TRAIT THEORY APPROACH

REPORTER: EULZ THE TRAIT THEORY OF GORDON W. ALLPORT (1897-1967) He emphasized the human, healthy, and organized aspects of behavior which is in contrast with other views that emphasized the animalistic, neurotic, tension-reducing, and mechanistic aspects of behavior. Allports first publication centered on traits as an important aspect of personality theory. Allport believed that traits are the basic units of personality. According to him, trait actually and are based in the nervous system. They represent generalized personality disposition that account for regularities in the functioning of a person across situations and over time. Traits can be defined by three properties-frequency, intensity, and range of situations. Example, a very submissive person would frequently be very submissive over a wide range of situations. TRAITS, STATES, AND ACTIVITIES Allport and Odbert defined traits as generalized and personalized determining tendencies -consistent and stable modes of an individuals adjustment to his environment . Traits are thus different from states and activities which describe those aspects of personality that are temporary, brief, and caused by external circumstances. Chaplin, John, and Goldberg replicated Allport and Odbertss classifications of personality descriptors into three categories: traits, states, and activities. Table 7.1 lists examples of each of the three categories. Table 7.1 Prototypical Examples of Traits, States, and Activities Traits States Activities Gentle Infatuated Carousing Domineering Pleased Ranting Trustful Angry Snooping Timid Invigorated Leering Cunning Aroused Reveling Example, a person may well be gentle throughout his or her lifetime, an infatuation (an internal state) typically does not last and even the most enjoyable carousing must come to an end. KINDS OF TRAITS Allport made a distinction among cardinal traits, central traits, and secondary dispositions. 1. A cardinal trait expresses a disposition that is so pervasive and outstanding in a persons life that virtually every act is traceable to its influence. 2. Central traits (e.g., honesty, kindness, assertiveness) express dispositions that cover a more limited range of situations than is true for cardinal traits. 3. Secondary traits represent dispositions that are the least conspicuous, generalized, and consistent. In other words, people possess traits with varying degrees of significance and generality. Allport did not say that trait is expressed in all situations independent of the characteristics of the situation. Indeed, Allport recognized the importance of the situation in explaining why a person does not behave the same way all the time. He wrote: traits are often aroused in one situation and not in another. For example, even the most aggressive people can be expected to modify their behavior if the situation calls for nonaggressive behavior, and even the most introverted person may behave in an extraverted fashion in certain situations. A trait expresses what a person generally does over many situations, not what will be done in any one situation. According to Allport, both trait and situation concepts are necessary to understand behavior.

FUNCTIONAL AUTONOMY This concept suggests that although the motives of an adult may have their roots in tension-reducing motives of the child, the adult grows out of them and becomes independent of these earlier tension-reducing efforts. What originally began as an effort to reduce hunger or anxiety can become a source of pleasure and motivation in its own right. Functional Autonomy: Sometimes a person may select an occupation for one reason, such as job security, and then remain in it for other motives, such as pleasure in the activity itself. THE THREE-FACTOR THEORY OF HANS J. EYSENCK (1916 - ) TRAIT MEASUREMENT: FACTOR ANALYSIS Eysenck emphasized the need to develop adequate measures of traits, the need to develop a theory that can be tested and is open to disproof, and the importance of establishing biological foundations for the existence of each trait. Eysenck emphasizes efforts such as these as being important to avoid a meaningless circularity of explanation, whereby trait is used to explain behavior that serves as the basis for the concept of the trait in the first place. For example, Jack talks to others because he is high on the trait of sociability, but we know that he is high on this trait because we observe that he spends a lot of time talking to others. The basis for Eysenck emphasis on measurement and the development of a classification of traits is the statistical technique of factor analysis. In factor-analytic study, a large number of test items is administered to many subjects. Factor analysis is a statistical technique that can identify groups, clusters, or factors of related items. I often go to large and noisy parties. I enjoy spending time with others. If I can help it, Id rather stay home than go out at night. ______ ______ ______

The resulting trait factors (e.g., sociability) can be interpreted and named by considering the characteristics that seems common to the items or behaviors found to be interrelated. Through further factor analyses, Eysenck determines the basic dimensions that underlie the trait factors found in the initial round of analysis. These dimensions represent secondary or superfactors. Example, the trait of sociability, impulsiveness, activity, liveliness, and excitability can be grouped together under the superordinate concept of extraversion. The term superfactors makes clear dimension with a low end (introversion) and high end (extroversion), such that people may fall along various points between two extremes. BASIC DIMENSIONS OF PERSONALITY The two basic dimensions of personality that Eysenck labelled are introversion-extraversion and neurotism (emotionally stable-unstable). As presented in Figure 7.2. Following the initial emphasis on only two dimesions, Eysenck has added a third dimension, which he calls psychotism. People high on this dimension tend to be solitary, insensitive, uncaring about others, and opposed to accepted social custom. According to Eysenck, the typical extravert is sociable, like parties, has many friends, craves excitement, acts on the spur of the moment, and is impulsive. In contrast to these characteristics, the introverted person tends to be quiet, introspective, reserved, reflective, distrustful of impulsive decisions, and prefer a well-ordered life to one filled with chance and risk.

