Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Similarities and differences among theories of personality
Psychology Chapter On Theories Of Personality
Theories of Personality Quizlet
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
As a child, going to the store with my mom was the highlight of my week. I would always beg her to stop and let me look at the magazines in the book section. I could have spent hours there doing all the personality quizzes and seeing what my “signature style” was. At the time, I wasn’t quite sure what all the results meant, but I knew I liked it and that it made me feel important that they were “my” results. Saving the best for last, I would then flip to the back to look at the horoscopes. Being a Cancer, the traits were always “caring” and “sensitive”. I would look to see who my “love match” was and what my lucky numbers were. Ever since those days, the questions of “What is a personality?”, “What types of personalities are there?”, and “Are …show more content…
Yet, how accurate are theses assessments if they are used applied to a bigger group? Do grouping personalities together make it easier to identify them or harder to identify them? Yet, theses questions remained unanswered by the website. In addition, the question of what are the different personalities still lingered. In the article, there is a section entitled “Theories of Personality”. Being written by an expert, some of the terms were hard to understand such as “psychodynamic”. However, the average person most likely doesn’t know what the word means and the website didn’t define what it was. This makes the question their capability of understanding the rest of the article, maybe even hindering their comprehension of some of the material. It was if it was common sense to know the different personality types and come ready to the website to know the theories of personalities. This website, although from a credible source, made it difficult for the average, everyday person without a degree in psychology to understand the …show more content…
The articles that were from a source such as a blog with an unknown author were much easier to understand versus that from an expert or a degree in that field. If a word was unknown it didn’t completely take away a whole lot from the article as you were still able to understand it for the most part. However, with an unknown author, the question of how reliable and accurate the article is present. With an article written by a psychologist expert, the words are harder to understand and are explained little if at all. The websites from experts, also appear to be less visually appealing versus the brightly colored pages of a blog. As a result, an individual might not find credible information having written off the visual look of the credible sources page(s). The last two articles researched left classic stakeholder cases to be presented, the power of peers and social media. The first article argued that peers shape our personality to our strengths and that while growing up, they helped reinforce your strengths. They see you on a regular basis and their reactions and opinions ultimately lead to the formation of your current personality. It then goes on to say that your peers “permanently skew your personality towards strengths.”(Meir) This phrase gives a negative connotation as to how the peers mold a
The questions were very thought out and not too broad which was an intelligent idea because if you want to achieve specific answers in a personality assessment, there needs to be specific questions. I read a book about the Big Five before this assignment was assigned so while I was taking the test I could partially tell which questions corresponded to which division of the Big Five. Nevertheless, that did not have an impact on how truthful my responses were. If I were to take the test again I do believe that I would get a similar score because I answered honestly and the answers I chose were the ones that represented me the best. I assume that the test would produce results for diverse groups of people as long as the information about gender, age and country were answered correctly. I thought that having a test that compares similar types of people to each other was a brilliant idea for the reason that it could have been too generic if
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
Many psychologists throughout many years present theoretical approaches in an attempt to understand personality. Hans Eysenck’s approach of personality differed from that of Sigmund Freud and his psychoanalytical theory of personality. Eysenck’s theory of personality relies on the scientific basis of biology in explaining human personality. Although Freud’s theories are intriguing to an open mind, Eysenck’s approach made measurable scientific sense. He relied on the use of trait and factor analysis, which is a statistical method. Freud relied on faith and his personal opinions based on observational research to reach the assumptions that set forth his theories (Feist & Feist, 2009). Eysenck and Freud did not agree on anything about understanding how and why the mind operates the way, it does.
After Allport, came along two psychologists, Raymond Cattell and Hans Eysenck, who each formulated their own theories regarding traits. Their theories have been the subjects of considerable research in the world of psychology. Cattell seemed to focus on far too many traits, while Eysenck seemed to focus on too few. As a result, psychologists have combined the two theories to make one satisfactory theory (Cherry), called “The Big Five Factors” (Myers). They are: conscientiousness, agreeableness, neuroticism, openness, and extraversion. These five factors merge to create the human personality (Cherry). Where people fall into these factors s...
Evolutionary psychologists explain the fact that all humans share a five factor personality structure because of common human nature. The Big Five offers a valuable take on personality structure because of the stability traits over time. Also offers a comprehensive of the basic personality traits and prove the differences of social life for many thousands of years, even going back to the EEA.
