Term
| the greeks believed in the idea of personality consisting of.. |
|
Definition
the four humors:
choleric
melancholic
sanguine
phlegmatic |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| an attempt to determine personality based on bumps on the head |
|
|
Term
how can we define personality?
(according to book) |
|
Definition
| personality encompasses the psychological triad: how people think, feel and behave. |
|
|
Term
| different perspectives of personality? |
|
Definition
| trait, biological, psychoanalytic, phrenomological, learning and cognitive. |
|
|
Term
| explain the trait approach/perspective |
|
Definition
| when psychologists focus efforts on ways people differ psychologically and how these differences might be conceptualized and measured. |
|
|
Term
| explain the biological approach/perspective |
|
Definition
| addressing biological mechanisms such as anatomy, physiology, genetics etc. & their relevance in personality |
|
|
Term
| explain the psychoanalytic approach/perspective |
|
Definition
| concerned primarily with the unconscious mind, and the nature and resolution of internal mental conflict |
|
|
Term
| explain the phrenomological approach/perspective |
|
Definition
| using phrenology to determine personality |
|
|
Term
| explain the learning/cognitive approach/perspective |
|
Definition
| behaviorisms, social learning theory, and cognitive personality psychology theory. |
|
|
Term
| define: Implicit Personality Theory |
|
Definition
-Everyday beliefs people have about personality
-Helpful to recognize IPTs as cues to potential biases
-IPTs may help explain why you prefer one approach to personality (or theory) over another |
|
|
Term
| in what ways can we measure personality? |
|
Definition
| stable dispositions that cause people to act, feel, and think in certain ways. If they are stable, they are measurable. |
|
|
Term
| in what ways can't we measure personality? |
|
Definition
| We cannot see personality. Multiple processes coalesce into what we call “personality” therefore it cannot be quantified |
|
|
Term
| what are the types of data? |
|
Definition
Behavior
Life
Informant
Self-Report |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
self report.
direct and simple
most common --> personality assessment (like in Cosmo)
Ask people directly! |
|
|
Term
| what are the pros and cons of S data? |
|
Definition
pro:
-You are your own best expert
-Access to internal feelings, beliefs, and attitudes
-Access to abilities, expectations, and motivations to act or be
cons:
-Susceptible to lying
-Maybe people don’t know everything about themselves
-Maybe people won’t tell you
-too simple, too easy, probably over and misused |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
informant report
asking a "knowledgeable other" (parent, friend, doctor etc)
Gossip |
|
|
Term
| what are the pros and cons of I data? |
|
Definition
pro:
-Rich amounts of information, across situations
-Real-world Basis
-Common sense, informants can synthesize a lot of information in making a judgment
-People have “reps” that others are aware of
con:
-informants can be limited to certain situations.
- error (human kind) |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Life outcomes
things in public records, divorce, tax reports, delinquency etc. |
|
|
Term
| what are the pros and cons of L data? |
|
Definition
pro:
-They are psychologically relevant, certain behaviors correspond to certain psychological tendencies
con:
-Sometimes there are too many factors affecting a life outcome |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
behavioral data
naturalistic of laboratory environment
fMRI etc |
|
|
Term
| what are the pros and cons of B data? |
|
Definition
pro:
-Gives researches access to events that are not common or can be re-created
-The researcher is collecting their own data from the person, there is no need to take someone else’s word for it
-Can be quantified (measured)
con:
-Data can be misinterpreted or unable to be interpreted |
|
|
Term
| when assessing data, what three things must you ask yourself? |
|
Definition
is it reliable?
is it valid?
is it generalizable? |
|
|
Term
| what does it mean to be reliable? |
|
Definition
free of irrelevant influences
--> TEST AND RETEST! |
|
|
Term
| what does validity measure? |
|
Definition
| the degree to which your measure captures what you think it does |
|
|
Term
| how can you "validate" a construct? |
|
Definition
| measure it and a bunch of related and unrelated things to see how much your measurement and those things converge and diverge. |
|
|
Term
| what does it mean to be generalizable? |
|
Definition
applicable across people....
-->
Problems with college students (as participants)
Gender Bias
Shows vs. No Shows
Cohort Effects
Ethnic Diversity (70% of the world is not of North American or European Descent) |
|
|
Term
| what is the clinical approach? |
|
Definition
| in-depth study of an individual or small group. |
|
|
Term
| what are three examples of clinical approach studies? |
|
Definition
case history method
open ended interview
and analysis of personal documents. |
|
|
Term
| what are the strengths of the clinical approach? |
|
Definition
In-depth understanding of the individual
Study lives over time
Study extreme and/or rare events
Useful for generating testable hypotheses |
|
|
Term
| what are some limitations of the clinical approach? |
|
Definition
Limited generalizability
Harder to keep personal biases out of the process |
|
|
Term
| define the correlational approach |
|
Definition
looks at the association between two things
--> is impulsivity linked to crime? |
|
|
Term
| what type of graph does the correlational approach use? |
|
Definition
| scatter plots --->visualize relations. |
|
|
Term
| what are some strengths of the correlational approach? |
|
Definition
Explore and identify relations between variables
Fewer ethical and procedural considerations |
|
|
Term
| what are some limitations of the correlational approach? |
|
Definition
Golden Rule of Correlation: Correlation does not prove causation!