Figure 7.2.

QUESTIONNAIRE MEASURES Esynck has developed numerous questionnaires to measure people along the dimension of introversionextraversion. Typical extravert answers YES to these questions: Do other people think of you as very lively? Would you be unhappy if you could not see lots of people most of the time? Do you often long for excitement? In contrast, the typical introvert will answer yes to these questions: Generally, do you prefer reading to meeting people? Are you mostly quiet when you are with people? Do you stop and think things over before doing anything? Other illustrative items from the Maudsley and Eysenck personality inventories are presented in Figure 7.3. these include items relevant to neurotism and lie scale to detect individuals who are faking responses to look good, as well as items relevant to extraversion-introversion. In addition to such questionnaires, other, more objective measures have been devised. For example, there is some suggestion that the lemon drop test may be used to distinguish between introve rts and extraverts. In this test a standard amount of lemon juice is placed on the subjects tongue. Introverts and extraverts differ in the amount of saliva produced when this is done.

Figure 7.3 Illustrative Items for Extraversion, Neurotism, and Lie Scale From the Maudley Personality Inventory and Eysenck Personality inventory 1. Do you usually take the initiative in making new friends? 2. Do ideas run through your head so that you cannot sleep? 3. Are you inclined to keep in the background on social occasions? 4. Do you sometimes laugh at a dirty joke? 5. Are you inclined to be moody? 6. Do you very much like good food? 7. When you get annoyed, do you need someone friendly to talk about it? 8. A s a child did you always do as you were told immediately and without grumbling? 9. Do you usually keep yourself to yourself except with very close friends? 10. Do you often make up your mind too late?

Yes ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

No ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___

RESERCH FINDINGS Are there other significant and theoretically meaningful differences in behavior associated with varying scores on the extraversion-introversion dimension? Introverts are more sensitive to pain than are extraverts, they become fatigue more easily than do extraverts, excitement interferes with their performance whereas it enhances performance for extraverts, and they tend to be more careful but less fast than extraverts. The following additional differences have been found: 1. Introverts do better in school than extraverts, particularly in more advanced subjects. Also, students withdrawing from college for academic reasons tend to be extraverts, where those who withdraw for psychiatric reasons tend to be introverts. 2. Extraverts prefer vocations involving interactions with other people, whereas introverts tend to prefer more solitary vocations. Extraverts seek diversion from job routine, whereas introverts have less need for novelty. 3. Extraverts enjoy explicit sexual and aggressive humor, whereas introverts prefer more intellectual forms of humor such as puns and subtle jokes. 4. Extraverts are more active sexually, in terms of frequency and different partners, than introverts. Re more suggestible than introverts. BIOLOGICAL BASIS Eysenck suggests that individual variations in introversion-extraversion reflect differences in neurophysiological functioning. Basically introverts are more easily aroused by events and learn social prohibitions more easily than extraverts. As a result, introverts are more restrained and inhibited. There is also some evidence that introverts are more influenced by punishments in learning, whereas extraverts are more influenced by rewards. It is hypothesized that individual differences along this dimension have both hereditary and environmental origins.

THE FACTOR-ANALYTIC TRAIT APPROACH OF RAYMOND B. CATTELL (1905- ) CATTELLS VIEW OF SCIENCE Cattell distinguishes among three methods in the study of personality: bivariate, multivariate, and clinical. The typical bivariate experiment, which follows the classical experimental design of the physical sciences, contains two variables, an independent variable that is manipulated by the experimenter and a dependent variable that is measured to observe the effects of the experimental manipulations. In contrast to the bivariate method, the multivariate method studies the interrelationships among many variables at once. In the multivariate experiment the investigator does not manipulate the variables. Instead, the experimenter allows life to make the experiments and then uses statistical methods to extract meaningful dimensions and causal connections. Similarity: Both bivariate and multivariate methods express concern for scientific rigor. Difference: Bivariate method, experimenters limit their attention to a few variables that they can manipulate in some way, whereas Multivariate method, experimenters consider many variables as they exist in a natural situation. In contrast to the bivariate method, the clinical method has the advantage that researchers can study important behaviors as they occur and look for lawfulness in the functioning of the total organism. Thus, in scientific aims and in philosophical assumptions, clinical and multivariate methods are close to one another and separate from the bivariate method. Similarity: In scientific aims and in philosophical assumptions, clinical and multivariate methods are close to one another and separate from the bivariate method. Difference: Clinician researcher uses intuition to assess variable and memory to keep track of events. Multivariate researcher uses scientific research procedures and statistical analyses. Table 7.2 Cattells Description of Bivariate, Clinical, and Multivariate Research Methods

