INTRODUCTION ( ^ ^ '
topics
personality psychologists study
>
what
what do personality psychologists study? '
>
what is meant by '
personality
three levels of analysis nature, individual and individual uniqueness
group differences
>
: 1. human , 3 .
>
the domains of knowledge of Personality ""
%
>
two traditions: nomothetic and
idiographic
assumptions entity incremental
>
two : -
/
level 1 : human nature how -
people are like all other people
dolphins have similar personality traits to humans but only humans language storytelling also : active and passive animals
> →
→ : use
,
group differences
level 2 : individual and how people like other people -
are some
gender differences
>
etc .
level 3 individual uniqueness
: -
how people are like no other people
everyone has unique traits goals etc
>
,
.
assumptions entity : -
incremental
>
pursuit of happiness
>
entity theory : human traits (like personality are fixed ,
it is impossible to change them /nature beliefs)
>
incremental theory : human traits are not fixed but are malleable to a
great extent /nurture beliefs
does
personality exist ?
>
Hartshorne & May ,
1928 children observed
: in different situations in which /lack of) altruistic behavior could be displayed (keeping money us.
giving it to
charity stealing money cheating
, , on a test
.
. .
)
Mischel 1968
'
! individual 's behavior in one situation and personality psychologists say)
'
weak relations between individual's behavior another situation bad (as some
>
:
in →
very
no an an
,
guy
what is personality ?
>
individual differences:
physical /height attractiveness
•
, ,
•
psychological -
intellectual /knowledge skills /non intellectual fleeting (emotions feelings enduring (specific
, ,
- :
, ,
-
habits ,attitudes ,
general personality
:
>
enduring ( non ) intellectual psychological individual differences
general specific
>
temperament personality Kharad- creativity emotional
,
er,
,
IQ /intelligence ,talent habits attitudes , preferences , ideas , emotions, competencies skills
, , , aptitudes
trait contexualised behaviors / facets
>
hierarchy conscientiousness
>
"
diligence
<
organization\
D at school 'D at work 0 at school 0 at work
1 I 1 I
D- S behavior D W behavior
- O S behavior
-
O W behavior
-
>
definition (book) : . . .
is the set of traits and mechanisms within the individual that are
organized and relatively enduring and that influence ones interactions with and , adaptions to ,
intrapsychic , physical, and social environment domains of
> the six
knowledge
(if statement) (then statement)
input output throughput
, ,
(output)
students Mischel & Peake 1982
'
>
study Mischel
among
:
,
-
cross -
situational consistency of conscientiousness '
class attendance, completion class readings, thoroughness class notes, punctuality neatness assignment neatness neatness personal appearance etc (total of 19 behaviors)
•
-
, ,
room , .
↳ Low
person 's conscientious behavior in different situations /i. e. no situational consistency ) → conscientiousness
correlation conclusions : there is
consistency in
'
= 13 → no a cross
average
-
.
must depend on the situation , personality does not for barely / exist
>
reanalysis data Mischel Jackson & Pau nomen , 1985 :
divided 19 behaviors into two groups aggregated (grouped together) behaviors high correlation of the two groups of behaviors /
5 much reliable
•
=
, ,
. more
↳ conclusion : based on one behavior other behavior is difficult to predict but based on a number of behaviors it's possible to predict how someone behaves on in number of other situations
average
:
, , a
,
{WARS with which similar behaviors be predicted and which interaction with the environment
personality exists summary of large number of related behaviors
afforded
. . . as the a can
emerges in
THE DISPOSITIONAL DOMAIN I 11 2) .
dimensions? animal studies evidence for types
types
> →
or :
, 1 dimension 2
types ?
