Psych of Personality Exam 2

Personality paradox

The discrepancy between the intuition that an individual possesses broad, stable traits and empirical findings showing low cross-situational behavioral consistency

Personality coefficient

A modest correlation typically ranging from 0.20 to 0.30 between generalized trait scores and specific behaviors across different situations, identified by Walter Mischel.

If… then… behavioral signatures

Distinct, stable profiles linking specific psychological situations to characteristic behavioral responses within the Cognitive-Affective Processing System.

Behavioral aggregation

The methodological approach of combining multiple behavioral measurements across various times and contexts to reveal reliable underlying trait patterns.

Person-situation debate

A historical controversy in psychology concerning whether an individual's actions are driven primarily by internal traits or by external environmental factors.

Mischel's 1968 critique

A foundational challenge asserting that generalized traits correlate poorly with specific cross-situational behaviors, prompting a major reassessment of dispositional theory.

Situationism

The theoretical perspective asserting that immediate environmental variables dictate human action far more strongly than internal, enduring dispositions.

Strong situation

A context characterized by strict social norms, clear expectations, and formal rules that suppress individual differences and induce uniform behavior across people.

Weak situation

An unstructured, ambiguous environment with minimal external constraints, allowing internal traits to exert maximum influence on behavior.

The Lexical Hypothesis

Proposes that the most universally important personality traits will become encoded as individual words (Galton, 1884)

Implications of the Lexical Hypothesis

• All important traits will have words to describe them

• The most important traits will have many words to describe them

Allport and Odbert (1936) extracted…

from two unabridged English dictionaries—all words that could be used to describe a person

How Do Cattell’s Clusters Cluster?

→ 35 clusters is still too long for a list of essential traits

→ Several researchers looked for broader dimensions underlying Cattell’s 35 synonym clusters (e.g., Fiske, 1949).

 Obtained self and/or informant judgments using the 35 clusters

 Used factor analysis to identify underlying dimensions

 Consistently found five independent dimensions!

how “words” broke down into steps

Odbert’s 17,953 words → Allport 4,500 traits → Cattell 35 clusters → Fiske & others 5 dimensions

personality paradox

holding opposing or contradictory traits at the same time

Walter Mischel (1968) proposed that ...

People don’t behave very consistently across situations.

Personality measures don’t predict behavior very well.

Therefore, behavior must be primarily caused by situational factors.

Therefore, personality traits don’t matter.

Others (situationists) went further, arguing that…

 People don’t behave at all consistently across situations.

 Personality measures don’t predict behavior at all.

 Therefore, behavior must be entirely caused by situational factors.

 Therefore, personality traits don’t exist.

Mischel’s (1968) critique got a lot of attention.

 It challenged everyday intuitions about personality

 It implied that personality psychology was useless

 It led to the decades-long person-situation debate

person-situation debate

a long-standing controversy in psychology regarding whether human behavior is primarily driven by internal personality traits or external environmental circumstances

Personality’s Response to P-S Debate

→ Personality traits do predict behaviors and life outcomes

Therefore, personality traits exist

→ In general, personality traits and situational factors predict behavior about equally well

Therefore, personality traits are important

→ Behavior is hard to predict

Goldberg (1990): Method

 Total sample of 712 university students

 Provided self- and/or peer ratings of personality, using a set of up to 1,710 trait adjectives (NOT just the 35 clusters)

 Factor analysis used to identify underlying dimensions

High Pole: Extraversion

enthusiastic, sociable, talkative

Low Pole: Extraversion

withdrawn, quiet, reserved

High Pole: Agreeableness

amiable, cooperative, polite, warm

Low Pole: Agreeableness

antagonistic, bossy fault finding

Low Pole: Conscientiousness

disorganized, careless, erratic

High Pole: Conscientiousness

orderly, exacting, dependable

High Pole: Neuroticism

defensive, anxious, temperamental

Low Pole: Neuroticism

passionless, unemotional

Low Pole: Openness

shallow, uncreative, imperceptive, dull

High Pole: Openness

contemplative, complex, insightful

Types of Big 5 Personality Measures

→ Trait-Descriptive Adjectives (TDA)

→ Big Five Inventory (BFI)

→ Costa & McCrae’s NEO-PI-R

Trait-Descriptive Adjectives (TDA)

40 unipolar adjectives (e.g., “Anxious”)

Big Five Inventory (BFI)

44 short descriptions (e.g., “Worries a lot.”)

Costa & McCrae’s NEO-PI-R

→ In-depth inventory

◼ Each factor has 6 facets

◼ Each facet has 8 sentence-like items (e.g., “I am not a worrier.”)

◼ 5 factors x 6 facets x 8 items = 240 total!

“Situational Eight” DIAMONDS:

1. Work has to be done (Duty)

2. Deep thinking is required (Intellect)

3. Somebody is being threatened, accused, or criticized (Adversity)

4. Potential romantic partners are present (Mating)

5. The situation is pleasant (Positivity)

6. The situation contains negative feelings (e.g., stress, anxiety, guilt, etc. (Negativity)

7. Somebody is being deceived (Deception)

8. Social interactions are possible or required (Sociality)

(first) D in Diamonds

Duty

I in Diamonds

Intellect

A in Diamonds

Adversity

M in Diamonds

Mating

O in Diamonds

pOsitivity

N in Diamonds

Negativity

(2nd) D in Diamonds

Deception

S in Diamonds

Sociality

Why Do Personality Judgments Matter?

→ they happen all the time

→ they have important consequences

Self-fulfilling prophecy

When someone elicits behavior from a target person that confirms their beliefs about the target

Assessing Accuracy of Personality Judgments

→ There’s no perfect criterion for judging the accuracy of personality judgments.

→ But an accurate judgment should show convergent validity.

