fbpx
Wikipedia

Personality

March 06, 2023

For other uses, see Personality (disambiguation).
Not to be confused with Personally.

Personality is a structure gathering interrelated behavioral, cognitive and emotional patterns that biological and environmental factors influence; these interrelated patterns are relatively stable over time periods, but they change over the entire lifetime.[1][2] While there is no generally agreed-upon definition of personality, most theories focus on motivation and psychological interactions with the environment one is surrounded by.[3] Trait-based personality theories, such as those defined by Raymond Cattell, define personality as traits that predict an individual's behavior. On the other hand, more behaviorally-based approaches define personality through learning and habits. Nevertheless, most theories view personality as relatively stable.[1]

The study of the psychology of personality, called personality psychology, attempts to explain the tendencies that underlie differences in behavior. Psychologists have taken many different approaches to the study of personality, including biological, cognitive, learning, and trait-based theories, as well as psychodynamic, and humanistic approaches. The various approaches used to study personality today reflect the influence of the first theorists in the field, a group that includes Sigmund Freud, Alfred Adler, Gordon Allport, Hans Eysenck, Abraham Maslow, and Carl Rogers.

Measuring

Personality can be determined through a variety of tests. Due to the fact that personality is a complex idea, the dimensions of personality and scales of such tests vary and often are poorly defined. Two main tools to measure personality are objective tests and projective measures. Examples of such tests are the: Big Five Inventory (BFI), Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI-2), Rorschach Inkblot test, Neurotic Personality Questionnaire KON-2006,[4] or Eysenck's Personality Questionnaire (EPQ-R). All of these tests are beneficial because they have both reliability and validity, two factors that make a test accurate. "Each item should be influenced to a degree by the underlying trait construct, giving rise to a pattern of positive intercorrelations so long as all items are oriented (worded) in the same direction."[5] A recent, but not well-known, measuring tool that psychologists use is the 16PF. It measures personality based on Cattell's 16-factor theory of personality. Psychologists also use it as a clinical measuring tool to diagnose psychiatric disorders and help with prognosis and therapy planning.[6]

Personality is frequently broken into factors or dimensions, statistically extracted from large questionnaires through factor analysis. When brought back to two dimensions, often the dimensions of introvert-extrovert and neuroticism (emotionally unstable-stable) are used as first proposed by Eysenck in the 1960s.[7]

Five-factor inventory

Many factor analyses found what is called the Big Five, which are openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism (or emotional stability), known as "OCEAN". These components are generally stable over time, and about half of the variance appears to be attributable to a person's genetics rather than the effects of one's environment.[8][9]

Some research has investigated whether the relationship between happiness and extraversion seen in adults also can be seen in children. The implications of these findings can help identify children who are more likely to experience episodes of depression and develop types of treatment that such children are likely to respond to. In both children and adults, research shows that genetics, as opposed to environmental factors, exert a greater influence on happiness levels. Personality is not stable over the course of a lifetime, but it changes much more quickly during childhood, so personality constructs in children are referred to as temperament. Temperament is regarded as the precursor to personality.[10]

Another interesting finding has been the link found between acting extraverted and positive affect. Extraverted behaviors include acting talkative, assertive, adventurous, and outgoing. For the purposes of this study, positive affect is defined as experiences of happy and enjoyable emotions.[11] This study investigated the effects of acting in a way that is counter to a person's dispositional nature. In other words, the study focused on the benefits and drawbacks of introverts (people who are shy, socially inhibited, and non-aggressive) acting extraverted, and of extraverts acting introverted. After acting extraverted, introverts' experience of positive affect increased[11] whereas extraverts seemed to experience lower levels of positive affect and suffered from the phenomenon of ego depletion. Ego depletion, or cognitive fatigue, is the use of one's energy to overtly act in a way that is contrary to one's inner disposition. When people act in a contrary fashion, they divert most, if not all, (cognitive) energy toward regulating this foreign style of behavior and attitudes. Because all available energy is being used to maintain this contrary behavior, the result is an inability to use any energy to make important or difficult decisions, plan for the future, control or regulate emotions, or perform effectively on other cognitive tasks.[11]

One question that has been posed is why extroverts tend to be happier than introverts. The two types of explanations that attempt to account for this difference are instrumental theories and temperamental theories.[8] The instrumental theory suggests that extraverts end up making choices that place them in more positive situations and they also react more strongly than introverts to positive situations. The temperamental theory suggests that extroverts have a disposition that generally leads them to experience a higher degree of positive affect. In their study of extraversion, Lucas and Baird[8] found no statistically significant support for the instrumental theory but did, however, find that extraverts generally experience a higher level of positive affect.

Research has been done to uncover some of the mediators that are responsible for the correlation between extraversion and happiness. Self-esteem and self-efficacy are two such mediators.

Self-efficacy is one's belief about abilities to perform up to personal standards, the ability to produce desired results, and the feeling of having some ability to make important life decisions.[12] Self-efficacy has been found to be related to the personality traits of extraversion and subjective well-being.[12]

Self-efficacy, however, only partially mediates the relationship between extraversion (and neuroticism) and subjective happiness.[12] This implies that there are most likely other factors that mediate the relationship between subjective happiness and personality traits. Self-esteem maybe another similar factor. Individuals with a greater degree of confidence about themselves and their abilities seem to have both higher degrees of subjective well-being and higher levels of extraversion.[13]

Other research has examined the phenomenon of mood maintenance as another possible mediator. Mood maintenance is the ability to maintain one's average level of happiness in the face of an ambiguous situation – meaning a situation that has the potential to engender either positive or negative emotions in different individuals. It has been found to be a stronger force in extroverts.[14] This means that the happiness levels of extraverted individuals are less susceptible to the influence of external events. This finding implies that extraverts' positive moods last longer than those of introverts.[14]

Developmental biological model

Modern conceptions of personality, such as the Temperament and Character Inventory have suggested four basic temperaments that are thought to reflect basic and automatic responses to danger and reward that rely on associative learning. The four temperaments, harm avoidance, reward dependence, novelty-seeking and persistence, are somewhat analogous to ancient conceptions of melancholic, sanguine, choleric, phlegmatic personality types, although the temperaments reflect dimensions rather than distance categories.

