Help
Options
Didn't know it?
click below
click below
Knew it?
click below
click below
Don't Know
Remaining cards (0)
Know
retry
shuffle
restart
0:00
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Normal Size Small Size show me how
PSYCH 236
Personality Psychology
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| What is personality psychology? | The essence of a person The study of how individuals are different from each other Often called the study of “individual differences” |
| Why study personality? | To better understand ourselves TO better understand others To be able to predict what other people will do under particular circumstances |
| What are the perspectives? | Traits, Biological and Evolutionary, Psychoanalytic,Phenomenological, Learning and Cognitive Processes |
| Why multiple perspectives? | Consider the all-in-one cell phone It does lots of things, but what does it do well? Same reason multiple perspectives are preferable to one all-encompassing theory |
| Discovering Personality | Self-Report Data Informant Report Data Life Data Behavioral Data |
| The Goal of Personality Psychology | Funder’s Second Law There are no perfect indicators of personality; there are only clues and clues are always ambiguous understand personality you need to collect multiple clues Funder’s Third Lab:BLISS: knowin you collected the right data to eval the h |
| S data (self-report data or self-judgment) | If you want to know about someone, ask them Very direct and simple These measures are face valid= measures what it’s supposed to Most commonly used kind of personality assessment |
| S data Pros | You are your own best expert Access to internal feelings, beliefs, and attitudes Access to abilities, expectations, and motivations Beliefs about yourself often become true (casual force) Simple and easy |
| S data Cons | Maybe people won’t tell you Susceptible to lying Maybe they can’t tell you People don’t know everything about themselves Too simple and too easy Probably overused and misused |
| I Data (informant report) | If you want to know about a personal ask someone who knows them (an “informed” person) Any “knowledgeable other” will do (e.g., parent, partner, friend, clinician/therapist, etc.) Gossip is a good method of sharing I data |
| I data Pros | Judgments made by informants: Are based on many situations, and often different types of situations large among of information Real-world basis based on observations of real experiences, rather than those created in a lab |
| I data Cons | Informant may have limited amount of information about the “target” Informants not with target in all situations Targets may be different with different people and in different situations Informants do know things the target keeps “private” |
| L Data (Life outcomes) | “residue” of personality. Not actually measuring personality; something that is thought to be heavily influenced by someone’s personality. clues to give you ideas of what the personality might be like. |
| L data Pros | They reflect important outcomes of interest L data are psychologically relevant certain behaviors correspond to certain psychological tendencies |
| L data Cons | Multidetermination L data may be influenced by many outcomes so it is difficult to know what role personality plays in behavior |
| B data (Behavior) | Watch what a person does Naturalistic B data (very expensive)=enough people to put out into the real world, need to be highly trained, reliable, and able to get at what the researcher is interested in. Time consuming. |
| B data Pros | Researchers can study events that are not common or can be re-created Objective and quantifiable Researchers collects precise and unbiased data (e.g., time, heart rate); no need to take someone else’s word for it Can be measured in numerical form |
| B data Cons | Researcher has to interpret the data Data can be misinterpreted or unable to be interpreted |
| S vs. B personality tests | S personality test: To researcher asks you a question because she wants to KNOW the answer B personality test: The researcher asks the question because she wants to know HOW you answer |
| The final words on clues | B.L.I.S (easy way to remember the clues) Not all kinds of data are “pure” clues Most of the time they are a mix of these clues Using multiple clues provides evidence of a valid conclusionBLIS is knowing you have collected the right data to thoroughly |
| Research design | use a variety of research designs to scientifically study personality Each approach has strengths and weaknesses and each adds a unique perspective to knowledge about personality |
| Clinical Approaches | In-depth study of an individual or small group ex. Case study method(In-depth study of one person) or Open ended interview (One-on-one conversation) and Analysis of personal documents |
| pros of Clinical Approaches | In-depth understanding of the individual Study lives over time Study extreme and/or rare events Useful for generating testable hypothesis |
| cons of Clinical Approaches | Limited generalizability Harder to keep personal biases out of the process |
| Correlational Approach | Look at the association between things (how two variables “go together”) Measure each variable in many peopleSee if changes in one variable are accompanied by changed in the second variable Use scatter plots to visualize relations |
| Correlation Coefficient | Range between -1 and 1 -1 is a perfect negative correlation 0 is no linear association 1 is perfect positive association Personality psychologist rarely (if ever) find perfect correlations! |
| Strengths and Limitations of the Correlation Approach | Explore and identify relations between variables Fewer ethical and procedural considerations Limitations Golden Rule of Correlation: Correlation does not prove causation! |
