Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Walter Mischel's argument against personality traitpsychology
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
n 1968, personality psychologist Walter Mischel dropped a bomb on the field of personality psychology. In his book titled Personality and Assessment, Mischel ultimately concluded that personality does not exist (Funder, 2016). He argued that behavior is too inconsistent across situations to be characterized by broad personality traits, and differences in behavior are due to differences in situational factors rather than differences in personality. Mischel’s ideas were immediately met with criticism, and so the person-situation debate began. Although it may not be as prevalent, the question of whether personality or situations are more important in determining behavior exists until today. Like Mischel, NPR’s podcast, “The Personality Myth,” argues against personality stability, but one of the oldest theories of personality would argue for it. …show more content…
In the podcast, Walter Mischel was the first to make his argument against personality stability. According to Mischel, personality is perceived as stable, because we want to believe that it is stable. To support his claims, he cites his own famous experiment called the Marshmallow Test as evidence. He concluded that people can change their behavior simply by thinking about or envisioning situations in a different way. Stanford Psychologist Lee Ross also made a case against personality stability. According to Ross, personality only seems stable, because situational factors are stable. When situational variables drastically change, so does personality. NPR cited Milgram’s obedience study as evidence. The most compelling case against the stability of personality was Dan. As a convicted rapist who now writes poems and plans and coordinates TED talks in prison, Dan insists that he is no longer the person who he was when he committed his crime. According to Dan, he changed his personality simply by changing his
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.
P.J. (2004). Personality: Theory and Research. USA: Wiley. SMITH. T. W. and WILLIAMS.
Cervone, D., Pervin, L. A. (2008). Personality: Theory and research (10th Ed.). New York: Wiley.
Sigmund Freud was born on May 6, 1856, in Austria (?). His family moved to Vienna in 1860, and that is where Freud spent, mostly, the remainder of his life (?). Freud is considered the father of Psychoanalysis, the first acknowledged personality theory (?). His theory suggest that a person’s personality is controlled by their unconscious which is established in their early childhood. The psychoanalytic theory is made up of three different elements interacting to make up the human personality: the id, the ego, and the superego (?).
An individual’s behaviour may differ depending on the circumstances they are in though there are definite signs of repetitive behaviour when placed in majority of the situations. These characteristics are known as traits which make up the personality of each person (Engler, 2014). Personality theorists do not have a mutual agreement on how the term personality should be used. They each have their definition of personality thus providing a large number of diverse personality theories (Engler, 2014). For example, Eysenck (1970) defined personality as a relatively permanent and consistent composition of an individual’s disposition that in turn establishes how the person adjusts to their
Everybody's personality is different. Some may be extraversion's or narcissists, low self-monitoring or high self-monitoring and the list goes on. During this semester, taking Personality Theories has thought me more about myself than I have learned in my whole life. I believe that my personality stems from my family environment, my friends and society and then I get to choose what I think to be morally correct and what fits with my personality the best.
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.
Magnavita, J. J. (2002). Theories of personality: Contemporary approaches to the science of personality. New York: Wiley.
Different people describe the word ‘personality’ differently. Martin et al. (2010,p.610) describes personality as a “particular pattern of behavior and thinking that prevails across time and situations, and differentiates one person from another”. According to Mullins and Christy (2013,p.136), they explain that Personality may be perceived as “consisting of stable characteristics that explains why an individual behaves a certain way. Independence, conscientiousness, agreeableness and self-control are all examples of personality characteristics”. Mullins and Christy (2013, p.136) further explain that we can only identify and understand a person’s personality from listening, watching and observing them. For instance, an independent person may show independence characteristic by demonstrating a strong sense of self-sufficiency. It would be expected that this individual would not be dependable on other people around him and if this is established, it can support the characteristic being a consistent part of the person’s behavior. Individuals are therefore generally consistent in the way they respond to situations. At...
Hergehhahn, B. R. and Olson, M. H. (1999). An Introduction to Theories of Personality. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Cardinal traits are the traits that most powerfully influence an individual. They may define someone both internally and externally, meaning that people surrounding the individual may associate a person by this trait but not always. To have an incredibly overwhelming cardinal trait driving an individual is somewhat rare but an example may be someone who is known and defined by their innate friendliness towards others. Central traits on the other hand are smaller, more building block-like units of an individual’s personality. These traits are typically descriptive of someone’s behaviors like if they are nice, intelligent, or rude. Secondary traits are the weakest and least impressionable of all the traits. They’re typically brought on by situations like if an individual won’t make eye contact with someone they’ve just met or if they play with their hands while they’re nervous.
Friedman, H. S., & Schustack, M. W. (2012). Personality: Classic theories and modern research (5th ed). Boston , MA, USA: Pearson
Personality is the study of an individual’s unique and relatively stable patterns of thinking, feeling, and behaving over time and across situations and it is what distinguishes one individual from another. In the past changes in personality were thought to have only occurred in the developmental stages of childhood and solidifies in adolescence. After the teenage years it was thought to be set like plaster or the change seen to be inconsequential or absent( Srivastava, John, Gosling, and Potter, 2003). However, recent studies have suggested that changes in personality traits continue to occur throughout an individual’s lifespan due to multiple reasons.
The concept of personality has numerous definitions (Fatahi, Moradi, & Kashani-Vahid, 2016). Schultz and Schultz (2009), define personality in its broad sense as the manner of an individual’s behaviour in different situations. This essay explores the nature of personality, with the intention of highlighting its flexibility. The results of numerous empirical research studies are examined in order to investigate if, and how personality changes over time. It will be argued that an individual’s personality has the ability to change throughout their life.