Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Relationship between behaviour and personality
Risk taking behavior conclusion
Analysis of the 5 factor model
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Relationship between behaviour and personality
Specific Risk Taking and Five Factor Model Personality Traits Risk taking has been a topic of great importance because it plays a role in determining how people view themselves and their lives. Researchers have concentrated on how different types of risk taking such as health risk or recreational risk can be strongly correlated with specific behavior such as the Five Factor Model personality traits. The concept of risk taking tendency has significant connections for the theoretical modeling of risk behavior, which will provide efficient insight behind individuals reasoning for risky behaviors (Nicholson, Soane, Fenton- O’Creevy, & Willman, 2005). The purpose of Nicholson study (2005) was to develop a practical and valid measurement of risk propensity. The study defined risk propensity as the tendency for an individual to either take or avoid risk (Stikin and Pablo). The study participants were n=2700 students from executive graduate programs such as those pursuing a masters in business. The participants were given the Risk Taking Index, a scale with a series of questions that inquired about their past and current risk behavior. The …show more content…
It also showed slight significance in prediction to health risk, r=.401, p< .01; impulsiveness was negatively correlated with health risk, r=-.343, p< .01 and a slight significance in social and career risk. Health risk, r=-.007, p< .01 was also negatively correlated with openness. The results did not indicate any major predictions towards the six risk domains for extraverted; however, there was a positive correlation in social risk taking with, r= .373, p< .01 with the extraversion personality trait. The results also confirmed the hypothesis that conscientiousness is negatively correlates with safety risk, r=-.101, p< .01. Neuroticism showed no prediction in any of the six risk
Over several decades, independent streams of systematic research into personality traits have converged on the same general conclusion: the domain of personality attributes can be described by five superordinate constructs (Digman, 1990). These five general, robust factors of personality are now called the “Big Five” and subsume as well as abstract, more specific personal attributes, dispositions, habits and behaviours as a framework (cf. Digman, 1990; MCRae and Costa, 1989; Wiggins and Pincus, 1992). The five global traits in this frame work are: (1) Extraversion, described by a need for stimulation, activity, assertiveness, and quantity and intensity of interpersonal interaction; (2) Agreeableness, represented
When one is proceeding through the journey of life and crossing the bridge of development, it is often noted that personality has a major influence on personal health. Sometimes, while searching for the perfect spouse or ideal home, one might get wrapped up in the adventure that life throws at them, and they do not realize the extent to which their personality, throughout their everyday lives, affects their health. This, therefore, creates an ideal space for scientists and psychologists across the world to study the impact of the various factors of personality on health. Some of the major factors that are commonly studied within Personality Psychology are the Big-Five
Risk taking was measured by playing a video game called chicken. It allowed the participants to make actual decisions in a risky situation. In the conditioned group, the participants would complete "chicken" at the same time and would be able to communicate with each other. The other groups were separated by placing one of the participants into a room while he/she completed the game while the other two waited outside. Risk preference was measured by five risky scenarios that the participants had to choose from. Again, one of the groups were able to discuss among themselves while the other group had to choose from the risks individually. Finally, risky decision making was measured again by 5 risky scenarios only this time the scenarios included consequences that may result from the given the
The big five will be used in this paper as reference to personality traits. The big five consist of five different personality traits that were considered universal because of their stability among many individuals from many different cultures. The big five includes extraversion, neuroticism, conscientiousness, agreeableness, and openness. Extraversion refers to those individuals who are seen as social and lively. Neuroticism speaks of those who tend to be tense and moody. Conscientiousness alludes to the individuals who are considered to be careful and responsible. Agreeableness is referring to the friendly individuals who are easy to get along with. Finally, openness refers to the people who tend to be intellectually curious and open to try new things and experiences. Although prior study shows that the Big Five traits remain the same overtime, they had shown that they change as the person ages. Two articles in ...
Most people think that nothing bad will happen to them (e.g. robbery, kidnapping, theft, rape, domestic violence and so on), but the truth is that no one is protected. It is widely known how powerful the personal experience can be regarding the recognition of risk and the eagerness to take to take precautions. Even when people fail to take precautions, this also can be attributed to experience, which means it needs an examination.
Neuroticism boldly contrasts with the other personality traits in the Five Factor Model for personality (Openness, Agreeableness, Extraversion, Contentiousness, and Neuroticism). An individual being high in any of the other four traits could hardly be considered pathological. For example, high levels of agreeableness, within reason, would probably be considered to be a positive and healthy characteristic. However, the discussion regarding neuroticism certainly takes a darker turn. Gunthert, Cohen, and Armeli (1999) in their study, operationally define neuroticism as a predisposition to experience negative affect (negative emotional systems). Lahey (2009) defines it slightly differently, as the tendency to “respond with negative emotions to threat, frustration, or loss.” More generally, the personality trait is characterized by anxiety, angry hostility, depression, self-consciousness, impulsiveness, and vulnerability (Cervone & Pervin, 2010). Neuroticism has critical implications outside of personality psychology. Some researchers suggest that neuroticism is significantly correlated with both physical and mental health issues more so than any other personality trait variable. This increased risk is not just for a particular group of pathologies; neuroticism has been linked to Axis I and II disorders in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) across the board (Lahey, 2009). In some occupational performance studies, negative affect was negatively related to job performance (Kaplan, Bradley, Luchman, & Haynes, 2009). This may be extrapolated to individuals high in neuroticism, as it the trait is the predisposition for the experience of negative affect. Research on daily stress and coping showed th...
