Introduction
The study of personality is an intriguing subject. I carried out a literature review of different journal articles to analyze what different scholars had to say on the topic. In the book Essentials of Psychology authored by Robert Feldman the different approaches of studying human personality are highlighted in the fourteenth chapter.
He begins by analyzing Sigmund Freud’s theory which proposes that the human personality is influenced by the experiences a human being goes through in the different stages of development. The biological approach argues that the personality of a human being is determined genetically. There are scholars who believe that personality is determined by the thoughts, values and feelings that people have.
The personality trait theory proposes that the personality of a human being can be analyzed using five broad measures of personality traits. The measures focus on whether one is an extrovert or easy to get along with. Finally, there is the humanistic approach that proposes that humans are inherently good. They have positive influences on each other leading to growth of healthy personalities. This paper is an analysis of what different scholars have contributed to the study of the human personality.
Biological Approach
David Buss believes that the study of the biological approach will greatly help in understanding personality. Biology is the study of life. In psychology biological approaches provide different ways of evaluating psychological and behavioral trends. He mentions the three ways in his article as evolutionary, behavioral genetic and psycho physiological approaches (Buss, 1990).
The biological study of personality has been greatly misunderstood. First of all, people think that there is a singular approach when it comes to the biological theory however there are several approaches. The second misconception causes people to believe biological approaches are against environmental approaches. This is false since evolutionary approaches describe how organisms adapt to their environments.
Majority of personality research is done without the influence of a biological outlook. Buss shows that the biological viewpoint addresses nine concerns in the area of personality. He argues that it provides a sufficient explanation of human nature. A further study of biology will provide many solutions to uncover the mystery of genetic variability in species. It will also help in the identification of the fundamental behaviors that differentiate individuals.
There is a need to provide clarity when it comes to the concepts of adaptation and adjustment. The biological approach provides the required information. It provides clarity since it recognizes the genesis of personality dispositions. It gives a closer look into personality development and the study of life history.
It also provides models and standards in analyzing personality forms instead of personality dimensions. It also shows the need of tackling the psychophysiology aspect of personality. Lastly, the biological approach helps one to concentrate on psychological mechanisms as the means of solving any problems that arise.
The personality neuroscience field is based on the fact that one cannot comprehend the whole person exclusive of the human brain. Neuroscience methods are used to examine individual diversity. This is in relation to behavior, stimulus, feelings, and cognition. Personality psychology has clearly assisted scholars in understanding the important dimensions of personality however it offers less in understanding the biological causes of these measures.
The field of neuroscience has been growing rapidly and bringing more clarity in the area. DeYoung wrote an article where he gives analysis of the growth of neuroscience in examining personality traits structured using a hierarchical structure. The hierarchical model is based on the Big Five dimensions which are Extraversion, Neuroticism, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness and Openness or Intellect.
He has gathered sufficient evidence proving that there are biological aspects that affect each personality trait. The data collected from personality psychology can be used in neuroscience studies. The psychological aspects that influence personality traits should interest someone who is fascinated by the study of personality neuroscience (DeYoung, 2010).
Humanistic Approach
Montouri and Fahim lay out a strong case on the impact of cross-cultural relationships on personality. They examine what different writers have written on culture compared to their own personal experiences. They believe cross-cultural experiences should be seen as a source of positive impact on personality especially in the United States where there are many people of different cultures.
In the United States people tend to be individualistic. They do not want to interact a lot with others. This mentality can cause people not to experience maximum personality growth (Montouri & Fahim, 2004).
Cross-cultural encounters cause people to examine their own beliefs and systems especially on how they perceiving the world around them. It causes one to engage in learning and relearning and in the process people experience a lot of growth and change. It makes individuals more open, friendly and accommodating. This is also an area of research that may provide great research materials.
Patterson and Joseph studied the person-centered model in relation to modern developments in the field of positive psychology. Carl Rogers’s person-centered theory proposes that human species have an inherent trend toward growth, development and maximum functioning. This assumption is used as the leading code for client centered healing practice.
