An unobtrusive measure of personality?

The use of unobtrusive measures has been advocated for some time by methodologists and research workers. (Webb et al., 1966). Recently Wing and Baddeley (1978) used simple measures of handwriting as indices of stress. They found that the height of the letter and the length of ticks (check marks), indicating answers to questions, increased significantly after alcohol intake.It has been shown in the past that measures based on the dimensions of letters or digits provide a sensitive index of stress (Baddeley et al., 1969; Legge et al., 1964). However, it has not yet been shown whether there is any relationship between the size of circles around ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answers to a personality questionnaire, and the scale scores it is measuring.This paper reports an investigation whose aim it was to relate circle size to the scale scores of Neuroticism, Extraversion, Psychoticism, and the Lie-scale of the EPQ (Eysenck and Eysenck, 1978).     

Histrionic personality disorder and antisocial personality disorder: sex-differentiated manifestations of psychopathy?

Little is known about the etiology of histrionic personality disorder (HPD) or its relation to other personality disorders. In this study, we examined whether HPD is etiologically related to psychopathy and more specifically whether HPD and antisocial personality disorder (ASPD) are sex-typed alternative manifestations of psychopathy. In addition, based on Newman's (1987) response modulation hypothesis of psychopathy, we examined the associations between psychopathic, HPD, and ASPD features and performance on laboratory measures of passive avoidance errors and interference effects. Seventy-five live theater actors completed self-report questionnaires and two laboratory measures of response modulation, and peers completed questionnaires concerning the participants' personality disorder features. The results provided weak and inconsistent support for the hypotheses that HPD is a female-typed variant of psychopathy and that ASPD is a male-typed variant of psychopathy. Contrary to previous findings, scores on response modulation tasks were not significantly related to psychopathy, or to either HPD or ASPD. The limitations of this study and possibilities for future research in this area are outlined.     

A Review of “Oxford handbook of personality assessment”

These two studies introduce the Goldfarb Fear of Fat Scale (GFFS) as an assessment device for use with bulimic clients. Study I presents norms and reliability data for a high school sample, as well as pilot comparisons between anorexic and normal women. Study II demonstrates that the GFFS significantly differentiates between bulimics, repeat dieters, and nondieting women. These results suggest that the GFFS may be utilized clinically as a diagnostic tool and indicator of change, which may assist in the early identification of bulimic individuals.     

Biologically determined dimensions of personality or temperament?

Relatively stable differences in the intensity of responses treated as a dimension, with suppressed reactions at one pole and reinforced reactions at the other, are discussed. They have been referred to as differences in the so-called Stimulation Processing Coefficient (SPC).Taking sensitivity thresholds, human behaviour, and evoked potentials (EP) as examples of the intensity of responses, it has been shown that such biologically determined dimensions of personality as: Strength of the Nervous System (Pavlov), Extraversion-Introversion (Eysenck), Stimulus Intensity Modulation (Petrie). Sensation Seeking (Zuckerman) and Reactivity (Strelau) have several features in common. All of them have strong biological backgrounds; the physiological mechanisms to be hypothesized as basic determinants of these dimensions are, however, different, depending on the specificity of the concepts discussed.In contradistinction to personality, which is treated by most psychologists as a result of interaction with the social environment, it is proposed to define the discussed dimensions as temperament, to be understood as a product of biological evolution, shaped under the influence of the surroundings.     

How social was personality? The Allports' "connection" of social and personality psychology

This paper investigates three conflicting reconstructions of the historical relationship between personality and social psychology and addresses questions they raise regarding the subdisciplinary status of personality in the 1920s and the way in which the field gradually emerged as a separate area of psychology. Contesting claims that Floyd Allport first connected social psychology to a separate "branch" of personality psychology in the 1920s, I argue that he drew upon earlier work of psychologists and sociologists who treated personality as a central topic of social psychology. I compare Floyd Allport's views with those of Gordon Allport, who endeavored to establish personality as a separate subdiscipline.     

Who should own the definition of personality?

The averaged judgment of knowledgeable others provides the best available point of reference both for the definition of personality structure in general and for assessing someone's personality in particular. Self-judgments, as in personality questionnaires, are intrinsically deficient because judgment errors cannot be averaged out. The recommended procedure for assessing someone's personality is to give a personality questionnaire, phrased in the third person singular, to those who know the target best. This set may or may not include the target person as a judge.     