Third variable problem
Hard (or almost impossible to determine causality) |
|
|
Term
| what are characteristics of the experimental approach? |
|
Definition
intervention, observation and control.
standardized procedures! |
|
|
Term
| in an experimental procedure, what is the independent variable? |
|
Definition
experimental condition.
--> treatment or no treatment. |
|
|
Term
| in an experimental procedure, what is the dependent variable? |
|
Definition
| the outcome of interest in the particular study |
|
|
Term
| what are the strengths of experimental studies? |
|
Definition
Can establish causality
Have a great deal of control |
|
|
Term
| what are the weaknesses of experimental studies? |
|
Definition
Artificial
Requires Deception/Ethical contraints
Sometimes not possible
Can’t be sure you are manipulating what you think you're manipulating
Potential that experimenter biases may still affect experiment |
|
|
Term
| what is ecological validity? |
|
Definition
| labs study what CAN happen in the real world, but it is not exactly the same as what ACTUALLY happens |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| organize and explain known findings, make predictions. |
|
|
Term
| when is deception allowed in experiments? |
|
Definition
1. research is important
2. there are no alternatives
3. there is no foreseeable harm to participants. |
|
|
Term
| what is the person/situations debate's main conflict? |
|
Definition
| it is a scientific argument over the causes of human behavior |
|
|
Term
| when did the person/situation debate begin? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| what two sides to the person situation debate are there? |
|
Definition
| situationist argument & the rebuttal |
|
|
Term
| define the situationist argument from the person/situation debate |
|
Definition
things external to you matter much more than things internal to you. (e.g. who you become and how you act is the result of external forces and varies depending on the situation you find yourself involved in)
also-->argue that people are not consistent enough from situation to situation to be characterized by broad personality traits. |
|
|
Term
| what is the rebuttal argument for the person/situation debate? |
|
Definition
internal things such as personality, genes, motivations, etc. are useful predictors of behavior.
also -> people have consistent personalities that guide their behaviors across situations |
|
|
Term
| who started the person/situation debate? |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
what did Mischel propose?
(think person/situation debate) |
|
Definition
| the concept of personality traits as broad predispositions is thus untenable. |
|
|
Term
| describe the basic findings of the Hartshorne and May cheating study? |
|
Definition
| A child may be consistently honest with his friends, but not with his parents or teachers. From this and other studies, Hartshorne and May concluded that character traits are not robust but rather “specific functions of life situations |
|
|
Term
| trait psychologists response to Hartshorne & May study... |
|
Definition
denying traits is absurd. prediction is improved when you aggregate. traits help predict behavior over the long haul.
behavior - MULTIPLE traits. |
|
|
Term
| conclusions about aggregation.. |
|
Definition
Aggregates of behaviors are highly stable
and reveal individual differences in traits.
Although traits may have low predictive
validity for a single situation, traits can have
powerful effects in the long term. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| people chose situations that are consistent with their personalities. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
certain personality traits may evoke (draw out) specific responses from the environment
(self fulfilling prophecy) |
|
|
Term
| what kept the person/situation debate going? |
|
Definition
| the Stanford Prison Experiment. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
| both internal and external forces interact with each other to produce behavior. |
|
|
Term
| what is the lexical hypothesis? |
|
Definition
the most important personality dimensions are encoded in everyday language.
-->
-that those personality characteristics that are most important in peoples' lives will eventually become a part of their language.
-more important personality characteristics are more likely to be encoded into language as a single word |
|
|
Term
| exploratory factor analysis' goal is what? |
|
Definition
to identify underlying factors that are responsible for associations between characteristics.
--> people who are nervous are also fearful and tense. |
|
|
Term
|
Definition
Openness to new experiences
Conscientiousness
Extraversion
Agreeableness
Neuroticism. |
|
|
Term
| traits associated with extraversion |
|
Definition
| talkative, energetic, outgoing |
|
|
Term
| traits associated with agreeableness |
|
Definition
| helpful, trusting, cooperative. |
|
|
Term
| traits associated with conscientiousness |
|
Definition
| reliable, hardworking, dependable |
|
|
Term
| traits associated with neuroticism |
|
Definition
|
|
Term
| traits associated with openness to experience |
|
Definition
| curious about intellectual and artistic matters, values artistic experiences, has an active imagination. |
|
|
Term
| advantages of the big five |
|
Definition
-Offers a working taxonomy of broad personality traits
-Organize Scattered Findings under One Scheme
-Use the Big Five to Predict Important Life Outcomes
-Use the Big Five to Study Personality Development |
|
|
Term
| Concerns with the big five |
|
Definition
Are the Big Five really separate dimensions of personality?
-Conceptually distinct, not always so empirically
-Is there a general “personality factor” sort of like general intelligence
-Big Five clearly linked to separate psychobiological systems?
-more than just 5? (unconscious desires, motivations etc) |
|
|
Term
| As long as we remember that one perspective can’t account for all of personality this isn’t so much a concern as it is a necessary limitation |
|
Definition
|
|
