CEBU NORMAL UNIVERSITY College of Teacher Education Graduate School ADVANCE THEORIES OF PERSONALITY First Semester 2013 - 2014

Name: FERNANDEZ, BRYAN A. Date: June 29, 2013 Program: MAEd - GC

What is PERSONALITY?

Etymology:
The word "personality" originates from theLatin persona, which means mask. Significantly, in the theatre of the ancient Latin-speaking world, the mask was not used as a plot device to disguise the identity of a character, but rather was a convention employed to represent or typify that character.
According to/in http://dictionary.reference.com The sum total of the physical, mental, emotional, and socil characteristics of an individual. Gordon Allport (1937) and HenryMurray (1938) - Personality is the set of psychological traits and mechanisms within the individual that are organized and relatively enduring and that inuence his or her interactions with, and adaptations to, the intrapsychic, physical, and social environments. R.B. Cattell (1950) The personality of an individual is that which enables us to predict what he will do in a given situation

In psychology, the patterns of behavior, thought, and emotion unique to an individual, and the ways they interact to help or hinder the adjustment of a person to other people and situations. J.P. Guilford (1959) - An individuals personality, then, is his unique pattern of traits. Mackinnon (1959) - Personality refers to factors inside people that explain their behavior. The sum total of typical ways of acting, thinking, and feeling that makes a person unique. Personality refers to an individuals characteristic patterns of thought, emotion, and behavior, together with the psychological mechanisms hidden or not behind those patterns (Funder, 2004). Personality is the set of psychological traits and mechanisms within the individual that are organized and relatively enduring and that influence his or her interactions with, and adaptations to, the intrapsychic, physical, and social environments (Larsen & Buss, 2005) Personality refers to those characteristics of the person that account for consistent patterns of feelings, thinking, and behaving (Pervin, Cervone & John, 2005). Personality is the organized, developing system within the individual that represents the collective action of that individuals major psychological subsystems (Mayer, 2007).

One and common definition: Personality can be defined as a dynamic and organized set of characteristics possessed by a person that uniquely influences his or her cognitions, motivations, and behaviors in various situations.

WHY study PERSONALITY? Each of us, as human beings, influences much that is within us and around us. Each of us has many psychological attributes -- feelings, thoughts, motivations, and the like. It is our personality that orchestrates our psychological qualities. Our feelings -- strong or slight -- determine some of how we act and react. Our thoughts guide us and influence others, who may be entertained by our wit or attracted to our wisdom. Our sense of self helps inform us of how to make choices among alternatives -- choices that may help us grow, or, that may harm us. This personality of ours slowly and persistently influences how we feel, what we do, who we are, and how we influence the world around us. Most of us can't help but wonder how our personality works, how our personality came to be -and what it might mean for our future. We also wonder about the personalities of others -- how they are the same or different from us.

Gordon Allport in the psychology of personality make these contributions (Allport, 1937)

develop general laws as to how an individual's uniqueness comes about predict a person's behavior on the basis of his/her individual characteristics discover the individual person's own point of view of who she or he is discover the parts of personality discover the structure that holds those parts together give preference to certain concepts -- e.g., ego-system, trait, life-history -- that recognize a person's individuality discover common traits codify knowledge as to the nature of human nature turn interpersonal impressions into more reliable knowledge adequately represent the individual in science, and provide that individual with respect

Four major perspectives on Personality Psychoanalytic - unconscious motivations Trait - specific dimensions of personality Humanistic - inner capacity for growth Social-Cognitive - influence of environment SixPsychologicalPerspectives Therearesixmainschoolsofthoughtregardingpersonality: psychodynamic:focusesonunconsciousmotivesandstructurestoexplainpersonality humanistic:focusesonthefundamentalgoodnessofpeopleandtheirattemptstostrive forhigherlevelsoffunctioning constitution(ortype):proposesarelationshipbetweenbodytypeandpersonality characteristics trait:examinesstablecharacteristicsofthepersonthathelpexplainbehavior

 social-cognitive:focusesonenvironmentalcontingenciesandaccompanyingmental procesestoexplainpersonality behavioral:focusesonthefundamentalsoflearningtoexplainbehavior 3 Facts to Consider When Defining Personality Individuals are unique Individuals behave differently in different situations Although individuals are unique and behave inconsistently across situations, there is considerable commonality in human behavior Two Main Personality Theories 1. Trait theory: people differ based on stable attributes (called traits) characteristics lie on a continuum e.g., the Big Five (OCEAN) Openness to Experience Conscientiousness Extraversion Agreeableness Neuroticism 2. Type theory: people can be sorted into categories (either one type or the other)

Three Levels of Personality Analysis These three levels are well summarized by Kluckhohn & Murray, in their 1948 book on culture and personality, in which they state that every human being is, in certain respects; 1. Like all others (the human nature level). 2. Like some others (the level of individual and group differences). 3. Like no others (the individual uniqueness level).

Major issues in personality theory:

1. First person or third person: the experience of the self or observers Subjective experience, especially experience of ourselves, not of external stimuli, has been an important theme throughout the history of personality theories. Over a century ago, William James (1890) wrote thoughtfully on the self, retaining the idea of a spiritual me from the era when scientific constraints had not yet strengthened their veto voice over such a soul-like idea, supplementing the spiritual self with a variety of selves (material, social, and so on) more appealing to a secular audience. With the rise of scientific psychology laboratories, the self received less attention, until its re-emergence with the personological emphases of Gordon Allport, Henry Murray, and others in the late 1930s (Coon 2000). Among therapists, Carl Rogers (1961) claimed that progress in psychotherapy requires attending to a persons experience of self. In this tradition, Bohart (2006) interprets diverse findings from psychotherapy research as evidence that it is the clients themselves, not their therapists, who are the most important change agents in psychotherapy.

