Foundation to Psychology/Submission 11 February 2016
Using Research evidence/ critically discuss the extent to which, Personality influences Behaviour
This essay is going to make considerations and outline the issues appropriately pertaining how, Personality influences Behaviour. It will provide views and apprehend fundamental areas of Psychology Cognitive, Biological, Developmental and Individual Differences. Comprehensive analysis of key theoretical debates would be provided: including the Twin Theories and detailed account on essential points would be analysed logically. Detailed account of how Freud (1915), developed the theory of the mind and described it as an iceberg. In addition, the nature versus nature and traits would be described and analysed subsequently.
According to Child (1968), personality of an individual is demonstrated by his/her firm, interior components that are successive in the same manner and separate distinctively from others evidently. The comprehensiveness of this definition includes intelligence as a characteristic of personality. In support of this definition, (Cattell 1965), suggested that personality definition should not be restricted to emotional and motivational factors but to be broad, (Cattel 1965).
One of the propounding theories in Psychology is nature versus nurture argument: which is one of the oldest psychological issues in an attempt to define or classify human personality that influences behaviour. Nature refers to all of the genes and hereditary are elements that influence who we are: from our physical appearance to our personality characteristics, the interrelationship between hereditary and environment is an essential element, (Davies 2001).
According to Galton (1865), his study to human potential led him to come up with an idea of better standard of off springs through hereditary. Successive research on mental faculties specifying that: "human mental abilities and personality traits, no less than the plant and animal traits described by Darwin, were essentially inherited" (Seligman 2002). Galton researched about twin studies which sited differences between monozygotic and dizygotic twins resulting in nature versus nurture elements of mental disability. In Psychology he quantified hereditary characteristics of, qualities, traits, and potential from one generation to the other, (Baynu 2002). These successful research; resulted in eugenics movement, strongly urging development of biological arrangement of species through suiting parenthood. Galton supported human breeding of mentally deficient individuals, (Irvine 1986 and Clayes 2001). Similarly; According to Petrie (1991), reproductive success, the value of productive offspring possessed by an individual. Gayton field observation in Africa drew some criticism when he compared African people’s inferiority with Anglo- Saxons generation.
Therefore; Bouchard and Loehlin (2001), disagreed the notion which states that, all human beings psychological traits are affected by genetic factors to a remarkable level. Lawrence Right (1999) behavioural genetics along twin studies made some impressive findings that our sameness is inborn concept. (Bouchard 2001); results from MZA and MZT correlations were similar, psychological traits are strongly influenced by genetic factors. The advantages of the research method is that they were tested separately, managed by unrelated people and reducing rate bias. Leon Kamin (2004) a critic for the research requested and refused data. According to William Right, due to federal law and consent no data was to be released. According to Segal (2012), undistinguishable treatment of monozygotic MZ twins who have close resemblance: specifically, lookalike and provided same treatment results in twin behavioural pairing. Insufficient likeliness in self-esteem in pairs of unrelated look-alike individuals, (Segal 2013)
For instance, the separation of genetic and environmental twin investigation on behavioural and physical traits has multiplied to date, Segal (2012). Considerable likeness between monozygotic twins and dizygotic twins is unvarying with genetic effect on the trait. Some positive results from other similar researches demonstrate the effectiveness of this Journal. According to (Danby and Thorpe 2006), sizeable and enormous studies and questionnaires discovered a lot of social similarities between MZ and DZ twins besides age and sex. Research for young twins by Thorpe and Gardener; research on older twins done by (Neiderhausser et al 2000), Reiss et al reported the evolution of personality and individual differences.
Specifically, the most prominent twin adoption studies is the Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart, (Johnson et al 2007); Bouchard and Pederson (1999). The linchpin of research concentrated on 59 sets of indistinguishable twins raised in dissimilar families and 47 sets of fraternal twins rose in the same house. Hence, participants in the study took six days familiarising with personality and intelligence tests. Resultantly, indistinguishable twins proved to have more psychological depth in similarities than the fraternal twins. Such results, considers less essentiality of shared environment than genetic elements to the development of temperament and various personality traits in spite shared environments undoubtedly have a cause, (Zawadzki et al 2001).
Additionally, some traits extremely have genetic links in twin studies of personality similarly; the super factor agreeableness from the Big Five scale had an estimated heritability of coefficient of 0.40: heritability coefficient of super factor of 0.55, Bouchard (2004). Individual behavioural inclination to watch television Prescott et al (1991). Even in some complex genetic type of behaviour for getting divorce, McGee and Lykken (1991) and alcoholism, Froehlich et al (2000) and Pickens et al (1991). Although genes are essential in shaping personality behaviour, environmental experience capacity is of paramount importance. However, although twin studies recommended links between genes and personality; but there is no accurate biological method about what exactly affect personality patterns, Gall (1835). Relatedly; on individual personality, behavioural sequence, structure, arrangement, or categories: detailing account of individuals as hot tempered or excitable, shy or aggressive, masculine, intelligent or dull, feminine either conditions may differ but an individual remain self, (Personality Theory 2009).
