Top Banner
Psychology 305 1 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20
59

Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Dec 28, 2015

Download

Documents

Chad Morrison
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Page 1: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 1

Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality

Lecture 20

Page 2: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 2

• Papers are due on Tuesday, April 6, 2010.

• Students are expected to submit their papers at the start of class. If you are unable to attend class on the day the paper is due, please have someone hand it in for you at the start of class. Papers left in mailboxes or submitted via e-mail will not be accepted.

• In addition to submitting a hardcopy in class, you must also submit your paper electronically to TurnItIn.

Reminders

Page 3: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 3Psychology 305 3

What is TurnItIn?

• TurnItIn is a plagiarism detection system that scans and compares your paper to online content (e.g., other students’ papers, websites such as wikipedia).

• It provides an “originality report” that documents the overlap between your paper and online content.

• It indicates the source of plagiarized content (note that overlap is acceptable if it is properly cited—see APA guidelines).

Page 4: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 4Psychology 305 4

• Go to www.turnitin.com

• To create your own account, click on “New User” in the upper right hand corner of the screen.

• You will need the following information to create your account or add this course to your existing account:

Class ID: 3206801Password: personality

TurnItIn Instructions

Page 5: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 5Psychology 305 5

• Step-by-step instructions are available in the “Student Quickstart Guide” at http://www.turnitin.com/static/

support/guides_manuals.html

• You must submit your paper to TurnItIn by the due date of the paper. You will receive 0 on your paper if you

do not submit it to TurnItIn by midnight on April 6, 2010.

• Please contact Lauren if you have any questions or difficulties submitting your paper to TurnItIn.

Additional Notes on TurnItIn

Page 6: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 6

Lecture 20

Questions That Will Be Answered In Today’s Lecture

Sex Differences in Personality, continued

5. What theories have been proposed to explain sex differences in personality?

Page 7: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 7

Cultural Differences in Personality

1. What are the major value dimensions on which cultures vary?

2. Does cultural variation on the dimension of individualism-collectivism influence the way in which the self is conceptualized?

3. Do trait theories adequately describe personality in non-Western cultures?

Page 8: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 8

What theories have been proposed to explain sex

differences in personality?

1. Social Theories

(a) Socialization Theory

Most widely held theory of sex differences in personality.

Assumes that the characteristics of boys and girls diverge because their caregivers and friends

reinforce them for adopting sex-appropriate characteristics.

Page 9: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 9

(b) Social Learning Theory

Based on Bandura’s work.

Assumes that the characteristics of boys and girls diverge because they learn “how to behave” from different models within their environment.

Maintains that, even in the absence of direct reinforcement, children learn from same-sex

models the classes of characteristics that are appropriate for their sex.

Page 10: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 10

(c) Social Role Theory

Assumes that the characteristics of boys and girls diverge because they learn that different sets of

characteristics are required for the social roles (e.g., familial roles, occupational roles) that they will ultimately assume in society.

Page 11: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 11

2. Hormonal Theories

• Studies suggest that some sex differences in personality emerge as a result of hormones encountered in utero:

• Assume that personality differences between males and females are the result of sex differences

in hormonal levels.

Page 12: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 12

For example, female fetuses with congenital adrenal hyperplasia (CAH) are exposed to excessive levels of testosterone due to hyperactivity of the adrenal gland. Research has shown that, as young girls, these females demonstrate a marked preference for “male” toys and, as adults, exhibit a strong preference for “masculine” occupations.

Page 13: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 13

• Other studies suggest that some sex differences in personality are due to circulating levels of

hormones.

For example, research has shown that, among females, higher levels of testosterone circulating within the bloodstream are associated with higher levels of aggressiveness and dominance.

Page 14: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 14

3. Evolutionary Theories

• Assume that sex differences in personality are due to the different reproductive problems faced by

males and females over the course of human evolutionary history.