The harm avoidance trait has been associated with increased reactivity in insular and amygdala salience networks, as well as reduced 5-HT2 receptor binding peripherally, and reduced GABA concentrations. Novelty seeking has been associated with reduced activity in insular salience networks increased striatal connectivity. Novelty seeking correlates with dopamine synthesis capacity in the striatum and reduced auto receptor availability in the midbrain. Reward dependence has been linked with the oxytocin system, with increased concentration of plasma oxytocin being observed, as well as increased volume in oxytocin-related regions of the hypothalamus. Persistence has been associated with increased striatal-mPFC connectivity, increased activation of ventral striatal-orbitofrontal-anterior cingulate circuits, as well as increased salivary amylase levels indicative of increased noradrenergic tone.[15]

Environmental influences

It has been shown that personality traits are more malleable by environmental influences than researchers originally believed.[9][16] Personality differences predict the occurrence of life experiences.[16]

One study has shown how the home environment, specifically the types of parents a person has, can affect and shape their personality. Mary Ainsworth's strange situation experiment showcased how babies reacted to having their mother leave them alone in a room with a stranger. The different styles of attachment, labeled by Ainsworth, were Secure, Ambivalent, avoidant, and disorganized. Children who were securely attached tend to be more trusting, sociable, and are confident in their day-to-day life. Children who were disorganized were reported to have higher levels of anxiety, anger, and risk-taking behavior.[17]

Judith Rich Harris's group socialization theory postulates that an individual's peer groups, rather than parental figures, are the primary influence of personality and behavior in adulthood. Intra- and intergroup processes, not dyadic relationships such as parent-child relationships, are responsible for the transmission of culture and for environmental modification of children's personality characteristics. Thus, this theory points at the peer group representing the environmental influence on a child's personality rather than the parental style or home environment.[18]

Tessuya Kawamoto's Personality Change from Life Experiences: Moderation Effect of Attachment Security talked about some significant laboratory tests. The study mainly focused on the effects of life experiences on change in personality and life experiences. The assessments suggested that "the accumulation of small daily experiences may work for the personality development of university students and that environmental influences may vary by individual susceptibility to experiences, like attachment security".[19]

Some studies suggest that a shared family environment between siblings has less influence on personality than individual experiences of each child. Identical twins have similar personalities largely because they share the same genetic makeup rather than their shared environment.[20]

Cross-cultural studies

There has been some recent debate over the subject of studying personality in a different culture. Some people think that personality comes entirely from culture and therefore there can be no meaningful study in cross-culture study. On the other hand, many believe that some elements are shared by all cultures and an effort is being made to demonstrate the cross-cultural applicability of "the Big Five".[21]

Cross-cultural assessment depends on the universality of personality traits, which is whether there are common traits among humans regardless of culture or other factors. If there is a common foundation of personality, then it can be studied on the basis of human traits rather than within certain cultures. This can be measured by comparing whether assessment tools are measuring similar constructs across countries or cultures. Two approaches to researching personality are looking at emic and etic traits. Emic traits are constructs unique to each culture, which are determined by local customs, thoughts, beliefs, and characteristics. Etic traits are considered universal constructs, which establish traits that are evident across cultures that represent a biological basis of human personality.[22] If personality traits are unique to the individual culture, then different traits should be apparent in different cultures. However, the idea that personality traits are universal across cultures is supported by establishing the Five-Factor Model of personality across multiple translations of the NEO-PI-R, which is one of the most widely used personality measures.[23] When administering the NEO-PI-R to 7,134 people across six languages, the results show a similar pattern of the same five underlying constructs that are found in the American factor structure.[23]

Similar results were found using the Big Five Inventory (BFI), as it was administered in 56 nations across 28 languages. The five factors continued to be supported both conceptually and statistically across major regions of the world, suggesting that these underlying factors are common across cultures.[24] There are some differences across culture, but they may be a consequence of using a lexical approach to study personality structures, as language has limitations in translation and different cultures have unique words to describe emotion or situations.[23] Differences across cultures could be due to real cultural differences, but they could also be consequences of poor translations, biased sampling, or differences in response styles across cultures.[24] Examining personality questionnaires developed within a culture can also be useful evidence for the universality of traits across cultures, as the same underlying factors can still be found.[25] Results from several European and Asian studies have found overlapping dimensions with the Five-Factor Model as well as additional culture-unique dimensions.[25] Finding similar factors across cultures provides support for the universality of personality trait structure, but more research is necessary to gain stronger support.[23]

Historical development of concept

The modern sense of individual personality is a result of the shifts in culture originating in the Renaissance, an essential element in modernity. In contrast, the Medieval European's sense of self was linked to a network of social roles: "the household, the Kinship network, the guild, the corporation – these were the building blocks of personhood". Stephen Greenblatt observes, in recounting the recovery (1417) and career of Lucretius' poem De rerum natura: "at the core of the poem lay key principles of a modern understanding of the world."[26] "Dependent on the family, the individual alone was nothing," Jacques Gélis observes.[27] "The characteristic mark of the modern man has two parts: one internal, the other external; one dealing with his environment, the other with his attitudes, values, and feelings."[28] Rather than being linked to a network of social roles, the modern man is largely influenced by the environmental factors such as: "urbanization, education, mass communication, industrialization, and politicization."[28] In 2006, for example, scientists reported a relationship between personality and political views as follows: "Preschool children who 20 years later were relatively liberal were characterized as: developing close relationships, self-reliant, energetic, somewhat dominating, relatively under-controlled, and resilient. Preschool children subsequently relatively conservative at age 23 were described as: feeling easily victimized, easily offended, indecisive, fearful, rigid, inhibited, and relatively over-controlled and vulnerable."[29]

Temperament and philosophy

 
William James (1842–1910)

William James (1842–1910) argued that temperament explains a great deal of the controversies in the history of philosophy by arguing that it is a very influential premise in the arguments of philosophers. Despite seeking only impersonal reasons for their conclusions, James argued, the temperament of philosophers influenced their philosophy. Temperament thus conceived is tantamount to a bias. Such bias, James explained, was a consequence of the trust philosophers place in their own temperament. James thought the significance of his observation lay on the premise that in philosophy an objective measure of success is whether philosophy is peculiar to its philosopher or not, and whether a philosopher is dissatisfied with any other way of seeing things or not.[30]

Mental make-up

James argued that temperament may be the basis of several divisions in academia, but focused on philosophy in his 1907 lectures on Pragmatism. In fact, James' lecture of 1907 fashioned a sort of trait theory of the empiricist and rationalist camps of philosophy. As in most modern trait theories, the traits of each camp are described by James as distinct and opposite, and maybe possessed in different proportions on a continuum, and thus characterize the personality of philosophers of each camp. The "mental make-up" (i.e. personality) of rationalist philosophers is described as "tender-minded" and "going by "principles", and that of empiricist philosophers is described as "tough-minded" and "going by "facts." James distinguishes each not only in terms of the philosophical claims they made in 1907, but by arguing that such claims are made primarily on the basis of temperament. Furthermore, such categorization was only incidental to James' purpose of explaining his pragmatist philosophy and is not exhaustive.[30]

