Personality trait theories are built on the basis of. Theories of personality traits. b) superiority complex

24.05.2020

1. Personality is the result of the interaction of the abilities, past experiences and expectations of the individual, on the one hand, and environment- on the other hand, in the opinion of:

a) behaviorists;

b) gestaltists;

c) psychoanalysts;

d) cognitive scientists.

2. A person’s personality largely determines his assessment of the situation, as well as where control over his actions comes from, according to:

a) behaviorists;

b) gestaltists;

c) Freudians;

d) cognitive scientists.

3. The influence of intellectual processes on human behavior is emphasized by personality theory:

a) analytical;

b) humanistic;

c) cognitive;

d) active.

4. J. Kelly believes that a cognitively complex person differs from a cognitively simple person in that:

a) has better mental health;

b) copes with stress worse;

c) has a lower level of self-esteem;

d) less adaptive to society.

5. The main concept in the cognitive theory of personality is:

a) “scheme”;

b) “model”;

c) “construct”;

d) “installation”.

6. Key concept analytical psychology is:

a) artifact;

b) archetype;

a) E. Erickson;

b) G. Eysenck;

c) K. Rogers;

d) J. Kelly.

8. The semantic differential method is proposed:

a) K. Spearman;

b) G. Eysenck;

c) Ch. Osgood;

d) J. Kelly.

9. The metatheory, which was the basis for research into “implicit theories of personality,” became:

a) the theory of cognitive dissonance;

b) the concept of personal constructs by J. Kelly;

c) balance theory;

a) L. Festinger;

b) K. Levin;

c) W. James;

d) P.V. Simonov.

11. Personality trait theories attempt to describe a person's personality based on:

d) his individual psychological characteristics.

12. The principle of functional autonomy is justified:

a) K. Rogers;

b) A. Maslow;

c) G. Allport;

d) K. Jung.

13. A personality theory that denies the presence of a common factor that determines behavior is called a theory:

a) symbolic interactionism;

b) multifactorial;

c) sociotechnical systems;

d) indeterminism.

14. K. Spence’s theory of personality is a theory of personality:

a) behaviorist;

b) psychoanalytic;

c) humanistic;

d) associationist.

a) one-factor;

b) two-factor;

c) three-factor;

d) four-factor.

16. Interactionism as a direction in modern Western psychology is based on the concept:

a) R. Burns;

b) E. Berna;

c) J. Mead;

d) J. Moreno.

17. In G. Eysenck’s personality scheme, two dimensions are distinguished: stability/instability and:

a) mobility/balance;

b) extraversion/introversion;

c) extrapunity/intropunity;

d) psychoticism/depression.

18. Introversion and extraversion, according to Rorschach:

a) non-opposite and non-mutually exclusive personality traits;

b) similar personality traits;

V) the necessary conditions for diseases of neuroses;

d) tendencies that are more or less inherent in everyone.

19. Neuroticism as a personality trait is included in the personality structure:

a) according to K. Horney;

b) according to Z. Freud;

c) according to G. Eysenck;

d) according to E. Bern.

20. According to the concept of G. Eysenck, an emotionally unstable introvert is:

a) choleric;

b) melancholic;

c) sanguine;

d) phlegmatic.

21. Personality is considered as a set of behavioral characteristics in the concept:

a) J. Cattell;

b) K. Leonhard;

c) E. Berna;

d) A. Maslow.

22. The center of consciousness and one of the key archetypes of personality, according to K. Jung’s theory of personality, is:

a) ego;

b) person;

d) self.

23. The concept of “inferiority complex” was introduced into scientific terminology by:

b) A. Adler;

c) S. Freud;

d) K. Rogers.

24. Any behavior is determined by its consequences:

a) according to B. Skinner;

b) according to J. Watson;

c) according to A. Bandura;

d) according to W. Köhler.

25. The behaviorist approach views a person as the result of:

a) understanding the consequences of his behavior;

b) cognitive interpretation of various situations;

c) conflicts between cognitive forces and reality;

d) interactions between people.

26. A direction in psychology that has focused its research not on the connection between stimulus and response, but on the nature of their relationship, is called:

a) neo-behaviourism;

b) interbehaviourism;

c) social behaviorism;

d) neurolinguistic programming.

27. A strict correspondence between certain biological structures of a person and his certain personality traits attempts to establish the direction of the dispositional theory of personality:

a) hard;

b) soft;

c) formal-dynamic;

d) structural and content.

28. Among the “hard” structural models of personality, the most famous is the personality model constructed:

a) A. Maslow;

b) G. Allport;

c) G. Eysenck;

d) K. Rogers.

29. The founder of trait theory is:

a) G. Allport;

b) G. Eysenck;

c) K. Rogers;

d) K. Levin.

30. The founder of the psychodynamic theory of personality is:

b) A. Adler;

c) S. Freud;

d) E. Fromm.

31. Personality trait theories attempt to describe a person's personality based on:

a) his physical constitution;

b) those models that he imitates;

c) factors controlling his actions;

d) individual characteristics of the subject.