Page 15: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 15

• Given the limited reproductive capacity of females and the great parental investment that is required of females, a preference would have evolved among females for males who possessed characteristics

that enabled the acquisition of resources (e.g., dominant).

These males would have been preferentially selected for mating. As a result, the frequency of their characteristics would have increased within the population until they came to characterize most males.

Page 16: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 16

• In contrast, given the unlimited reproductive capacity of males and the small parental investment that is required of males, a preference would have evolved among males for females who possessed

characteristics that were indicative of an ability to nurture offspring (e.g., empathetic).

These females would have been preferentially selected for mating. As a result, the frequency of their characteristics would have increased within the population until they came to characterize most females.

Page 17: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 17

• Values: (a) are concepts or beliefs, (b) pertain to desirable end states or behaviors, (c) transcend

specific situations, (d) guide selection or evaluation of behavior and events, and (e) are ordered by relative importance” (Schwartz and Bilsky, 1987).

What are the major value dimensions on which

cultures vary?

• Culture: “information capable of affecting individuals’ behaviour that they acquire from other members of their species through teaching, imitation, and other forms of social transmission” (Richerson and Boyd, 2005).

Page 18: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 18

Identified 4 value dimensions on which these cultural groups varied: Power distance, uncertainty avoidance, masculinity, and individualism.

Examined values among IBM employees in 40 countries (e.g., Canada, China, Columbia, Germany, Greece, India, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, New Zealand, Poland, Uruguay, U.S., West Africa).

• A number of studies have examined the major value dimensions on which cultures vary. Among the most influential of these is Hofstede’s (1980) study:

Page 19: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

19

Value DimensionHighest Scoring

CountriesLowest Scoring

Countries

Power distancePhilippines, Mexico,

VenezuelaDenmark, Israel,

Austria

Uncertainty avoidanceGreece, Portugal,

BelgiumSweden, Denmark,

Singapore

MasculinityJapan, Austria,

VenezuelaNetherlands, Norway,

Sweden

IndividualismU.S., Australia,

Great BritainPakistan, Columbia,

Venezuela

Countries High and Low on Hofstede’s (1980) Value Dimensions

Page 20: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

20

Value Dimension Maximum Score Average Score Canada’s Score

Power distance 104 55 39

Uncertainty avoidance

112 64 48

Masculinity 95 50 52

Individualism 91 43 80

Canada’s Scores on Hofstede’s (1980) Value Dimensions

Page 21: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 21

• Of the various value dimensions on which cultures have been found to vary, the dimension that has been most studied is the dimension of individualism, or individualism-collectivism (IC).

• In recent years, there has been a proliferation of research on the impact of IC on a variety of psychological constructs, most notably the self-concept.

Page 22: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 22

• Self-concept: a cognitive schema (i.e., organized knowledge structure) that contains beliefs about the self and controls the processing of self-relevant

information.

• Theorists have come to believe that cultural variation on IC has a profound influence on the self-concept.

Does cultural variation on the dimension of IC

influence the way in which the self is conceptualized?

Page 23: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 23

• Specifically, theorists have come to believe that the emphasis on independence and personal goals in individualistic cultures leads people to develop an “independent self-construal.”

• In contrast, the emphasis on interdependence and collective goals in collectivistic cultures leads

people to develop an “interdependent self- construal.”

Page 24: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

24

X XX X SELFX X X X X

FATHER

FRIEND

FRIEND

CO-WORKER

SIBLING

MOTHER

STRANGER

STRANGERX X X X

X X X

X X

X

X X X X

X

X

Out-Group

In-Group

The Independent Self-Construal

Page 25: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

25

X X SELF X X

FATHER

FRIEND

FRIEND

CO-WORKER

SIBLING

MOTHER

STRANGER

STRANGERX X X

X X

X

X

X X

X X

X

XX

X

X

X

Out-Group

In-Group

The Interdependent Self-Construal

Page 26: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

26

Independent Self-Construal

Interdependent Self-Construal

Definition of self

Free from social context. Tied to social context.

