Personality:
structure, theories,
measurement
9.10.2007
How would you describe yourself?















cool, reserved
concrete thinking
easily upset
not assertive
sober, serious
expedient
tough-minded
trusting
practical
forthright
self-assured
conservative
group-oriented
undisciplined
relaxed
or
or
or
or
or
or
or
or
or
or
or
or
or
or
or
warm, easy going
abstract thinking
calm, stable
dominant
happy-go-lucky
conscientious
tender-minded
suspicious
imaginative
shrewd
apprehensive
experimenting
self-sufficient
self-disciplined
tense, driven
Definition of personality
 Personality consists of all the relatively
STABLE and DISTINCTIVE styles of
thought, behavior and emotional response
that characterize a person’s adaptations to
surrounding circumstances.
2 questions
 Why don’t people react in the same way to
the same situation?
 early life experiences
 biological makeup
 learning
 Can we predict behavior? Does it depend
on personality traits or on situation?
 is personality assessment meaningful?
Different personality theories
 psychoanalytic approach
 trait theories
 social cognitive approach
 humanistic approach
 evolutionary/biological approach
Psychoanalytic approach
 Sigmund Freud
 childhood experiences
 the role of unconscious in motivating
human actions
Trait theories
 What are fundamental elements of
personality?
 A trait: any relatively enduring way in
which one individual differs from another
 stable in time
 consistent over situations
 their combination is the cause of the individual
differences
Social cognitive approach
 active, conscious aspects of our
personality
 different ways in which individuals interpret
events
 personality styles are shaped by
observational learning
 self-efficacy
Humanistic approach
 emphasizes human potential for growth,
creativity and spontaneity
 self-concept
Biological approaches
 evolutionary approach
 behavioral genetic approach
The structure of the personality
Assessment of personality
 observation
 interview
 rating…
 personality inventory
 projective techniques
History of personality
assessment
 Pseudosciences:
phrenology,
physiognomy,
graphology
History of personality assessment
 Type theories:
 Galen – theory of body
humors (sanguine,
choleric, melancholic,
phlegmatic type)
 Kretschmer,
Lombroso, Sheldon –
body type theories
Contemporary assessment of
personality
 Trait theories:
 Allport, Cattel…
(factor analysis)
 Hans Eysenck: 3
dimensions, biological
basis of differences
 Big Five
 no theory of development
 relies too heavily on simple
mathematical techniques
 exaggerate the consistency of
human behavior
 can lead to circular reasoning
Contemporary assessment of
personality
 Humanistic theories:
 self concept scales
 MMPI (empirical basis)
Projective Testing
Techniques
Projective techniques
 not psychometric instruments
 used in clinical settings, special training
 study of personality and adjustment
 use symbolic, pictorial, verbal and
expressive stimuli
uncovering of covert, latent, unconscious
aspects of personality
The concept of “projection”
 unwittingly attributing one’s own drives,
needs, perceptions, attitudes and style to
others
 giving meaning to relatively ambiguous or
unstructured stimuli by drawing upon one’s
own private desires, traits, fears, and
experience
Projective techniques:
disguised tests
 no awareness of psychological
interpretation
 responses should be free of personal
censorship
 dominant psychological characteristics are
“hidden” in the responses
Classification of “projectives”
Frank, 1948
 what they require or seek to evoke from
the subject





constitutive
constructive
interpretive
cathartic
refractive
Rorschach’s “Ink blot test”
Criticism
 Lack of satisfactory internal consistency, or test-retest





reliability.
Failure to provide cogent evidence for clinical validity.
Failure of the individual Rorschach scoring categories
to relate to diagnosis.
Lack of prognostic, or predictive validity with respect to
the outcome of treatment, or later behavior.
Individual differences between groups of normal
subjects.
Failure to find any significant relationships between
Rorschach scores and intelligence, or creative ability.
Draw a person test
TAT – Thematic apperception test
(Murray, 1943)
Rozenzweig’s Picture-frustration
Study
Make a Picture Story
Thank you for your
attention!