180x Filetype PDF File size 0.18 MB Source: assets.cambridge.org
Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-88778-6 - Personality Traits, Third Edition Gerald Matthews, Ian J. Deary and Martha C. Whiteman Excerpt More information PART I The nature of personality traits © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-88778-6 - Personality Traits, Third Edition Gerald Matthews, Ian J. Deary and Martha C. Whiteman Excerpt More information 1 The trait concept and personality theory Introduction: conceptions of traits Everyday conceptions of traits The idea of personality traits may be as old as human language itself. Aristotle (384–322BC),writingtheEthicsinthefourthcenturyBC,sawdispositionssuch as vanity, modesty and cowardice as key determinants of moral and immoral behaviour. He also described individual differences in these dispositions, often referringtoexcess,defectandintermediatelevelsofeach.HisstudentTheophras- tus (371–287 BC) wrote a book describing 30 ‘characters’ or personality types, of which a translator remarked that Theophrastus’ title might better be rendered ‘traits’(Rusten,1993).Basictohiswholeenterprisewasthenotionthatindividual good or bad traits of character may be isolated and studied separately. Contemporary English is replete with terms used to describe personal quali- ties. Table 1.1 shows some examples: the five words rated by American college students as the most and least favourable words in Anderson’s (1968) survey of 555 personality terms, together with five words given a neutral rating. Allport and Odbert (1936) identified almost 18,000 English personality-relevant terms; morewordsthanShakespeareused!Nouns,sentencesandevenactionsmayalso have personality connotations (Hofstede, 1990). The language of personality description permeates our everyday conversation and discourse. Everyday conceptions of personality traits make two key assumptions. First, traits are stable over time. Most people would accept that an individual’s behaviournaturallyvariessomewhatfromoccasiontooccasion,butwouldmain- tain also that there is a core of consistency which defines the individual’s ‘true nature’: the unchangeable spots of the leopard. In other words, there are differ- ences between individuals that are apparent across a variety of situations. We might expect a student we have noted as a ‘worrier’ to be particularly disturbed and worried in several different contexts such as examinations, social occasions and group discussions. Stability distinguishes traits from more transient prop- erties of the person, such as temporary mood states. Second, it is generally believed that traits directly influence behaviour. If a person spontaneously breaks into cheerful song, we might ‘explain’ the behaviour by saying that he or she has a happy disposition. Such lay explanations are, of course, on shaky ground because of their circularity. Aristotle suggested a more subtle, reciprocal causal 3 © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-88778-6 - Personality Traits, Third Edition Gerald Matthews, Ian J. Deary and Martha C. Whiteman Excerpt More information 4 the nature of personality traits Table 1.1 Ratings of likeableness of some favourable, neutral and unfavourable traits Favourable traits Neutral traits Unfavourable traits Trait Rating Trait Rating Trait Rating Sincere 5.73 Quiet 3.11 Dishonest 0.41 Honest 5.55 Impulsive 3.07 Cruel 0.40 Understanding 5.49 Changeable 2.97 Mean 0.37 Loyal 547 Conservative 2.95 Phony 0.27 Truthful 5.45 Hesitant 2.90 Liar 0.26 Note Each word was rated on a 0–6 scale by 100 US college students Source Anderson (1968) hypothesis: that it is through actions that dispositions develop, which in turn influence actions. It is by refraining from pleasures that we become temperate, and it is when we have become temperate that we are most able to abstain from pleasures. (Thomson’s, 1976, translation of the Ethics, 1104a: 33–5) One of the major tasks for a scientific psychology of traits is to distinguish internal properties of the person from overt behaviours, and to investigate the causal relationships between them. To avoid circularity, it is essential to seek to identify the underlying physiological, psychological and social bases of traits, which are the true causal influences on behaviour. Scientic conceptions of traits This book places the concept of the trait at centre-stage in the scientific study of human personality, because, ‘if there is to be a speciality called personality, its uniqueandthereforedefiningcharacteristicistraits’(Buss,1989).Thereisalarge gap between the everyday concept of a trait, and a concept that is scientifically useful. Several distinct steps are necessary for developing a science of traits. The firststepisthemeasurementandclassificationoftraits.Thesimplesttechniquefor personality measurement is just to ask the person to rate how well trait adjectives such as those shown in table 1.1 apply to himself or herself. We can also ask questions about behaviours that are thought to relate to personality. Measures of theextraversion–introversiontraittypicallyaskwhetherthepersonenjoysparties, meetingpeopleandothersocialactivities,forexample.Wecanalsohaveaperson whoknowstherespondentwell,suchasaspouseorclosefriend,provideratings ofhisorherpersonality.Traitsneednotbemeasuredsolelybyverbalreport:real- worldactionsandbehaviourinthelaboratorymaybeassessedtoo(Cattell,1973). Wewould expect an extraverted person to belong to many clubs and societies, © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-88778-6 - Personality Traits, Third Edition Gerald Matthews, Ian J. Deary and Martha C. Whiteman Excerpt More information The trait concept and personality theory 5 Table 1.2 Examples of experimental studies showing correspondences between traits and objective behavioural measures Study Trait Behavioural measure Carment, Miles and Cervin Extraversion Moretimespenttalking (1965) Edman,Schalling and Impulsivity Faster reaction time Levander (1983) DeJulio and Duffy (1977) Neuroticism Greater distance from experimenter chosen Ganzer (1968) Test anxiety Moretimespentlooking awayfromthetaskduring testing Newman,Patterson and Psychopathy Morepersistence in gambling Kosson (1987) whenconsistently losing Mehl, Gosling and Extraversion Moretimeinconversation Pennebaker (2006) and less time alone Agreeableness Fewer swear words used Conscientiousness Less time spent at home and moretimeinclass Rhodes and Smith (2006) Extraversion and Morephysical activity Conscientiousness for example. Experimental tests of typically extraverted behaviours may also be devised, such as amount of laughter at jokes and willingness to respond rapidly but inaccurately. In practice, however, personality measures based on objective behaviouraltestshavehadonlylimitedsuccess,andfewhavebeenvalidated(see Kline, 1993). Verbal report has been the preferred method of trait assessment used by personality researchers. Aswehaveseenalready,thereisahugenumberofwordswhichmaybeusedto describe personality. Many of these words have rather similar meanings: precise, careful, meticulous and painstaking would all seem to relate to some common quality of conscientiousness. Such overlapping traits can be grouped together as a broad aspect or dimension of personality. The question then becomes: what is the number of broad dimensions needed to describe the main elements of any individual personality? Much research effort has been devoted to drawing up classificatory schemes of fundamental personality dimensions: estimates of the numberrequired range from three to thirty or so. There is no guarantee that people’s self-descriptions are accurate. The sec- ond step in personality research is to test whether and how traits relate to behaviours. Table 1.2 gives some examples of correlations obtained empirically between personality traits and objectively assessed behavioural measures. In eachcase,thedataimplythattheperson’sself-ratingsorquestionnaireresponses are at least partially accurate. Traits may also be useful in applied settings, in © in this web service Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org
no reviews yet
Please Login to review.