psych exam 3: personality

freuds perspective on personality

personality is driven by the unconcscious mind

most of the mind operates below conscious awareness

ID

the unconscious mind

sits at the very bottom of the pyramid

the devil

superego

internalized ideals/moral

(essentially your rules for right and wrong”

the angel

ego

acts as your referee

sits at the top of the pyramid

personality develops from the egos efforts to resolve tension between the ID and superego

defense mechanism

unconscious processes used to avoid anxiety-arousing thoughts or feelings

defense mechanism - regression

retreating to a more infantile stage of behavior

ex) thumb sucking in the car before the first day of school

defense mechanism - reaction formation

turning an unacceptable impulse into its opposite

• feeling one way, but acting the total opposite way

ex) you like someone, but you act mean to them instead

defense mechanism - projection

having a bad feeling but instead of owning it, you accuse someone else of having it

ex) a cheater accusing their partner of cheating

defense mechanism - rationalization

making up an exuse to justify something instead of facing the real reason

ex) i didnt study bc the test doesnt matter anyway (but ur rly just scared to fail)

defense mechanism - displacement

taking your anger out on someone/something safer then the actual source

ex) getting yelled at by your mom, nut then kicking the dog

defense mechanism - denial

flat out refusing to believe something is true

ex) refusing to believe a loved one passed away

big 5 personality traits

OCEAN

openess: how curious/creative you are

conscientiousness: how organized/respoinsble you are

extrraversion: how outgoing/social you are

agreeableness: how kind/cooperative you are

neuroticism: how anxious/emotionally unstable you are

high openess

smart and likes new things

low openness

traditional, closed minded

Low Conscientiousness

Reckless, more likely to do drugs/risky stuff

Low Agreeableness

More likely to be a jerk — linked to heart disease and criminal behavior

High Neuroticism

Anxious, more relationship drama/breakups

Which extreme is "bad" for each trait?

• Conscientiousness → LOW is bad

• Agreeableness → LOW is bad

• Openness → LOW is bad (closed-minded/traditional)

• Neuroticism → HIGH is bad (too much anxiety)

fundamental attribution error

When someone does something, we usually blame who they are instead of what's going on around them.

Example: Someone cuts you off in traffic → you assume "what a jerk," instead of thinking "maybe they're rushing to the hospital."

• Blaming their personality = automatic, fast, lazy thinking

• Considering the situation = takes more mental effort

Milgram's Obedience Study set up and result

• Setup: Scientist told regular people to shock another person (secretly an actor, not really hurt) each time they got an answer wrong

• Result: 65% of people shocked all the way to max level, just because a person in a lab coat told them to (authoriative figure)

In the Milgram study, What made people MORE likely to obey?

• Authority figure seemed legitimate

• Little info available, so people trusted the "expert"

• Could pass blame to the experimenter ("just following orders")

• Someone else did the actual shocking, they just "helped"

In the Milgram Study, What made people LESS likely to obey?

• Another "expert" spoke up and said it was wrong

• They saw someone else refuse to continue

• They were physically/emotionally closer to the person getting hurt

Milgram — Simple Takeaway

Normal people will do harmful things if an authority figure tells them to — especially if they can distance themselves from the responsibility.

Stanford Prison Experiment — Setup & Result

Zimbardo set up a fake prison with regular people randomly assigned to be "guards" or "prisoners." It got out of hand fast — guards became cruel and abusive very quickly.

Stanford Prison Experiment — Credibility Issue

Zimbardo was actually way more involved/directive behind the scenes than originally believed, so the study has real credibility problems.

tanford Prison Experiment — Real-World Connection

• Abu Ghraib: After 9/11, U.S. soldiers guarding Iraqi prisoners committed similar abuse

• Studied to understand why — same psychological patterns as Stanford showed up

Stanford Prison Experiment — Why guards turned cruel (4 reasons)

• Obedience — following authority-set norms ("this is how we treat prisoners here")

• Us vs. them — group loyalty, no one wants to be the "snitch"

• Dehumanization — prisoners stripped of individuality (no names, poor hygiene), easier to mistreat

• Deindividuation — guards swept up in the group, lost personal responsibility ("the group made me do it")