DOCSLIB.ORG

The Healthy Personality from a Basic Trait Perspective Wiebke

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Healthy Personality from a Basic Trait Perspective Wiebke The Healthy Personality from a Basic Trait Perspective Wiebke Bleidorn, University of California, Davis Christopher J. Hopwood, University of California, Davis Robert A. Ackerman, The University of Texas at Dallas Edward A. Witt, Chicago, IL Christian Kandler, University of Bremen & Medical School Berlin Rainer Riemann, Bielefeld University Douglas B. Samuel, Purdue University & M. Brent Donnellan, Michigan State University Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Wiebke Bleidorn, Department of Psychology, University of California Davis, One Shields Avenue, Davis, CA, 95616, United States. E-mail: [email protected] Please cite this preprint as: Bleidorn, W., Hopwood, C. J., Ackerman, R. A., Witt, E. A., Kandler, C., Riemann, R., Samuel, D. B., & Donnellan, M. B. (in press). The healthy personality from a basic trait perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. HEALTHY PERSONALITY 2 Abstract What basic personality traits characterize the psychologically healthy individual? The purpose of this paper was to address this question by generating an expert-consensus model of the healthy person in the context of the 30 facets (and five domains) of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (Costa & McCrae, 1992) system of traits. In a first set of studies, we found that the healthy personality can be described, with a high level of agreement, in terms of the 30 facets of the NEO-PI-R. High levels of Openness to Feelings, Positive Emotions, and Straightforwardness, together with low levels on facets of Neuroticism were particularly indicative of healthy personality functioning. The expert-generated healthy personality profile was negatively correlated with profiles of pathological personality functioning and positively correlated with normative personality functioning. In a second set of studies, we matched the NEO-PI-R profiles of over 3,000 individuals from seven different samples with the expert-generated healthy prototype to yield a healthy personality index. This index was characterized by good retest reliability and cross-rater agreement, high rank-order stability, and substantial heritability. Individuals with high scores on the healthy personality index were psychologically well-adjusted, had high self- esteem, good self-regulatory skills, an optimistic outlook on the world, and a clear and stable self-view. These individuals were low in aggression and meanness, unlikely to exploit others, and were relatively immune to stress and self-sufficient. We discuss the results in the light of their implications for both research and theory on healthy personality functioning. Keywords: Health; Personality; Big Five; Traits; Virtues HEALTHY PERSONALITY 3 What basic personality traits characterize the psychologically healthy individual? Although contemporary researchers have used basic trait models such as the Five Factor Model/Big Five domains to characterize personality disorders (e.g., Lynam & Widiger, 2001), little attention has been paid to the characterization of healthy personality from a basic trait perspective. This gap exists despite considerable interest in describing healthy persons in the history of personality psychology and extensive validation of Big Five traits for characterizing normal-range and maladaptive aspects of personality functioning. This paper fills this gap by generating an expert-consensus model of the healthy person in the context of the 5 domains and 30 facets of the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (Costa & McCrae, 1992) system of traits. We describe the results of several studies designed to develop and provide initial validity evidence for an expert-consensus personality profile of the psychologically healthy person. Specifically, we determine how well lay people and experts in positive psychology agreed with trait experts regarding the healthy personality, identify correlations with pathological personality profiles, examine the heritability and psychometric characteristics of the healthy personality, and determine how much the healthy personality profile overlaps with a normative personality profile. Historical Accounts of the Healthy Personality Scholars have been interested in characterizing a healthy personality prototype since the beginning of the scientific study of personality. The father of modern personality trait theory, Gordon Allport (1955), distinguished the “mature person” based on their intentional pursuit of long-term goals. He argued that healthy people a) extend aspects of themselves into other activities, people, or ideas, b) relate warmly to others, c) are self-accepting and emotionally secure, d) are realistic in their perceptions of the world and other people, e) show responsibility through industrious work, f) possess self-insight, and g) approach life with directedness and unified identity. Psychoanalytic authors have also articulated the characteristics of healthy individuals. Erik Erikson (1950) famously claimed that Sigmund Freud described the healthy person as someone who can HEALTHY PERSONALITY 4 “love and work” (Elms, 2001). Erich Fromm (1955) argued that the central challenge of being human was overcoming the human inevitabilities of loneliness and insignificance through union with nature, other people, and the diverse aspects of the self. Individuals who meet this challenge are able to satisfy basic needs for a) relatedness to others, b) creative transcendence over ennui and lethargy, c) rootedness in some personally meaningful aspect of society, d) a secure and stable sense of identity, and e) reasonable as opposed to superstitious inferences about the environment. For Fromm, healthy people are productive, happy, and