>
=
>
examples typologies
som at ◦
form types
Jung 's typology Myers :
-
Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)
>
four dichotomies extraversion : us .
introversion ,
sensing us .
intuition , thinking us .
feeling judging
, us .
perceiving
personality constructs
>
extraversion (vs introversion and neuroticism (emotional stability vs emotional instability) fundamental personality constructs ? ? how ? how is number determined ?
as more
many
'
for periodic table of personality constructs in the
'
searching periodic system building blocks of personality are known , they described in sufficiently comprehensive dice
>
a
,
as
,
the are a .
lexical hypothesis
>
Goldberg ,
1981 : a. individual differences that are important in human interactions have been encoded in language ,
2. themore important an individual difference is , the more
languages have one or
more words for it, 3 .
sufficiently encompassing dictionaries of language provide repository a a of words related to individual differences
lexical method
" '
Galton 1884 conspicuous aspects
'
I tried to idea of the number of the of the character by counting appropriate dice the words used to express them topless to deal with vague
>
in
gain
:
, an more an , seems
'
subject
↳ nouns down, dictator liar critic
:
, , , adjectives funny :
,
dictatorial , lying ,
critical verbs to
,
:
laugh ,
to dictate , to lie , to criticize
first selection adjectives (Allport & Odbert, 1936)
Webster 's 1925 international dictionary ' contained approximately 400.000 words of which personality characteristics
'
17.953 adjectives but theones describing physical
>
new 4.5-1 .
=
appearance , intellectual capacities , temporary moods , strong
judgement were removed
manageable lists Goldberg (1982,1990) adjectives describing stable traits 13584 of these 1710 common words used in
study) BrokKen (197-8)-1203 adjectives (551 used Dutch follow
study )
>
: in
up
-
-
, ,
big five dimensions
Goldberg (1982,1990) five factors
"
called the big five Is I agreeableness II conscientiousness, #emotional I intellect
stability,
>
: :
, urgency , ,
Dutch research Hofstad De Raad (19-91) five corresponding factors I extraversion , I friendliness, # conscientiousness , # emotional
stability I intellect /spirit
>
: :
,
questionnaire
>
five factor model : NEO PI R f- neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience ,
- -
personality inventory revised -
, Costa & McCrae(19921 Hoekstra , Ormel & ,
De
Fruyt 1199 6)
>
big fire : FFPI (five factor
personality inventory ,
Hendriks 4997)
HEXACO dimensions
>
since the first lexical research , 12 more studies have been conducted in other countries , in all the same six dimensions are found /one additional dimension agreeableness and emotional stability
>
H=
honesty humility -
,
E-
emotionality , ✗ extraversion , A
= =
agreeableness ,
C- conscientiousness , 0 =
openness to experience
additional sixth dimension honesty humility honesty (sincerity & fairness) humility (greed avoidance & modesty)
> -
-
=
,
'
and emotional component of big 5 emotional (in) stability emotionality includes sentimentality ofagreeabl ness
' '
ordering big five agreeableness agreeableness includes
'
stability
>
re - : HEXACO irritation ,
HEXACO theory
>
individual differences in :
engagement -
extraversion social , conscientiousness task , openness to experiences ideas ,
= = =
altruism / Kin altruism) lack of empathy /second order reactive
taking advantage /proactive agreeableness revenge/first-order reactive emotionality
' '
-
honesty -
huna .
, ,
-
HEXACO behavior honesty humility HEXACO altruism evidence for role of introversion
>
in ,
is explained by low
agreeableness ,
low
emotionality ,
low - →
,
no
types us dimensions
' '
>
unlikely that every human behavior is bimodal on dimension
every
2° 64 f- violation of multivariate normality )
types but possible that in six personality dimensions clusters of personality types be found
>
maybe bit too much of good thing
'
→
=
is a a
:
,
can
2002)
'
study based NEO PI R three clusters of types ftsendorpf
> '
-
on
-
:
,
undercontrolled (low controlled (high neuroticism, low extraversion) resilient (low neuroticism , high extraversion
agreeableness conscientiousness agreeableness conscientiousness openness to exp
•
on
,
over , ,
, , , .
( violation of multivariate normality )
↳ but not the case that most people located close to the center of dusters → people spread across the different
'
:
are
only are dimensions no
'
↳
clusters are not consistently found in different samples tounties ages , ,
personality instruments etc.) →
e.
g. change from introvert to extrovert
Ashton & Lee 12009)
the end of types?