Another study (Twenge (200, 2001, 2002), shows that younger groups of people are more neurotic and extraverted than older ones. This study shows changes in the level of neuroticism across lifespan. These are studies which allows us to understand better each personality type and their possible study requirements.
There has yet to be any determining evidence defines the characteristics of extraversion. The experimenters in this particular experiment have hypothesized that the facets of extraversion are somehow linked by reward sensitivity. This hypothesis was also tested against a model in which they are linked by sociability. There has been much work on this topic in the past, beginning with the works of Jung and James in the early 20th century—to the work of Watson and Clark in 1997. And even after a century of study, they are still unable to truly define the characteristics of the extraversion dimension of personality. In the many attempts to define extraversion, Watson and Clark have defined six basic facets of the personality trait. These are: venturesome, affiliation, positive affectivity, energy, ascendance, and ambition. Researchers Depue and Collins, in 1999, also offered a more succinct depiction of the characteristics of extraversion, this only having three basic parts. The first being affiliation, the enjoyment and value of close interpersonal bonds, also being warm and affectionate. The second, agency, being socially dominant, enjoying leadership roles, being assertive and exhibitionistic, and having a sense of potency in accomplishing goals. The final facet being impuslivity, but this one has been argued upon whether it should be included at all in the characteristics of extraversion at all.
Personality can be defined as an individual’s characteristic pattern of thinking, feeling and acting. Many personality theorists have put forward claims as to where personality is derived from and how it develops throughout an individual’s life. The two main personality theories this essay will be focusing on is the Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) (Bandura, 1986) and the Trait Theory – Five Factor Theory (FFT) (McCrae and Costa, 1995). The SCT allocates a central role to cognitive, observational learning and self-regulatory processes (Bandura, 1986). An individual’s personality develops through experiences with their sociocultural environment. Whereas the Trait Theory proposes that all individuals are predisposed with five traits (Extraversion, Openness, Conscientiousness, Agreeableness and Neuroticism) which determines our personality. This theory also puts forward that personality is stable and cannot change as it’s biologically determined.
In terms of The Big Five Trait Theory, an individual with a high level of extraversion is thought to display dominant behaviour as well as good leadership skills. The individual focusses their psychic energy on things that are external...
(1997). McRae et al. (1997) attempted to find if the Five-Factor Model was a universal constant in all cultures. They also attempted to see if cultural views would change how the five traits were viewed. The researchers collected data from 6 different translations of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory, this inventory looks for universal trait dimensions in a variety of languages. These 6 translations were then compared to the American counterpart. It was found that while some cultures did differ slightly in their view of the five traits found in the Five-Factor Model in comparison to Americans, the traits were still universal. All six translations found the big five traits of extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism and opens to experience to be
The Big Five personality factors are the modern way of describing someone’s feelings, actions, and traits. This new factor map, improving Hans and Sybil Eysenck’s two-dimensional map which consisted of a stable/unstable axis and an introverted/extroverted axis, has five different factors. They are Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism and everyone can be described using these five criteria. This paper will discuss and interpret my results from a Big Five personality test including how accurate I believe it is and how this might change in the future.
Numerous studies have been conducted on each factor and their subsets within the Five Factor Model; however, most studies have focused on extraversion, neuroticism, and their contributions to understanding an aspect of personality due to the ease in which each factor can be observed. The study of the Five Factor Model personality trait, conscientiousness, and its sub factors began to gain recognition as a meaningful and practical personality trait in the 1990s, and have been extensively studied and will continue to be studied throughout the twenty-first century. This paper examines how conscientiousness and its sub factors affect personality psychology based on scholarly literature and scientific research that thoroughly explains the role
It compares reliable, stress with lazy, careless. At the same time reflect the extent of individual self control and the ability of delay the satisfy demand (Cattell, 1933). Impulse is not necessarily a bad thing, sometimes environmental requirements we can quick decisions. Impulsive individuals are often thought to be happy, interesting, very good playmate. But impulsive behavior often bring themselves into trouble, although can bring temporary satisfaction to the individual, it is easy to cause long-term adverse consequences, such as assault others, drug use, and so on. Impulsive individuals don't usually get great success. Prudent people usually can avoid trouble, and get more success. People usually think prudent people are smarter and more reliable, but the prudent people are likely to be a perfectionist or a workaholic. Extreme caution’s individual let a person feel drab, lack of angry (Brummett, 2006). Conscientiousness can be divided into six sub dimensions, competence, order, dutifulness, achievement striving, self-discipline and
Studies of human personality has brought great influence and impact towards our society describing how we behave, perceive and state how each person is different from others. The Big Five Personalities Traits is describe as openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism known to be sufficient measure and the base of describing a person personality stated by many psychologists ( McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. C., Jr. 1987 ; Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. 1992)