self-directed. Conceptualizing optimal functioning was a central preoccupation of humanistic personality theorists. Abraham Maslow (1970) famously hypothesized that individuals self-actualize only when their basic physical and psychological needs are met. Unlike the vast majority of people who live in states of becoming in which they focus on reducing internal tensions related to unmet basic needs, “self- actualizers” live in states of being focused on increasing tension by pursuing new challenges. Maslow described self-actualizing people as accepting, spontaneous, focused on the outside world, autonomous, socially interested, moral, funny, creative, immune to social pressure, and prone to peak experiences in which there is a mystical and blissful connection with the world. Carl Rogers (1961) asserted that healthy functioning is the natural outcome of removing barriers to health. “Fully functioning” people, he argued, are characterized by an a) uninhibited openness to experience and b) creative spontaneity, c) live in the here and now, d) have faith in their internal experience, and e) choose behaviors that accord with their inner standards. Viktor Frankl (1962), who survived two Nazi concentration camps, emphasized the pursuit of meaning in life as a distinguishing indicator of healthy personality functioning. He argued that people whose lives have meaning can endure difficult situations because life is worth living. Meaning is obtained by pursuing goals and interests that lie outside of one’s own personal interest. In his scheme, healthy persons are a) free to choose their own course of action, b) responsible for the choices they make, c) focused on pursuing personally meaningful goals, d) in conscious control of their behavior, e) HEALTHY PERSONALITY 5 creative, f) attentive to concerns beyond self-preservation, g) future-oriented, and h) capable of giving and receiving love. As should be evident, significant points of divergence exist among these classic theorists. Whereas psychoanalytic theorists were mostly interested in the balance of conflicts between society and self or between different aspects of the self, humanistic theorists were more concerned with intrapsychic processes of individuation that culminate, under ideal developmental conditions, in human uniqueness and fulfillment. Yet, three similarities stand out. First, each of these otherwise competing visions of human personalities defined healthy functioning in terms of a specific personality prototype. Second, each of these perspectives interpreted the healthy prototype as a profile of certain personality characteristics. Third, across theories, the identified prototypes generally included the preponderance of positive as opposed to negative emotions, interpersonal warmth and connection, rationality and self- awareness, personal responsibility and achievement, and creative openness. A limitation of these early accounts of healthy personality functioning is that many of them were not operationalized and systematically tested (Gable & Haidt, 2005). Despite some efforts to assess healthy personality functioning (e.g., Block, 1961; Cartwright & Morey, 1988; McLain, 1970; Sieglman, Block, Block, & von der Lippe, 1970; Wagner & Morse, 1975 Westen & Shedler, 1998), as of yet, existing measures have not contributed to a coherent and systematic body of knowledge about the nature of the healthy personality. The dearth of integrative models and the lack of consensus about the most appropriate tools to assess the healthy personality led to moratorium on empirical research on this topic. This situation has changed, however, with the emergence of positive psychology and its focus on human virtues and character strengths over the last few decades. Positive Psychology Positive psychology, whose origins lie in the humanistic movement of the 1950s, focuses on three
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Personality Theory and the Nature of Human Nature Robert Hogan
    Personality Theory and The Nature of Human Nature Robert Hogan & Ryne A. Sherman Hogan Assessment Systems Pre-print under review for special issue at Personality and Individual Differences Abstract This overview of modern personality theory makes six points. First, personality theory is crucial for understanding life. Second, life is largely about competition. Third, there is competition within groups for individual status, and there is competition between groups for collective survival. Fourth, academic psychology focuses on within group competition, but between group competition can be more consequential. Fifth, successful within group competition depends on social skill; successful between group competition depends on leadership. And finally, personality determines/explains the outcome of both forms of competition. Personality Theory and The Nature of Human Nature People are the deadliest invasive species in the history of the earth. People have the potential to kill every living thing and, in certain instances have already done so (e.g., passenger pigeons, western black rhinoceros, great auk) or are on their way to doing so (e.g., sea turtles, elephants, tigers, polar bears). Given their frightful potential and world-wide presence, it would be useful to know something about people. Personality psychology is the “go-to” discipline for understanding people; personality psychology is the only discipline whose primary focus is the nature of human nature. What does personality psychology tell us about human nature? The answer depends on whom you ask; or more precisely, to which theory of personality you subscribe. Modern personality psychology began in Vienna at the end of the 19th century, where an amazing flowering of human creativity brought revolutions in a wide variety of fields including architecture, music, physics, medicine, music, painting, literature, economics, and especially philosophy.