How Do Accurate Judgments Happen?

by using the Realistic Accuracy Model

Realistic Accuracy Model

relevance → availability → detection → utilization

relevance

Target must behave in a way that indicates their personality.

availability

Judge must have access to this information.

utilization

Judge must interpret this information correctly.

detection

Judge must notice this information.

Moderators of Accuracy

 Good trait

 Good target

 Good judge

 Good information

the good trait

More accuracy for traits that produce easy-to-observe behaviors

→ easy to see (detection)

→ wide range of contexts (availability)

the good target

high judge-ability

→ more accurate ppl who act in line w/ personality (relevance)

→ more accurate for ppl who behave consistently (availability)

the good judge

→ more accurate judgments by ppl who are intelligent and conscientious (utilization)

→ more accurate judgments by ppl who are invested in interpersonal relationships (detection)

good information

→ More information generally leads to better judgments (availability and detection)

→ better information generally leads to better judgments (strong vs. weak situations)

snap judgments

like first impressions

Zero-Acquaintance Paradigms

A situation in which one person observes another but has had no or minimal direct exposure to that target

behavioral residue

physical trace of activities

interior residue

reflects activities conducted in that space

exterior residue

reflects activities conducted outside that space (like a ski pass)

identity claims

→ symbolic statements about identity

→ self-directed

→ other-directed

→ may manifest in similar ways but diff underlying motivations

conscious crafting

these can be identity claims

unconscious leaking

things like behavioral residue & nonverbal behavior/expression

4 approaches to studying personality traits (Funder)

 Single-trait approach

 Many-trait approach

 Essential-trait approach

 Typological approach

single-trait approach

→ Attempts to identify all of the behaviors and life outcomes that a particular personality trait predicts.

→ Focus on a single trait of special importance

one trait → many behaviors and life outcomes

narcissism

excessive self-love

self-monitoring

Extent to which a person intentionally varies their behavior across situations to influence how others perceive them

High self-monitoring

 Search for clues about how to act & adjusts accordingly

 Look to the environment; flexible

Low self-monitoring

 Behavior guided more by their inner personality

 Look within; consistent

Personal Reaction Inventory

psychological self-report tool designed to assess depressiform cognitions and attributional styles

many-trait approach

Attempts to identify all of the personality traits that predict a particular behavior or life outcome

one behavior or life outcome ← many traits

California Q-Set (CAQ)

→ 100 phrases

→ sorted into 9 bins

→ forced, normal distribution

essential trait approach

Attempts to identify the set of traits that are generally most important for describing and predicting behavior.

Cattell’s 16 Essential Traits

other could not replicate and instead found 5

Eysenck's "Giant 3” Superfactors

→ Psychoticism (P)

→ Extraversion (E)

→ Neuroticism (N)

Psychoticism (P)

 Aggressive, impulsive, self-indulgent

 Combination of low A and low C

 Not mentally ill!

◼ Lacks constraint (Tellegen’s term)

The Typological Approach

→ Attempts to identify groups of people with distinct combinations of personality characteristics.

→ Qualitative, rather than quantitative difference

Myers-Briggs Type Indicator

has 16 types

 Extraversion-Introversion

 Sensing-Intuition

 Thinking-Feeling

 Judging-Perceptive

personality in non-human animals

Evidence of each of the Big 5

 E most common (sociability, bold vs. avoidant)

 A and N also common (low hostility; fearful)

 O common in all but 4 species (curiosity/play)

 C only in chimpanzees (goal-directedness)

organizational framework

The Big Five helped create a unified taxonomy of traits

 Most personality tests & models can be classified in Big Five terms

 “Big Five” because so broad

hierarchy of framework

broadest, lower, and lowest

broadest

Factor - Extraversion

lower

Facet – Sociability

lowest

Habits or specific behaviors – smiling, telling a joke

big 5 and specific behaviors method

 Sample of undergraduates

 Completed the Big Five Inventory

 Frequency of behaviors coded from EAR recordings made over 2 consecutive days

big 5 and specific behaviors result

Self-reports of personality significantly associated with many objectively coded behaviors

→ E: more frequent convos, more words spoken, less alone

→ A: fewer swear words

→ C: more time spent in class

→ N: more frequent arguments

→ O: more time spent in coffee shops

meta-traits

the broadest level

Meta-Traits: Stability (Self-Control)

 Desire to maintain a sense of order in their lives; greater impulse control

 Associated Big Five Domains:

→ Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, & Emotional Stability (N-)

 Linked to serotonin

→ Regulating/inhibiting neurotransmitter

Meta-Traits: Plasticity (Engagement)

 Desire to engage in the world, constantly soaking up novelty from the environment

 Associated Big Five Domains:

→ Extraversion & Openness

 Linked to dopamine

→ Activating neurotransmitter

what can conscientiousness predict?

→ job performance & academic success

→ health and longevity

→ takes on extra responsibility

→ well-being tied to work

what can agreeableness predict?

→ peer acceptance. dating satisfaction

→ sense of humor, forgiveness

→ psychologically well-adjusted

→ lower criminal behavior

what can neuroticism predict?

→ sensitive to stressors

→ poor coping skills

→ experience more neg. emotion

→ problems in work & relationships

what can opennes predict?

→ politically liberal

→ play a musical instrument

→ belief in supernatural

→ substance abuse

what can extraversion predict?

→ high social status, popular, attractive

→ experience more positive emotion

→ leadership positions, involved in community

→ health, longevity

The “Quiet Revolution” of Introverts

 In the U.S., cultural value is placed on extraversion

 Recent movement to highlight the value of introversion

→ Fosters creativity because deep thought requires solitude?

geographic variation in the big 5

each geographic location has a regional difference in the big 5

static appearance

clothing & hairstyle