Topic 4: Trait Perspective

Key Features

emphasis on individual differences

consistent in actions, thoughts, feelings across time and situations

differences in pattern compositions => individual differences

idea of personality being patterns of trait qualities

History

Hippocrates (400BC)

Galen (150AD)

Carl Jung (1930s)

4 Humours

temperament changes due to excess of humours

Blood

sanguine => optimistic, carefree

Phlegm

phlegmatic => calm, stoic

Black Bile

melancholic =>
depressed

Yellow Bile

choleric => angry, irritable

believed people were of certain types: introvert or extrovert

Introvert

prefers solitude and withdraws when stressed

Extrovert

prefers company of others and seeks out others when stressed

Types vs Traits

Traits

quantitative differences in degree of characteristic exp. in personality

Types

discontinuous and discrete categories

qualitative differences between people

people differ on a continuous dimension

Nomothetic View

traits exist in the same way in everyone

everyone exists on a common trait continuum => allows true comparisons to occur

individuality => unique combinations of levels on trait dimensions common to everyone

derived from Greek word "nomos" meaning law => idea of establishing general laws to study others

Idiographic View

emphasis on individual uniqueness in expressions, thoughts, feelings of traits (eg. extraversion)

Traits are unique and individualised

Unable to make meaningful comparisons

Factor Analysis

aims to find correlations across many variables

correlations in multiple qualities across many people

reflect underlying trait that contributes to them

1⃣ Collecting measurements on many variables from many people

2⃣ Correlational Computation

in the form of self-reports or observer ratings

3⃣ Factor Extraction

calculating correlations between each pair of variables

forming a correlation matrix

reduces correlations to factors (shared dimensions of commonalities)

links between items (eg. 2, 3, 5) considered factors

4⃣ Factor Loading

Loadings

5⃣ Naming Factors

measured by correlations between item and factor (r > 0.40)

extent to which the item reflects underlying dimension

name guides future research and thinking

conveys the essence of underlying quality

Limitations

only guided by items that load onto factor

items can be ambiguous

Uses

Development of assessments

Reduces multiple personality measurements to smaller sets of traits

Provides basis for comparing factor importance to traits

selecting items that load strongly and discarding items that don't

does not tell you what to measure

repeating the process to improve external validity

Starting Points

Empirical approach

endorsed by Raymond Cattell

believed that preconceptions would lead one astray

Language

evolution of languages would include words that describe human qualities

Lexical Criterion of Importance

⬆ number of descriptive words for a quality suggests ⬆ importance of that quality

Cattell factor analysed 171 trait terms

emerging factors were trait dimensions important to personality

resulted in 16 Personality Factor inventory

Theoretical Approach

endorsed by Hans Eysenck

believed in starting with well-developed ideas on personality

Supertraits

began with typology of Hippocrates & Galen and observations of Jung & Wundt

supertraits ➡ traits ➡ habits ➡ specific responses

4 Categories

Phlegmatic

⬇ extraversion & ⬇ neuroticism

careful, calm, controlled

Melancholic

⬇ extraversion & ⬆ neuroticism

anxious, pessimistic

Sanguine

⬆ extraversion & ⬇ neuroticism

carefree, sociable

Choleric

⬆ extraversion & ⬆ neuroticism

excitable, aggressive

Extraversion-Introversion & Neuroticism-Emotional Stability

Similarities to 16PF

supertraits resemble first 2 traits in 16PF

16PF second-order factors

factors (clusters) extracted from factors

resemble extraversion and neuroticism

Hierarchical view of supertraits

component traits resemble 16PF traits

Interpersonal Approach

endorsed by Jerry Wiggins & co

Interpersonal Circle

centered on two core dimensions underlying human relations

Dominance

Unassured-Submissive 🕕

Love (horizontal)

Warm-Agreeable 🕒

core human traits embedded in human relationships

Cold-Hearted 🕘

Assured-Dominant 🕛

total of eight personality patterns

introversion-extraversion not fundamental but result from intersection of dominance and love

5 Factor Model

emerging academic consensus that personality incorporates five superordinate factors

Research evidence

Diverse samples and assessments

Teacher ratings of children, peer ratings, nonverbal assessments

collected across diverse cultures and languages

studied proverbs for evidence of five factors

research literature has impressive fit to five factor model

Disagreements

Naming

Choice of items used for factor analysis

various word connotations

click to edit

Factors

Extraversion

life domain of power

Other Labels / Features

assertiveness, spontaneity

tendency towards happiness

sociability

some argue this is product of extraversion features

general agreement among researchers

Neuroticism

Agreeableness

Conscientiousness

Openness to Experience

life domain of affect

Other Labels

emotional stability / control

high agreement among researchers

refers to subjective experience of anxiety and distress

life domain of love

Features

Other Labels

Conformity

Likeability

Friendly compliance

concern with maintaining social order and relationships

nurturance and emotional supportiveness

inhibition of negative affect

⬇ agreeableness

⬆ frequency of power displays to resolve social conflict

experience ⬆ conflicts

okay agreement among researchers

life domain of work

Other Labels

Responsibility

Will to achieve

low agreement among researchers

conscientious loads on itself and agreeableness

examinations of qualities of conscientiousness concluded that no single measure encompasses all