| Experimental Approach | Systematic, controlled method to asses causal relationships Experimenter creates 2 or more levels or conditions of an independent variable Participants are randomly assigned to one condition Experimenter examines the effect n the dependent variable |
| Experimental Approach pros | Gold standard for making causal statements Control over confounds |
| Experimental Approach cons | Ethical constraints/deception Potential that experimenter biases may still affect experiment Issues of ecological validity… Labs demonstrate what can happen but this is not the same as what happens in the real world |
| Research Ethics | Psychologist have a code of professional ethics. These include: Not to harm research participants Promote accuracy, honestly, truthfulness Respect the dignity and rights of individuals |
| Personality traits | Consistent patterns in the way individuals behave, feel and think. People have different amounts of a trait. Traits influence behavior over time. Traits are constant |
| Interactionist interpretation | Individuals select certain situations based on their personality Similar individuals are more likely to select the same situations |
| Walter Mischel | believes that personality exists but behavior is so inconsistent from situation to situation that there is no reason to study personality. Personality exists but its not a useful tool Behavior is primarily determined by the situation |
| Situationist Argument | If personality only somewhat influences what a person will do, then the situation must strongly influence what a person will do He thought the professional study of personality is useless |
| how does Personality affect situations | Selection People seek out and avoid different situations depending on their personality Evocation A person’s action evokes or draws forth certain responses from other people Manipulation Situations can be changed (not just reconstrued or reconceptual |
| Personality is consistent over time | Longitude & Life Course Approaches Look at the accumulation of situations and behaviors Narrative & Idiographic Approaches Look at the person and their life story recurring themes Aggregation & Act Frequency Approaches Combine or average behavior |
| The Five Factor Model | O.C.E.A.N Openness to Experience, Consciousness, Extroversion, Agreeableness, Neuroticism |
| The Interpersonal Circumplex | Easy to Judge Traits These traits are easy to pick up on Warm vs. cold Dominant vs. submissive These traits are the first things we pick up on |
| Strong Situations | These situations have a high degree of “social norms” For instance, this classroom right now If any of you yell during this lecture, it will speak highly (and poorly!) about your personality |
| Weak Situations | These situations allow for more freedom in how individual’s response uniquely For instance, a car crash It would be telling whether you yelled at or apologized to a driver who hit you |
| Accuracy of zero-acquaintance ratings | How well can you know someone that you don’t know at all For instance, based on pictures of facebook profiles These are often highly accurate, but again, that does not mean they are correct |
| Personality Perception What does your perception of others say about you? | Assumed similarity: the tendency to see other people are more similar to yourself than they really are. Positivity: seeing others as more agreeable, conscientious, extraverted, open, and less neurotic Negativity: tendency to see others as having more bad |
| Projective test | Interpret ambiguous stimuli Person projects their personality onto the test; test is something ambiguous or vague Subjective Free response B dataExamples: Thematic Apperception Test (TAT) Rorschach inkblot test |
| Disadvantages to Projective test | Really hard to administer Take a long time/time consuming to score. You cant be absolutely certain that you are measuring what you are intended to measure Prone to bias from the person who is scoring the test |
| DAP | For children Helps with interpersonal issue Draw a person-draw a person of the opposite sex from the first person |
| House Tree Person | Self perception Have a person draw a house (family), tree (strength), or person (some information about the child’s self concept) |
| Objective Tests | Yes/No, True/False, Numeric rating scale Misleading term, no test can be completely objective.Questions may be interpreted to mean different things Differences in how people answer questions Give people many items related to concept and derive scores |
| Objective test limitation | Lots of items Why so many items? Increasing the items increase reliability (more stable answer), but does not necessarily make the test more valid |
| Rational Approach | Items must mean the same thing to each person Each person must be able to make an accurate self-assessment The person must be willing to report that assessment Each item must be relevant to the construct of interest (basis of rational approach) |
| The Factor Analytic Approach | 1. Collect Data 2. Recall the Correlation Coefficient 3. Extract Factors.Factor Analysis: Sorting Traits into Groups 4. Examine Loadings 5. Label Factors |
| Limitation of Factor Analysis | You get out what you put in (i.e. the results are only as good as the items you start with) GIGO: Garbage in, garbage out Missing (omitted) items Researcher determines how items in a factor are conceptually related Sometimes the results make no sense |
| Empirical Approach | Give them a truckload of items, the more the better Are the items theoretically relevant? Actual item content is purposely ignored Take the results and compare them, find the items that successful executive endorse more than comparison. use in future |
