cognitive rewards or punishments. For instance, a person who cheats on her income tax may mentally punish herself, feeling guilty and displeased with herself. If, just before mailing her tax return, she corrects her “mistake,” the positive feelings she will experience will be rewarding and will serve to reinforce her view of herself as a law-abiding citizen.

***

Part VIII

By ignoring the internal processes that are uniquely human, traditional learning theorists such as Skinner have been accused of oversimplifying personality so much that the concept becomes meaningless. In fact, reducing behavior to a series of stimuli and responses and excluding thoughts and feelings from the realm of personality leaves learning theorists practicing an unrealistic and inadequate form of science, at least in the eyes of their critics.

Of course, some of these criticisms are blunted by social learning theory, which explicitly considers the role of cognitive processes in personality. Still, all learning theories share a highly deterministic view of human behavior, a view that maintains behavior is shaped primarily by external forces. In the eyes of some critics, determinism disregards the ability of people to take control of their behavior.

On the other hand, learning approaches have had a major impact in a variety of ways. For one thing, they have helped make the study of personality an objective, scientific venture by focusing on observable features of people and the environments in which they live. Beyond this, learning theories have produced important, successful means of treating personality disorders. The degree of success these treatments have enjoyed provides confidence that learning theory approaches have merit.

***

Part IX

Where, in all these theories of personality, is an explanation for the saintliness of a Mother Teresa, the creativity of a Michelangelo, the brilliance and perseverance of an Einstein? An understanding of such unique individuals - as well as more everyday sorts of people who share some of the same attributes - comes from humanistic theory.

According to humanistic theorists, the theories of personality that we have discussed share a fundamental error in their views of human nature. Instead of seeing people as controlled by unconscious, unseen forces (as does psychoanalytic theory), a set of stable traits (trait theory), or situational reinforcements and punishments (learning theory), humanistic theory emphasizes people’s basic goodness and their tendency to grow to higher levels of functioning. It is this conscious, self-motivated ability to change and improve, along with people’s unique creative impulses, that make up the core of personality.

The major representative of the humanistic point of view is Carl Rogers (1971). Rogers suggests that there is a need for positive regard which reflects a universal requirement to be loved and respected. Because others provide this positive regard, we grow dependent on them. We begin to see and judge ourselves through the eyes of other people, relying on their values.

According to Rogers, one outgrowth of placing import on the values of others is that there is often some degree of mismatch between a person’s experiences and his or her self-concept, or self-impression. If the mismatch is minor, so are the consequences. But if it is great, it will lead to psychological disturbances in daily functioning, such as the experience of frequent anxiety.

Rogers suggests that one way of overcoming the discrepancy between experience and self-concept is through the receipt of unconditional positive regard from others - a friend, a spouse, or a therapist. Unconditional positive regard consists of supportive behavior on the part of an observer, no matter what a person says or does. This support, says Rogers, allows people the opportunity to evolve and grow both cognitively and emotionally as they are able to develop more realistic self-concepts.

To Rogers and other humanistic personality theorists (such as Abraham Maslow), an ultimate goal of personality growth is self-actualization. Self-actualization is a state of self-fulfillment in which people realize their highest potential: This, Rogers would argue, occurs when their experience with the world and their self-concept are closely matched. People who are self-actualized accept themselves as they are in reality, which enables them to achieve happiness and fulfillment.

Although humanistic theories suggest the value of providing unconditional positive regard toward people, unconditional: positive regard toward humanistic theories has been less forthcoming from many personality theorists. The criticisms have centered on the difficulty of verifying the basic assumptions of the theory, as well as on the question of whether unconditional positive regard does, in fact, lead to greater personality adjustment.

Humanistic approaches have also been criticized for making the assumption that people are basically “good” - a notion that is not only unverifiable, but one in which nonscientific values are used to build supposedly scientific theories. Still, the humanistic theories have been important in highlighting the uniqueness of human beings and in guiding the development of a significant form of therapy designed to alleviate psychological difficulties.

***

Part X

By now, you have come across this question a number of times in connection with a number of diverse areas of psychology. The response, once again, is the same: This is not an appropriate question to be asking. Each theory looks at somewhat different aspects of personality and holds different premises, and in many cases personality is most reasonably viewed from a number of perspectives simultaneously. Of course, the potential exists that someday there will be a unified theory of personality, but the field has not yet reached that point, and the likelihood of it happening in the near future is slim.

In the meantime, though, it is possible to highlight and compare the major differences between each of the theories. We list below the most important dimensions along which the theories differ:

• The unconscious versus the conscious. Psychoanalytic theory emphasizes the importance of the unconscious; humanistic theory stresses the conscious and trait and learning theories largely disregard both.

• Nature (genetic factors) versus nurture (environmental factors). Psychoanalytic theory stresses genetic factors; learning theory focuses on the environment, trait theory varies; and humanistic theory stresses the interaction between both in the development of personality.

• Freedom versus determinism. While humanistic theories stress the freedom of individuals to make choices in their lives, other theories stress determinism, the view that behavior is directed and caused by factors outside people’s willful control. Determinism is particularly evident in psychoanalytic and learning theories, as well as in most trait theories; in such approaches, people’s behavior is assumed to be brought about by factors largely outside of their control.

Post – reading

I. Choose the correct answer.

1. The major aim of the trait theories is

a) to prove that some people have a trait and others do not;

b) to show that the degree to which the trait applies to a specific person can’t vary;

c) to identify the specific primary traits.

2. Alport suggested

a) ten basic categories of traits;

b) three basic categories of traits;

c) twenty basic categories of traits.

3. Source traits are

a) less fundamental than surface traits;

b) more fundamental than surface traits;

c) equally fundamental than surface traits.