32. S. Freud’s psychoanalytic concept of personality refers to:

a) to theories of personality traits;

b) to theories of personality types;

c) to theories of personality instances;

d) to factor theories of personality.

33. Considering the mental structure of a person, S. Freud showed that the pleasure principle is guided by:

a) "It"

c) “Super-I”;

d) "Super-ego".

34. According to Z. Freud, the unconscious is an instance of the psyche:

a) asocial;

b) immoral;

c) illogical;

d) healthy.

35. In S. Freud’s theory the following principles are not considered as a principle of regulation of the mental life of the individual:

a) reality;

b) pleasure;

c) constancy;

d) reflections.

36. Many personality traits are determined by sexual desires suppressed in childhood, according to:

a) associationism;

b) behaviorism;

c) cognitivism;

d) psychoanalysis.

37. S. Freud believed that the Oedipus complex develops at the stage:

a) oral;

b) anal;

c) phallic;

d) genital.

38. The principle that a person's feelings and behavior should be considered inappropriate when his interpretation of situations is based on irrational thoughts underlies the approach:

a) behavioral;

b) cognitive;

c) active;

d) psychoanalytic.

39. The problem of psychological defense mechanisms I was first developed:

a) in Gestalt psychology;

b) in humanistic psychology;

c) in behaviorism;

d) in psychoanalysis.

40. The guarantor of psychological security is not:

a) adequate self-esteem;

b) a sense of belonging to a group;

c) a tendency to supra-situational activity;

d) rigidity of thinking.

41. Psychological defense as a consequence of contradictions in the structure of the “I” is considered by:

a) neo-Freudianism;

b) personalistic theories;

c) domestic psychology;

d) cognitive psychology.

42. Replacing an action with an inaccessible object with an action with an accessible one is called:

a) rationalization;

b) repression;

c) forgetting;

d) transfer.

43. Substitution cannot occur:

a) in a change in feelings;

b) in changing motives;

c) in changing personality relationships to the opposite;

d) in regression.

44. The transformation of the energy of instinctive drives into socially acceptable methods of activity is called:

a) rationalization;

b) identification;

c) sublimation;

d) repression.

45. A return to ontogenetically earlier, infantile behavioral strategies is called:

a) denial;

b) regression;

c) repression;

d) suppression.

46. The concept of “sublimation” was introduced into the scientific dictionary:

a) K. Jung;

b) A. Adler;

c) Z. Freud;

d) G. Helmholtz.

47. The essence of projection is:

a) attributing one’s own feelings to other people;

b) in the orientation of behavior towards an accessible goal;

c) in denial of real facts;

d) in choosing behavior opposite to the suppressed one.

48. A more mature psychological defense mechanism is considered to be:

a) denial;

b) repression;

c) projection;

a) projection;

b) repression;

c) sublimation;

d) suppression.

50. One form of psychological defense helps to cope with the Oedipus complex. This:

a) repression;

b) projection;

c) identification;

d) sublimation.

51. In a girl, the Oedipus complex corresponds to the following complex:

a) Electra;

b) Aphrodite;

d) A. Freud.

52. According to A. Adler, an inferiority complex is not:

a) a consequence of a defect;

b) universal driving force personality development;

c) a consequence of frustration of the need to overcome unfavorable circumstances;

d) a force inhibiting development.

53. According to A. Adler, the tendency to be late for dates or the need to arouse admiration at any cost is a consequence of:

a) inferiority complex;

b) superiority complex;

c) feelings of inferiority;

d) inadequately resolved Oedipus complex.

54. According to humanistic theories, self-realization is closely related:

a) with a superiority complex;

b) with self-respect;

c) with a revaluation of one’s own “I”;

d) with the ability to love.

55. Only observable behavior can be described objectively, according to:

a) gestaltists;

b) Freudians;

c) behaviorists;

d) cognitive scientists.

56. A person’s behavior in a problem situation, based on a series of “blind” motor tests that only accidentally lead to success, was explained by:

a) psychology of consciousness;

b) Gestalt psychology;

c) behaviorism;

d) psychoanalysis.

57. As elements of personality, the behaviorist theory of personality calls:

a) deposits;

b) reflexes or social skills;

c) abilities;

d) temperament.

58. One of the founders of social learning in the behavioral theory of personality is:

a) J. Watson;

b) B. Skinner;

c) A. Bandura;

d) K. Horney.

59. According to A. Bandura, the formation of confidence in what a person can and cannot do is determined by:

a) 3 main conditions;

b) 4 main conditions;

c) 5 basic conditions;

d) 6 basic conditions.

60. According to E. Sheldon’s typology, a person of the ectomorphic type is:

a) shy, prefers mental work;

b) strong, muscular, dynamic and prone to dominance;

c) fat, round, cheerful and sociable;

d) small, fragile and most often extroverted.