| The Empirical Approach pros/cons | Pros Seems to work well at predicting behavior Hard to fake Cons Only as good as differences between groups May not work in a different time, place, or with different people Difficult to explain to a layman |
| The Ideal Approach | Mix it Up! Get a big pool of items that you think might be theoretically relevant, and some that aren’t for comparison. Check to see if they are related statistically as you think they are theoretically.Validate them with some independent criterion |
| Assumptions about Traits (according for Gordon Allport) | Traits are real and they influence behavior People have different levels of each trait Traits are not moral or social judgments Traits are relatively stable and enduring qualities Traits interact with environments to produce overt behavior |
| Single-trait approach | Examine one trait in isolation; see what behavior it is related toSome researchers spend their whole careers on one trait Examine all the carious kinds of data (BLIS) |
| Many trait approach | Determine the traits that are most closely associated with a specific behavior. Take one behavior you are interested in and find the traits related to it |
| Essential-trait approach | Try to identify the most important traits We want parsimony Fewest traits that can account for “personality” Also want to describe as much behavior as possible Balance these two goals: find the fewest traits that explain the most |
| What is Self-Monitoring? | Highlights the difference between your innter and outer self High Self Monitors carefully judge each situation and mold behavior (or personality) to fit it.Low Self Monitors are consistent across situations (fit the mold of the “good target”) |
| Extraversion (Surgency) | Different interpretations Mainly is viewed as sociability Talkative, energetic, outgoing, enthusiastic Also interpreted as assertiveness, confidence, or happiness (positive emotionally) |
| Agreeableness | Generally, attempts to foster relationships or to maintain the status quo Includes components of compliance, likeability, and empathy Women are higher Associated with many positive outcomes |
| Conscientiousness | Refers to having responsibility and achievement orientation Organized, thorough, efficient, responsible Engage in many healthy behaviors, avoid risks, complete more education |
| Neuroticism (Emotional Stability) | To what extent an individual becomes distressed (has negative reactions to stressful events) Includes being anxious, nervous, or easily upset More unhappy Tendency toward psychopathology |
| Openness to Experience | Most disputed factor Creativity, imagination, open minded Level of intelligence and culture (art, music, etc.) Artistic, politically liberal Belief in ghosts, UFOs, conspiracy theories Witty and clever |
| Correlates of Big Five Combination | High Consci. + lower neuroticism= better grades High neuorticism+ low conscious + low agreeableness = risky seual behavior High extra + low conscious = high alcohol use High extra + low neur= happiness |
| Issues Related to the Big Five | Predictive ability But broad traits better at predicting behavior in generic situations Narrow traits better for narrowly defined situations. Personality of the stranger May be a unified theory of traits But not of all personality |
| Self-Judgments:advantages | Advantages Lots of information and ready access Definitional truth: true by definition Causal force: what people believe about themselves matters Simple and easy |
| Self-Judgments: disadvantages | Disadvantages Individuals may edit responses Individuals may not be able to accurately report on themselves |
| Informant Reports: Asking knowledgeable Informants about the Target | Advantages Lots of information based on real-world observations Use of common sense in making ratings Definitional truth Causal force; reputation matters Disadvantages Limited perspective Limited access to the internal state of targetsErrors. |
| Behavioral Data: Directly Observing the Target’s Behavior | How they are answering, not what they are answering Advantages Unusual behaviors can be elicited in the lab Appearance of objectivity Disadvantages Behavioral responses must be interpreted |
| Quality of Data: Approaches for Evaluating the Data Used in Research | Reliability: dependability and repeatability Validity: how strongly a measure reflects the construct of interest Generalizability: do results apply to other people or experimental conditions? |
| Effect Sizes: | Null hypothesis significance testing: is there an effect? Type I Error (False Positive) Type II Errors (False Negative) Correlations reflect the size of the association between two variables |
| Ethics: How Should Psychologists Treat Participants? | Appropriate use of findings Honestly Deception Necessary for some topics May generate mistrust |
| Person-Situation Debate | Situationist Argument Personality coefficient is small Situations are more important Personality assessment is misguided Everyday intuitions of traits are wrong Response Improve research Search for moderators situational effects are not typically |
| Interactionism | Traits and situations work together Traits channel people into particular situations Traits evoke responses form other and shape situations |
| Methods of Objective Test Construction | Rational Create a pool of face valid items Factor Analytic Factors account for similarity among items Empirical Yield B data Combination of methods |
| Purpose of Testing with Objective test | Assist the individual Diagnosis Self-knowledge Assist organizations Employee selection |
| Factors that affect accuracy | Good judges-are they good at making judgments Good targets-somebody who is pretty consistent in different situations, Good information: quantity and quality |
| Realistic Accuracy Model | Relevance Availability Detection Utilization |
Created by:
1267530096
Popular Psychology sets