Structure of self

Stable, bounded, unitary. Variable, flexible, fluid.

Primary tasksUniqueness, self-expression,

realization of internal attributes, promotion of personal goals.

Fitting in, self-restraint, assuming one’s “proper” place,

promotion of others’ goals.

Role of othersSelf-evaluation (i.e., social

comparison).Self-definition.

Basis of self-esteem

Ability to express oneself and one’s internal attributes.

Ability to restrain oneself and maintain harmony with others.

Independent Versus Interdependent Self-Construals (Markus & Kitayama, 1991)

Page 27: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 27

• The distinctions between the self-construals promoted in individualistic cultures and collectivistic cultures are reflected in the following proverbs from North America and Japan, respectively:

Japanese proverb: “The nail that stands out gets pounded down.”

North American proverb: “The squeaky wheel gets the grease.”

Page 28: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 28

• A number of studies have provided support for the theory that individualistic cultures and collectivistic cultures promote distinct self-construals.

• Among these studies are those that have compared: (a) the self-descriptions of people from different

cultures and (b) the degree of self-consistency among people from different cultures.

Page 29: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 29

• These differences are exemplified in the following passages (Markus & Kitayama, 1998):

(a) Self-descriptions:

• Research has shown that individualists tend use abstract, global, and stable attributes (e.g., traits) to describe themselves, whereas collectivists tend to use social categories or affiliations (e.g., social roles) to describe themselves.

Page 30: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 30

Response of a student from the U.S.:

I like to live life with a lot of positive energy. I feel like there is so much to do and see and experience. However, I also know the value of relaxation. I love the obscure. I play ultimate Frisbee, juggle, unicycle, and dabble on the recorder. I have a taste for the unique. I am very friendly and in most situations very self-confident. I’m almost always happy and when I am down, it is usually because of stress.

Instructions: Describe yourself briefly.

Page 31: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 31

Response of a student from Japan:

I cannot decide quickly what I should do, and am often swayed by other people’s opinions, and I cannot oppose the opinions of people who are supposed to be respected because of age or status. Even if I have displeasure, I compromise myself to the people around me without getting rid of the displeasure. When I cannot make a decision I often do it according to other people’s opinions. Also, I am concerned about how other people think about me and often decide on that consideration. I try to have a harmless life. I calm down be being the same as others.

Page 32: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 32

• Studies that have compared the self-descriptions of people from different cultures have primarily

employed the Twenty Statements Test (TST; Kuhn & McPartland, 1954).

• The TST is an unstructured measure that requires participants to write 20 statements in response to the question “Who am I?”

Page 33: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 33

Administered the TST to Americans and Indians:

(a) 65% of the statements generated by Americans referred to attributes, whereas 34% of the

statements generated by Indians referred to attributes.

(b) 26% of the statements generated by Americans referred to social categories, whereas 42% of the statements generated by Indians referred to social categories.

Dhawan et al. (1995)

Page 34: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 34

(a) 58% of the statements generated by Americans referred to attributes, whereas 18% of the statements generated by Japanese referred to attributes.

(b) 9% of the statements generated by Americans referred to social categories, whereas 27% of the statements generated by Japanese referred to social categories.

Cousins, 1989

Administered the TST to Americans and Japanese:

Page 35: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 35

• Research has shown that the self-beliefs of individualists tend to be more consistent across social contexts than the self-beliefs of collectivists.

• Moreover, research has shown that there is a greater correlation between consistency of self-beliefs and psychological adjustment among individualists than collectivists.

(b) Self-consistency:

Page 36: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 36

Campbell et al. (1996)

Recruited participants from Canada and Japan.

In each study, had participants complete measures of “self-concept clarity” (SCC) and self-esteem (SE). SCC refers to the “extent to which self-beliefs are clearly and confidently defined, internally consistent, and [temporally] stable.”

Conducted 3 studies.

