Cambridge University Press
   978-0-521-88778-6 - Personality Traits, Third Edition
   Gerald Matthews, Ian J. Deary and Martha C. Whiteman
   Excerpt
   More information
               PART I
               The nature of personality traits
   © in this web service Cambridge University Press          www.cambridge.org
    Cambridge University Press
    978-0-521-88778-6 - Personality Traits, Third Edition
    Gerald Matthews, Ian J. Deary and Martha C. Whiteman
    Excerpt
    More information
              1       The trait concept and
                      personality theory
                      Introduction: conceptions of traits
              Everyday conceptions of traits
              The idea of personality traits may be as old as human language itself. Aristotle
              (384–322BC),writingtheEthicsinthefourthcenturyBC,sawdispositionssuch
              as vanity, modesty and cowardice as key determinants of moral and immoral
              behaviour. He also described individual differences in these dispositions, often
              referringtoexcess,defectandintermediatelevelsofeach.HisstudentTheophras-
              tus (371–287 BC) wrote a book describing 30 ‘characters’ or personality types,
              of which a translator remarked that Theophrastus’ title might better be rendered
              ‘traits’(Rusten,1993).Basictohiswholeenterprisewasthenotionthatindividual
              good or bad traits of character may be isolated and studied separately.
                 Contemporary English is replete with terms used to describe personal quali-
              ties. Table 1.1 shows some examples: the five words rated by American college
              students as the most and least favourable words in Anderson’s (1968) survey of
              555 personality terms, together with five words given a neutral rating. Allport
              and Odbert (1936) identified almost 18,000 English personality-relevant terms;
              morewordsthanShakespeareused!Nouns,sentencesandevenactionsmayalso
              have personality connotations (Hofstede, 1990). The language of personality
              description permeates our everyday conversation and discourse.
                 Everyday conceptions of personality traits make two key assumptions. First,
              traits are stable over time. Most people would accept that an individual’s
              behaviournaturallyvariessomewhatfromoccasiontooccasion,butwouldmain-
              tain also that there is a core of consistency which defines the individual’s ‘true
              nature’: the unchangeable spots of the leopard. In other words, there are differ-
              ences between individuals that are apparent across a variety of situations. We
              might expect a student we have noted as a ‘worrier’ to be particularly disturbed
              and worried in several different contexts such as examinations, social occasions
              and group discussions. Stability distinguishes traits from more transient prop-
              erties of the person, such as temporary mood states. Second, it is generally
              believed that traits directly influence behaviour. If a person spontaneously breaks
              into cheerful song, we might ‘explain’ the behaviour by saying that he or she
              has a happy disposition. Such lay explanations are, of course, on shaky ground
              because of their circularity. Aristotle suggested a more subtle, reciprocal causal
                                                                                                   3
    © in this web service Cambridge University Press                                        www.cambridge.org
     Cambridge University Press
     978-0-521-88778-6 - Personality Traits, Third Edition
     Gerald Matthews, Ian J. Deary and Martha C. Whiteman
     Excerpt
     More information
                 4           the nature of personality traits
                             Table 1.1 Ratings of likeableness of some favourable, neutral and
                             unfavourable traits
                                  Favourable traits                Neutral traits            Unfavourable traits
                             Trait               Rating      Trait              Rating      Trait          Rating
                             Sincere             5.73        Quiet              3.11        Dishonest      0.41
                             Honest              5.55        Impulsive          3.07        Cruel          0.40
                             Understanding       5.49        Changeable         2.97        Mean           0.37
                             Loyal               547         Conservative       2.95        Phony          0.27
                             Truthful            5.45        Hesitant           2.90        Liar           0.26
                             Note Each word was rated on a 0–6 scale by 100 US college students
                             Source Anderson (1968)
                             hypothesis: that it is through actions that dispositions develop, which in turn
                             influence actions.
                                      It is by refraining from pleasures that we become temperate, and
                                      it is when we have become temperate that we are most able to abstain from
                                      pleasures.    (Thomson’s, 1976, translation of the Ethics, 1104a: 33–5)
                                One of the major tasks for a scientific psychology of traits is to distinguish
                             internal properties of the person from overt behaviours, and to investigate the
                             causal relationships between them. To avoid circularity, it is essential to seek to
                             identify the underlying physiological, psychological and social bases of traits,
                             which are the true causal influences on behaviour.