-
clusters explain little variance HEXACO data they do randomly generated multivariate normally distributed data
>
as in as in
>
scores on dependent variables are 2 to 3 times better explained by the six HEXACO dimensions than by clusters from the same HEXACO data
e
, THE DISPOSITIONAL DOMAIN I 12 1) .
personality structure
'
simple structure circumflex structure
>
us .
>
simple structure items :
only hood on 1
single factor ,
circum plex structure items load on : 2 (or more) factors
↳
personality circumflexes : Hofstee & De Raad (abridged big 5 circumplex AB5c) , -
six logical dimensions /HEXACO)
↳
for every adjective find ,
two highest to 2) factor loadings based
.
,
on that, construe two circles (circumflexes) , total 15 circumflexes :
interpersonal circumplex
'
!
people interact with each other control dominance vs. submissiveness affiliation ( loved combination of both
>
many adjectives
two how
agreeableness
'
main dimensions -
, or
-
us .
disagreeableness →
are a
combination of agreeableness high extraversion low agreeableness
>
extraversion and dominance
mainly
→ :
a
,
↳
to
analyze :
factor analysis (and then context with norm group)
response biases
>
do personality scores on a test
accurately reflect personality ?
>
measurement problems :
sloppiness /infrequency scale) faking /faking good/faking bad)
, , response sets (acquiescence agreeing unwillingly -
,
extreme answers
,
social desirability
personality and evaluation
lexical research removed adjectives that were extremely positive /excellenti good ) or negative ( abnormal bad ) → but
'
single adjective is evaluativeby neutral
' ' ' ' ' '
> :
, no
↳
e.
g. brave (7.9 1) us .
cowardly /1.93) ,
tolerant (8.071 us .
vindictive 12.01)
chiasms trait ,
e.
g. spending money
a little a lot
desirable thrifty ? generous
undesirable stingy É {wasteful .
social desirability : 3 options
in terms of social
adjectives that are neutral
choosing desirability
>
Letting respondents choose between adjectives with similar social
desirability cowardly reckless , careful
>
→
e. A 2 3 45 ^ 2345 brave
g. . . . . . . . . . . .
'
items (statements that are neutral with respect to social desirability physical pain
'
involved I'm
writing
>
→ where is
tough person
,
a
very
situational influence
B f (P) behavior function of personality
>
= = a
>
B =
f (s) behavior = a
function of the situation
( B=f (Pxs) personality and situation
>
behavior = a function of the interaction between
situations
>
intrapsychic environment (feelings , thoughts memories physical environment (opportunities and threats
, , ,
social environment (interpersonal relationships) →
strong us . weak
f (s) ? Milgram experiment / participants conform to group pressure /authority pressure) 5) !
✗
↳B= → Asch and some → B- f (P ✗
-
group personality and stereotypes
' '
is there such
thing personality? do and differ emotionality ? yes ! Italian French people average , higher on
extraversion than Germans:
>
a as men women are
group average on on
-
, on
-
, , ,
stereotyping ? Terracina
↳
2005: correlation between aggregated self and observer ratings and national
stereotypes in 49 countries is trivially small ( -0.04 )
-
r
-
,
↳ national
stereotypes are not an adequate reflection of true national differences in personality
personality change
>
does your personality change over the course of your life? 3 levels of research →
population changes ( g. sensation seeking e. ,
group changes
G.g. men /women and sensation seeking individual ,
personality stable? coherence , rank order
stability and level
>
is mean -
change
-
•
(rank -
order) stability Costa & McCrae 119941 : median test-retest correlations
:
of five NEO Pt - -
R factors after 3-30
years (
M -17)
-
↳ r= 0.64 (neuroticism extraversion, openness to experience
, , agreeableness) ,
r= 0.67 (conscientiousness)
gsht↳-
Specht ,
2011 :
stability honesty -
humility emotionality extraversion agreeableness conscientiousness openness to experience
topics
personality psychologists study
>
what
what do personality psychologists study? '
>
what is meant by '
personality
three levels of analysis nature, individual and individual uniqueness
group differences
>
: 1. human , 3 .