Self-reflection is an implicit basis for using self-report questionnaires to measure personality. It is explicit in some theoretical formulations, such as those popular in recent decades that describe life stories or narratives as important aspects of identity and functioning (e.g., McAdams 1996), and those that emphasize self-concept and identity (Loevinger and Knoll 1983). In terror management theory, self-esteem provides a buffer against the anxiety caused by awareness of mortality (Greenberg, Pyszczynski and Solomon 1986; Pyszczynski, Greenberg, Solomon et al. 2004). The theoretical concept of possible selves demonstrates the power of self-reflective cognition to change behaviour, at least when the social context provides needed support and opportunity (Oyserman, Bybee and Terry 2006). Self-referent cognitions are obviously developed with experience, and so these concepts provide a place for theorists to link the influence of family and culture on personality.

2. Social and cultural factors Since personality is presumably learned in a familial and societal context, theory should elaborate on these processes. So far, progress is slow. The historical Conceptual issues in personality theories have proposed influences of the family (Freud, Adler), of gender (Horney), and of social class (Dollard and Miller), but all of these in a EuroAmerican context, and assuming the values and expectations of an individualistic society. More recently, cross-cultural investigations of personality measures report similarities in the factor structure of personality tests across cultures, but there are differences too, and much theoretical and empirical work remains (Cahan and White 1992; Fung and Ng 2006; Norenzayan and Heine 2005; Rothbaum, Weisz, Pott et al. 2000; Sedikides, Gaertner and Vevea 2005). 3. Studying the individual or comparing people: idiographic and nomothetic approaches Idiographic approaches study individuals, while nomothetic approaches seek generalizations and make comparisons based on the study of many people. This distinction, proposed by the German philosopher Wilhelm Windelband in 1892, was discussed by American personality psychologist Gordon Allport (1937), who argued that idiographic traits that resided within individuals were the real causes within personality. Windelbands idiographic approach was what he called a historical science in that it emphasized the history of one person (Maher and Gottesman 2005). This approach requires considerable investigation of one person and so is suitable to psychohistorical investigation and to clinical applications. 4. Individual differences Along with this advance in trait theory, Mischel and other cognitive behaviourists (Bandura 1986) emphasized a persons cognitions as refined trait concepts: no longer defined in terms of the observable behaviour alone, but the persons thoughts or beliefs about the situation, his capabilities, her probable outcomes, and so on. The proliferation of measures of selfefficacy expectations in many domains of behaviour attests to the impact of this cognitive reconceptualization of trait concepts. 5. Development: continuity and change over time Longitudinal research, which is needed to address questions of change or continuity, is challenging, but fortunately some major longitudinal studies enlighten us about personality continuity and change, including ego-control (Block and Block 2006), and emotionality and self-regulation (Kubzansky, Martin and Buka 2004). Stability from childhood to adulthood, while significant in many cases, is low enough to suggest that significant change occurs, especially before adulthood (Caspi, Roberts and Shiner 2005; Hampson and Goldberg 2006).

6. Biology and nature The idea that biology influences personality is nothing new. It was a familiar concept to the ancient Greeks, and an assumption behind the eugenics movement in the late nineteenth and first half of the twentieth centuries. Today, an explosion in neuroscience knowledge permits modern personality theorists to describe detailed biological mechanisms that underlie individual differences in personality. Neurotransmitter explanations are offered by Eysenck (1967), Gray (1970), and others. Modern theories describe biology and experience (e.g., reward and punishment) interacting to shape personality, in contrast to antiquated either-or conceptualization of the naturenurture question. Based on the assumption that the psychological mind is grounded in the biological brain and body, emerging neuroscience evidence of the brain as modular suggests a model of personality that is also built of components. Pleasure, pain and other emotions have different neural pathways, helping theorists understand why people differ in their reaction to the same events. Defence mechanisms, described since Freuds time and part of the establi shed language of psychoanalytically inspired theory, are being recast in terms of brain processes and learning, instead of flow of libido (Kandel 2006; Northoff, Bermpohl, Schoeneich and Boeker 2007). Neuroscientists collaborating with experienced Buddhist meditators report that the mind can influence the brain, as well as the reverse (Davidson 2001). 7. Adjustment and wellbeing Although adjustment and pathology have been reoccurring themes throughout the history of personality theory, the proper conceptualization of these themes is controversial. Some theorists (Allport and Freud, for example) describe conflict or fragmentation within personality as a sign of maladjustment, and unity as evidence of health. Suggested Activity: I suggest you have to take the PERSONALITY TEST. Thank you very much! Web Resources: http://www.thepersonalitysystem.org/PFA%20What%20Is%20Personality/Why%20study%20personali ty.htm http://highered.mcgrawhill.com/sites/dl/free/0073531901/429741/Lar31901_ch01_ScrnOpt_002_023.pdf http://teachingpsychology.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/conceptual-issues-in-personality-theory.pdf http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Personality_psychology.html http://www.unh.edu/personalitylab/Assets/reprintspublic/Asserting%20the%20definition%20of%20personality.pdf