Page 37: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

37

1. My beliefs about myself often conflict with one another. *2. On one day I might have one opinion of myself and on another day I

might have a different opinion. *3. I spend a lot of time wondering about what kind of person I really am. * 4. Sometimes I feel that I am not really the person that I appear to be. *5. When I think about the kind of person I have been in the past, I’m not

sure what I was really like. *6. I seldom experience conflict between the different aspects of my

personality. 7. Sometimes I think I know other people better than I know myself. *8. My beliefs about myself seem to change very frequently. *9. If I were asked to describe my personality, my description might end

up being different from one day to another day. *10. Even if I wanted to, I don’t think I could tell someone what I’m really like.

*11. In general, I have a clear sense of who I am and what I am. 12. It is often hard for me to make up my mind about things because I

don’t really know what I want. *

Campbell et al’s SCC Scale

* Reverse-scored item.

Page 38: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 38

Across the 3 studies, found that:

(a) the SCC scores obtained by the Canadians were higher than the SCC scores obtained by the Japanese.

(b) the correlations between SCC and SE were higher among the Canadians than the Japanese.

Page 39: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

39

StudyMean SCC Score

Canadian ParticipantsMean SCC Score

Japanese Participantsp

1 41.72 34.41 <.01

2 39.30 35.01 <.01

3 38.02 34.35 <.01

SCC Scores for Canadian and Japanese Participants (Campbell et al. 1996)

Page 40: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

40

StudyCorrelation Between

SCC and SE Canadian Participants

Correlation Between SCC and SE

Japanese Participantsp

1 .69 .37 <.001

2 .63 .46 <.07

3 .59 .08 <.001

Correlations Between SCC and Self-Esteem for Canadian and Japanese Participants

(Campbell et al., 1996)

Page 41: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 41

Do trait theories adequately describe personality in

non-Western cultures?

• In light of research suggesting that the self-beliefs of people from collectivistic cultures are relatively variable across social contexts, some theorists (e.g., Shweder, 1991) have argued that the study of personality in collectivistic cultures is misguided.

Page 42: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 42

• Consistent with this view, Hsu (1985) stated “… the concept of personality is an expression of the Western ideal of individualism.”

• Similarly, Cross and Markus (1999) claimed that personality psychology is “an ‘indigenous psychology’

of Western Europeans and North Americans rather than a universal psychology of human behavior.”

Page 43: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 43

• Indeed, Hirschfeld (1995) has noted that “in many … cultures there is a marked absence of discourse that explains human behavior in terms of transsituationally stable motivational … properties captured by

explanations of trait and disposition.”

Page 44: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 44

• In contrast, other theorists have argued that the concept of personality is universally relevant. In support of their argument, they note that all cultural groups possess terms to describe individuals’ enduring characteristics:

Pakikiramdam (Filipino; sensitive, empathetic)

Ren qin (Chinese; relationship-oriented)

Simpatico (Mexican; avoiding of conflict)

Mitratapurne (Hindi; friendly)

Page 45: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 45

• In particular, researchers have examined two trait theories across cultures: Eysenck’s Theory of

Personality and the Five Factor Model of Personality.

• Although a number of theories of personality have been proposed, researchers who have studied

personality across cultures have largely focused on trait theories.

Page 46: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 46

(a) Eysenck’s Theory of Personality

Eysenck’s (1967, 1970) theory of personality was developed on the basis of research conducted in Great Britain. Moreover, Eysenck developed his measure of personality—the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ)—in Great Britain.

Page 47: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 47

For example, Barrett et al. (1998) administered Eysenck’s measure to participants in 34 countries (e.g., Australia, Brazil, Canada, Egypt, Israel, Japan,

Singapore, Sri Lanka, Uganda, U.S.). Consistent with Eysenck’s theory, they found that each of the 3 dimensions could be reproduced in all of the

countries surveyed.

A number of studies have used the EPQ to test Eysenck’s theory in countries outside of Great Britain.

