Personality and the self PDF

Preview

Summary

Personality and the selfWhat is Personality? -From the Latin word “Persona” ‘Mask’ -Ancient theatre performers Provide information about character -Personality’ stems from a fixed characterization - The Role -Not necessarily the ‘true self’ – The ActorChild (1968) “More or less stable internal facto...

Description

Personality and the self What is Personality? -From the Latin word “Persona” ‘Mask’ -Ancient theatre performers Provide information about character -Personality’ stems from a fixed characterization - The Role -Not necessarily the ‘true self’ – The Actor Child (1968) “More or less stable internal factors that make one person’s behaviour consistent from one time to another, and different from the behaviour other people would manifest in comparable situations” Key points: -Stability -Behaviour informs/indicates what is internal -Consistency -Individual differences

Freud’s Theory of Personality -A ‘structural theory’ - The mind is divided into three, conflicting, systems. -‘Id’ - unconscious aggressive and sexual instincts (libido) ‘Pleasure principle’. -‘Ego’ Develops in first 2 years of life Operates on ‘reality principle’ Tries to satisfy the ‘id,’ while mediating and resolving conflicts between ‘id’ and ‘superego’. -‘Superego’ By age 5, incorporates society and parents’ values At ‘conscience’ level Tries to match ‘ego-ideal’. -Based on clinical patients in Austria 100+ years ago - Not very generalisable. -Modern research support very limited ‘Id’ – Amygdala. -Much of his theory cannot be tested scientifically It’s good history, but not great science.

Iceberg theory - Conscious level: 10%. Thoughts and perceptions. - Preconscious Level: 10-15% Memories and stored knowledge. - Unconscious level: 75-80% Violent motives, selfish needs, immoral urges, shameful experiences.

Humanistic Approach -Opposite to what Freud said. All mind is present and available. -The roots are in existentialism. -Active awareness of ‘the present’. -Personal growth and ‘determination’. -Phenomenology was key method Individuals give direct account of themselves. -Came about in 1950s & 1960s. -It was in stark contrast to the dominant behaviourist approach at the time (e.g., Skinner).

Abraham Maslow -Proposed a ‘Hierarchy of Needs’. -At the top of which stood ‘psychological needs’. -Maslow expanded the horizon far beyond the seriously narrow behaviouristic perspective. -No inner-truth; deterministic rather than agentic. -Maslow assumed that society runs against the fulfilment of our higher needs. -What we need as humans not facilitated by modern society.

Self-actualisation- “What a man can be, he must be”. -Spontaneous. - They embrace reality and facts rather than denying truth. - They are interested in solving problems (theirs/others). -They are accepting of themselves and others and lack prejudice. Carl Rogers -Client-centred therapy. -Who people are and who they want to be. -Attempts to reconcile self-concept with ‘ideal self’ ‘Q-sort’ technique (9-point ‘like me’ to ’not like me’) “I try to live up to expectations of others” “I am a very anxious person”. -Stack via self-assessment then Stack via ‘ideal self’. Studies showed client-centred therapy changed correlations between self-concept and ideal self from .21 to .69, and after one year increased to .79 (Rogers, 1961).

Personality Assessment The most common way to assess personality is by using different types of test. Questionnaires: The most common method, relies on self-report by the self-evaluation of certain behaviours, thoughts, or feelings. Ratings: Provided by observers, indicating whether their friend/partner/stranger possesses certain characteristics. Projective tests: Ambiguous stimuli asking for subjective interpretation.

Objective tests: Measuring objective behaviour relevant to some aspects of personality.

Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) -One of the most famous. -MMPI-2 (1989/2001): 567 true/false items assess psychiatry & abnormal psychology. -Used for job hiring, court cases, govt, military. -Criticized - reliability/validity/white v non-white. -Items - Sexist, religion, bodily functions. -Paranoia Psychasthenia (OCD) Hypomania, Schizophrenia, Social Introversion are examples of results. MMPI-2-RF (2008)- Created after complaints from last one. -338 true/false items. -Half the time to complete (30-50 minutes). -MMPI-2 still more widely used because of its existing large research base and familiarity with psychologists. -Embedded validity scales. - ‘Lie scale’ – 15 socially desirable behaviours. -‘F scale’ – 60 items scattered through test; looks for random and/or contradictory responding. -‘K scale’ – Designed to identify psychopathology in people who might score in -‘normal’ range due to defensiveness. Projective tests-Rorschach Inkblot Test (Rorschach, 1921) & Thematic Apperception Test (Murray, 1938). -Based on assumption that by interpreting ambiguous stimuli, subjects will project underlying motives, revealing personalities. -Summary: The results lack reliability & validity (subjects tend to give different answers on different occasions) Links between motives, projections, & personality are complex and generally not easy to interpret. Factor theories of personality -Basic assumption 1: a series of items can be reduced to a smaller set of underlying, fundamental dimensions (factors; traits). -Basic assumption 2: Personality factors are underlying explanation for specific actions, thoughts, etc. The Big Five In the last 15-20 years most personality theorists have agreed that there are five major personality factors The Big five personality factors are: Openness to Experience - Intellectually curious, open to emotion, sensitive to beauty & willing to try new things. Conscientiousness- Tendency to display self-discipline, act dutifully, & strive for achievement.

