Personality is the characteristics or traits of a person that highlights the way that people behave through time, or in different situations.
Eysenck is a theorist who has studied many aspects of psychology including intelligence and mental illness, but his work today concentrates on personality. Eysenck’s theory solely focuses on the personality characteristic, which defines who you are like being clam or easily exited. This theory of personality is based on the nature side of the nature / nurture, Eysenck said there are three general characteristics that are seen as predispositions to our behaviour in which we respond to in certain ways. The three characteristics are with the first one being: Introversion/ extroversion, is when we direct our attention on our inner experiences. While extroversion is when we direct our attention to the environment, a person who is introversion is quiet and reserved while an extroversion person is sociable and outgoing. Neuroticism/ emotional stability, this is when moodiness versus even temper. Neuroticism associates a person’s likelihood to become upset or emotional, while stability has the likelihood to help us remain in emotionally in control. Psychoticism, those people who show this trait may have issues dealing with reality. Which can result in them being anti-social and hostile. Everyone will show traits from these three characteristics however depending on what combination, of the three you have will determine your personality. The connection linking biology and personality is seen fully in Eysenck’s theory, and is fully ignored in other perspectives.
Identity is how an individual understands themselves in relation to other people and society, this can either be negative or positive way which starts in early childhood.
Goffman is a sociologist who developed the concept of dramaturgy, he suggested that life was a continuous play where individuals are actors. The theory behind the study of dramaturgy, that when we interact with others we are studying the situation to enable us to see what role we should play. Goffman said that when we are born we are forced onto a stage which is called everyday life, with our socialisation composed of learning how to play our allocated roles from different individuals. It is believed that we select how we appear to ourselves which is established on the impact we want to make, by doing this we pick what identify we want to show like how an actor picks a role or a character. Also what we pick to wear is like a costume in which we change depending on what situation we are, for example we would wear different clothes to work and wear something else if going on a night out. The accessories we use such as designer bags, briefcase or gym bag, are classed as props that we use or carry about on a daily basis this tells others certain things about who we are. Everything about us tells a person who we are and what role we are playing in society, we pick on what we want to be called like professor or doctor if we have earned a degree. It is said that most of our interaction is built on scripts, that we often foresee what someone else anticipates from us. This response built upon the scripts that we have keep in our memories from past experiences. Everyday life is forming our back stage behaviour to be able to fit, into the role that is expected from on stage environments.
Nature is our phenotype, which refer to our genes and any hereditary conditions. Is also our biological DNA that determines our different characteristics we have, that focus on our physical characteristics such as eye or hair colour also our height? There is nothing to say that our personality, intelligence or our likes and dislikes are in our DNA chromosomes as well.
Nurture is the genotype; this is influenced by the environment or social circumstances even from our upbringing or lifestyle.
There is a debate between nature and nurture on which one has the biggest effect on our behaviour, this is one of the oldest arguments of psychology. Each of these sides have good points which makes it really hard to decide whether a person’s development is predisposed in DNA, or if a majority of it is influenced by our like experiences and the environment. As of now we both know that nature and nurture play an important part in human development, but it is hard to say whether we are developed majorly because of nature or nurture. As through research it showed both are, just as important as each other.
Having knowledge of nature and nurture can help us understand that a person’s behaviour is not about what’s in our DNA, but it the environment that causes us to do something. In the case study Steven was abusive and aggressive towards his brother, this behaviour is not in Stevens genes, he learnt it from watching his stepfather. This is because all behaviour is learned through watching and learning from parents or friends, as Steven was a young boy when he first seen his stepfather violent behaviour. As children learn most things by observation and copying all behaviour seen, no one told Steven that aggressive behaviour was wrong therefore he ended up being aggressive to his stepbrother.
As the theorist Bandura is behind the social learning theory and the bobo doll experiment, he says that behaviour is learned from the environment. This is done by the process of observational learning, as children observe and imitate those around them which results in them behaving in certain ways. The individuals who are observed are called models, children are surrounded by many influential models these can be parents, friends or characters on a television show. Therefore, children who watch those showing aggressive behaviour, these individuals are called models and will therefore imitate the behaviour they have observed.
Holmes and Rahe came up with a survey called the social readjustment rating scale, this was to allow them to identify any crucial or difficult situations or events in a individuals life. This scale is used broadly in the social and behavioural sciences, by giving values to important life events such as getting married, birth of a child, death of a loved one or even loss of a job. It is planned around the examination of major life changes; however, these can be either positive or negative changes. The social readjustment scale consists of a list forty-three most common stressful events that can happen in a life time, such life events where given a score. These stressful events range from death of a spouse or child which is right up at the top of the list, with the last on the list being minor incidents with the law such as traffic or parking ticket.
The person taking part in the survey will show how many of these life events they have experienced in their life in the past year, the events are written down and added up giving a total. If the total adds up to three hundred or more, will show that there is a greater possibility of the individual experiencing an outstanding level of stress. It was originally aimed for males only, but the scale is now used on both males and females. The aim of the scale was to look into whether the scores collected, tally up with the onset illness. This scale is based on origins of stress rather than everyday life events, however many people will not experience many of the life events of the social readjustment scale.
Social readjustment rating scale, see appendix 2
The social readjustment scale can be related to Steven from the case study, as he can be giving a total score by looking at the scale and seeing what major life events he has experienced. By using the scale will help us to understand what level of stress Steven is at, therefore knowing what has happened to Steven through his life experiences a care worker will be able to help Steven through his difficult time. Some people may say that what Steven has experienced is part of everyday life, rather than it being a source of stress.