The researchers came up with five hypotheses in order to test the assumptions of the person-centered theory. First of all they wanted to know whether men are born with an innate need to actualize. Are there socio-environmental conditions that increase the desire for self-actualization? They also wanted to know whether change process outcomes lead to healthy psychological functioning.
Do others affect the change process? Do negative remarks stop the change process? Finally, will the changed share common values? Theoretical similarities and points of union between the self-determination and person-centered model were pointed out. The self-determination theory analyses behaviors as either intrinsically or extrinsically motivated.
The empirical evidence gathered showed significant implications on the major hypothesis of the person-centered model. The empirical findings showed that the five hypotheses raised were true (Patterson & Joseph, 2007). The researchers argue that based on the results the person-centered model provides helpful conditions for the therapeutic transformation.
The transformation leads to a favorable social environment. It is very important to use this convergence of theories and evidence to deal with the criticism of the person-centered model. There are arguments that the person-centered model lacks sufficient evidence. Researchers can use the evidence gathered concerning the person-centered approach by these authors in their future work. Meta-theoretical theories have potential contribution to positive psychology.
Personality Trait Approach
At times circumstances may force researchers to use short instruments or nil instruments while conducting various research projects. Gossling, Rentfrow, and Swann wrote an article where they evaluated the new 5 and 10-item measures of the big five personality dimension.
The big five structure has great support. It is the most widely used research model for personality traits. However, it has not been accepted universally. Big five structure is a hierarchical theory of personality traits based on five wide factors. Researchers at time work on limited time. They are forced to use a brief instrument for the big-five personality dimension otherwise they will not conduct the research at all.
In this article, studies are conducted to evaluate the new 5 and 10-item measures of the big five personality traits. The authors were looking at parameters such as test-retest reliability, patterns of predicted external correlates and unity between self and observers’ ratings.
Their findings proved that the researchers may use brief instruments instead of the longer big-five instruments. There are times the research conditions necessitate the use of a brief instrument. The 10-item is recommended out of the two instruments. This is based on the fact that the instrument has proven to be psychometrically superior, it allows researchers to check for errors and it takes about one minute to complete the test (Gossling, Rentfrow, & Swann, 2003).
Sulloway did an analysis of the revolutionary theory and personality psychology and in light of the scientific revolutions that have taken place. Sulloway suggests that the birth order of children in a human family shapes their personalities. Children in human families fight for parental resources through creating distinctive roles for themselves. He argues that the first born is usually responsible, competitive and reserved while the rest get their identity by being playful and rebellious.
The effects of birth order on children personalities were examined by Jefferson, Jeffrey and McCrae in 1998. Their findings revealed that there was no relationship between personality and birth order. They got a sample that was representative of the nation and analyzed several qualities in people.
Was an individual an extrovert? Was he open to people? Their results on the adult sample revealed that altruism and tender-mindedness had little effect on the personality traits. In the analysis of age mates the observations or results showed that children who are not the first-borns were more open and agreeable however the observations on spouses did not advance the same theory.
The findings collected failed to prove that personality plays a meditational role in Sulloway’s theory of scientific revolutions (Jefferson, Jeffrey & McCrae, 1998). Based on these findings it is evident that both birth order and personality are independent predictors of creativity in human lives.
Psychoanalytical Approaches
Sigmund Freud who was a leading psycho-analyst discovered the Oedipus complex. He realized that children also have sexual feelings as adults. After Freud unearthed his childhood memories he formed a general theory which he called the Oedipus complex. This theory originates from the phallic period in a child based on his or her aggression towards the parents. This is the source of the whole psychological structure.
He proposed that the external behavior of all people proved the existence of the complex. Afroz wrote an article where he attempted to identify the effects of Oedipus complex on external behavior of humans. He analyzed the results of tests carried out on a random sample of several males and females. Freud described four types of changes of the complex. They include socialized, anti-socialized, partially repressed and abnormally socialized type.
This theory received a lot of critics from other researchers. The theory seemed controversial due to the high emphasis of the child’s sexuality as its origin. Freud truly believed so much in the sexual basis of the complex that he immediately refused to consider other explanations. After considering the results of the survey, the author concludes that the Oedipus complex is the source of all positive and negative emotions (Afroz, 2009).