61. The origins of neuroses are in anxiety that arises in interpersonal relationships, sees:

a) K. Horney;

b) G. Sullivan;

c) E. Fromm;

d) E. Erickson.

62. At the core of human nature is intention, which determines the goals and expectations of each person, according to:

a) E. Erickson;

b) K. Buhler;

c) E. Sheldon;

d) A. Vallon.

63. The “flourishing” of a person depends on how a person copes with each of the eight psychosocial crises through which he goes through in his life, according to:

a) E. Erickson;

b) K. Buhler;

c) A. Vallon;

d) A. Maslow.

64. Human nature can only be known through affective experience through which it is expressed “in a given place and in given time", according to personality theories:

a) behavioral;

b) humanistic;

c) psychoanalytic;

d) cognitivist.

65. Personality is considered as a set of self-states in the concept:

a) K. Rogers;

b) A. Bandura;

c) E. Berna;

There are not two at all identical people. Any person behaves with a certain consistency and differently from others. Allport explains this in his concept of “trait,” which he considered the most valid “unit of analysis” for studying what people are like and how they differ from each other in their behavior.

Allport defined a trait as “a neuropsychological structure capable of transforming a variety of functionally equivalent stimuli and of stimulating and directing equivalent (largely enduring) forms of adaptive and expressive behavior.” Simply put, a trait is a predisposition to behave in a similar way across a wide range of situations. For example, if someone is inherently timid, they will tend to remain calm and reserved in many situations. different situations- sitting in class, eating in a cafe, doing homework in the dorm, shopping with friends. If, on the other hand, a person is generally friendly, he will be more likely to be talkative and sociable in the same situations. Allport's theory states that human behavior is relatively stable over time and across a variety of situations.

Traits are psychological characteristics, transforming a set of stimuli and causing a set of equivalent responses. This understanding of trait means that a variety of stimuli can evoke the same responses, just as a variety of responses (feelings, sensations, interpretations, actions) can have the same functional meaning.

According to Allport, personality traits are not associated with a small number of specific stimuli or responses; they are generalized and persistent. By providing similarity in responses to multiple stimuli, personality traits impart considerable consistency to behavior. A personality trait is something that determines constant, stable, typical features of our behavior for a variety of equivalent situations. It is a vital component of our “personality structure.” At the same time, personality traits can also be decisive in a person’s behavior. For example, dominance as a personality trait can only manifest itself when a person is in the presence of significant others: with his children, with his spouse, or with a close acquaintance. In each case he immediately becomes the leader. However, the dominance trait is not activated in a situation where this person finds a ten dollar bill on the doorstep of a friend's house. Such a stimulus will most likely cause a manifestation of honesty (or, conversely, dishonesty), but not dominance. Thus, Allport recognizes that individual characteristics are reinforced in social situations, and adds: “Any theory that views personality as something stable, fixed, unchangeable is incorrect.” Likewise, water can have the shape and structure of a liquid, solid(ice) or substances such as snow, hail, slush - its physical form is determined by the temperature of the environment.

It should be emphasized, however, that personality traits do not lie dormant, awaiting external stimuli. In fact, people actively seek out social situations that facilitate the expression of their characteristics. A person with a strong predisposition to communicate is not only an excellent conversationalist when he is in company, but also takes the initiative to seek contacts when he is alone. In other words, a person is not a passive “respondent” to a situation, as B. F. Skinner might have believed; rather, on the contrary, the situations in which a person finds himself most often are, as a rule, the very situations in which he actively strives get in. These two components are functionally interrelated.

"Traits" traits

In Allport's system, personality traits can be said to be characterized by “traits,” or defining characteristics.

1. A personality trait is not just a nominal designation. Personality traits are not fiction; they are a very real and vital part of any person's existence. Every person has within himself these “generalized aspirations for action.” Allport's main emphasis here is that these personal characteristics are real: they really exist in people, and are not just theoretical fabrications.

2. A personality trait is a more generalized quality than a habit. Personality traits determine relatively unchanged and general characteristics of our behavior. Habits, while stable, are more specific tendencies, and therefore they are less generalized both in relation to the situations that “trigger” them and in relation to the behavioral reactions caused by them. For example, a child may brush his teeth twice a day and continue to do so because his parents encourage him to do so. It is a habit. However, over time, the child can also learn to comb his hair, wash and iron clothes, and tidy his room. All these habits, merging together, can form such a trait as neatness.

3. A personality trait is the driving or at least determining element of behavior. As already noted, traits do not lie dormant, waiting for external stimuli that can awaken them. Rather, they encourage people to engage in behavior in which these personality traits are most fully manifested. For example, a college student who is highly social will not just sit around waiting for parties to socialize. She actively seeks them out and thus expresses her sociability. So, personality traits “build” an individual’s action.

4. The existence of personality traits can be established empirically. Although personality traits cannot be observed directly, Allport pointed out that their existence can be confirmed. Evidence can be obtained by observing human behavior over time, studying medical histories or biographies, and using statistical methods that determine the degree to which individual responses to the same or similar stimuli coincide.