                             Scienti“c conceptions of traits
                             This book places the concept of the trait at centre-stage in the scientific study of
                             human personality, because, ‘if there is to be a speciality called personality, its
                             uniqueandthereforedefiningcharacteristicistraits’(Buss,1989).Thereisalarge
                             gap between the everyday concept of a trait, and a concept that is scientifically
                             useful. Several distinct steps are necessary for developing a science of traits. The
                             firststepisthemeasurementandclassificationoftraits.Thesimplesttechniquefor
                             personality measurement is just to ask the person to rate how well trait adjectives
                             such as those shown in table 1.1 apply to himself or herself. We can also ask
                             questions about behaviours that are thought to relate to personality. Measures of
                             theextraversion–introversiontraittypicallyaskwhetherthepersonenjoysparties,
                             meetingpeopleandothersocialactivities,forexample.Wecanalsohaveaperson
                             whoknowstherespondentwell,suchasaspouseorclosefriend,provideratings
                             ofhisorherpersonality.Traitsneednotbemeasuredsolelybyverbalreport:real-
                             worldactionsandbehaviourinthelaboratorymaybeassessedtoo(Cattell,1973).
                             Wewould expect an extraverted person to belong to many clubs and societies,
     © in this web service Cambridge University Press                                                    www.cambridge.org
     Cambridge University Press
     978-0-521-88778-6 - Personality Traits, Third Edition
     Gerald Matthews, Ian J. Deary and Martha C. Whiteman
     Excerpt
     More information
                                                                         The trait concept and personality theory             5
                  Table 1.2 Examples of experimental studies showing correspondences between
                  traits and objective behavioural measures
                  Study                               Trait                     Behavioural measure
                  Carment, Miles and Cervin           Extraversion              Moretimespenttalking
                     (1965)
                  Edman,Schalling and                 Impulsivity               Faster reaction time
                     Levander (1983)
                  DeJulio and Duffy (1977)            Neuroticism               Greater distance from
                                                                                   experimenter chosen
                  Ganzer (1968)                       Test anxiety              Moretimespentlooking
                                                                                   awayfromthetaskduring
                                                                                   testing
                  Newman,Patterson and                Psychopathy               Morepersistence in gambling
                     Kosson (1987)                                                 whenconsistently losing
                  Mehl, Gosling and                   Extraversion              Moretimeinconversation
                     Pennebaker (2006)                                             and less time alone
                                                      Agreeableness             Fewer swear words used
                                                      Conscientiousness         Less time spent at home and
                                                                                   moretimeinclass
                  Rhodes and Smith (2006)             Extraversion and          Morephysical activity
                                                         Conscientiousness
                  for example. Experimental tests of typically extraverted behaviours may also be
                  devised, such as amount of laughter at jokes and willingness to respond rapidly
                  but inaccurately. In practice, however, personality measures based on objective
                  behaviouraltestshavehadonlylimitedsuccess,andfewhavebeenvalidated(see
                  Kline, 1993). Verbal report has been the preferred method of trait assessment
                  used by personality researchers.
                     Aswehaveseenalready,thereisahugenumberofwordswhichmaybeusedto
                  describe personality. Many of these words have rather similar meanings: precise,
                  careful, meticulous and painstaking would all seem to relate to some common
                  quality of conscientiousness. Such overlapping traits can be grouped together as
                  a broad aspect or dimension of personality. The question then becomes: what is
                  the number of broad dimensions needed to describe the main elements of any
                  individual personality? Much research effort has been devoted to drawing up
                  classificatory schemes of fundamental personality dimensions: estimates of the
                  numberrequired range from three to thirty or so.
                     There is no guarantee that people’s self-descriptions are accurate. The sec-
                  ond step in personality research is to test whether and how traits relate to
                  behaviours. Table 1.2 gives some examples of correlations obtained empirically
                  between personality traits and objectively assessed behavioural measures. In
                  eachcase,thedataimplythattheperson’sself-ratingsorquestionnaireresponses
                  are at least partially accurate. Traits may also be useful in applied settings, in
     © in this web service Cambridge University Press                                                                www.cambridge.org