Applying Psychological Science Paper
In this paper, Daniel Cervone and Yuichi Shoda are trying to ease into the idea that a new era of explaining personality coherence/psychology is emerging and stemming away from the usual trait based theories. This fourth era is expanding to involve not just how consistent people can be in generic trait categories but emphasizes the need to explore cardinal psychological components that influence the adherence of experiences and actions in multiple aspects. This theory is dedicated to trying to understand how multiple mechanisms operate as coherent psychological systems.
This research article conveys the importance of stemming away from the reliance of only trait theories to describe personality, but also contemplating the
…show more content…
The first era was the trait era in which researchers focused on measuring one's dispositional tendencies of behavior. The second era was trait critique, which is when one notices a great consistency in behavior when it comes to cross-situational perspectives. The third era was called trait revival in which researchers developed the five-factor model. This model is a description of personality tendencies. The five personality traits of this model are Conscientiousness, Agreeableness, Neuroticism(Introversion), Openness to Experience and Extroversion. What those studies led the researchers to discover was that you can't describe and explain people's tendencies just by looking at even higher dispositions. One must look at the casual thinking processes of an individual's mind to understand the tendencies and dispositions they eventually develop. Cervone and Shoda discussed how multiple studies of the five-factor model did not accurately describe people's tendencies. Usually the people would transcend the basic structural five-factor
Does personality determine behavior? Phelps (2015) dived into this discussion in his article by reviewing the perspectives of personality, how psychology relates to behavior and the idea of self, and further, how behaviorists define personality and all of its components. Phelps (2015) compares and contrasts the common beliefs of personality and the view of self as attributed to personality theorists with those characterized by behavioral theorists. A typical understanding of personality is one that defines it as an internal substance that drives behavior, and therefore, by seeking to understand a person's personality we can almost assume their actions (Phelps, 2015). Behavioral theorists, on the other hand, do not lean on vague internal conditions to explain behavior, but rather they evaluate a person's past and present settings to define behavior, according to Phelps (2015). The conclusion is that behaviorists' perspectives on these topics are far more parsimonious in nature and most popular views of personality speak to a more internal and far-reaching position rather than the behavior itself (Phelps, 2015). Likewise, Phelps (2015) addresses the issue of meeting specific criteria for discerning whether a theoretical viewpoint is valid in helping us understand people. He continued to remark that behaviorists' stances meet a large portion of the criteria as presented by Gordon Allport (Phelps, 2015). For example, they have less assumptions, they are consistent, and not to mention, they are testable and falsifiable, Phelps (2015) supports. In my opinion and critical review, this article is useful because it provides an unbiased assessment of a variety of personality theories and definitions of personality and the self. Likewise, it is simple and easy to understand, thus qualifying it as parsimonious. Overall, I think the article did its ultimate job of evaluating different perspectives and
The trait approach focuses on describing and quantifying individual differences. The approach tries to categorize people into groups based upon what traits they exhibit. According to the textbook, “The most important factors of personality ought to be found across different sources of data, and he [Cattell] developed a typology of data – including self-report, peer-report, and behavioral observations – that has become part of the foundation of the distinctions between S, I, L, and B data” (Funder, 2013, p. 222). As the essential--trait approach was being developed over the years, the amount of traits drastically changed over time. Multiple psychologists worked on this theory, all having different ideas and amounts of essential ...
Theoretical perspectives in the study of human behavior can easily be applied to cases in social work practice. The mental health field in particular lends itself to the application of different human behavior theories. Specifically, depression can be viewed through the lens of Social Cognitive Theory, or Social Cognitive Learning. There is one case of a woman with depression, whose name will be changed, that social cognitive theory can be applied to. Cheryl is a 58 year old woman who has been diagnosed with Major depressive disorder. She has had this diagnosis since she was 17 years old. Many of her symptoms and experiences can be viewed or explained in terms of social cognitive theory.
Cervone, D., Pervin, L. A. (2008). Personality: Theory and research (10th Ed.). New York: Wiley.
According to the World Health Organization over 2.8 million Americans die each year as a result of being overweight or obese (2014). While it is commonly accepted that healthy eating can combat obesity, adopting and maintaining healthy eating behavior remains complex (Schwazer et al, 1994). Many theories of health behavior change have been developed in order to identify factors that affect and predict the adoption and maintenance of health behaviors. Among these theories is the Social Cognitive Theory (SCT). This theory asserts that behavior is a product of environment, behavior, and person factors, especially cognition. Under the SCT umbrella is Self-efficacy Theory (SET), which claims that one’s beliefs concerning their ability to initiate difficult behavior (such as healthy eating) predicts their likelihood of accomplishing such behaviors.