>
the domains of knowledge of Personality ""
%
>
two traditions: nomothetic and
idiographic
assumptions entity incremental
>
two : -
/
level 1 : human nature how -
people are like all other people
dolphins have similar personality traits to humans but only humans language storytelling also : active and passive animals
> →
→ : use
,
group differences
level 2 : individual and how people like other people -
are some
gender differences
>
etc .
level 3 individual uniqueness
: -
how people are like no other people
everyone has unique traits goals etc
>
,
.
assumptions entity : -
incremental
>
pursuit of happiness
>
entity theory : human traits (like personality are fixed ,
it is impossible to change them /nature beliefs)
>
incremental theory : human traits are not fixed but are malleable to a
great extent /nurture beliefs
does
personality exist ?
>
Hartshorne & May ,
1928 children observed
: in different situations in which /lack of) altruistic behavior could be displayed (keeping money us.
giving it to
charity stealing money cheating
, , on a test
.
. .
)
Mischel 1968
'
! individual 's behavior in one situation and personality psychologists say)
'
weak relations between individual's behavior another situation bad (as some
>
:
in →
very
no an an
,
guy
what is personality ?
>
individual differences:
physical /height attractiveness
•
, ,
•
psychological -
intellectual /knowledge skills /non intellectual fleeting (emotions feelings enduring (specific
, ,
- :
, ,
-
habits ,attitudes ,
general personality
:
>
enduring ( non ) intellectual psychological individual differences
general specific
>
temperament personality Kharad- creativity emotional
,
er,
,
IQ /intelligence ,talent habits attitudes , preferences , ideas , emotions, competencies skills
, , , aptitudes
trait contexualised behaviors / facets
>
hierarchy conscientiousness
>
"
diligence
<
organization\
D at school 'D at work 0 at school 0 at work
1 I 1 I
D- S behavior D W behavior
- O S behavior
-
O W behavior
-
>
definition (book) : . . .
is the set of traits and mechanisms within the individual that are
organized and relatively enduring and that influence ones interactions with and , adaptions to ,
intrapsychic , physical, and social environment domains of
> the six
knowledge
(if statement) (then statement)
input output throughput
, ,
(output)
students Mischel & Peake 1982
'
>
study Mischel
among
:
,
-
cross -
situational consistency of conscientiousness '
class attendance, completion class readings, thoroughness class notes, punctuality neatness assignment neatness neatness personal appearance etc (total of 19 behaviors)
•
-
, ,
room , .
↳ Low
person 's conscientious behavior in different situations /i. e. no situational consistency ) → conscientiousness
correlation conclusions : there is
consistency in
'
= 13 → no a cross
average
-
.
must depend on the situation , personality does not for barely / exist
>
reanalysis data Mischel Jackson & Pau nomen , 1985 :
divided 19 behaviors into two groups aggregated (grouped together) behaviors high correlation of the two groups of behaviors /
5 much reliable
•
=
, ,
. more
↳ conclusion : based on one behavior other behavior is difficult to predict but based on a number of behaviors it's possible to predict how someone behaves on in number of other situations
average
:
, , a
,
{WARS with which similar behaviors be predicted and which interaction with the environment
personality exists summary of large number of related behaviors
afforded
. . . as the a can
emerges in
THE DISPOSITIONAL DOMAIN I 11 2) .
dimensions? animal studies evidence for types
types
> →
or :
, 1 dimension 2
types ?