P.J. (2004). Personality: Theory and Research. USA: Wiley. SMITH. T. W. and WILLIAMS.
Eleanor Roosevelt once said, “Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people.” Personality is characterized by many dimensions of a person’s overall being. The belief that personality stems from one origin is small minded and on many levels, unsupported. If the scope of personality is expanded, it suggests that there is not a single explanation determining a person’s personality and how it is formed. Personality Theories have been generated for centuries by individuals who desire to identify what distinguishes a person’s personality and how it affects their behaviors. What is it that comprises all the unique characteristics about a person?
In its most basic form, personality is what defines a person through their “…expression of emotions, relationship building, and their individual patterns of behavior…” (CITE). Two of the most prolific theories on the formation of personality were developed by neurologist Sigmund Freud and psychologist Carl Rogers. Both Freud and Rogers worked in psychotherapy, the area of therapy, which “…focuses on fostering a positive mental well-being…” (CITE). These men based their general theories of personality on their experiences with patients, however their conclusions are worlds apart. Rogers is recognized for his approach to therapy where the “…client…” has a more direct role in the process (CITE). Whereas Freud is best known for his work on the unconscious mind.
organizing principle. It propels you on your life path. It represents the orderly arrangement of
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.
There are many people in this world; no two people are the same. When considering personality theories it is important to note that not all theories apply to all situations or all people. Different theories have different approaches. It is important to know the person before making assumptions about the proper theory to apply to the person or in any given situation. The purpose of this paper is to analysis how different personality theorists could interoperate different individual circumstances and behaviors based on case examples provided by the instructor.
I believe our personalities make up who we are and how others perceive us at times. Personalities are our own unique qualities, that we possess as individuals. In writing this short paper, I have found that psychologists use assessments to define an individual’s personality to determine their qualities and what makes them different from other individuals. Through the Big Five Personality test, I found it difficult to define and understand an individual personality
For psychologists, one of the more popular theories espoused is the trait approach to personality, or “the idea that people have consistent personality characteristics that can be measured and studied” (Kalat, 2002, 512). However there are several problems that arise. First, there are significant cross-cultural differences, so one set of personality traits for one culture may differ considerably for another. The next problem would concern the creation of a test that could accurately measure these traits. While psychologists have for the most part addressed these issues, I will focus on the latter of the two. There has been a number of multiple personality tests put to use such as the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI), the Thematic Apperception Test (TAT), the Rorschach Inkblots and others. In our class we were instructed to take the 16 PF personality test in which we would judge for ourselves how accurate the test was based on our own personal experiences. In judging the usefulness of this test we took into consideration its reliability and validity. For a test to be reliable it must be able to accurately reflect consistent results for various people that can be agreed upon by researchers and therapists alike. Reliability in turn relates to validity. To be valid a test must be dependable producing data that can be used to detect a mental illness or otherwise certain personality dimensions within psychologically healthy individuals. Furthermore personality tests must be standardized, having data capable of being “interpreted in a prescribed fashion” (Kalat, 2002, 528). These standards are based on a comparison of a large number of people who have taken the test, one group with a particular disorder and another group who consist of the normal range. These allow researchers to identify people who score within a certain range to be more typical of a particular disorder. While the 16 PF personality test meets these criteria, whether or not the test is accurate remains to be explored. Within the next couple of pages I will describe the results of the test and discuss whether or not the data is an accurate reflection of my own personality.
Friedman, H. S., & Schustack, M. W. (2012). Personality: Classic theories and modern research (5th ed). Boston , MA, USA: Pearson
The Five-Factor Model of Personality gives an insight to psychologists when dealing with patients and test subjects. Due to this theory, research psychologist are able to research personality more accurately and uphold a better understanding when discussing the reasoning behind certain pre-disposed tendencies. Also, counselors which practice different types of therapy are enabled to learn details concerning their patient that can assist in the treatment of that specific patient. There have been multiple disputes in regards to the validity of the Five-Factor Model of Personality theory. Many skeptics believe that there are too many variations that come into play when dealing with personality in order to accurately depict and diagnose a 100% accurate declaration of ones’ characteristics (McCrae, 1991). The issue with relying on the model in order to declare one’s characteristics is that there is often overlap between the degrees of high and low (Popkins, 1998). Although this is a valid statement, the model is a significant role in sorting through the variations to achieve a probable consensus. Therefore, the model cannot achieve a result without any probable cause for doubt but generally will provide a clear depiction of ones’ traits and