5. A personality trait is only relatively independent of other traits. To paraphrase a famous expression, we can say: “No feature is an island.” There is no sharp boundary separating one feature from another. Rather, personality is a set of overlapping traits that are only relatively independent of each other.

6. A personality trait is not synonymous with moral or social evaluation. Despite the fact that many traits (eg, sincerity, loyalty, greed) are subject to conventional social evaluation, they still represent the true characteristics of an individual. Ideally, the researcher should first detect the presence of certain traits in the subject, and then find neutral, rather than evaluative, words to describe them.

7. A trait can be viewed either in the context of the individual in whom it is found or by its prevalence in society.

8. The fact that actions or even habits are not consistent with a personality trait is not evidence that the trait is absent. Not every person has the traits same degree integration. A trait that is the main one for one may be secondary or completely absent for another. The same individual may have contradictory traits. There are cases when social conditions, much more than personality traits, are the primary “drivers” for certain behavior.

Common versus individual traits

In his early work, Allport distinguished between general features and individual. The first (also called measurable or legalized) include any characteristics shared by a number of people within a given culture. We might say, for example, that some people are more persistent and persistent than others, or that some people are more polite than others. Logic of reasoning about existence common features is that members of a particular culture experience similar evolutionary and social impacts, and therefore they develop, by definition, comparable adaptation patterns. Examples include language skills, political and/or social attitudes, value orientations, anxiety and conformism. Most people in our culture are comparable to each other on these general dimensions.

According to Allport, as a result of such a comparison of individuals according to the degree of expression of any common trait, a normal distribution curve is obtained. That is, when indicators of the severity of personality traits are depicted graphically, we get a bell-shaped curve, in the center of which there is a number of subjects with average, typical indicators, and at the edges there is a decreasing number of subjects whose indicators are closer to extremely pronounced. The figure (see Appendix 1) shows the distribution of indicators of the severity of such a general personality trait as “dominance-subordination”. Thus, the measurability of common traits allows the personologist to compare one person with another on significant psychological parameters (as is done with general physical characteristics such as height and weight).

While Allport considered this comparison procedure valid and useful, he also believed that personality traits are never expressed in exactly the same way in any two people.

Individual Traits (also called morphological) denote those characteristics of an individual that do not allow comparison with other people. These are the “authentic neuropsychological elements that control, direct, and motivate certain types of adaptive behavior.” This category of traits, manifested uniquely in each individual, most accurately reflects his personal structure. Therefore, according to Allport, personality can only be adequately described by measuring individual traits, using such sources of information as a clinical case report, diary, letters and other similar personal documents. Allport believed that the only way to understand uniqueness was to focus on individual traits.

Types of individual dispositions

IN last years Throughout his career, Allport came to realize that using the term "personality trait" to describe both general and individual characteristics was problematic. Therefore, he revised his terminology and called individual traits individual dispositions. General traits changed their name, becoming simply personality traits. The definition of personality disposition now includes the phrase “characteristic of the individual,” but otherwise the definition remains the same as the earlier definition of trait.

Allport was deeply interested in the study of individual dispositions. Over time, it became obvious to him that not all individual dispositions are equally inherent in a person and not all of them are dominant. Therefore, Allport proposed to distinguish three types of dispositions: cardinal, central and secondary.

Cardinal dispositions. Cardinal disposition permeates a person so much that almost all his actions can be reduced to its influence. This highly generalized disposition cannot remain hidden, unless, of course, it is such a trait as secrecy - the owner of it can become a hermit, and then no one will recognize his inclinations. Allport argued that very few people have a cardinal disposition.

Central dispositions. Not so comprehensive, but still quite striking characteristics of a person, called central dispositions- these are, so to speak, the building blocks of individuality. Central dispositions are best compared to the qualities cited in letters of recommendation (eg, punctuality, attentiveness, responsibility). Central dispositions are tendencies in human behavior that can be easily detected by others.

“How many central dispositions can the average person have?” To clarify this question, Allport asked his students to “think about someone of the same sex whom you know well” or “describe her or him by listing those words, phrases or sentences that are best and truest to you.” seem to reflect the essential characteristics of that personality.” 90% of students listed from three to ten essential characteristics, the average number was 7.2. Thus, Allport concluded that the number of central dispositions by which an individual can be described is surprisingly small: perhaps in the range of five to ten. From the point of view of the person himself, the number of central dispositions is indeed small.

Secondary dispositions. Traits that are less noticeable, less generalized, less stable, and thus less useful in characterizing personality are called secondary dispositions. This category should include preferences in food and clothing, special attitudes and situationally determined characteristics of the person. Consider, for example, a person who never behaves obediently and submissively, except when a police officer gives him a speeding ticket. Allport noted that one must know a person very closely in order to discover his secondary dispositions.