    [Show full text]
  • Leadership Theory: a Different Conceptual Approach
    Journal of Leadership Education DOI:10.12806/V17/I2/T1 APRIL 2018 THEORY Leadership Theory: A Different Conceptual Approach William E. Allen, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Fort Hays State University Abstract Creating a logical and consistent picture of the state of leadership theory and research is a difficult task (Hernandez, Eberly, Avolio, & Johnson, 2011). Attempts to describe leadership studies occasionally include words such as “paradox,” “inconsistencies,” “contradictions,” and “messy” (Brungardt, 1996; Klenke, 1993). These adjectives flow from many diverse ways of thinking about leadership (Bass, 2008; Grint, 2000; Northouse, 2015; Ruben, 2012). This paper presents an alternative view of leadership theory providing practitioners, educators, and students with an additional-and perhaps a singular-conceptual framework for their toolbox. It also provides leadership studies students with a unifying perspective of leadership theory without taking anything away from individual theories. Introduction This idea for a thirty-thousand-foot alternative view of leadership theory developed out of the challenges associated with teaching leadership studies concepts in China cross-culturally to Chinese students. The understanding of leadership theory that follows allows the reader to grasp the depth and breadth of discipline content in a way that makes sense from a holistic perspective. The new point of view encourages discussion with the hope for a more efficacious understanding of leadership theory in any part of the world. Prior papers have noted this same need and interest (Harter, 2012; Martin & Allen, 2016; Paxton & Van Stralen, 2016; Perkins, 2009). Moreover, this paper answers the call for a critical perspective that goes well beyond the currently available approach by addressing core assumptions in the field (Tourish, 2015).
    [Show full text]
  • Personality Traits
    Personality Traits SECOND EDITION GERALD MATTHEWS University of Cincinnati IAN J. DEARY University of Edinburgh MARTHA C. WHITEMAN University of Edinburgh published by the press syndicate of the university of cambridge The Pitt Building, Trumpington Street, Cambridge, United Kingdom cambridge university press The Edinburgh Building, Cambridge, CB2 2RU, UK 40 West 20th Street, New York, NY 10011–4211, USA 477 Williamstown Road, Port Melbourne, VIC 3207, Australia Ruiz de Alarc´on 13, 28014 Madrid, Spain Dock House, The Waterfront, Cape Town 8001, South Africa http://www.cambridge.org C Cambridge University Press 2003 This book is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published 1998. Reprinted 1999, 2000, 2002 Second edition 2003 Printed in the United Kingdom at the University Press, Cambridge Typefaces Times 10/13 pt. Formata System LATEX2ε [TB] A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloguing in Publication data Matthews, Gerald. Personality traits / Gerald Matthews, Ian J. Deary, Martha C. Whiteman. – 2nd edn. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0 521 83107 5 – ISBN 0 521 53824 6 (pb) 1. Personality. I. Deary, Ian J. II. Whiteman, Martha C. III. Title. BF698.M3434 2003 155.23 – dc21 2003046259 ISBN 0 521 83107 5 hardback ISBN 0 521 53824 6 paperback The publisher has used its best endeavours to ensure that URLs for external websites referred to in this book are correct and active at the time of going to press.