suggests that better name may exist

does not fully reflect qualities of persistence, planning, purposive pursuit of goals

lowest agreement among researchers

life domain of intellect

⬆ openness

⬆ favourable interracial attitudes and ⬇ stigmatisation

Disagreements

Differences in measurements

does not measure logical aspect of intelligence

❌ evidence that openness and intellect qualities rely on different brain areas

argue that measures of imaginative and logical aspects of IQ merge => imply intellect is better name

Features

having social impact

⬆ agreeableness

⬆ social support from family members

⬇ poaching of romantic partners and ⬇ responsive to poaching attempts by others

⬆ responsiveness in parenting

value benevolence and tradition

value achievement and stimulation

⬆ extraversion

⬆ interactions with women

firm handshake that signals confidence

Features of ⬆ conscientiousness

⬆ health-linked behaviours and ⬆ lifespan

⬆ job success & more affected by job loss

⬆ sexual satisfaction in marriages

click to edit

⬆ neuroticism

⬆ difficult interactions bet. married partners and ⬆ likelihood of distancing from partner after negative event

⬇ relationship satisfaction

predicts earlier death partly because smoke more

NEO-PI-R

five factors are superordinate traits with six narrow traits per domain

Variations

Expanding

Honesty-Humility

may be absorbed by agreeableness in some measures

⬆ predictive validity of 5 factor model

Condensing

6th supertrait that is added to the five-factor model

higher-order analysis of 5 factors yields 2

Socialisation

Personal Growth

⬇ neuroticism, agreeableness, conscientiousness

influence whether people have good social relations

extraversion and openness

influences whether people expose themselves to new things and ⬆ growth

aka stability

aka plasticity

Supertraits or facet traits

facet traits are better predictors of behaviour

supertraits allow for intuitive understanding of personality causes

Trait influence on behaviour

Assumptions

traits being stable aspects of personality that influence behaviour in wide range of settings

trait differences should predict behavioural differences

Studies

Walter Mischel

poor correlations between trait self-reports and behaviours (r = 0.30)

finding suggests traits only account for 9% of behaviour r2=0.09

Limitations

faulty self-report measures

faulty behavioural measurements

Situationism

extreme view that situational factors exclusively define behaviour

promoted by social psychologists

Evidence

situations and traits reported with different statistics so difficult to make comparisons

Converted statistics reported in famous studies on situations to correlations

Found situations had same correlation (r = 0.3)

Interactionism

view that traits and situations interact to influence behaviour

Situations

Situation Strength

Strong Situations

force behaviour into channels and restrict personality expression

Eg. army setting

Weak Situations

Eg. lawn of college campus

allow easy expressions of personality

Eg. stressful situation causes extroverts to seek others and introverts to withdraw

cause one behaviour in one person and another behaviour in others

Personality

influences choice on situations that people enter

different responses elicited from others due to personality differences

change the situation

Later studies found stronger correlations

reflects influence of multiple traits on behaviour

Intuitively understood

Context-Specific Expressions

Verbal Hedges

Eg. shy with strangers

implies understanding that trait-based behaviour only occurs in certain situations

word or phrase that limits trait applicability

understanding of traits as patterns of linkages that link situations to actions

action should not be expected to occur always because situation does not always occur

Behavioural Signature

unique patterns of situation-action links established over time and experience

idiographic traits

traits as situation-linked frequency distributions of states

Assessments

represents important focus of the trait perspective

extensively uses self-report measures

used to construct personality profiles

reflects nomothetic assumption that everyone can be placed on the trait dimension

identify trait interactions

eg. Boldness expressed differently based on levels of sociability

Personality Disorders

represented as extreme manifestations of big five traits

represented well in big five model and facet scales are even more accurate

Context of Problems

traits as vulnerabilities or susceptibilities to problematic behaviour

emerge in certain situations

Diathesis-Stress Model

diathesis refers to susceptibility

interaction between diathesis and stress for problematic behaviour to emerge

Limitations

no explanation of how and why people behave a certain way

Circular Explanations

behaviour is used to infer existence of traits

traits are used to explain behaviour

can be broken if traits are used to predict novel behaviours

only claims to present a single angle

more links developed with other perspectives that provide underlying mechanisms for trait operations

Similarities with supertraits

extroversion and neuroticism relate to Eysenck's extroversion and emotional stability

five factors are superordinate traits each composed of facet traits similar to hierarchy of traits suggested by Eysenck