The prevailing approach not only in everyday life, but also in scientific psychology is a theory of personality traits. IN Ancient Greece, and even earlier in China there were ideas about personality that clearly resemble the theory of personality traits. Gallen (200 AD) believed that depending on the ratio of “juices” (liquids) in the human body, one of four types of temperament develops. In the works of many philosophers of all eras until the beginning of the 20th century. one can find clear hints about the existence of such parameters as extraversion - introversion and neuroticism - stability. Since the mid-80s. In the last century, the theory of traits was especially actively studied by R. McCrae and P. Costa, who believe that personality traits are one of the causal factors in the formation of habits, attitudes and skills. In domestic psychological science to this direction This includes theories of interindividual differences (A.G. Shmelev) and character accentuations (I.B. Gannushkin, K. Leongard).

It is obvious that the typological approach to personality research and trait theory have much in common. Firstly, they are both universal: any person can be classified as one or another type and assessed in terms of the degree of presence of one or another trait. Secondly, when studying personality, these approaches are very convenient due to their time efficiency. It is enough to find some sign of a type or trait, and the rest “the picture is completed on its own” (Gestalt law). Therefore, further, deeper knowledge of the individual is not required. Both approaches one way or another present personality as a rather static category. Change is unlikely.

From an operational point of view the difference between the typological approach and the “ in the spirit of trait theory"is that it is not the columns that are generalized (unified), but the rows of the characteristic tables.

The blurring of boundaries between theories of traits and theories of types - psychosomatic (E. Kretschmer) and psychological (K. Jung) - is also evidenced by the fact that in some concepts types are formulated according to the principle of a dominant trait, and in the presence of several expressed (accentuated traits) they say about mixed, amalgam types, etc. This is the case, for example, with the domestic PDO method (pathocharacterological diagnostic questionnaire).

In this regard, it is important to note that typical is something general, inherent in a certain group or class of phenomena. Meanwhile, touching on the question of the relationship between the typical and the individual in a person, one cannot help but recall the opinion of V. S. Merlin: from time immemorial to the present day, it is generally accepted that some human properties are typical, while others are individual. The more typical a person is, the less original, original, and individual he is, and vice versa. In reality, there are no two types of properties in a person - typical and individual. Each individual property is typical in some manifestations and individual in others.

At the same time, we note that many (including psychologists) understand type according to the “all or nothing” principle, as, for example, in astrology. Therefore, personality types cannot exist in scientific psychology. However, no one assures that “pure” types are being considered, as, for example, in temperament. As a result, the question still remains open.

At the heart of dispositional direction In the study of personality, the adherent and founder of which was Gordon Allport (1897-1967), there are two general ideas: trait theory and the uniqueness of each person. Their essence is that people demonstrate a certain consistency in their actions, thoughts and emotions, regardless of the passage of time, events and life experience. Moreover, each personality is unique, and its uniqueness the best way can be understood through the definition of specific personality traits. Allport introduced his own term - proprium (“inherent”, “inherent”) - this is what is in inner world is recognized as its own and is a distinctive feature. Proprium gives direction to a person's life, it is a positive, creative, growth-seeking and developing property of human nature.

A concept directly related to the proprium, identity, is considered as internal constancy. According to Allport, the core of personality is the motives of activity. To explain the nature of motivation, he introduced the concept of functional autonomy, meaning that the motivation of an adult is not functionally related to his childhood impressions, just as a tree grown from a seed is functionally autonomous from the seed. The motives of a mature personality cannot be deduced from early intentions and ideas. The goals of an adult are determined by the current situation and current intentions.

G. Allport made a significant and varied contribution to personology. The subject of his research was life values, temperament, personality character. The scientist has repeatedly emphasized the importance of a unifying philosophy of life, which is based on values, that is, on a person’s conviction of what is truly important in life and what is not. Believing that a person's efforts to find meaning in life are determined by values, he became one of the authors of the Values Study Test. Many people are familiar with Allport's idea regarding the character of a person: character is a valued personality, and personality is an unvalued character. Temperament, in his opinion, is the “primary material” from which personality is built, and is also especially important when discussing the hereditary aspects of the emotional nature of the individual. Thus, Gordon Allport emphasizes the integrity and indivisibility of the entire personality structure.

Thus, Allport's theory represents a combination of humanistic and individual approaches to the study of personality. Humanism manifests itself in an attempt to identify all aspects of a human being, including the potential for personal growth, self-transcendence and self-actualization. An individual approach is reflected in the researcher’s desire to understand and predict the development of a real specific personality. Distinctive feature Allport's theoretical orientation is his belief that human behavior is always the result of one or another configuration of personality traits.