Bivariate
Scientific rigor, controlled experiments Attention to few variables Neglect of Important phenomena Simplistic, piecemeal

Clinical
Intuition Consideration of many variables Study of important phenomena Interest in global events and complex patterns of behavior (total personality)

Multivariate
Scientific rigor, objective and quantitive analysis Consideration of many variables Study of important phenomena Interest in global events and complex patterns of behavior (total personality)

Importance: For Cattell, the most important statistical technique in multivariate research is factor analysis. Cattell prefers to work with a larger number of factors at the trait level, which have a more narrow definition but tend to correlate with each other. In contrast, Eysenck uses secondary factor analysis to combine trait into a smaller numberof superfactors.

CATTELLS THEORY OF PERSONALITY Kinds of Traits The basic structural element for Cattell is the trait, which was defined as predisposition. The concept of trait assumes that behavior follows some pattern and regularity over time and across situations. Among the many possible distinctions between traits, two are of particular importance. The first among ability traits, temperant traits, and dynamic traits, and the second is that between surface traits and source traits. Ability traits relate to skills and abilities that allow the individual to function effectively. Intelligence is an example of an ability trait. Temperant traits relate to the emotional life of the person and the stylistic quality of behavior. Wither one tends to work quickly or slowly, be generally calm or emotional, or act after deliberation or impulsively, all have to do with qualities of temperant that vary from individual to individual. Dynamic traits relate to the striving, motivational life of the individual, the kinds of goals that are important to the Person. Ability, temperant, and dynamic traits are seen as capturing the major stable elements of personality. The distinction between surface traits and source traits relates to the level at which we observe behavior. Surface traits express behaviors that on a superficial level may appear to go together but in fact do not always move up and down (vary) together and do not necessarily have a common cause. Can be discovered objectively such as asking people which personality characteristics they think go together, the refined statistical procedures of factor analysis are necessary to discover source traits. Source traits express an association among behaviors that do vary together to form a unitary, independent dimension of personality. Can be discovered objectively such as asking people which personality characteristics they think go together, the refined statistical procedures of factor analysis are necessary to discover source traits. These source traits represent the building blocks of personality. SOURCES OF DATA: L-data, Q-data, and OT-data Cattell distinguishes three sources of data: L-data: Life record data, which include both objective life-event data and ratings by observers and peers. It relates to 6ehavioural in actual, everyday situations such as school performance or interaction with peers. Q-data: Questionnaire data, which are based on self-reports, and objective test data (OT-data). It involves self-support data or responses to questionnaires, such as the Maudley and Eysenck personality inventories. OT-data: Objective test data, involves behavioural miniature situations in the subject is unaware of the relationship between the response and the personality characteristic being measured. According to Cattell, if multivariate, factor-analytic research is indeed able to determine the basic structures of personality, then the same factors or traits should be obtained from the three kinds of data. SUMMARY of Cattell research: 1. Cattell set out to define the structure of personality in three areas observation, called L-data, Qdata, and OT-data. 2. Cattell started his research with L-data and through the factors analysis of ratings came up with 15 source traits. 3. Guided in his research on Q-data by L-data findings, Cattell developed the 16 P.F. Questionnaire, which contains 12 traits that match traits found in the L-data research and 4 traits that appear to be unique to questionnaire methods. 4. Using these results to guide his research in the development of objective tests, Cattell found 21 source traits in OT-data that appear to have complex and low level relation to the traits found in other data. ********************************* REPORTED BY: EULITO R. BANGURAN *********************************

Table 7.3 Cattells 16 Personality Factors Derived from Questionnaire Data Reserved Outgoing Les s intelligent More intelligent Stable, Ego Strength Emotionally/Neuroticism Humble Assertive Sober Happy-go-lucky Expedient Conscientious Shy Venturesome Tough-minded Tender-minded Trusting Suspicious Practical Imaginative Forthright Shrewd Placid Apprehensive Conservative Experimenting Group-dependent Self-sufficient Undiscipline Controlled Relaxed Tense