    [Show full text]
  • The Psychometric Evaluation of a Personality Selection Tool
    Seattle aP cific nivU ersity Digital Commons @ SPU Industrial-Organizational Psychology Dissertations Psychology, Family, and Community, School of Spring January 18th, 2017 The syP chometric Evaluation of a Personality Selection Tool James R. Longabaugh Seattle Pacific nU iversity Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.spu.edu/iop_etd Part of the Industrial and Organizational Psychology Commons Recommended Citation Longabaugh, James R., "The sP ychometric Evaluation of a Personality Selection Tool" (2017). Industrial-Organizational Psychology Dissertations. 10. https://digitalcommons.spu.edu/iop_etd/10 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Psychology, Family, and Community, School of at Digital Commons @ SPU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Industrial-Organizational Psychology Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital Commons @ SPU. The Psychometric Evaluation of a Personality Selection Tool James Longabaugh A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Industrial-Organizational Psychology Seattle Pacific University January, 2017 THE PSYCHOMETRIC EVALUATION OF A PERSONALITY INSTRUMENT i Acknowledgments The question of whether it is the journey or the destination that is more important has never been so clear; it is the journey. There have been so many people who have helped and supported me along the way, and I only hope that I can acknowledge as many of them as possible. It is with great gratitude that I extend thanks to each and every one who has helped me attain this high honor, but more so for their contributions of inspiration and motivation along the way. First and foremost, my advisor, my mentor, and my dissertation chair, Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Cognitive Theory of Personality
    1 SOCIAL COGNITIVE THEORY OF PERSONALITY Albert Bandura Stanford University Bandura, A. (1999). A social cognitive theory of personality. In L. Pervin & O. John (Ed.), Handbook of personality (2nd ed., pp. 154-196). New York: Guilford Publications. (Reprinted in D. Cervone & Y. Shoda [Eds.], The coherence of personality. New York: Guilford Press.) 2 Many psychological theories have been proposed over the years to explain human behavior. The view of human nature embodied in such theories and the causal processes they postulate have considerable import. What theorists believe people to be determines which aspects of human functioning they explore most thoroughly and which they leave unexamined. The conceptions of human nature in which psychological theories are rooted is more than a theoretical issue. As knowledge gained through inquiry is applied, the conceptions guiding the social practices have even vaster implications. They affect which human potentialities are cultivated, which are underdeveloped, and whether efforts at change are directed mainly at psychosocial, biological or sociostructural factors. This chapter addresses the personal determinants and mechanisms of human functioning from the perspective of social cognitive theory (Bandura, 1986). The recent years have witnessed a resurgence of interest in self-referent phenomena. Self- processes have come to pervade diverse domains of psychology because most external influences affect human functioning through intermediary self processes rather than directly. The self system thus lies at the very heart of causal processes. To cite but a few examples, personal factors are very much involved in regulating attentional processes, schematic processing of experiences, memory representation and reconstruction, cognitively-based motivation, emotion activation, psychobiologic functioning and the efficacy with which cognitive and behavioral competencies are executed in the transactions of everyday life.
    [Show full text]
  • Traits, Behavioral Systems, and Relationships: Three Models of Infant-Adult Attachment
    Reprinted from Immelmann et al. (1981), Behavioral Development. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press (pp. 621-650). TRAITS, BEHAVIORAL SYSTEMS, AND RELATIONSHIPS: THREE MODELS OF INFANT-ADULT ATTACHMENT EVERETT WATERS Psychodynamic, social learning, and ethological approaches to infant behavior have each yielded important descriptive insights concerning infant-adult attachment. In many respects these insights appear to be complementary. But because of competition and conflict among theoretical systems, integration of descriptive insights has been difficult to achieve. The pace at which new attachment research appears seems to have slackened. Recent critiques have suggested that everything implied by the notion of a bond between infant and adult can be captured by studying patterns of interactive behavior, without invoking the concept of attachment (Rosenthal 1973). Weinraub et al. (1977) have even wondered whether an attachment construct has any value at all from a logical and scientific point of view. The goal of this chapter is to step outside the arena of cross-theoretical controversy and to examine models rather than theories of infant-adult attachment. My premise is that difficulties and discouragement have arisen in part because we have failed to look beyond differences of theoretical orientation to examine the models and types of constructs that we use in developing attachment theory and designing research. My primary concern is that the failure to consider various modes of model building has not only made communication across theoretical systems and research paradigms difficult, it has also significantly restricted our descriptive approach to the infant-adult tie. The basic data from which much of attachment theory and research proceed can be summarized very briefly.