>
=
>
examples typologies
som at ◦
form types
Jung 's typology Myers :
-
Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI)
>
four dichotomies extraversion : us .
introversion ,
sensing us .
intuition , thinking us .
feeling judging
, us .
perceiving
personality constructs
>
extraversion (vs introversion and neuroticism (emotional stability vs emotional instability) fundamental personality constructs ? ? how ? how is number determined ?
as more
many
'
for periodic table of personality constructs in the
'
searching periodic system building blocks of personality are known , they described in sufficiently comprehensive dice
>
a
,
as
,
the are a .
lexical hypothesis
>
Goldberg ,
1981 : a. individual differences that are important in human interactions have been encoded in language ,
2. themore important an individual difference is , the more
languages have one or
more words for it, 3 .
sufficiently encompassing dictionaries of language provide repository a a of words related to individual differences
lexical method
" '
Galton 1884 conspicuous aspects
'
I tried to idea of the number of the of the character by counting appropriate dice the words used to express them topless to deal with vague
>
in
gain
:
, an more an , seems
'
subject
↳ nouns down, dictator liar critic
:
, , , adjectives funny :
,
dictatorial , lying ,
critical verbs to
,
:
laugh ,
to dictate , to lie , to criticize
first selection adjectives (Allport & Odbert, 1936)
Webster 's 1925 international dictionary ' contained approximately 400.000 words of which personality characteristics
'
17.953 adjectives but theones describing physical
>
new 4.5-1 .
=
appearance , intellectual capacities , temporary moods , strong
judgement were removed
manageable lists Goldberg (1982,1990) adjectives describing stable traits 13584 of these 1710 common words used in
study) BrokKen (197-8)-1203 adjectives (551 used Dutch follow
study )
>
: in
up
-
-
, ,
big five dimensions
Goldberg (1982,1990) five factors
"
called the big five Is I agreeableness II conscientiousness, #emotional I intellect
stability,
>
: :
, urgency , ,
Dutch research Hofstad De Raad (19-91) five corresponding factors I extraversion , I friendliness, # conscientiousness , # emotional
stability I intellect /spirit
>
: :
,
questionnaire
>
five factor model : NEO PI R f- neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience ,
- -
personality inventory revised -
, Costa & McCrae(19921 Hoekstra , Ormel & ,
De
Fruyt 1199 6)
>
big fire : FFPI (five factor
personality inventory ,
Hendriks 4997)
HEXACO dimensions
>
since the first lexical research , 12 more studies have been conducted in other countries , in all the same six dimensions are found /one additional dimension agreeableness and emotional stability
>
H=
honesty humility -
,
E-
emotionality , ✗ extraversion , A
= =
agreeableness ,
C- conscientiousness , 0 =
openness to experience
additional sixth dimension honesty humility honesty (sincerity & fairness) humility (greed avoidance & modesty)
> -
-
=
,
'
and emotional component of big 5 emotional (in) stability emotionality includes sentimentality ofagreeabl ness
' '
ordering big five agreeableness agreeableness includes
'
stability
>
re - : HEXACO irritation ,
HEXACO theory
>
individual differences in :
engagement -
extraversion social , conscientiousness task , openness to experiences ideas ,
= = =
altruism / Kin altruism) lack of empathy /second order reactive
taking advantage /proactive agreeableness revenge/first-order reactive emotionality
' '
-
honesty -
huna .
, ,
-
HEXACO behavior honesty humility HEXACO altruism evidence for role of introversion
>
in ,
is explained by low
agreeableness ,
low
emotionality ,
low - →
,
no
types us dimensions
' '
>
unlikely that every human behavior is bimodal on dimension
every
2° 64 f- violation of multivariate normality )
types but possible that in six personality dimensions clusters of personality types be found
>
maybe bit too much of good thing
'
→
=
is a a
:
,
can
2002)
'
study based NEO PI R three clusters of types ftsendorpf
> '
-
on
-
:
,
undercontrolled (low controlled (high neuroticism, low extraversion) resilient (low neuroticism , high extraversion
agreeableness conscientiousness agreeableness conscientiousness openness to exp
•
on
,
over , ,
, , , .
( violation of multivariate normality )
↳ but not the case that most people located close to the center of dusters → people spread across the different
'
:
are
only are dimensions no
'
↳
clusters are not consistently found in different samples tounties ages , ,
personality instruments etc.) →
e.
g. change from introvert to extrovert
Ashton & Lee 12009)
the end of types?