Towards a systematic Qura’nic theory of personality

Based on hermeneutic interpretation of the Holy Qura’n and the theoretical suggestions of the eminent Muslim thinker Al-Ghazali, a Qura’nic theory of personality is articulated. Eight main interrelated concepts have been identified in the present analysis and serve as the building blocks of a Qura’nic theory of personality: nafs (psyche), nafs ammarah besoa’ (evil-commanding psyche), al-nafs al-lawammah (the reproachful psyche), roh (spirit), a’ql (intellect), qalb (heart), al-nafs al-mutmainnah (the serene psyche) and al-nafs al-marid’a (the sick psyche). The Qura’nic theory of personality is psychospiritual, structural, dynamic, topographic, holistic, and holds a largely negative view of human nature. The implications of this theory for research and practice are discussed.     

Multitrait Multimethod validation of Implicit Association Test as a measure of individual differences in personality: Is there personality at all?

The objective of the study was to investigate the validity of IAT in the assessment of the Big five personality traits. We employed the Multi-Trait Multi-Method (MTMM) approach on a sample of 146 respondents. We collected measures on IATs assessing Big five personality traits, self-reports, and two ratings of close others of different gender on NEO PI-R. Additionally, we assessed behavior related to the Big five personality traits in a structured interview where three experts independently provided rating measures. MTMM analyses suggest that personality IAT measures have little in common with personality traits measured traditionally using explicit methods. The evidence does not support the claim that personality IAT can serve as a valid measure of individual differences in personality traits.     

Animation–Accommodation–Authorization theory of the human personality

It is posited that there are three essential elements associated with human nature and the human personality: Animation, Accommodation, and Authorization (A³). These broadly construed elements are defined, and then it is shown how they underlie the ways humans cognitively and emotionally engage their world. This explication is made possible by calling on a novel construction, called a “trialogue”, that formally relates attributes of cognitive engagement (termed intellect) and attributes of emotional engagement to the three essential elements. The trialogue construction constrains the interrelationships among attributes and essential elements, enabling the internal validity of the theory to be tested. A preliminary study with 174 participants investigated the question of internal validity and found convincing evidence to support the basic premise of the model. The structural complementarities of intellect and emotional engagement may provide a better understanding not only of personality but also of some institutions (e.g., educational).     

Structure of act-report data: is the five-factor model of personality recaptured?

We examined the correspondence between the structure of act-report data and 5-factor models emerging from trait-rating data. Twenty categories were selected as markers for the 5-factor model and retrospective act reports were constructed for the target categories. One hundred eighteen men and women comprising 59 dating couples completed self-based and observer-based act reports. Several factor analyses tested different assumptions. Retaining total act performance (TAP) produced a blend of the traditional 5 factors. Removing TAP closely reproduced the 5-factor model in both principal-components and procrustes analyses. Correlations between the derived act factors and trait ratings from 6 data sources support a reinterpretation of the traditional trait labels. Discussion focuses on the implications of different assumptions on the formulation of a basic model of personality structure.     

The general factor of personality: Substance or artefact?

While it is now widely recognized that a general factor (GFP) can be extracted from most personality data, this finding has been subject to numerous critiques: (1) that the GFP is an artefact due to socially desirable responding; (2) that it is factorially indeterminate; (3) that it can be more parsimoniously modelled using blended variables; (4) that it shows less genetic variance due to dominance than should be true of a fitness trait; (5) that it correlates more weakly with g than would be predicted from Life History theory; (6) that it cannot be recovered across personality inventories. We present new evidence and argument to show that each of these critiques is open to reasonable doubt.     

The semantics of personality in Russian “subjective sociology”

The article is devoted to the “subjective method” and the role of value preferences, as underscored in Russian proto-sociology, developed by the populists in discussions with the “ethical Marxism,” on the one hand, and with positivists, on the other. The main issue—how was the apologia of individual in these studies connected to the ideals of social development?—leads to the question, whether such ideals could be based on an inborn moral law or “universal good” in the spirit of empirical-positivist theories. Is the use of ethical categories in scientific knowledge admissible in principle, and if so, to what degree? How should the measure of subjectivity in historical or sociological studies be “regulated,” and are there universally binding solutions to these problems?     

Is personality disorder inherited? An overview of the evidence

Genetic factors appear to be of considerable importance in determining normal variation in personality. This is suggested by family, twin, and adoption studies as well as by indirect findings based on animal and psychophysiological studies. In contrast, there is consistent evidence that the contribution of shared family environment is minimal. Despite difficulties in defining personality disorder, it appears that many types of personality disorder, in particular schizotypal personality disorder and antisocial personality disorder/criminality, are also influenced genetically. The genetic transmission of normal personality traits and disorder is most easily explained by the contribution of multiple genes of small effect rather than by single-gene inheritance. Recent advances in molecular genetics have led to the localization of genes of minor effect for some traits. This raises the possibility of detecting a molecular basis of traits and disorders such as personality and personality disorder.Anita Thapar is supported by a Research Training Fellowship from the Medical Research Council.     

