Gordon Allport: Father of personality theory
Gordon Allport (1897-1967) is often called the father of personality theory: He was very much a trait theorist and believed in the individuality and uniqueness of the person and that people have consistent personalities.
Allport attempted to blend nomothetic and idiographic perspectives: he called this blend the morphogenic approach.
Allport believed that each person had traits of various types:
Individual: traits possessed by one person
Common: traits possessed by many people
Cardinal traits: One trait that dominates the person
Central traits: small number of traits important traits that may affect many behaviours
Secondary traits: many consistent traits which are not often exhibited
Motivational traits: Very strongly felt traits
Stylistic traits: Less strongly felt traits.
Allport believed that through autobiographies, letters and diaries an understanding of an individual’s personality could be gained. He studied 301 letters written by Jenny Gove Masterson and was able to describe Jenny in terms of 8 traits.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Personality Traits: Idiographic vs. Nomothetic
Personality Traits: Idiographic vs. Nomothetic
However the whole issue of whether a trait exists in all people to a greater or lesser degree is complicated by different views of the trait perspective.
There are two different views as to whether all traits exist in all people:
Idiographic: people have unique personality structures; thus some traits (cardinal traits) are more important in understanding the structure of some people than others
Nomothetic: people's unique personalities can be understood as them having relatively greater or lesser amounts of traits that are consistently across people (e.g., the NEO is nomothetic)
The Idiographic view emphasizes that each person has a unique psychological structure and that some traits are possessed by only one person; and that there are times when it is impossible to compare one person with others. This viewpoint also emphasizes that traits may differ in importance from person to person (cardinal, central and secondary traits). It tends to use case studies, bibliographical information, diaries etc for information gathering.
The Nomothetic view, on the other hand, emphasizes comparability among individuals but sees people as unique in their combination of traits. This viewpoint sees traits as having the same psychological meaning in everyone. The belief is that people differ only in the amount of each trait. It is this which constitutes their uniqueness. This approach tends to use self-report personality questions, factor analysis etc. People differ in their positions along a continuum in the same set of traits.
Most contemporary psychologists tend towards a nomothetic approach (and the trait approach is often viewed solely as a nomothetic approach these days), but they are aware of how a trait may be slightly different from person to person in the way that it is expressed.
However the whole issue of whether a trait exists in all people to a greater or lesser degree is complicated by different views of the trait perspective.
There are two different views as to whether all traits exist in all people:
Idiographic: people have unique personality structures; thus some traits (cardinal traits) are more important in understanding the structure of some people than others
Nomothetic: people's unique personalities can be understood as them having relatively greater or lesser amounts of traits that are consistently across people (e.g., the NEO is nomothetic)
The Idiographic view emphasizes that each person has a unique psychological structure and that some traits are possessed by only one person; and that there are times when it is impossible to compare one person with others. This viewpoint also emphasizes that traits may differ in importance from person to person (cardinal, central and secondary traits). It tends to use case studies, bibliographical information, diaries etc for information gathering.
The Nomothetic view, on the other hand, emphasizes comparability among individuals but sees people as unique in their combination of traits. This viewpoint sees traits as having the same psychological meaning in everyone. The belief is that people differ only in the amount of each trait. It is this which constitutes their uniqueness. This approach tends to use self-report personality questions, factor analysis etc. People differ in their positions along a continuum in the same set of traits.
Most contemporary psychologists tend towards a nomothetic approach (and the trait approach is often viewed solely as a nomothetic approach these days), but they are aware of how a trait may be slightly different from person to person in the way that it is expressed.
What are Personality Traits?
Traits are distinguishing qualities or characteristics of a person. Traits are a readiness to think or act in a similar fashion in response to a variety of different stimuli or situations.
In general, trait theory assumes that people differ on variables or dimensions that are CONTINUOUS. People are seen to differ in the AMOUNTS or QUANTITIES of a characteristic rather than differ in the QUALITY of their characteristics.
Traits are now more in favour than types. Remember, traits are continuous; types are categorical.
Category
Character
Number
Types
discontinuous, discrete, qualitative
Few
Traits
continuous, degree, quantitative
Many
In general, trait theory assumes that people differ on variables or dimensions that are CONTINUOUS. People are seen to differ in the AMOUNTS or QUANTITIES of a characteristic rather than differ in the QUALITY of their characteristics.
Traits are now more in favour than types. Remember, traits are continuous; types are categorical.
Category
Character
Number
Types
discontinuous, discrete, qualitative
Few
Traits
continuous, degree, quantitative
Many
Introduction to Personality Traits
Allport and Odbert (1936, cited in Funder, 2001) found 17,953 words to describe the way people are psychologically different from each other (e.g. shy, trustworthy, laconic, phlegmatic, kind, conscientious, anxious, etc.). All these words describe personality traits.
Trait approach tries to synthesize and formalize these traits in order to explain and predict behaviour.
Underlying questions driving the trait approaches to personality include:
What traits are basic/essential to personality?
How many are there?
How do we find out?
Note that labeling of traits is subjective: hence different theorists label similar or same traits using different words. Also, look for the meaning that underlies the trait, rather than simply at the name. Similar traits have been given different labels by different theorists (e.g., neuroticism and emotional stability usually refer to the same trait).
Trait approach tries to synthesize and formalize these traits in order to explain and predict behaviour.
Underlying questions driving the trait approaches to personality include:
What traits are basic/essential to personality?
How many are there?
How do we find out?
Note that labeling of traits is subjective: hence different theorists label similar or same traits using different words. Also, look for the meaning that underlies the trait, rather than simply at the name. Similar traits have been given different labels by different theorists (e.g., neuroticism and emotional stability usually refer to the same trait).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)