Page 48: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 48

Similarly, Lynn and Martin (1997) administered a modified version of Eysenck’s measure to

participants in 37 countries (e.g., Australia, Bangladesh, Canada, Egypt, Finland, Iran, Japan, Nigeria, Russia, Uganda, Yugoslavia) and found that each of the 3 dimensions could be reproduced in all of the countries surveyed.

Page 49: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

49

Personality Dimension

Highest Scoring Countries

Lowest Scoring Countries

PsychoticismCzechoslovakia, India,

YugoslaviaSpain, Portugal,

Norway

ExtraversionIsrael, United States,

Puerto RicoRussia, Iran,

China

Emotional InstabilityGreece, Russia,

EgyptNorway, Nigeria,

Israel

Countries High and Low on Psychoticism, Extraversion, and Emotional Instability (Lynn & Martin, 1997)

Page 50: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

50

Personality Dimension

Maximum Possible

Score

Average Score for

Males

Average Score for Females

Canada’s Score for

Males

Canada’s Score for Females

Psychoticism 30 5.3 4.1 4.7 3.8

Extraversion 30 18.9 18.1 18.3 17.8

Emotional Instability

30 13.0 15.7 11.5 14.0

Canada’s Scores on Psychoticism, Extraversion,and Emotional Instability (Lynn & Martin, 1997)

Page 51: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 51

Consistent with the results obtained for Canada, Lynn and Martin (1997) found that:

(a) in 36 of the 37 countries surveyed, men obtained higher means than women on psychoticism.

(c) in all of the countries surveyed, men obtained lower means than women on emotional instability.

(b) in 30 of the 37 countries surveyed, men obtained higher means than women on extraversion.

Page 52: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 52

van Hemert et al. (2002), however, administered Eysenck’s measure to participants in 24 countries (e.g., Bangladesh, Chile, China, Germany, Iran,

Ireland, Nigeria, Russia) and found that only 2 of the dimensions—extraversion and emotional instability—could be reproduced in all of the countries surveyed.

Thus, at this point, only 2 of Eysenck’s dimensions may be of universal importance in describing

personality—extraversion and emotional instability.

Page 53: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 53

(b) The Five Factor Model of Personality

The five factor model emerged from several independent lines of research conducted in North America. Moreover, the most commonly used measure of the “Big 5”—the NEO-PI-R (Costa & McCrae, 1992)—was developed in the United States.

Page 54: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 54

A number of studies have used the NEO-PI-R to test the Five Factor Model in other countries.

For example, McCrae et al. (2005) administered the NEO-PI-R to participants in 51 countries (e.g.,

Belgium, Canada, China, Croatia, Iceland, Indonesia, Kuwait, Nigeria, Russia, Spain, Thailand, Turkey). Consistent with the FFM, they found that each of the 5 dimensions could be reproduced in all of the countries surveyed.

Page 55: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 55

On the basis of their findings, McCrae et al. (2005) developed the following diagram to depict the

“personality profiles” of different nations.

Page 56: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

56

High N,

Low C

High E, A,and O

Page 57: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 57

Note that the largest difference that McCrae et al. (2005) found was in E:

E.g., Mean scores on E:

Americans: 52.3Belgians: 52.2Canadians: 52.5English: 53.7French Swiss: 51.0Irish: 55.6Portuguese: 51.3

Chinese: 46.6Ethiopians: 47.0Filipinos: 48.9Indians: 48.5Moroccans: 44.8Nigerians: 44.4Ugandans: 46.5

Page 58: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 58

Questions That Were Answered In Today’s Lecture

Sex Differences in Personality, continued

5. What theories have been proposed to explain sex differences in personality?

Page 59: Psychology 3051 Psychology 305B: Theories of Personality Lecture 20.

Psychology 305 59

Cultural Differences in Personality

1. What are the major value dimensions on which cultures vary?

2. Does cultural variation on the dimension of individualism-collectivism influence the way in which the self is conceptualized?

3. Do trait theories adequately describe personality in non-Western cultures?