Hierarchy A system in which some units are higher in order and therefore in control of the functions of other units.
Personality Those characteristics of the person that account for consistent patterns of experience and action.
Process In personality theory, the concept that re- fers to the motivational aspects of personality.
Structure In personality theory, the concept that refers to the more enduring and stable aspects of personality.
System A collection of highly interconnected parts that function together; in the study of personality, distinct psychological mechanisms may function together as a system that produces the psychological phenomena of personality.
c01PersonalityTheoryFromEverydayObservationsToSystematicTheories.indd Page 31 07/11/12 4:35 PM user-019A
REVIEW
1. We all think about personality in our day-to-day
lives. The work of personality theorists differs from this everyday thinking in that personality theories pursue fi ve goals that are uncommon in everyday thinking about persons. They engage in (1) scientifi c observations that underlie theo- ries that are (2) internally coherent and system-
atic, (3) testable, and (4) comprehensive, and that
foster (5) useful applications.
2. Personality theories address what, how, and
why questions about personality by developing theories that address four distinct topics: (1) personality structure, (2) personality processes, (3) personality development, and (4) personali- ty change (including via psychotherapy).
3. Personality theorists have confronted a range
of issues throughout the history of the field. In developing theories that encompass these issues, the theorist hopes to develop a frame- work that serves three scientific functions: (1) organizing existing knowledge about per- sonality, (2) fostering new knowledge on im- portant issues, and (3) identifying new issues for study.
4. The existence of multiple theories in the fi eld
can be understood by thinking of theories as toolkits, each of which provides unique concep- tual tools for doing the jobs of the personality psychologist.
Temperament Biologically based emotional and
behavioral tendencies that are evident in early childhood.
Trait An enduring psychological characteristic of an individual; or a type of psychological construct (a “trait construct”) that refers to such characteristics.
Type A cluster of personality traits that may consti- tute a qualitatively distinct category of persons (i.e., a personality type).
Units of analysis A concept that refers to the basic variables of a theory; different personality theories in- voke different types of variables, or different basic units of analysis, in conceptualizing personality structure.
33 QUESTIONS TO BE ADDRESSED IN THIS
CHAPTER
THE DATA OF PERSONALITY PSYCHOLOGY
LOTS of Data
How Do Data from Different Sources Relate to One Another?
Fixed Versus Flexible Measures Personality Theory and Assessment
Personality and Brain Data Personality Theory and Assessment
GOALS OF RESEARCH: RELIABILITY, VALIDITY, ETHICAL BEHAVIOR
Reliability Validity
The Ethics of Research and Public Policy
THREE GENERAL STRATEGIES OF RESEARCH
Case Studies
Case Studies: An Example
Correlational Studies Correlational Research: An Example Experiments Experimental Research: An Example
Evaluating Alternative Research Approaches
Case Studies and Clinical Research: Strengths and Limitations
The Use of Verbal Reports
Correlational Research and Questionnaires: Strengths and Limitations
Laboratory, Experimental Research: Strengths and Limitations
Summary of Strengths and Limitations
PERSONALITY THEORY AND PERSONALITY RESEARCH
PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT AND THE CASE OF JIM
Autobiographical Sketch of Jim
MAJOR CONCEPTS REVIEW
THE SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF PEOPLE
2
c02TheScientificStudyofPeople.indd Page 33 07/11/12 7:18 PM user-019A
34
Chapter Focus
Three students in a course on personality work together on a research project. They have been instructed to develop a research method for studying the effects of achievement motivation on academic performance. At their fi rst meeting, they realize that they have drastically differing opinions about how to proceed. Alex is convinced that the best approach is to follow one student over the course of the semester, carefully recording all relevant information (grades, changes in motivation, feelings about courses, etc.) to obtain a complete and in-depth picture of a particular case. Sarah, however, thinks little of Alex’s idea because his conclusions would apply only to that one person. She sug- gests that the group develop a set of motivation questions and give the ques- tions to as many students as possible. She then would examine the correlation between questionnaire responses and performance in school. Yolanda thinks that neither of these approaches is good enough. She thinks that the best way to understand things scientifi cally is to run experiments. She suggests an experimental manipulation that causes some people to feel motivated and others to feel unmotivated, followed by a measure of test performance.
The students’ views illustrate the three major methods in personality re- search: case studies, correlational studies using questionnaires, and labo-
ratory experiments. This chapter introduces you to these three research
methods. First, however, we review the different types of information, or data sources, that might go into any study, as well as the general goals that investigators have when they conduct research on personality.
QUESTIONS TO BE
ADDRESSED IN
THIS CHAPTER
1. What kind of information is it important to obtain when studying
personality?
2. What does it mean to say that scientifi c observations must be “reliable”
and “valid”?
3. How should we go about studying people? Should we conduct research
in the laboratory or in the natural environment? Through the use of self- reports or reports of others? Through study of many subjects or a single individual?
4. How much difference does it make to study people with one or another
type of data? Or through one versus another approach to research? In other words, to what extent will the person “look the same” when studied from different vantage points or perspectives?
Chapter 1 suggested that, at an intuitive level, everyone is a personality theo- rist. Everybody thinks about people—what makes them “tick”; what affects their psychological development; how, and why, they differ. The personality psycho- logist’s theorizing, however, differs from yours. As you learned, personality
THE DATA OF PERSONALITY PSYCHOLOGY 35
scientists must formulate their ideas very explicitly, so that they can be tested by objective scientifi c evidence.
Here in Chapter 2, we turn to personality research. In so doing, we fi nd a similar theme. Everybody, at an intuitive level, is a personality researcher. We all observe differences among people, as well as consistent patterns of behav- ior within individuals. These observations constitute the “research evidence” we use to formulate our intuitive personality theories.
However, once again, your intuitive “research” differs from that of the per- sonality scientist. Scientists follow established procedures to maximize the objectivity and accuracy of the information they obtain. They report their research procedures and results in scientifi c journals, which enables other scientists to replicate their procedures and verify their fi ndings. This chapter introduces you to the research practices of the personality psychologist.
Although this chapter is devoted to research, not theory, you should bear in mind that questions about theory and research are not as separate as our divi- sion of chapters might suggest. One might guess that psychologists would fi rst conduct much “theory-free” research and then develop theories to explain their fi ndings. But this is impossible. There is no such thing as “theory-free” research. Research involves the systematic study of relationships among events. Generally, we need a theory to identify the events that are most impor- tant to study. We also need a theory to tell us how to study them.
Suppose, for example, that you wanted to test the idea that people who are anxious about dating relationships do not perform as well as they should on exams in college courses because their anxiety interferes with their learning. To test this idea, you would have to begin by measuring people’s level of anxiety. But how? It is impossible to proceed without making some theoretical assump- tions. One option would be to ask people directly “Are you anxious about dat- ing?” But this option makes two risky assumptions: (1) that people are aware of their level of anxiety, and thus are capable of reporting it, and (2) that people will tell you, honestly and accurately, about their anxiety if you ask. These assumptions could be wrong, and a personality theory might specify exactly how they are wrong. For example, psychodynamic theories suggest that some people are so anxious that they are not even aware of their anxiety. They repress it. This theory suggests that you need a different research method. Other poten- tial research procedures, such as measuring physiological arousal or brain functioning to index levels of anxiety, similarly rest on theoretical ideas about what anxiety is, what its underlying causes are, and how it is expressed. Thus, theory and research are closely linked. Theory without research can be mere speculation. Research without theory is meaningless fact gathering.