Theorists in their quest to identify personality, researchers brought up with Trait Perspective. According to Cattell (1965), Traits are believed, to condition behaviour and relate basic standard or classification concealed in an individual. Eysenck, in his predictions on theories he made use of the factor analysis. He applied the use of factor analysis to identify traits in some fundamental dimensions he named super factors. His model had three congregated dimensions named Extraversion, Neuroticism and Psychoticism, (Eysenck 1992)
Eysenck (1992), extraversion personality is outgoing, sociable, impulsive and biologically are inspired resulting in being stimuli seekers. Neuroticism biologically are based on sympathetic nervous system, flight or fight reaction in times of trouble, this characteristics can easily become worried, unhappy or angry and become moody and anxiety. Psychoticism is controversial; the ones who produce high scores are described as determined. To substantiate factor analysis he dispensed Eysenck Personality globally complementing with different cultures. Eysenck based his trait theory on Biology: which got support from studies that investigated about the twins, which proposed how individuals can produce positive outcomes on extra version super factor, (Pergadia et al 2006 and Health et al 2006).
Some hormonal studies of brain activity and blood pressure link to super factor. There are others who criticised Eysenck’s theory, Furnham (2008) disagreed that Eysenck work distinguish five articles. The support of the theory has hugely increased, (Zuckerman 2011); the research has evidently managed to responded to the validity and convenient of the five big factors, (Cooper and Sheldon 2002)
However, other researchers brought other ideas coming up with the Big Five Factor Model, higher order dimensions of personality, Poropat (2009) and Boyle (2008). Morden day theorist’s advocates for Big Five Model: an empirical acquired five paramount traits classified as, agreeableness versus disagreeableness, extraversion versus introversion, neuroticism versus stability, conscientiousness versus irresponsibility and openness versus unimaginativeness which is popularly abbreviated as OCEAN. (Ewen 2010 and Boyle 2008): many modern theorists suggests the big five model exhibit.
Therefore, there are theories in psychology about Personality and they differ in their views in the way they perceive the human behaviour. Psychodynamic Perspective stresses its primary prominence on the notion that behaviour is a result of fights and compromises needs, (R Comer R et al 2013). According to Freud (1915), the mind as a little iceberg hence, the top being more visible and distinct. He structured the mind in three levels; the top being the conscious, accommodating thoughts and feelings. The second being the precocious holding the mental content which is in between conscious mind and the unconscious which is the deepest level which hold unconscious mind. Freud et al (1915), identified three dominant strength in personality development; which he identified as the id, some component constituting basic institutional drives, eating, sleeping, sex and comfort regulated by pleasure principle. These are impulses that change from child hood to another age, (Freud et al 1915).
Also, ego is a result of personality factor that operate to appease, propel the id and work in conjunction with pressure placed on behaviour by the environment: this works logically problem solving element. Then, there is the super ego; which represents internalization of parental conscience, the rules of society, functions to reward, punish through a system of moral attitudes, conscience, and a sense of guilt. All this forms develop as the child develops. According to Freud (1915), ego acts as equal distribution between separating ego and id.
However, Freud (1915) stated the id, ego and super ego as they tend to infight: children go through stages of personality development resulting in two stages of sexuality and aggression which Freud described as causers of internal conflict, calling them psychosexual. The stages are named according to the pleasure producing parts of the body; oral, anal, phallic, latency and genital. The biological serving purpose of these learning periods resolves health personality. Periodically children would develop constructive oral traits outcomes. The process would go through phases of eating, drinking, and chewing; this could lead some into adulthood behaviours, Freud (1915).
On evaluating Sigmund Freud Psychoanalytic Theories: Dumont 2010) believed Freud’s ideas are still dominant, to some the reverence has changed, (Eysenck 1985), objected to psychoanalysis stating that it lacked scientific theory or validation. Also, another critic raised the issue of ego in comparison with id with the subsequent development of ego psychology the criticism of the content of psychoanalysis and the debate about the value “action language” as a possible substitute, (Schaefer 1976). Also, (Kline 1972) psychoanalysis is untestable therefore unscientific, empirical evidence proved their lack of empirical evidence; (Eysenck and Wilson 1998).
According to Drew Watson (1998), he find five research evidence in support of Sigmund Freud that early child hood influences the shaping of personality. Freud (1909), Little Hans a boy patient, who feared horses, he analysed that it was due the relationship with the father and managed to overcome it as a result of addressing inhibiting feelings. Alfred Adler () believed human behaviour is essential than sexual needs and other unconscious encouragements.