-
clusters explain little variance HEXACO data they do randomly generated multivariate normally distributed data
>
as in as in
>
scores on dependent variables are 2 to 3 times better explained by the six HEXACO dimensions than by clusters from the same HEXACO data
e
, THE DISPOSITIONAL DOMAIN I 12 1) .
personality structure
'
simple structure circumflex structure
>
us .
>
simple structure items :
only hood on 1
single factor ,
circum plex structure items load on : 2 (or more) factors
↳
personality circumflexes : Hofstee & De Raad (abridged big 5 circumplex AB5c) , -
six logical dimensions /HEXACO)
↳
for every adjective find ,
two highest to 2) factor loadings based
.
,
on that, construe two circles (circumflexes) , total 15 circumflexes :
interpersonal circumplex
'
!
people interact with each other control dominance vs. submissiveness affiliation ( loved combination of both
>
many adjectives
two how
agreeableness
'
main dimensions -
, or
-
us .
disagreeableness →
are a
combination of agreeableness high extraversion low agreeableness
>
extraversion and dominance
mainly
→ :
a
,
↳
to
analyze :
factor analysis (and then context with norm group)
response biases
>
do personality scores on a test
accurately reflect personality ?
>
measurement problems :
sloppiness /infrequency scale) faking /faking good/faking bad)
, , response sets (acquiescence agreeing unwillingly -
,
extreme answers
,
social desirability
personality and evaluation
lexical research removed adjectives that were extremely positive /excellenti good ) or negative ( abnormal bad ) → but
'
single adjective is evaluativeby neutral
' ' ' ' ' '
> :
, no
↳
e.
g. brave (7.9 1) us .
cowardly /1.93) ,
tolerant (8.071 us .
vindictive 12.01)
chiasms trait ,
e.
g. spending money
a little a lot
desirable thrifty ? generous
undesirable stingy É {wasteful .
social desirability : 3 options
in terms of social
adjectives that are neutral
choosing desirability
>
Letting respondents choose between adjectives with similar social
desirability cowardly reckless , careful
>
→
e. A 2 3 45 ^ 2345 brave
g. . . . . . . . . . . .
'
items (statements that are neutral with respect to social desirability physical pain
'
involved I'm
writing
>
→ where is
tough person
,
a
very
situational influence
B f (P) behavior function of personality
>
= = a
>
B =
f (s) behavior = a
function of the situation
( B=f (Pxs) personality and situation
>
behavior = a function of the interaction between
situations
>
intrapsychic environment (feelings , thoughts memories physical environment (opportunities and threats
, , ,
social environment (interpersonal relationships) →
strong us . weak
f (s) ? Milgram experiment / participants conform to group pressure /authority pressure) 5) !
✗
↳B= → Asch and some → B- f (P ✗
-
group personality and stereotypes
' '
is there such
thing personality? do and differ emotionality ? yes ! Italian French people average , higher on
extraversion than Germans:
>
a as men women are
group average on on
-
, on
-
, , ,
stereotyping ? Terracina
↳
2005: correlation between aggregated self and observer ratings and national
stereotypes in 49 countries is trivially small ( -0.04 )
-
r
-
,
↳ national
stereotypes are not an adequate reflection of true national differences in personality
personality change
>
does your personality change over the course of your life? 3 levels of research →
population changes ( g. sensation seeking e. ,
group changes
G.g. men /women and sensation seeking individual ,
personality stable? coherence , rank order
stability and level
>
is mean -
change
-
•
(rank -
order) stability Costa & McCrae 119941 : median test-retest correlations
:
of five NEO Pt - -
R factors after 3-30
years (
M -17)
-
↳ r= 0.64 (neuroticism extraversion, openness to experience
, , agreeableness) ,
r= 0.67 (conscientiousness)
gsht↳-
Specht ,
2011 :
stability honesty -
humility emotionality extraversion agreeableness conscientiousness openness to experience