Where's the beef? Putting personality back into personality assessment

This article attempts to demonstrate the value of using a psychoanalytic theory of personality for psychological testing. This approach has more clinical utility than a solely research-based one. It recasts test data into conceptually related constructs that have internal consistency to each other and are directly relevant to psychotherapeutic treatment. Such theoretical recasting serves an organizing function, an integrative function, a clarification function, and a predictive function for the clinical inference process. Furthermore, a psychoanalytically oriented approach to testing allows for the expansion in sources of data that one considers in the testing situation. Five different sources of data emerge from the testing situation once one refocuses on theoretical constructs rather than test signs. These include test scores, test content, the patient-examiner interaction, patient behavior, and examiner countertransference.     

Rationality,self-regard and the “healthiness” of personality disorders

Although irrationality has been consistently correlated with the intensity of acute clinical syndromes that are characterized by emotional or thought disorders, relationships between irrationality and personality disorders have not been investigated carefully. When they enter treatment, clients at the Institute for Rational-Emotive Therapy (IRET) had personality trait scale scores that accounted for substantial variance in rationality scale scores on several well-validated instruments. The eleven scales of the Millon Clinical Multiaxial Inventory (MCMI) associated with the DSM-III axis II personality disorders had a pattern of relationships with rationality and irrationality that parallels their somewhat surprising relationships with measures of acute emotional distress. Scales 4, 5, 6, and 7 were almost always associated with hyperrationality on most scales and with enhanced self-esteem, as well as with relatively low distress; scales 1, 2, 3, 8, S, and C were associated with irrationality and low self-esteem, as well as with severe distress. The P scale had inconsistent and weak correlations with rationality and self-esteem, as it had with measures of intake distress.Russell C. Leaf is Associate Professor of Psychology at Rutgers. He also directs a research project at the Institute for Rational-Emotive Therapy, in collaboration with the four other authors of this article, on the relationships between intake personality and mental health. He is an Institute Fellow and Supervisor, and previously served as a staff therapist and as the Institute's Director of Clinical Evaluation.Albert Ellis is President of the Institute for Rational-Emotive Therapy.Roslyn Mass is Professor of Psychology at Middlesex County College. She is in charge of data processing and analysis for the collaborative research of this authorial team, and is a Fellow of and previously served as Administrative Director of the Institute for Rational-Emotive Therapy.Raymond DiGiuseppe is Associate Professor of Psychology at St. Johns and Director of Research and Director of Training at the Institute for Rational-Emotive Therapy.Diane Alington is Assistant Director and a core member of the Institute for Health, Health Care Policy and Aging Research at Rutgers, where she conducts a research program on sex differences in adult development.     

Disposed to aggress?: In search of the violence-prone personality

The heritability, cross-situational consistency, and cross-temporal stability of aggressive behavior is examined in an effort to assess the logical, practical, and empirical utility of the violence-prone personality. For reasons of conceptual obscurity, circular reasoning, labeling, and negation of process, the concept of a violence-prone personality is rejected in favor of several more specific processes (i.e., Person × Situation interaction, survival strategies, psychological adjustment, the motivation to avoid change, implicit personality theories, systemic reinforcement of behavior, environmental stability, methodological issues).     

Psychiatric literacy: Lay beliefs of obsessive–compulsive personality disorder

This study examined the lay perceptions of the nature, aetiology and treatment of obsessive–compulsive personality disorder (OCPD). An opportunistic, predominantly British, sample of 342 participants completed a 22-item questionnaire on the treatments and causes of OCPD. Factor analysis revealed various constructs about aetiology, including a genetic/biological basis, problems with adaptation, parenting problems and issues of co-morbidity. Similarly, the ratings of the statements about efficacious cures factored into beliefs about psychoanalysis, cognitive behaviour therapy, self-help methods and the possibility of spontaneous remission. Theories of cause and treatment were modestly and significantly correlated. The findings highlight the necessity of greater mental health awareness and the importance of counselling and education in order to increase successful treatment and self- help-seeking of OCPD patients. Limitations of the study are considered.     

What do cross-national comparisons of personality traits tell us? The case of conscientiousness

Much research contrasts self-reported personality traits across cultures. We submit that this enterprise is weakened by significant methodological problems (in particular, the reference-group effect) that undermine the validity of national averages of personality scores. In this study, behavioral and demographic predictors of conscientiousness were correlated with different cross-national measures of conscientiousness based on self-reports, peer reports, and perceptions of national character. The predictors correlated strongly with perceptions of national character, but not with self-reports and peer reports. Country-level self- and peer-report measures of conscientiousness failed as markers of between-nation differences in personality.