One of the students of G. Allport and G. Murray was S. R. Muddy, who in the 1970s. became famous as the author of the original concepts of needs, the desire for meaning, existential neurosis and existential psychotherapy. For the last 15 years, the main focus of his work has been the research, diagnosis and facilitation of resilience - a core personal characteristic that underlies the “courage to be”, according to P. Tillich, and is largely responsible for the success of an individual in coping with unfavorable life circumstances (D. A. Leontyev, 2002). Muddy offers a rather complex and detailed definition of personality - this is a specific set of characteristics and aspirations that determine those general and individual characteristics of behavioral manifestations (thoughts, feelings and actions) that are stable over time and can or cannot be explained only through the analysis of social and biological factors influencing the current situation of human functioning. Based on the analysis of existing concepts of personality, Maddi identifies the core and periphery of personality. What is characteristic of all people, what reveals the integral, indispensable attributes of any personality, the author refers to as the core of personality. These general traits undergo almost no changes throughout life; they fundamentally influence all aspects of behavior. In addition, there are personality attributes that are much more stable and are associated with behavioral manifestations that can be directly observed. These attributes are not innate, they appear in the personality structure as a result of learning, and their influence on human behavior is not so great. Because they are a consequence of learning and have only a limited influence on behavior, he called them the periphery of the personality. The connection between the core and periphery of the personality is carried out through development.

In the concept of Salvatore Maddi, one of the main provisions is the desire to maintain the usual, characteristic level of activation for the individual. Activation is arousal or tension determined by the influence of internal or external stimulation. People differ in the amount of activation they require depending on their normal level of activation. The following types are distinguished:

a highly activated personality with traits of activity and externality or with characteristic traits of activity and internality;
a low-activated personality with traits of activity and externality or with characteristic traits of activity and internality.

Factor analysis theorists R. Cattell (1905-1998) and G. Eysenck (1916-1997) believed that the basis of personality structure is personality traits. According to Cattell, personality traits are hypothetical constructs that predispose a person to engage in consistent behavior over time and under different circumstances. He defines the personality structure by 16 factors - initial traits. The hierarchical model of personality structure, according to Eysenck, includes types, personality traits, habitual reactions and specific reactions. Eysenck emphasizes that most people do not fall into extreme categories. Unlike Cattell, Eysenck sees only two main types: introversion - extraversion, stability - neuroticism.

Many researchers (A. Furnham, P. Haven, D. A. Leontiev) believe that the most common approach in the field of personology is the study of personality using personality traits. But despite its prevalence, they seriously criticize it. In our opinion, D. A. Leontiev expresses his point of view most fully.

“The two main characteristics of traits,” he writes, “are their stability (stable personality characteristics that tend to change relatively little over time) and generality (i.e., something that manifests itself not in one situation, but in different ones).”

In this case, the question arises, to what extent is this constancy maintained? You can give a lot of examples that it is relative. Then it turns out that either we will have to describe each situation and characteristic traits exhibited by a person separately, or we will have to move in depth from the surface of the observed traits to some deep structures that could explain different external appearances in different situations. The second difficulty that arises when describing personality in the language of traits is the subjectivity of such a description, its dependence on evaluation criteria. What one would appreciate as integrity, another would call stubbornness. The third difficulty is that describing a person in the language of traits does not provide an understanding of the possibilities for change in this person. If he is like this, then this is what he is, there can be nothing else. It turns out that if we strive for an unbiased, objective knowledge of personality, then the concept of traits does not suit us.

According to E. Yu. Korzhova, we can associate the popularity of trait theories with a functional-consumer attitude towards a person and the development of natural scientific methodology of cognition, accompanied by the spread of a measurement approach to personality. It seems that proponents of this approach do not even ask the question that there are personality phenomena that cannot be measured, and that there is more to personality than a set of traits.

There are no two completely identical people. Any person behaves with a certain consistency and differently from others. Allport explains this in his concept of “trait,” which he considered the most valid “unit of analysis” for studying what people are like and how they differ from each other in their behavior.

Allport defined a trait as “a neuropsychological structure capable of transforming a variety of functionally equivalent stimuli and of stimulating and directing equivalent (largely enduring) forms of adaptive and expressive behavior.” Simply put, a trait is a predisposition to behave in a similar way across a wide range of situations. For example, if someone is inherently timid, they will tend to remain calm and composed in many different situations - sitting in class, eating at a cafe, doing homework in the dorm, shopping with friends. If, on the other hand, a person is generally friendly, he will be more likely to be talkative and sociable in the same situations. Allport's theory states that human behavior is relatively stable over time and across a variety of situations. Maklakov A.G. General psychology. SPB., 2015. P.324.

Traits are psychological characteristics that transform a set of stimuli and determine a set of equivalent responses. This understanding of trait means that a variety of stimuli can evoke the same responses, just as a variety of responses (feelings, sensations, interpretations, actions) can have the same functional meaning.

Thus, Allport recognizes that individual characteristics are reinforced in social situations, and adds: “Any theory that views personality as something stable, fixed, unchangeable is incorrect.” Similarly, water can have the form and structure of a liquid, a solid (ice), or a substance such as snow, hail, slush - its physical form is determined by the temperature of the environment.