Empiricists and rationalists

 
John Locke (1632–1704)

According to James, the temperament of rationalist philosophers differed fundamentally from the temperament of empiricist philosophers of his day. The tendency of rationalist philosophers toward refinement and superficiality never satisfied an empiricist temper of mind. Rationalism leads to the creation of closed systems, and such optimism is considered shallow by the fact-loving mind, for whom perfection is far off.[31] Rationalism is regarded as pretension, and a temperament most inclined to abstraction.[32]

Empiricists, on the other hand, stick with the external senses rather than logic. British empiricist John Locke's (1632–1704) explanation of personal identity provides an example of what James referred to. Locke explains the identity of a person, i.e. personality, on the basis of a precise definition of identity, by which the meaning of identity differs according to what it is being applied to. The identity of a person is quite distinct from the identity of a man, woman, or substance according to Locke. Locke concludes that consciousness is personality because it "always accompanies thinking, it is that which makes everyone to be what he calls self,"[33] and remains constant in different places at different times.

 
Benedictus Spinoza (1632–1677)

Rationalists conceived of the identity of persons differently than empiricists such as Locke who distinguished identity of substance, person, and life. According to Locke, Rene Descartes (1596–1650) agreed only insofar as he did not argue that one immaterial spirit is the basis of the person "for fear of making brutes thinking things too."[34] According to James, Locke tolerated arguments that a soul was behind the consciousness of any person. However, Locke's successor David Hume (1711–1776), and empirical psychologists after him denied the soul except for being a term to describe the cohesion of inner lives.[30] However, some research suggests Hume excluded personal identity from his opus An Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding because he thought his argument was sufficient but not compelling.[35] Descartes himself distinguished active and passive faculties of mind, each contributing to thinking and consciousness in different ways. The passive faculty, Descartes argued, simply receives, whereas the active faculty produces and forms ideas, but does not presuppose thought, and thus cannot be within the thinking thing. The active faculty mustn't be within self because ideas are produced without any awareness of them, and are sometimes produced against one's will.[36]

Rationalist philosopher Benedictus Spinoza (1632–1677) argued that ideas are the first element constituting the human mind, but existed only for actually existing things.[37] In other words, ideas of non-existent things are without meaning for Spinoza, because an idea of a non-existent thing cannot exist. Further, Spinoza's rationalism argued that the mind does not know itself, except insofar as it perceives the "ideas of the modifications of body", in describing its external perceptions, or perceptions from without. On the contrary, from within, Spinoza argued, perceptions connect various ideas clearly and distinctly.[38] The mind is not the free cause of its actions for Spinoza.[39] Spinoza equates the will with the understanding and explains the common distinction of these things as being two different things as an error which results from the individual's misunderstanding of the nature of thinking.[40]

Biology

The biological basis of personality is the theory that anatomical structures located in the brain contribute to personality traits. This stems from neuropsychology, which studies how the structure of the brain relates to various psychological processes and behaviors. For instance, in human beings, the frontal lobes are responsible for foresight and anticipation, and the occipital lobes are responsible for processing visual information. In addition, certain physiological functions such as hormone secretion also affect personality. For example, the hormone testosterone is important for sociability, affectivity, aggressiveness, and sexuality.[21] Additionally, studies show that the expression of a personality trait depends on the volume of the brain cortex it is associated with.[41]

Personology

Personology confers a multidimensional, complex, and comprehensive approach to personality. According to Henry A. Murray, personology is:

The branch of psychology which concerns itself with the study of human lives and the factors that influence their course which investigates individual differences and types of personality ... the science of men, taken as gross units ... encompassing "psychoanalysis" (Freud), "analytical psychology" (Jung), "individual psychology" (Adler) and other terms that stand for methods of inquiry or doctrines rather than realms of knowledge.[42]

From a holistic perspective, personology studies personality as a whole, as a system, but at the same time through all its components, levels, and spheres.[43][44]