Lechner, C, M., and Rammstedt, B. (2015), in a Cognitive assessment to find personality attributes of individual differences in their capability to responding: hypothetically, those who react with lower thinking capacity display stronger acquiescent reaction characteristics than individuals with cognitive ability. The results find that; lower capacity thinking and age related declines in lower thinking outcome is related to high acquiescent, in relation to Big Five factor Lachner and Rammstedt (2015).
In relation to the introduction of the experiment, individuals response differently, especially rational reasoning which could draw bias, Jackson and Mesick (1958). Essentially, the elements question of personality assessment, McLarnon and Carswel, (2013). The problem of providing the basis of Five Factor structure could be caused by the second source of discrepancy in individual reaction that could be caused by style and variance, Messick (1958). In a related research, Holland et al studied personality of Ferminity Infrequency which used VPI manual study that supported its validity and reliability.
Additionally; Comer et al (2013), a theory of psychology which acclaims great emphasis and exceptional attributes to human functioning. Carl Rogers was the founder of client centred therapy which encourages indistinguishable association between therapists and clients to archive their full prospective. Comer et al; Similarly Maslow’s inspiring individuals to self-actualisation: proposed that individuals have a basic comprehensive purpose which through capability can be attained, suggestively, individuals who attain such comprehensive objective lead a fulfilling life. Maslow proposed a Hierarchy of needs which include Physiological needs, safety needs, belonging and love needs, esteem needs and self-actualisation which is the highest level on the pyramid of needs. Fresh Perspective (2006), in a related contrast argued that, a street beggar anxious about the next meal, which is a psychological need: rather than reaching her fullest potential: if the personal needs are not met, the soul would not advance to the next ladder. Motivated Reinforcement Learning (2009), also in a related source, Maslow’s endeavour to amalgamate the massive research anatomy which is affiliated to human stimulus, apprehension for higher level is a matter of concern if basic needs are met (Motivated Reinforcement Learning 2009)
Finally, this essay has described, analysed and explained the concept of nature versus nurture and how it has evolved from olden days in an effort of how theorists characterises its essentiality. The development of science and research methods in later years brought up with the study of biological traits in an individual and how the traits and environment builds and shape the behaviour of an individual. The research on twin studies highlighted how particular situations or conditions that can cognitively impact on behaviour. Also, the interrelatedness of the theory of iceberg to other theories on influencing personality to behaviour. References on Personality influencing Behaviour
Reference Page on Personality influencing Behaviour.
Allen, G. (2002). The measure of a Victorian polymath: Pulling together the strands of Francis Galton's legacy to modern biology. Nature, 145(3), 19-20.
Bynum, W. F. (2002). The childless father of eugenics. Science, 296, 472.
Clayes, G. (2001). Introducing Francis Galton, 'Kantsaywhere' and 'The Donoghues of Dunno Weir.' Utopian Studies, 12(2), 188-190.
Cattell, R. B, (1946), Description and measurement of Personality. Yonkers-on Hudson: World Book.
Cattel, R. B, (1965), The Scientific Analysis Personality London Penguin.
Darwin, C. (1859). On the Origin of the species by means of natural selection: or The preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life: J. Murray.
Francis Galton Nature versus Nurture
Danby, S. and Thorpe, K. (2006). Compatibility and conflict: Negotiations of relationships by dizygotic same sex twin girls. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 9, 1o3-112.
Forest, D. (1995). Francis Galton (1822-1911). In R. Fuller (Ed.), Seven pioneers of psychology: Behavior and mind (pp.1-19). Routledge: London and New York.
Joseph, J (2004,) The Gene Illusion. Genetic Research in Psychiatry and Psychology .Algora Publishers New York. Cited in Google Books.
Reiss, D. , Nederhausser, J. M., Hetherington, E. M. and Plomin , R. (2000), The Relationship Code. Cambridge, M A: Havard University Research.
Thorpe, K. , and Gardner, K. (2006). Twins and their friendships: Differences between monozygotic, dizygotic same-sex and dizygotic mixed pairs. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 9, 155-164.
Irvine, P. (1986). Sir Francis Galton (1822-1911). Journal of Special Education, 20(1).
Jensen, A. (2002). Galton's legacy to research on intelligence. Journal of Biosocial Science, 34, 145-172.
Personality Theories (2009), Houghton Miffin Harcourt, New York p 261
Segal, N. L Heshberger, N. l, and Arods (2003. Meeting ones twin: Perceived Social Closeness and Familiarity. Evolutionary Psychology, 1, 70-95.
Seligman, D. (2002). Good breeding. National Review, 54(1), 53-54.
Simonton, D. K. (2003). Francis Galton's Hereditary Genius: Its place in the history and psychology of Science. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The anatomy of impact: What makes the great works of psychology great (pp. 3-18). American Psychological Association: Washington, D.C.
The Psychology of Personality (2009)Wiley Blackwell Sussex