Extraversion- Enjoy interacting with others, w/tendency to be enthusiastic, action-oriented individuals. Agreeableness- Value getting along with others, generally considerate, kind, generous, trusting & trustworthy. Neuroticism- Tendency to experience negative emotions, such as anger, anxiety, or depression. -5 factor model is the result of dozens of independent studies carried out in several countries. -The five factors came from psycho-lexical research and from questionnaire studies (e.g., NEO-PI, McCrae & Costa, 1985) all over the world. -Main strength: impressive empirical evidence in support of the five factors (or similar variants) in several cultures. -However, the model is still primarily descriptive Missing underlying theoretical framework Empirical result of factor analysis.

Social cognitive theory Albert Bandura -One of the most influential theorists in psychology. -Proposed reciprocal determinism: environmental factors, internal factors, and behaviours influence each other. -Proposed that observational learning and vicarious experience were key factors in the acquisition of behaviour/personality. -Via the process of Reinforcement. Observational learning & reinforcement Bandura et al. (1961): Children watched an adult playing with tinker toys & a ‘Bobo doll’ (5foot inflated plastic doll). Violent model: after 1 minute of playing with the tinker toys, the adult approached the doll and for 9 minutes punched it, kicked it, hit it, tossed it in the air, while saying “Hit him down”, “Sock him in the nose” etc. Neutral model: the adult worked for 10 minutes with the tinker toys. The children were mildly frustrated & then left alone for 20 minutes with toys, including Bobo Doll. DV: amount of physical and verbal aggression. -Children were clearly influenced by adults behaviours towards the doll. Bandura (1965): Repeated experiment this time rewarding or punishing the adults. Results showed that children who observed rewarded adults displayed more aggression towards Bobo doll than those who observed the punished adults. Conclusion: differences in aggression due to vicarious reinforcement, not learning Previously assumed that reinforcement needed to be direct. Here, model’s reinforcement ‘transfers’ to the observer.

The self “Knowing others is wisdom. Knowing oneself is enlightenment.” ~ Lao Tzu. “People often say that this or that person has not yet found himself. But the self is not something that one finds. It is something that one creates.” ~Thomas Szasz. As psychologists, we talk about studying the ‘A, B, Cs : Affect – Self-esteem. Behaviour – Self-presentation. Cognition- Self-concept. Self-concept- The complete set of beliefs people have about themselves (Markus, 1977). Self-schemas -Mental framework or structure that represents and synthesizes the ‘components of you’ in a meaningful, coherent manner Based on important ‘self-dimensions’ Allows you to answer the question, “Who am I?”. Self-schemas & bias -Research shows your memory recall is influenced by the current schema. -We tend to reject information in the environment that contradicts our self-schema. -Not all bad! It helps with a major need - Knowledge. More complex = better. -Solid, complex self-schemas act as psychological buffer. Comparison perspectives 1)Self to self -Self-Discrepancy Theory (Higgins, 1989). -Actual self – Reality. -Ideal self - Person you want to be. -Ought self - Person you ‘should’ be. -Ideal and Ought are 'self-guides’. -Ideal = Promotion goals (“Go be that person!”). -Ought = Prevention goals (“Don’t be that person!”). -Implications: if actual self isn’t your idea self it could cause sadness, depression. If actual self isn’t the ought self it could lead to anxiety and guilt. 2) Self to Other Individuals -Social Comparison Theory (Festinger, 1954) -Assess self in comparison to others, serving multiple goals: A) Knowledge. B) Esteem. -Downward social comparisons. -You, relative to less fortunate others. -Compare test to worse student. C) Improving -Upward social comparisons.

-To learn from experts; Inspired by example. -Moderated by achievability. -Achievable = inspiration. -Unachievable = discouraging. 3) Self to other groups Social Identity Theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1986). Personal identity: Idiosyncratic features of the self. Social Identity: The self defined by your ‘group. Three steps: 1) Categorization: Black, White, Christian, Muslim Helps make sense of the environment & ourselves. 2) Identification: The ‘I’ becomes the ‘we’. 3) Comparison: My ‘ingroup’ to some other ‘outgroup(s)’. All in the service of viewing my group (thus myself) in the most positive light. Minimal Group Paradigm. Objective-Self Awareness (Duval & Wicklund, 1972) -You’re either attending to yourself or to objects in the environment. -When you become ‘self-aware’ you are the object Under OSA, we turn to our standards, assess, and alter behaviour appropriately. - OSA in the lab? Mirrors Audio/video recordings. Objective-Self Awareness studies (Carver, 1975) -Stated attitude toward punishment as teaching tool. -2 groups: Pro-punishment; anti-punishment. -2 conditions: Mirror (OSA); no mirror. -Participants allowed to shock learner at mistakes. -Results: No mirror = No difference; Mirror = pro-punishment significantly higher shock levels than anti. (Batson et al., 1999) Moral behaviour -Participants had to place themselves and another student into a positive or a neutral condition. -Coin provided to ease the decision 2 conditions: -Mirror (OSA); no mirror. -Results: No mirror = 85% said coin flipped in their favour Mirror = 50%. Culture and the self Markus & Kitayama (1994) -East vs. West and different construals of the self. -Western construal of self is Independent. -Persons are separate; distinct. -Important to express ‘uniqueness’. -Self organized around internal traits. -Eastern construal of self is Interdependent. -Persons are fundamentally connected. -Important to maintain harmony.

-Self defined by social relationships; role. -Independent vs. Interdependent: -Emotions: Independent: Ego-focused Anger, frustration, pride Interdependent: Otherfocused Sympathy, shame. -Anger: West: healthy expression or control it? East: no such debate; restraint. -Cognition: (Imae & Gentner, 2003): Japanese & American, children & adults. -‘Dax’ made something up. What is it that makes the thing a Dax. Shape or substance? -Americans- more like to say shape. -Japanese- more likely to say substance....