See also

 
Look up personality in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

References

  1. ^ a b Corr, Philip J.; Matthews, Gerald (2009). The Cambridge handbook of personality psychology (1. publ. ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-86218-9.
  2. ^ Khazan, Olga (March 2022). "My Personality Transplant". The Atlantic. 329 (2).
  3. ^ Sadock, Benjamin; Sadock, Virginia; Ruiz, Pedro (2017). Kaplan and Sadock's Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry. Wolters Kluwer. ISBN 978-1-4511-0047-1.
  4. ^ Aleksandrowicz JW, Klasa K, Sobański JA, Stolarska D (2009). "KON-2006 Neurotic Personality Questionnaire" (PDF). Archives of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. 1: 21–22.
  5. ^ Hogan, Joyce; Ones, Deniz S. (1997). "Conscientiousness and Integrity at Work". Handbook of Personality Psychology. pp. 849–870. doi:10.1016/b978-012134645-4/50033-0. ISBN 9780121346454.
  6. ^ Denis, McKim (2017-11-30). Boundless dominion : providence, politics, and the early Canadian presbyterian worldview. Montreal. ISBN 978-0-7735-5240-1. OCLC 1015239877.[page needed]
  7. ^ Eysenck, Hans Jurgen (2006). The biological basis of personality. Transaction Publishers. ISBN 1-4128-0554-6. OCLC 61178246.
  8. ^ a b c Lucas, Richard E.; Baird, Brendan M. (2004). "Extraversion and Emotional Reactivity". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 86 (3): 473–485. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.86.3.473. PMID 15008650.
  9. ^ a b Briley, Daniel A.; Tucker-Drob, Elliot M. (2014). "Genetic and environmental continuity in personality development: A meta-analysis". Psychological Bulletin. 140 (5): 1303–1331. doi:10.1037/a0037091. PMC 4152379. PMID 24956122.
  10. ^ Holder, Mark D.; Klassen, Andrea (13 June 2009). "Temperament and Happiness in Children". Journal of Happiness Studies. 11 (4): 419–439. doi:10.1007/s10902-009-9149-2. S2CID 145541419.
  11. ^ a b c Zelenski, John M.; Santoro, Maya S.; Whelan, Deanna C. (2012). "Would introverts be better off if they acted more like extraverts? Exploring emotional and cognitive consequences of counter-dispositional behavior". Emotion. 12 (2): 290–303. doi:10.1037/a0025169. PMID 21859197.
  12. ^ a b c Strobel, Maria; Tumasjan, Andranik; Spörrle, Matthias (February 2011). "Be yourself, believe in yourself, and be happy: Self-efficacy as a mediator between personality factors and subjective well-being". Scandinavian Journal of Psychology. 52 (1): 43–48. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9450.2010.00826.x. PMID 20497398. S2CID 44632456.
  13. ^ Joshanloo, Mohsen; Afshari, Samaneh (26 November 2009). "Big Five Personality Traits and Self-Esteem as Predictors of Life Satisfaction in Iranian Muslim University Students". Journal of Happiness Studies. 12 (1): 105–113. doi:10.1007/s10902-009-9177-y. S2CID 144459533.
  14. ^ a b Lischetzke, Tanja; Eid, Michael (August 2006). "Why Extraverts Are Happier Than Introverts: The Role of Mood Regulation". Journal of Personality. 74 (4): 1127–1162. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.2006.00405.x. PMID 16787431.
  15. ^ Sadock, Benjamin J.; Sadock, Virginia A.; Ruiz, Pedro (June 2017). "Personality Disorders". In Cloninger, R; Svrakic, D (eds.). Kaplan and Sadock's Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry. Wolter Kluwer. ISBN 978-1-4511-0047-1.[page needed]
  16. ^ a b Jeronimus, Bertus F.; Riese, Harriëtte; Sanderman, Robbert; Ormel, Johan (2014). "Mutual reinforcement between neuroticism and life experiences: A five-wave, 16-year study to test reciprocal causation". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 107 (4): 751–764. doi:10.1037/a0037009. PMID 25111305.
  17. ^ Kail, Robert; Barnfield, Anne (2014). Children and Their Development. Pearson. ISBN 978-0-205-99302-4.[page needed]
  18. ^ Harris, Judith Rich (1995). "Where is the child's environment? A group socialization theory of development". Psychological Review. 102 (3): 458–489. doi:10.1037/0033-295x.102.3.458.
  19. ^ Kawamoto, Tetsuya (April 2016). "Personality Change from Life Experiences: Moderation Effect of Attachment Security". Japanese Psychological Research. 58 (2): 218–231. doi:10.1111/jpr.12110.
  20. ^ "The Role of the Environment in Shaping Personality". The Great Courses Daily. December 27, 2019.
  21. ^ a b Funder, David C. (February 2001). "Personality". Annual Review of Psychology. 52 (1): 197–221. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.197. PMID 11148304.
  22. ^ McCrae, R.R., & Allik, I.U. (2002). The five-factor model of personality across cultures. Springer Science & Business Media.[page needed]
  23. ^ a b c d McCrae, Robert R.; Costa, Paul T. (1997). "Personality trait structure as a human universal". American Psychologist. 52 (5): 509–516. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.52.5.509. PMID 9145021.
  24. ^ a b Schmitt, David P.; Allik, Jüri; McCrae, Robert R.; Benet-Martínez, Verónica (26 July 2016). "The Geographic Distribution of Big Five Personality Traits". Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology. 38 (2): 173–212. doi:10.1177/0022022106297299. hdl:20.500.12724/2395. S2CID 86619840.
  25. ^ a b Church, A. Timothy (August 2000). "Culture and Personality: Toward an Integrated Cultural Trait Psychology". Journal of Personality. 68 (4): 651–703. doi:10.1111/1467-6494.00112. PMID 10934686.
  26. ^ Greenblatt, Stephen (2011). The swerve : how the world became modern. W.W. Norton. ISBN 978-0-393-08338-5. OCLC 755097082.
  27. ^ Gélis (1989). "The Child: from anonymity to individuality". In Ariès, Philippe; Duby, Georges (eds.). A History of Private Life III: Passions of the Renaissance. p. 309.
  28. ^ a b Inkeles, Alex; Smith, David H. (1974). Becoming Modern. doi:10.4159/harvard.9780674499348. ISBN 978-0-674-49934-8.[page needed]
  29. ^ Block, Jack; Block, Jeanne H. (October 2006). "Nursery school personality and political orientation two decades later" (PDF). Journal of Research in Personality. 40 (5): 734–749. doi:10.1016/j.jrp.2005.09.005. Retrieved 22 February 2022.
  30. ^ a b c James, William (1970). Pragmatism and Other Essays. New York: Washington Square Press.
  31. ^ James, William (1970). Pragmatism and other essays. New York: Washington Square Press. p. 16.
  32. ^ James, William (1970). Pragmatism and other essays. New York: Washington Square Press. p. 32.
  33. ^ Locke, John (1974). An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Toronto: Random House.[page needed]
  34. ^ James, William (1970). Pragmatism and other essays. New York: Washington Square Press. p. 69.
  35. ^ Hume, David (1955). An Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding. US: Liberal Arts Press Inc.[page needed]
  36. ^ Descartes, Rene (1974). Meditations on the First Philosophy. New York: Anchor Books.[page needed]
  37. ^ Spinoza, Benedictus (1974). The Ethics (The Rationalists ed.). New York: Anchor Books.
  38. ^ Spinoza, Benedictus (1974). The Ethics (The Rationalists ed.). New York: Random House. p. 241.
  39. ^ Spinoza, Benedictus (1974). The Ethics (The Rationalists ed.). New York: Random House. p. 253.
  40. ^ Spinoza, Benedictus (1974). The Ethics (The Rationalists ed.). New York: Random House. p. 256.
  41. ^ DeYoung, Colin G.; Hirsh, Jacob B.; Shane, Matthew S.; Papademetris, Xenophon; Rajeevan, Nallakkandi; Gray, Jeremy R. (30 April 2010). "Testing Predictions From Personality Neuroscience". Psychological Science. 21 (6): 820–828. doi:10.1177/0956797610370159. PMC 3049165. PMID 20435951.
  42. ^ Explorations in personality. Murray, Henry A. (Henry Alexander), 1893–1988., Harvard University. Harvard Psychological Clinic. (70th anniversary ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2008. ISBN 978-0-19-804152-8. OCLC 219738947.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: others (link)[page needed]
  43. ^ Murray, H.A. (1938). Explorations in Personality. New York: Oxford University Press.[page needed]
  44. ^ Strack, S. (2005). Handbook of Personology and Psychopathology. Wiley[page needed]

Further reading

  • Bornstein, Robert F. (2006). "A Freudian construct lost and reclaimed: The psychodynamics of personality pathology". Psychoanalytic Psychology. 23 (2): 339–353. doi:10.1037/0736-9735.23.2.339.
  • Kwon, Paul (August 1999). "Attributional Style and Psychodynamic Defense Mechanisms: Toward an Integrative Model of Depression". Journal of Personality. 67 (4): 645–658. doi:10.1111/1467-6494.00068. PMID 10444853.
  • Prunas, Antonio; Di Pierro, Rossella; Huemer, Julia; Tagini, Angela (January 2019). "Defense mechanisms, remembered parental caregiving, and adult attachment style". Psychoanalytic Psychology. 36 (1): 64–72. doi:10.1037/pap0000158. S2CID 148867764.