In Allport's system, personality traits can be said to be characterized by “traits,” or defining characteristics. A personality trait is not just a nominal designation. Personality traits are not fiction; they are a very real and vital part of any person's existence. Every person has within himself these “generalized aspirations for action.” Allport's main emphasis here is that these personal characteristics are real: they really exist in people, and are not just theoretical fabrications. Reinwald N.I. Psychology of Personality. M., 2015. P.312.

A personality trait is a more generalized quality than a habit. Personality traits determine relatively unchanged and general characteristics of our behavior. Habits, while stable, are more specific tendencies, and therefore they are less generalized both in relation to the situations that “trigger” them and in relation to the behavioral reactions caused by them. For example, a child may brush his teeth twice a day and continue to do so because his parents encourage him to do so. It is a habit. However, over time, the child can also learn to comb his hair, wash and iron clothes, and tidy his room. All these habits, merging together, can form such a trait as neatness.

A personality trait is the driving, or at least determining, element of behavior. As already noted, traits do not lie dormant, waiting for external stimuli that can awaken them. Rather, they encourage people to engage in behavior in which these personality traits are most fully manifested. For example, a college student who is highly social will not just sit around waiting for parties to socialize. She actively seeks them out and thus expresses her sociability. So, personality traits “build” an individual’s action.

The existence of personality traits can be established empirically. Although personality traits cannot be observed directly, Allport pointed out that their existence can be confirmed. Evidence can be obtained by observing human behavior over time, studying medical histories or biographies, and using statistical methods that determine the degree to which individual responses to the same or similar stimuli coincide.

A personality trait is only relatively independent of other traits. To paraphrase a famous expression, we can say: “No feature is an island.” There is no sharp boundary separating one feature from another. Rather, personality is a set of overlapping traits that are only relatively independent of each other. Reinwald N.I. Psychology of Personality. M., 2015. P.316.

A personality trait is not synonymous with moral or social evaluation. Despite the fact that many traits (eg, sincerity, loyalty, greed) are subject to conventional social evaluation, they still represent the true characteristics of an individual. Ideally, the researcher should first detect the presence of certain traits in the subject, and then find neutral, rather than evaluative, words to describe them.

A trait can be viewed either in the context of the individual in whom it is found or by its prevalence in society. Just because actions or even habits are inconsistent with a personality trait is not evidence that the trait is absent. Not every person's traits have the same degree of integration. A trait that is the main one for one may be secondary or completely absent for another. The same individual may have contradictory traits. There are cases when social conditions, much more than personality traits, are the primary “drivers” for certain behavior. Abulkhanova-Slavskaya K.A. Life Strategy M., 2011. P.125.

In his early work, Allport distinguished between general traits and individual ones. The former (also called measurable or legitimized) include any characteristics shared by a number of people within a given culture. We might say, for example, that some people are more persistent and persistent than others, or that some people are more polite than others. The logic of reasoning about the existence of common traits is as follows: members of a certain culture experience similar evolutionary and social influences, and therefore they develop, by definition, comparable patterns of adaptation. Examples include language skills, political and/or social attitudes, value orientations, anxiety and conformity. Most people in our culture are comparable to each other on these general dimensions.

While Allport considered this comparison procedure valid and useful, he also believed that personality traits are never expressed in exactly the same way in any two people.

In the later years of his career, Allport came to realize that using the term "personality trait" to describe both general and individual characteristics was problematic. Therefore, he revised his terminology and called individual traits individual dispositions. General traits changed their name, becoming simply personality traits. The definition of personality disposition now includes the phrase “characteristic of the individual,” but otherwise the definition remains the same as the earlier definition of trait.

Cardinal dispositions. The cardinal disposition permeates a person so much that almost all his actions can be reduced to its influence. This highly generalized disposition cannot remain hidden, unless, of course, it is such a trait as secrecy - the owner of it can become a hermit, and then no one will recognize his inclinations. Central dispositions. Less comprehensive, but still quite striking characteristics of a person, called central dispositions, are, so to speak, the building blocks of individuality. Secondary dispositions. Traits that are less noticeable, less generalized, less stable, and thus less useful in characterizing personality are called secondary dispositions. Petrovsky A.V., Yaroshevsky M.G. History and theory of psychology. Rostov n./D., 2013. P.507.

Determination of personality traits. American psychologist is considered the founder of trait theory Gordon W. Allport (Allport, 1897-1967), who proposed using a trait as the “unit of analysis” of personality. According to G. Allport, under personality trait is understood a predisposition to behave in a similar way in a wide range of equivalent situations.

For example, if a person is inherently timid, he is likely to remain calm and composed in many situations - sitting in class, eating in a cafe, doing homework in the dorm, shopping with friends. If, on the other hand, a person is generally friendly, he will be more active, talkative and sociable in the same situations.

General and individual features. In his early works, G. Allport distinguished between general and individual traits (1937).

Common features(also called measurables) include any characteristic that is common to a large number of people within a given culture. Examples include the ability to use language, social attitudes, value orientations, level of anxiety, and a tendency to conform to behavior. Most people in each culture can be compared with each other on these general parameters, because... they experience similar evolutionary and social pressures.