Baumeister, Dale and Sommer in 1998 carried out a literature review of different articles on Freud’s theory of defense mechanisms exhibited in individuals. The strategy adopted depends on an individual’s personality. The researchers focused on writers who had carried out various forms primary data collection and analysis. They focused on populations with no special cases when it came to defense of self-esteem against threats that was not extreme in nature.
They found that people did exhibit denial, reaction formation, isolation and undoing. However there was no conclusive evidence that projection, sublimation and displacement were used by personality types as defense mechanisms (Baumeister, Dale & Sommer, 1998). It is an interesting area of personality and provides an area for further research. It would be interesting to find out why certain personalities chose one type of defense mechanism over the other.
Learning Approach
Dweck in 2008 was interested in finding out whether a person’s beliefs could change his or her personality. He believed more research should be carried out on beliefs since people’s personality transformed every time they acquired new beliefs.
The case studies analyzed showed that the individuals who were open to change and acquiring new beliefs performed better in life when faced with challenges. Adopting a learning ability caused them to be malleable increasing their adaptability in life. All they had to do was change their beliefs. Those who were rigid or fixed when hit with challenges were de-motivated.
Secondly people’s acceptance or rejection caused people to behave in certain ways. If a person had a belief that he would be rejected, he would be insecure and have fragile relationships. People who knew they were accepted were more confident and exhibited stronger relationships and high confidence. If the expectations for acceptance or rejection were changed, it would have a profound change in someone’s personality. If one knew they were accepted, he would be more confident even in the face of challenges (Dweck, 2008).
There is growth in interest in forming synthetic agents which are efficient as the human agents. This will require extensive programming to create such artificial agents who act as natural agents. Behavioral scientists are required to issue the codes for the system. They cannot afford to act as consultants.
Decoding the personality traits into the tangible behavior of agents using available modern programming structure has proven to be a hard task. This is due to the requirement of a level of code complexity which makes the system out of reach to the behavioral scientists.
Simpkins, Isbel and Marcquez suggest that the reinforcement learning approach can solve the problem. Reinforcement learning approach attempts to equip the synthetic agents with human personality traits and motivational factors.
The creation of a system that is accessible to the behavioral scientists and increases the knowledge of the rich agents directly while minimizing the complexity of the programming is promising. It is important to find a way to derive the concrete behavior of an agent straight from the psychological personality models. This vision needs to be studied further to make it a reality (Simpkins, Isbel and Marcquez, 2010).
References
Afroz, T. (2009). Social Explanation of Oedipus Complex: A Psycho-analysis of Human Behavior. TMC Academic Journal, 4(2): 8-18.
Baumeister, R. Dale, K., & Sommer, K.(1998). Freudian Defense Mechanisms and Empirical Findings in Modern Social Psychology: Reaction Formation, Projection, Displacement, Undoing, Isolation, Sublimation, and Denial. Journal of Personality, 66(6): 1081-1095.
Buss, D. (1990). Towards a Biologically Informed Psychology of Personality. Journal of Personality, 15(8), 1-17.
Dweck, C. (2008). Can Personality be Changed? The role of Beliefs in Personality and Change. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17, 391-394.
DeYoung, C. (2010). Personality Neuroscience and the Biology of Traits. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4(12): 1165-1180.
Jefferson, T., Jeffrey H. & McCrae, R. (1998). Associations between Birth Order and Personality Traits: Evidence from Self-Reports and Observer Ratings. Journal of Research in Personality, 32, 498-509.
Gossling, S., Rentfrow, P., & Swann, W. (2003). A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 504-528.
Montouri, A. & Fahim, U. (2004). Cross-Culture Encounter as an opportunity for Personal Growth. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 44, 243-265.
Patterson, T. & Joseph, S. (2007). Person-Centered Personality Theory: Support From Self Determination Theory And Positive Psychology. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 47(1): 117-139.
Simpkins, C., Isbel, C., & Marcquez, N. (2010). Deriving Behavior from Personality: A Reinforcement Learning Approach. In Proceedings of the International Conference of Cognitive Modeling, 1-6.