March 06, 2023
personality, other, uses, disambiguation, confused, with, personally, structure, gathering, interrelated, behavioral, cognitive, emotional, patterns, that, biological, environmental, factors, influence, these, interrelated, patterns, relatively, stable, over, . For other uses see Personality disambiguation Not to be confused with Personally Personality is a structure gathering interrelated behavioral cognitive and emotional patterns that biological and environmental factors influence these interrelated patterns are relatively stable over time periods but they change over the entire lifetime 1 2 While there is no generally agreed upon definition of personality most theories focus on motivation and psychological interactions with the environment one is surrounded by 3 Trait based personality theories such as those defined by Raymond Cattell define personality as traits that predict an individual s behavior On the other hand more behaviorally based approaches define personality through learning and habits Nevertheless most theories view personality as relatively stable 1 The study of the psychology of personality called personality psychology attempts to explain the tendencies that underlie differences in behavior Psychologists have taken many different approaches to the study of personality including biological cognitive learning and trait based theories as well as psychodynamic and humanistic approaches The various approaches used to study personality today reflect the influence of the first theorists in the field a group that includes Sigmund Freud Alfred Adler Gordon Allport Hans Eysenck Abraham Maslow and Carl Rogers Contents 1 Measuring 1 1 Five factor inventory 2 Developmental biological model 3 Environmental influences 4 Cross cultural studies 5 Historical development of concept 6 Temperament and philosophy 6 1 Mental make up 6 2 Empiricists and rationalists 7 Biology 8 Personology 9 See also 10 References 11 Further readingMeasuring EditPersonality can be determined through a variety of tests Due to the fact that personality is a complex idea the dimensions of personality and scales of such tests vary and often are poorly defined Two main tools to measure personality are objective tests and projective measures Examples of such tests are the Big Five Inventory BFI Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory MMPI 2 Rorschach Inkblot test Neurotic Personality Questionnaire KON 2006 4 or Eysenck s Personality Questionnaire EPQ R All of these tests are beneficial because they have both reliability and validity two factors that make a test accurate Each item should be influenced to a degree by the underlying trait construct giving rise to a pattern of positive intercorrelations so long as all items are oriented worded in the same direction 5 A recent but not well known measuring tool that psychologists use is the 16PF It measures personality based on Cattell s 16 factor theory of personality Psychologists also use it as a clinical measuring tool to diagnose psychiatric disorders and help with prognosis and therapy planning 6 Personality is frequently broken into factors or dimensions statistically extracted from large questionnaires through factor analysis When brought back to two dimensions often the dimensions of introvert extrovert and neuroticism emotionally unstable stable are used as first proposed by Eysenck in the 1960s 7 Five factor inventory Edit The Big Five personality traits Many factor analyses found what is called the Big Five which are openness to experience conscientiousness extraversion agreeableness and neuroticism or emotional stability known as OCEAN These components are generally stable over time and about half of the variance appears to be attributable to a person s genetics rather than the effects of one s environment 8 9 Some research has investigated whether the relationship between happiness and extraversion seen in adults also can be seen in children The implications of these findings can help identify children who are more likely to experience episodes of depression and develop types of treatment that such children are likely to respond to In both children and adults research shows that genetics as opposed to environmental factors exert a greater influence on happiness levels Personality is not stable over the course of a lifetime but it changes much more quickly during childhood so personality constructs in children are referred to as temperament Temperament is regarded as the precursor to personality 10 Another interesting finding has been the link found between acting extraverted and positive affect Extraverted behaviors include acting talkative assertive adventurous and outgoing For the purposes of this study positive affect is defined as experiences of happy and enjoyable emotions 11 This study investigated the effects of acting in a way that is counter to a person s dispositional nature In other words the study focused on the benefits and drawbacks of introverts people who are shy socially inhibited and non aggressive acting extraverted and of extraverts acting introverted After acting extraverted introverts experience of positive affect increased 11 whereas extraverts seemed to experience lower levels of positive affect and suffered from the phenomenon of ego depletion Ego depletion or cognitive fatigue is the use of one s energy to overtly act in a way that is contrary to one s inner disposition When people act in a contrary fashion they divert most if not all cognitive energy toward regulating this foreign style of behavior and attitudes Because all available energy is being used to maintain this contrary behavior the result is an inability to use any energy to make important or difficult decisions plan for the future control or regulate emotions or perform effectively on other cognitive tasks 11 One question that has been posed is why extroverts tend to be happier than introverts The two types of explanations that attempt to account for this difference are instrumental theories and temperamental theories 8 The instrumental theory suggests that extraverts end up making choices that place them in more positive situations and they also react more strongly than introverts to positive situations The temperamental theory suggests that extroverts have a disposition that generally leads them to experience a higher degree of positive affect In their study of extraversion Lucas and Baird 8 found no statistically significant support for the instrumental theory but did however find that extraverts generally experience a higher level of positive affect Research has been done to uncover some of the mediators that are responsible for the correlation between extraversion and happiness Self esteem and self efficacy are two such mediators Self efficacy is one s belief about abilities to perform up to personal standards the ability to produce desired results and the feeling of having some ability to make important life decisions 12 Self efficacy has been found to be related to the personality traits of extraversion and subjective well being 12 Self efficacy however only partially mediates the relationship between extraversion and neuroticism and subjective happiness 12 This implies that there are most likely other factors that mediate the relationship between subjective happiness and personality traits Self esteem maybe another similar factor Individuals with a greater degree of confidence about themselves and their abilities seem to have both higher degrees of subjective well being and higher levels of extraversion 13 Other research has examined the phenomenon of mood maintenance as another possible mediator Mood maintenance is the ability to maintain one s average level of happiness in the face of an ambiguous situation meaning a situation that has the potential to engender