4. To a strict learning theorist, personality is

a) a set of internal thoughts, feelings and motivations;

b) the sum of learned responses to the external environment;

c) not understood by looking at the features person’s environment.

II. Try it. Assessing Your Real Self-Concept and Your Ideal Self-Concept

The concept of: self is central to humanistic personality theory. Yet how well do most of us know ourselves? Few of us take the time to systematically assess our view of ourselves, and to determine, how closely our self-concept matches the ideal self to which we aspire.

To get an idea of how well your real self-concept and ideal self-concept match up, try the following exercise. First, quickly place a check mark next to each item that describes you (Use the first column for your checks.) Be truthful and honest! Next, go back through the list and place a check beside each item; this time in the second column, that describes your ideal self – the kind of person you would like to be. Once again work through the list quickly.

1. Absent-minded ________

2. Anxious ________

3. Artistic ________

4. Attractive ________

5. Capable ________

6. Charming ________

7. Clear-thinking ________

8. Clever ________

9. Confused ________

10. Courageous ________

11. Dissatisfied ________

12. Dreamy ________

13. Emotional ________

14. Energetic ________

15. Enterprising ________

16. Excitable ________

17. Forceful ________

18. Forgetful _________

19. Gentle _________

20. Good-looking _________

21. Handsome ________

22. Hard-headed ________

23. Hasty ________

24. Headstrong ________

25. Hurried ________

26. Imaginative ________

27. Impatient ________

28. Impulsive ________

29. Industrious ________

30. Ingenious ________

31. Initiating ________

32. Insightful ________

33. Inventive ________

34. Irritable ________

35. Moody _________

36. Nervous ________

37. Original ________

38. Persevering ________

39. Pessimistic ________

40. Polished ________

41. Preoccupied ________

42. Resourceful ________

43. Restless ________

44. Tactful _________

45. Wise _________

46. Witty _________

Now make three lists. In the fist, list the terms that are characteristic of your real, but not your ideal, self. In the second, list characteristics of your ideal, but not your real, self. Finally, make a list of the characteristics that apply both to your ideal self and your real self. The first list will tell you things about yourself that are inconsistent with what you would like to be like. The second list gives you a sense of the way you would like to be. Finally, the last list shows you the traits on which you already match your ideal. How well do your idea and real self-concepts match up?

You also might want to compare yourself with the responses of a broad sample of subjects who answered these questions as part of a study (Gough, Fioravanti, & Lazzari). For those people, these items were rated as more characteristic of their real selves than their ideal selves: 1, 2, 9, 11, 12, 13, 16, 18, 22, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 34, 35, 36, 39, 41, and 43. In comparison, the following items were more characteristic of their ideal selves than their real selves: 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 14, 15, 17, 19, 20, 21, 26. 29, 30, 31, 32. 33, 37, 38, 40, 42, 44, 45, and 46.

(Source: Вуrne & Кеlleу, 1981.)

Follow-up

I. Say if the statement is True or False. If the statement is False give the correct variant using the text above.

a) Traits are relatively enduring dimensions along which people are similar to each other.

b) Trait theorists have tried to identify the major traits that characterize personality.

c) Allport divided traits into cardinal and secondary traits.

d) Using a statistical technique called factor analysis, Cattell identified surface traits and ten basic source traits, while Eysenck found just two major dimensions: introversion-extroversion and neuroticism-stability.

e) Learning theories of personality concentrate on how environmental factors shape personality.

f) Humanistic theories view the core of personality as the ability to change, improve, and be creative in a uniquely human fashion.

g) According to Rogers, personality is not influenced by a need for positive regard, reflecting universal requirements for being loved and respected.

i) The major characteristics along which personality theories differ include the role of the unconscious versus the conscious, nature (genetic factors) versus nurture (environmental factors), and freedom versus determinism.

II. Unit Review. Give the correct variant for each item.

1. According to Allport, a______________ trait is a single characteristic that directs most of a person’s activities, while a ___________________ trait makes up the core of personality.

2. One explanation of factor analysis is that it

1. combines individuals’ traits into overall patterns

2. breaks down a personality trait into degrees of positiveness or negativeness

3. seeks to explain the presence of certain traits

4. determines an individual’s behavior by assessing his or her self-concept

3. Raymond Cattell used surface traits and source traits to explain behaviors based on sixteen personality dimensions. True or false?

4. Laurel is quiet, pensive, and restrained in her social relationships, whereas her roommate Judy is more outgoing, talkative, and socially active. According to Hans Eysenck, Laurel and Judy would vary on the ______________________ - ___________________ dimension of personality.

5. Learning theorists Dollard and Miller believed that an organism is energized by

1. a desire for pleasure

2. the need for a positive self-concept

3. the need for love and respect

4. biological and learned drives

6. The notion of unconditional positive regard was proposed by B. F. Skinner in his learning theory of personality. True or false?

7. Match the theory with the appropriate description.

1. _________ Trait theory

2. _________ Learning theory

3. _________ Humanistic theory

4. _________ Social learning theory

5. _________ Psychoanalytic theory

1. Emphasizes the role of observation of others in determining personality.

2. Criticized for its limitations in labeling, but not explaining, personalities.

3. Focuses on observable traits, responses to environment, and behavior modification.

4. Begins with the idea that people are basically good.

5. Emphasizes the role of the unconscious.

III. Project work. Choose one of the psychological theories of personality given above which appeals to you most of all. Imagine that you are a famous psychologist who presents this theory in front of the colleagues. Use different media sources to find out more information about the theory of personality you have chosen. Make up a good presentation in class. Be ready to answer the questions of your opponents.