There is a debate about the main determinant of personality in psychology. Some hold that nurture hold the biggest influence while others insist that nature is a bigger influence. This paper will take both views as determinant in personality. The nature view would imply that his birth had a big influence on the person that he later became.
Personality is patterns of thinking, behavior and emotional responses that make up individuality over time. Psychologist attempt to understand how personality develops and its impact on how we behave. Several theories attempt to explain personality, using different approaches. The social-cognitive and humanistic approaches are two of many theories that attempt to explain personality. This essay will identify the main concepts of social-cognitive and humanistic approach, identify perspective differences and discuss approach limitations.
A person’s personality has been the subject of psychological scrutiny for many years. Psychologists have drawn up several theories in an attempt to accurately predict and determine one’s personality. Foremost amongst these, is the “Big Five Trait Theory” which stemmed from Raymond B. Cattell’s theory.
The five-factor model includes five broad domains or dimensions of personality that are used to describe human personality. The five factors are openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism. While these five traits should be sufficient on their own to describe all facets of a personality, there also should be no correlation between the main factors. The Five Factor Model is now perhaps the most widely use trait theory of personality and has achieved the closest thing to a consensus in personality research. The advantage of this theory is that there have been multiple research studies conducted on this theory. Results suggest that this theory is effective in describing and determining personality. However, this theory is very categorical and does not allow for much flexibility. It also looks at the person personality at that time and now how it developed.
The study of personality traits is beneficial in identifying the many variables that exist from human to human; the combinations of these variables provide us with a true level of individuality and uniqueness. In the field of psychology, trait theory is considered to be a key approach to the study of human personality (Crowne, 2007; Burton, Westen & Kowalski, 2009). This paper aims to identify a number of significant contributors who have played crucial roles in both the development and application of trait theory. This paper then moves focus to these theorists, outlining their theory and analysing both the strengths and weaknesses of those theories. An illustration of the methods used in trait measurement is given and includes the arguments both for and against such procedures. Lastly the findings of trait theory and its components described within the paper will be summarised.
While most agree that people can be described based upon their personality traits, theorists continue to debate the number of basic traits that make up human personality. While trait theory has objectivity that some personality theories lack (such as Freud’s psychoanalytic theory), it also has weaknesses. Some of the most common criticisms of trait theory center on the fact that traits are often poor predictors of behavior. While an individual may score high on assessments of a specific trait, he or she may not always behave that way in every situation. Another problem is that trait theories do not address how or why individual differences in personality develop or emerge.
Friedman, H. S., & Schustack, M. W. (2012). Personality: Classic theories and modern research (5th ed). Boston , MA, USA: Pearson
Feist, J., Feist, G. J., & Roberts, T. A. (2009). Theories of personality. New York:
Trait approach covers the big five personality traits: extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness to experience. These five traits have been identified as the most identifiable personality traits, even across cultures and societies. According to McCrae, Costa, and Busch’s (1986) study on personality system comprehensiveness, the big five personality model included the five traits most identified with by individuals asked to describe themselves and others. I found this segment of the class especially intriguing as it helped me not only learn so much about myself, but also take a deeper look into the personality of my family, peers, and even strangers. I am also more conscious of how I self-monitor my personality traits. For example, I am very much so an introverted person but at times I try to be extroverted based off the environment. In highly social environments, I consciously smile and try to talk to people because I want to be perceived in a favorable light, not actually because I feel the need to be sociable. In other words, I don’t want to be perceived as odd. I believe I developed this form of self-monitoring because when I am introverted at social events people will constantly ask me if I’m ok since I’m quiet, which makes me uncomfortable as they make me the focus. Being the center of attention makes me anxious, and therefore to prevent that I have developed being a fake-extrovert to avoid it. This exemplified how I apply self-monitoring to my everyday life. Trait approach gave me insight into how to identify vastly accepted personality traits, as well as, how each of these traits can be influenced and
The second major theory is called the trait or five-factor model. Often referred to as the "Big 5". The five personality traits described by the theory are extraversion, agreeableness, openness, conscientiousness and neuroticism. Beneath each proposed global factor, a number of correlated and more specific primary factors are claimed. One strength of the trait perspectives is their ability to categorize observable behaviors. In other words, observing the behaviors of an individual over time and in varying circumstances provides evidence for the personality traits categorized in trait theories. Another strength is that trait theories use