either positive or negative emotions in different individuals It has been found to be a stronger force in extroverts 14 This means that the happiness levels of extraverted individuals are less susceptible to the influence of external events This finding implies that extraverts positive moods last longer than those of introverts 14 Developmental biological model EditModern conceptions of personality such as the Temperament and Character Inventory have suggested four basic temperaments that are thought to reflect basic and automatic responses to danger and reward that rely on associative learning The four temperaments harm avoidance reward dependence novelty seeking and persistence are somewhat analogous to ancient conceptions of melancholic sanguine choleric phlegmatic personality types although the temperaments reflect dimensions rather than distance categories The harm avoidance trait has been associated with increased reactivity in insular and amygdala salience networks as well as reduced 5 HT2 receptor binding peripherally and reduced GABA concentrations Novelty seeking has been associated with reduced activity in insular salience networks increased striatal connectivity Novelty seeking correlates with dopamine synthesis capacity in the striatum and reduced auto receptor availability in the midbrain Reward dependence has been linked with the oxytocin system with increased concentration of plasma oxytocin being observed as well as increased volume in oxytocin related regions of the hypothalamus Persistence has been associated with increased striatal mPFC connectivity increased activation of ventral striatal orbitofrontal anterior cingulate circuits as well as increased salivary amylase levels indicative of increased noradrenergic tone 15 Environmental influences EditIt has been shown that personality traits are more malleable by environmental influences than researchers originally believed 9 16 Personality differences predict the occurrence of life experiences 16 One study has shown how the home environment specifically the types of parents a person has can affect and shape their personality Mary Ainsworth s strange situation experiment showcased how babies reacted to having their mother leave them alone in a room with a stranger The different styles of attachment labeled by Ainsworth were Secure Ambivalent avoidant and disorganized Children who were securely attached tend to be more trusting sociable and are confident in their day to day life Children who were disorganized were reported to have higher levels of anxiety anger and risk taking behavior 17 Judith Rich Harris s group socialization theory postulates that an individual s peer groups rather than parental figures are the primary influence of personality and behavior in adulthood Intra and intergroup processes not dyadic relationships such as parent child relationships are responsible for the transmission of culture and for environmental modification of children s personality characteristics Thus this theory points at the peer group representing the environmental influence on a child s personality rather than the parental style or home environment 18 Tessuya Kawamoto s Personality Change from Life Experiences Moderation Effect of Attachment Security talked about some significant laboratory tests The study mainly focused on the effects of life experiences on change in personality and life experiences The assessments suggested that the accumulation of small daily experiences may work for the personality development of university students and that environmental influences may vary by individual susceptibility to experiences like attachment security 19 Some studies suggest that a shared family environment between siblings has less influence on personality than individual experiences of each child Identical twins have similar personalities largely because they share the same genetic makeup rather than their shared environment 20 Cross cultural studies EditThere has been some recent debate over the subject of studying personality in a different culture Some people think that personality comes entirely from culture and therefore there can be no meaningful study in cross culture study On the other hand many believe that some elements are shared by all cultures and an effort is being made to demonstrate the cross cultural applicability of the Big Five 21 Cross cultural assessment depends on the universality of personality traits which is whether there are common traits among humans regardless of culture or other factors If there is a common foundation of personality then it can be studied on the basis of human traits rather than within certain cultures This can be measured by comparing whether assessment tools are measuring similar constructs across countries or cultures Two approaches to researching personality are looking at emic and etic traits Emic traits are constructs unique to each culture which are determined by local customs thoughts beliefs and characteristics Etic traits are considered universal constructs which establish traits that are evident across cultures that represent a biological basis of human personality 22 If personality traits are unique to the individual culture then different traits should be apparent in different cultures However the idea that personality traits are universal across cultures is supported by establishing the Five Factor Model of personality across multiple translations of the NEO PI R which is one of the most widely used personality measures 23 When administering the NEO PI R to 7 134 people across six languages the results show a similar pattern of the same five underlying constructs that are found in the American factor structure 23 Similar results were found using the Big Five Inventory BFI as it was administered in 56 nations across 28 languages The five factors continued to be supported both conceptually and statistically across major regions of the world suggesting that these underlying factors are common across cultures 24 There are some differences across culture but they may be a consequence of using a lexical approach to study personality structures as language has limitations in translation and different cultures have unique words to describe emotion or situations 23 Differences across cultures could be due to real cultural differences but they could also be consequences of poor translations biased sampling or differences in response styles across cultures 24 Examining personality questionnaires developed within a culture can also be useful evidence for the universality of traits across cultures as the same underlying factors can still be found 25 Results from several European and Asian studies have found overlapping dimensions with the Five Factor Model as well as additional culture unique dimensions 25 Finding similar factors across cultures provides support for the universality of personality trait structure but more research is necessary to gain stronger support 23 Historical development of concept EditThe modern sense of individual personality is a result of the shifts in culture originating in the Renaissance an essential element in modernity In contrast the Medieval European s sense of self was linked to a network of social roles the household the Kinship network the guild the corporation these were the building blocks of personhood Stephen Greenblatt observes in recounting the recovery 1417 and career of Lucretius poem De rerum natura at the core of the poem lay key principles of a modern understanding of the world 26 Dependent on the family the individual alone was nothing Jacques Gelis observes 27 The characteristic mark of the modern man has two parts one internal the other external one dealing with his environment the other with his attitudes values and feelings 28 Rather than being linked to a network of