    [Show full text]
  • Reconceptualising Psychopathy
    orensic P F sy f c o h l o a l n o r g u y o J Journal of Forensic Psychology Mihailides et al., J Foren Psy 2017, 2:2 ISSN: 2475-319X DOI: 10.4172/2475-319X.1000120 Review Article Open Access Reconceptualising Psychopathy Stephen Mihailides*, Roslyn Galligan and Glen Bates Department of Psychological Sciences, Swinburne University, Australia *Corresponding author: Stephen Mihailides, Department of Psychological Sciences, Swinburne University, John Street, Hawthorn, Australia, Tel: 0403 209 663; E-mail: [email protected] Received date: February 06, 2017; Accepted date: March 20, 2017; Published date: March 24, 2017 Copyright: © 2017 Mihailides S, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Abstract This work re-engineers theory about psychopathy, by redevelopment of core assumptions about psychopathy. In that redevelopment, the origins of current theory are traced, to analyse critically the post Cleckley period of construct development. The discordances in competing lines of existing theory become a precursor to theoretical innovation. The notion of paradoxical superfunctioning-a topical feature of Cleckley's work is recognised as having utility for redefining theory. This precedes fundamental reformulation of theory of psychopathy, where the focus is upon the implications of normal levels of psychopathy for adaptive human functioning. Psychopathy is formulated as a state- trait construct. The principle of dynamism is deployed to guide understanding of how state levels of psychopathy may vary by context.
    [Show full text]
  • Personality Network Neuroscience: Promises and Challenges on the Way Toward a Unifying Framework of Individual Variability
    PERSPECTIVE Personality network neuroscience: Promises and challenges on the way toward a unifying framework of individual variability Kirsten Hilger1,2 and Sebastian Markett3 1Department of Psychology I, Julius-Maximilians University Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany 2Department of Psychology, Goethe University Frankfurt, Frankfurt am Main, Germany 3Department of Psychology, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Germany Downloaded from http://direct.mit.edu/netn/article-pdf/5/3/631/1960477/netn_a_00198.pdf by guest on 29 September 2021 Keywords: Personality network neuroscience (PNN), fMRI, Personality psychology, Trait theory, Functional brain connectivity an open access journal ABSTRACT We propose that the application of network theory to established psychological personality conceptions has great potential to advance a biologically plausible model of human personality. Stable behavioral tendencies are conceived as personality “traits.” Such traits demonstrate considerable variability between individuals, and extreme expressions represent risk factors for psychological disorders. Although the psychometric assessment of personality has more than hundred years tradition, it is not yet clear whether traits indeed represent “biophysical entities” with specific and dissociable neural substrates. For instance, it is an open question whether there exists a correspondence between the multilayer structure of psychometrically derived personality factors and the organizational properties of traitlike brain systems. After a short introduction into fundamental personality conceptions, this article will point out how network Citation: Hilger, K., & Markett, S. (2021). Personality network neuroscience: neuroscience can enhance our understanding about human personality. We will examine the Promises and challenges on the way toward a unifying framework of importance of intrinsic (task-independent) brain connectivity networks and show means to link individual variability. Network Neuroscience, 5(3), 631–645.
    [Show full text]
  • Leadership Theory Simplified
    Professional and Staff Development FSPSD200 Leadership Theory Simplified Allisen Penn “Pop leadership” Assistant Professor ­ philosophy abounds Leadership Development in our culture today. Book stores have shelves full of books on leader­ ship. Leaders and leadership are discussed daily on tele ­ vision, radio, newspapers, magazines and on the web. As a result, many mixed messages about leadership are Write your definition of leadership: expressed. So – how do you decide what is accurate? Read the inside cover of a leadership book and you may find that the book is more about manage­ ment and business than leadership. A magazine or newspaper may just express the opinion of a famous person about leadership. While the perspective of a well-known leader or the insight offered in a book may be A commonly accepted definition valuable, you may want to ask – is of leadership is a process used by an this information supported by individual to influence a group of research? An understanding of the members toward a common goal existing leadership research may (Bass, 1990; Howell and Costley, help you shape your own opinion 2001). Maxwell (1993) simply states about what is good leadership. Once that leadership is influence. you determine what is good leader­ ship, you can begin to develop your The following overview of own leadership approach. leadership theories is intended to Arkansas Is provide a synopsis of some of the What is leadership? There are research conducted on leadership in Our Campus almost as many definitions of leader­ the last 50 years. There is a list of ship as there are books and opinions suggested reading (page 4) to help Visit our web site at: about leadership.