According to G. Allport, as a result of comparing people according to the degree of expression of any common trait, a normal distribution curve is obtained. That is, when indicators of the severity of a personality trait are depicted graphically, a bell-shaped curve is obtained, in the center of which there is a number of subjects with average indicators, and at the edges there is a decreasing number of subjects whose indicators are approaching extremely pronounced ones.

Thus, the measurability of common traits makes it possible to compare one person with another on significant psychological parameters (just as it is done on general physical characteristics such as height and weight).

Personality Traits(also called morphological) denote those characteristics of a person that do not allow comparisons with other people. According to Allport, these are those “genuine neuropsychic elements which control, direct and motivate certain types of adaptive behavior” (1968). This category of traits manifests itself uniquely in each individual and most accurately reflects his personal structure. Personality traits can be identified using sources of information such as clinical case reports, diaries, letters and other personal documents. Allport believed that focusing on individual traits was the only way to understand the uniqueness of each individual person.

Specific characteristics (criteria) traits. According to the concept of G. Allport, there are 8 criteria for determining traits, which the author described in an article entitled “Once again about personality traits” (1966):

1. Personality traits are real characteristics, which really exist in people, and are not just theoretical fabrications. Every person has within himself these “generalized aspirations for action.” For example, we can name such clearly recognizable traits as aggressiveness, meekness, sincerity, decency, introversion and extroversion.

2. Personality traits are more generalized qualities than habits. Habits, being stable, relate to more specific tendencies, and therefore are less generalized, both in relation to the situations that “trigger” them into action, and in relation to the behavioral reactions caused by them. For example, a child may brush his teeth twice a day and continue to do so because his parents encourage him to do so. It is a habit. However, over time, the child can learn to comb his hair, wash and iron clothes, and tidy his room. All these habits, merging together, can form such a trait as neatness.

3. Personality traits are the driving or at least determining elements of behavior. Traits do not lie dormant in anticipation of external stimuli that can awaken them, but encourage people to behave in one way or another. For example, a college student with a high degree of sociability doesn't just sit around waiting for parties to socialize. She actively seeks them out and thus expresses her sociability.

4. The existence of personality traits can be established empirically. Although personality traits cannot be observed directly, Allport pointed out that their existence can be confirmed. Evidence can be obtained by observing human behavior over time, studying medical histories or biographies, and using statistical methods that determine the degree to which individual responses to the same or similar stimuli coincide.

5. Traits are only relative formations: there is no sharp boundary separating one trait from another. Personality is a set of overlapping traits that are only relatively independent of each other. To illustrate this, Allport cited a study in which traits such as insight and a sense of humor were highly correlated with each other (1960). Obviously, these are different traits, but they are nevertheless somehow connected. Since the results of correlation analysis do not allow us to draw conclusions about causal relationships, we can assume the following: if a person has a highly developed insight, then it is very likely that he can notice the absurd aspects of human life, which leads to the development of his sense of humor. According to G. Allport, it is more likely that the traits overlap initially, since a person tends to react to events and phenomena in a generalized way.

6. A personality trait is not synonymous with moral or social evaluation. Although many traits (eg, sincerity, loyalty, greed) are socially evaluated, they still represent the true characteristics of a person. Ideally, the researcher should first detect the presence of certain traits in the subject, and then find neutral, rather than evaluative, words to describe them.

7. A trait can be viewed either in the context of the individual in whom it is found or by its prevalence in society. Let's take shyness as an illustration. Like any other personality trait, it can be viewed in terms of both uniqueness and universality. In the first case, we will study the impact of shyness on the life of this particular person. In the second, to study this trait “universally”, by constructing a reliable and valid “shyness scale” and determining individual differences in the “shyness” parameter.

8. Just because actions or even habits are inconsistent with a personality trait is not evidence that the trait is absent. First, each individual may exhibit certain traits within a limited range. For example, he may be neat in everything that concerns him appearance, and at the same time not worry about the order at all on your desk and in your apartment. Secondly, there are cases when situational conditions, more than personality traits, are the primary “drivers” for certain behavior. For example, if a neat girl is late for a plane, she may not even notice that her hair is disheveled or her suit has lost its neat appearance along the way.

The last feature of traits is associated with varying degrees of their integration and, accordingly, with varying degrees of personality integrity. The integrity of the individual, in turn, depends on the level of development of the “proprium” - a kind of “core of personality” that provides connections between traits and gives the uniqueness of its individuality.

To the list of the main characteristics of traits, we can also add a feature highlighted by the English psychologist G. Eysenck - hierarchy. This author's model contains three supertraits that have a powerful influence on behavior. In turn, each of these supertraits is built from several component traits. Composite traits consist of numerous habitual responses that are formed from many specific responses. In its most general form, G. Eysenck’s scheme looks like this.

Personality trait theories are built on the basis of. Theories of personality traits. b) superiority complex

Report a typo

Text that will be sent to our editors:

Your comment (optional):