social roles the modern man is largely influenced by the environmental factors such as urbanization education mass communication industrialization and politicization 28 In 2006 for example scientists reported a relationship between personality and political views as follows Preschool children who 20 years later were relatively liberal were characterized as developing close relationships self reliant energetic somewhat dominating relatively under controlled and resilient Preschool children subsequently relatively conservative at age 23 were described as feeling easily victimized easily offended indecisive fearful rigid inhibited and relatively over controlled and vulnerable 29 Temperament and philosophy Edit William James 1842 1910 William James 1842 1910 argued that temperament explains a great deal of the controversies in the history of philosophy by arguing that it is a very influential premise in the arguments of philosophers Despite seeking only impersonal reasons for their conclusions James argued the temperament of philosophers influenced their philosophy Temperament thus conceived is tantamount to a bias Such bias James explained was a consequence of the trust philosophers place in their own temperament James thought the significance of his observation lay on the premise that in philosophy an objective measure of success is whether philosophy is peculiar to its philosopher or not and whether a philosopher is dissatisfied with any other way of seeing things or not 30 Mental make up Edit James argued that temperament may be the basis of several divisions in academia but focused on philosophy in his 1907 lectures on Pragmatism In fact James lecture of 1907 fashioned a sort of trait theory of the empiricist and rationalist camps of philosophy As in most modern trait theories the traits of each camp are described by James as distinct and opposite and maybe possessed in different proportions on a continuum and thus characterize the personality of philosophers of each camp The mental make up i e personality of rationalist philosophers is described as tender minded and going by principles and that of empiricist philosophers is described as tough minded and going by facts James distinguishes each not only in terms of the philosophical claims they made in 1907 but by arguing that such claims are made primarily on the basis of temperament Furthermore such categorization was only incidental to James purpose of explaining his pragmatist philosophy and is not exhaustive 30 Empiricists and rationalists Edit John Locke 1632 1704 According to James the temperament of rationalist philosophers differed fundamentally from the temperament of empiricist philosophers of his day The tendency of rationalist philosophers toward refinement and superficiality never satisfied an empiricist temper of mind Rationalism leads to the creation of closed systems and such optimism is considered shallow by the fact loving mind for whom perfection is far off 31 Rationalism is regarded as pretension and a temperament most inclined to abstraction 32 Empiricists on the other hand stick with the external senses rather than logic British empiricist John Locke s 1632 1704 explanation of personal identity provides an example of what James referred to Locke explains the identity of a person i e personality on the basis of a precise definition of identity by which the meaning of identity differs according to what it is being applied to The identity of a person is quite distinct from the identity of a man woman or substance according to Locke Locke concludes that consciousness is personality because it always accompanies thinking it is that which makes everyone to be what he calls self 33 and remains constant in different places at different times Benedictus Spinoza 1632 1677 Rationalists conceived of the identity of persons differently than empiricists such as Locke who distinguished identity of substance person and life According to Locke Rene Descartes 1596 1650 agreed only insofar as he did not argue that one immaterial spirit is the basis of the person for fear of making brutes thinking things too 34 According to James Locke tolerated arguments that a soul was behind the consciousness of any person However Locke s successor David Hume 1711 1776 and empirical psychologists after him denied the soul except for being a term to describe the cohesion of inner lives 30 However some research suggests Hume excluded personal identity from his opus An Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding because he thought his argument was sufficient but not compelling 35 Descartes himself distinguished active and passive faculties of mind each contributing to thinking and consciousness in different ways The passive faculty Descartes argued simply receives whereas the active faculty produces and forms ideas but does not presuppose thought and thus cannot be within the thinking thing The active faculty mustn t be within self because ideas are produced without any awareness of them and are sometimes produced against one s will 36 Rationalist philosopher Benedictus Spinoza 1632 1677 argued that ideas are the first element constituting the human mind but existed only for actually existing things 37 In other words ideas of non existent things are without meaning for Spinoza because an idea of a non existent thing cannot exist Further Spinoza s rationalism argued that the mind does not know itself except insofar as it perceives the ideas of the modifications of body in describing its external perceptions or perceptions from without On the contrary from within Spinoza argued perceptions connect various ideas clearly and distinctly 38 The mind is not the free cause of its actions for Spinoza 39 Spinoza equates the will with the understanding and explains the common distinction of these things as being two different things as an error which results from the individual s misunderstanding of the nature of thinking 40 Biology EditThe biological basis of personality is the theory that anatomical structures located in the brain contribute to personality traits This stems from neuropsychology which studies how the structure of the brain relates to various psychological processes and behaviors For instance in human beings the frontal lobes are responsible for foresight and anticipation and the occipital lobes are responsible for processing visual information In addition certain physiological functions such as hormone secretion also affect personality For example the hormone testosterone is important for sociability affectivity aggressiveness and sexuality 21 Additionally studies show that the expression of a personality trait depends on the volume of the brain cortex it is associated with 41 Personology EditPersonology confers a multidimensional complex and comprehensive approach to personality According to Henry A Murray personology is The branch of psychology which concerns itself with the study of human lives and the factors that influence their course which investigates individual differences and types of personality the science of men taken as gross units encompassing psychoanalysis Freud analytical psychology Jung individual psychology Adler and other terms that stand for methods of inquiry or doctrines rather than realms of knowledge 42 From a holistic perspective personology studies personality as a whole as a system but at the same time through all its components levels and spheres 43 44 See also Edit Look up personality in Wiktionary the free dictionary Association for Research in Personality an academic organization Cult of personality political institution in which a leader uses mass media to create a larger than life public image Differential psychology Human variability Offender profiling Personality and Individual Differences a scientific journal published bi monthly