    [Show full text]
  • What to Consider When Constructing Personality State Measures
    Running Head: ASSESSING PERSONALITY STATES Assessing Personality States: What to Consider when Constructing Personality State Measures Kai T. Horstmann & Matthias Ziegler Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (Germany) This is the accepted version of the article. This version has not been copy-edited. It was published in the special issue New approaches towards conceptualizing and assessing personality in the European Journal of Personality. Please cite as: Horstmann, K. T. & Ziegler, M. (2020). Assessing Personality States: What to Consider When Constructing Personality State Measures. European Journal of Personality. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2266 Author Notes Correspondence: Kai T. Horstmann, Department of Psychology, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany [email protected] We thank our three student assistants Lilly Buck, Maximilian Ernst and Aaron Peikert for their help with the literature revieW. We also thank Clemens Stachl for helpful suggestions. ASSESSING PERSONALITY STATES 2 Abstract Repeated assessments of personality states in daily diary or experience sampling studies have become a more and more common tool in the psychologist’s toolbox. However, and contrary to the widely available literature on personality traits, no best practices for the development of personality state measures exist, and personality state measures have been developed in many different ways. To address this, we first define what a personality state is and discuss important components. Based on this, we define what a personality state measure is and suggest a general guideline for the development of such measures. Following the ABC of test construction can then guide the strategy for obtaining validity and reliability evidence: (A) What is the construct being measured? (B) What is the intended purpose of the measure? And (C) What is the targeted population of persons and situations? We then conclude With an example by developing an initial item pool for the assessment of conscientiousness personality states.
    [Show full text]
  • Psychometrics a RTICLE
    O RIGINAL Psychometrics A RTICLE PSICOMETRIA PSICOMETRÍA Luiz Pasquali1 ABSTRACT RESUMO RESUMEN Psychometrics has foundations on the A psicometria fundamenta-se na teoria da La Psicometría se fundamenta en la teoría theory of measurement in Sciences and is medida em ciências para explicar o sentido de la medida en las ciencias buscando ex- aimed at explaining the meaning of re- que têm as respostas dadas pelos sujeitos plicar el sentido en las respuestas de los que sponses provided by subjects submitted to a uma série de tarefas e propor técnicas fueron sujetos a una serie de tareas, ade- a series of tasks, and proposing techniques de medida dos processos mentais. Neste ar- más de proponerse técnicas de medida de for the measurement of mental processes. tigo são apresentados os conceitos e mo- sus procesos mentales. En este artículo son This article presents concepts and models delos da psicometria moderna e discutidos presentados los conceptos y modelos de of modern psychometrics and discusses the os parâmetros de validade e precisão dos psicometría moderna, así como son discu- validity and reliability parameters of the testes. tidos los parámetros de validez y precisión applied tests. de los testes. KEY WORDS DESCRITORES DESCRIPTORES Psychometrics. Psicometria. Psicometría. Reproducibility of results. Reprodutibilidade dos testes. Reproducibilidad de resultados. Validity of tests. Validade dos testes. Validez de las pruebas. Validation studies. Estudos de validação. Estudios de validación. 1 Researcher Professor Associated with the
    [Show full text]
  • Was Gordon Allport a Trait Theorist?
    PERSONALITY PROCESSES AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES Was Gordon Allport a Trait Theorist? David C. Zuroff McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada Contemporary discussions have generally defined a trait as a pervasive, cross-situational consistency in behavior. A careful examination of Allport's (1937, 1961, 1966) writings reveals that he did not believe in such pervasive consistencies. In fact, he maintained that behavior in different situations is frequently inconsistent, even contradictory, because different traits are aroused to different degrees in different situations. Allport was, therefore, an interactionist in the sense that he recognized that behavior is determined by the person and the situation. However, he failed to develop an interactionist process theory that could predict and explain the situational variability that he observed and de- scribed. Allport's concept of a trait as well as those of several contemporary theorists are compared and found to differ in terms of (a) the ontological status they ascribe to traits and (b) the type of consistency over situation they require. Distinctions among types of trait concepts are then used to clarify the debate about the existence of traits. It is argued that the evidence for traits as pervasive, cross-situational consistencies is quite negative but that there is considerable evidence for the exis- tence of traits as average levels of responses and as consistent patterns within delimited ranges of situations. Mischel's (1984) concept of a context-bound consistency is shown to be surprisingly sim- ilar to Allport's concept of a trait. The future of trait constructs is discussed in relation to the descrip- tive, predictive, and explanatory functions of traits.
    [Show full text]