by Elsevier Personality computing Personality crisis Personality disorder Personality rights consisting of the right to individual publicity and privacy Trait theoryReferences Edit a b Corr Philip J Matthews Gerald 2009 The Cambridge handbook of personality psychology 1 publ ed Cambridge Cambridge University Press ISBN 978 0 521 86218 9 Khazan Olga March 2022 My Personality Transplant The Atlantic 329 2 Sadock Benjamin Sadock Virginia Ruiz Pedro 2017 Kaplan and Sadock s Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry Wolters Kluwer ISBN 978 1 4511 0047 1 Aleksandrowicz JW Klasa K Sobanski JA Stolarska D 2009 KON 2006 Neurotic Personality Questionnaire PDF Archives of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy 1 21 22 Hogan Joyce Ones Deniz S 1997 Conscientiousness and Integrity at Work Handbook of Personality Psychology pp 849 870 doi 10 1016 b978 012134645 4 50033 0 ISBN 9780121346454 Denis McKim 2017 11 30 Boundless dominion providence politics and the early Canadian presbyterian worldview Montreal ISBN 978 0 7735 5240 1 OCLC 1015239877 page needed Eysenck Hans Jurgen 2006 The biological basis of personality Transaction Publishers ISBN 1 4128 0554 6 OCLC 61178246 a b c Lucas Richard E Baird Brendan M 2004 Extraversion and Emotional Reactivity Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 86 3 473 485 doi 10 1037 0022 3514 86 3 473 PMID 15008650 a b Briley Daniel A Tucker Drob Elliot M 2014 Genetic and environmental continuity in personality development A meta analysis Psychological Bulletin 140 5 1303 1331 doi 10 1037 a0037091 PMC 4152379 PMID 24956122 Holder Mark D Klassen Andrea 13 June 2009 Temperament and Happiness in Children Journal of Happiness Studies 11 4 419 439 doi 10 1007 s10902 009 9149 2 S2CID 145541419 a b c Zelenski John M Santoro Maya S Whelan Deanna C 2012 Would introverts be better off if they acted more like extraverts Exploring emotional and cognitive consequences of counter dispositional behavior Emotion 12 2 290 303 doi 10 1037 a0025169 PMID 21859197 a b c Strobel Maria Tumasjan Andranik Sporrle Matthias February 2011 Be yourself believe in yourself and be happy Self efficacy as a mediator between personality factors and subjective well being Scandinavian Journal of Psychology 52 1 43 48 doi 10 1111 j 1467 9450 2010 00826 x PMID 20497398 S2CID 44632456 Joshanloo Mohsen Afshari Samaneh 26 November 2009 Big Five Personality Traits and Self Esteem as Predictors of Life Satisfaction in Iranian Muslim University Students Journal of Happiness Studies 12 1 105 113 doi 10 1007 s10902 009 9177 y S2CID 144459533 a b Lischetzke Tanja Eid Michael August 2006 Why Extraverts Are Happier Than Introverts The Role of Mood Regulation Journal of Personality 74 4 1127 1162 doi 10 1111 j 1467 6494 2006 00405 x PMID 16787431 Sadock Benjamin J Sadock Virginia A Ruiz Pedro June 2017 Personality Disorders In Cloninger R Svrakic D eds Kaplan and Sadock s Comprehensive Textbook of Psychiatry Wolter Kluwer ISBN 978 1 4511 0047 1 page needed a b Jeronimus Bertus F Riese Harriette Sanderman Robbert Ormel Johan 2014 Mutual reinforcement between neuroticism and life experiences A five wave 16 year study to test reciprocal causation Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 107 4 751 764 doi 10 1037 a0037009 PMID 25111305 Kail Robert Barnfield Anne 2014 Children and Their Development Pearson ISBN 978 0 205 99302 4 page needed Harris Judith Rich 1995 Where is the child s environment A group socialization theory of development Psychological Review 102 3 458 489 doi 10 1037 0033 295x 102 3 458 Kawamoto Tetsuya April 2016 Personality Change from Life Experiences Moderation Effect of Attachment Security Japanese Psychological Research 58 2 218 231 doi 10 1111 jpr 12110 The Role of the Environment in Shaping Personality The Great Courses Daily December 27 2019 a b Funder David C February 2001 Personality Annual Review of Psychology 52 1 197 221 doi 10 1146 annurev psych 52 1 197 PMID 11148304 McCrae R R amp Allik I U 2002 The five factor model of personality across cultures Springer Science amp Business Media page needed a b c d McCrae Robert R Costa Paul T 1997 Personality trait structure as a human universal American Psychologist 52 5 509 516 doi 10 1037 0003 066X 52 5 509 PMID 9145021 a b Schmitt David P Allik Juri McCrae Robert R Benet Martinez Veronica 26 July 2016 The Geographic Distribution of Big Five Personality Traits Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology 38 2 173 212 doi 10 1177 0022022106297299 hdl 20 500 12724 2395 S2CID 86619840 a b Church A Timothy August 2000 Culture and Personality Toward an Integrated Cultural Trait Psychology Journal of Personality 68 4 651 703 doi 10 1111 1467 6494 00112 PMID 10934686 Greenblatt Stephen 2011 The swerve how the world became modern W W Norton ISBN 978 0 393 08338 5 OCLC 755097082 Gelis 1989 The Child from anonymity to individuality In Aries Philippe Duby Georges eds A History of Private Life III Passions of the Renaissance p 309 a b Inkeles Alex Smith David H 1974 Becoming Modern doi 10 4159 harvard 9780674499348 ISBN 978 0 674 49934 8 page needed Block Jack Block Jeanne H October 2006 Nursery school personality and political orientation two decades later PDF Journal of Research in Personality 40 5 734 749 doi 10 1016 j jrp 2005 09 005 Retrieved 22 February 2022 a b c James William 1970 Pragmatism and Other Essays New York Washington Square Press James William 1970 Pragmatism and other essays New York Washington Square Press p 16 James William 1970 Pragmatism and other essays New York Washington Square Press p 32 Locke John 1974 An Essay Concerning Human Understanding Toronto Random House page needed James William 1970 Pragmatism and other essays New York Washington Square Press p 69 Hume David 1955 An Inquiry Concerning Human Understanding US Liberal Arts Press Inc page needed Descartes Rene 1974 Meditations on the First Philosophy New York Anchor Books page needed Spinoza Benedictus 1974 The Ethics The Rationalists ed New York Anchor Books Spinoza Benedictus 1974 The Ethics The Rationalists ed New York Random House p 241 Spinoza Benedictus 1974 The Ethics The Rationalists ed New York Random House p 253 Spinoza Benedictus 1974 The Ethics The Rationalists ed New York Random House p 256 DeYoung Colin G Hirsh Jacob B Shane Matthew S Papademetris Xenophon Rajeevan Nallakkandi Gray Jeremy R 30 April 2010 Testing Predictions From Personality Neuroscience Psychological Science 21 6 820 828 doi 10 1177 0956797610370159 PMC 3049165 PMID 20435951 Explorations in personality Murray Henry A Henry Alexander 1893 1988 Harvard University Harvard Psychological Clinic 70th anniversary ed Oxford Oxford University Press 2008 ISBN 978 0 19 804152 8 OCLC 219738947 a href Template Cite book html title Template Cite book cite book a CS1 maint others link page needed Murray H A 1938 Explorations in Personality New York Oxford University Press page needed Strack S 2005 Handbook of Personology and Psychopathology Wiley page needed Further reading EditBornstein Robert F 2006 A Freudian construct lost and reclaimed The psychodynamics of personality pathology Psychoanalytic Psychology 23 2 339 353 doi 10 1037 0736 9735 23 2 339 Kwon Paul August 1999 Attributional Style and Psychodynamic Defense Mechanisms Toward an Integrative Model of Depression Journal of Personality 67 4 645 658 doi 10 1111 1467 6494 00068 PMID 10444853 Prunas Antonio Di Pierro Rossella Huemer Julia Tagini Angela January 2019 Defense mechanisms remembered parental caregiving and adult attachment style Psychoanalytic Psychology 36 1 64 72 doi 10 1037 pap0000158 S2CID 148867764 Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Personality amp oldid 1141330946, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,

article

, read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games.