Download Chapter 8

Chapter 8
The Trait Approach:
Relevant Research
The popularity of the trait approach to the
study of personality
 Of the six approaches to the study of personality described
in your text, the trait approach is the one that is the most
widely used by researchers in:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Psychology
Communications
Business
Health science
Physical education
Sociology
Social work
Some of Henry Murray’s psychogenic needs
Need
Definition
n Achievement
To accomplish tasks, surpass others
n Affiliation
To approach liked others, win their affection
n Aggression
To fight opposition, attack, seek revenge
n Autonomy
To seek freedom, independence, resist coercion
n Dominance
To control others, to influence, persuade,
command
n Exhibition
To impress, excite, amaze, fascinate, or shock others
n Harmavoidance
To avoid pain, injury, illness, danger, or death
n Nurturance
To give sympathy, support, and to console others
n Order
To put things in order, be neat, organized, clean
n Play
To seek fun, jokes, laughter
n Sentience
To seek and enjoy sensuous experiences
n Sex
To form erotic relationships, have sex
n Understanding
To seek answers, to enjoy analysis, theory, reason
The Thematic Apperception
Test (TAT)
Developed by Henry Murray
- born 1893, died 1988 at age 95
- developed the TAT in the 1930s
Achievement Motivation
David C. McClelland (1917-1998)
 McClelland earned his Ph.D. in experimental




psychology at Yale University in 1941.
He taught at Connecticut College and Wesleyan
University before accepting a position at Harvard in
1956.
After 30 years at Harvard he moved to Boston
University, where he was a Distinguished Research
Professor of Psychology until his death at the age of 80.
He proposed a content theory of motivation based on
Henry Murray's (1938) theory of personality.
In his 1961 book, The achieving society, McClelland
argued that human motivation comprises three dominant
needs: the need for achievement (nAch), the need for
power (nPow), and the need for affiliation (nAffil). The
subjective importance of each need varies from
individual to individual and also depends on an
individual's cultural background.
High achievement motivation characteristics
 Moderate risk takers: they want to succeed, but are also highly
motivated to avoid failure
 High energy level: they work hard at tasks that enable them to
experience a sense of achievement, but are as susceptible as
anyone else to the boredom of routine tasks
 Prefer jobs that assign personal responsibility: they want to be
able to take credit for their successes, but also need to know
when, and how, they have failed
 Prefer jobs that are diagnostic of their ability level: they prefer
clear, unambiguous feedback about their level of success or
failure
Predicting achievement behavior
 The parents whose children had the highest nAch scores were those
who provided support and encouragement long enough for the children
to feel competent, but not so long that the children were robbed of
independence and initiative. They knew when to “back off” and let the
child take charge (McClelland & Pilon, 1983).
 McClelland (1965) reported that the nAch scores of a group of male
students at Harvard University predicted their status as entrepreneurs
14 years later (83% of the high nAch students became entrepreneurs).
 A potential weakness of high nAch individuals is their reluctance to
delegate authority. For example, McClelland and Boyatzis (1982)
reported that nAch was related to success for lower-level managers but
not for higher-level managers.
Gender, culture, and achievement
 Although the early nAch studies used only men as subjects, as
women’s work opportunities have changed, more studies have focused
on nAch in women.
 Jenkins (1987) found that women’s nAch scores predicted their job
choice and job characteristics 14 years later.
 Other research indicates the men and women differ in the value they
assign to achievement tasks (Eccles, 1985) and in the way they define
success (Gaeddert, 1985).
 Achievement has a different meaning in individualist cultures, such as
the US, than in collectivist cultures such as Japan and China (Hui,
1988).
Outcome attributions
 Three dimensions for classifying the attributed causes of personal
outcomes: the stability dimension. the causal locus dimension, and the
controllability dimension
 The causal locus dimension has the most weight in determining how
good or bad people feel about their positive (success) or negative
(failure) outcomes.
 The stability dimension has the most weight in determining whether
people predict that the same outcome will occur in the future.
 The attribution approach suggests that achievement motivation can
often be changed by changing the person’s attributions (Wilson &
Linville, 1982, 1985).
Three dimensions of outcome attributions
Stability
Locus
Controllability
Stable attributions
Unstable attributions
Good coordination (+)
Poor math aptitude (‒)
Good luck (+)
Had a cold (‒)
Internal attributions
External attributions
Extra effort (+)
Low ability level (‒)
Easy test (+)
Difficult competition (‒)
Controllable attributions
Uncontrollable attributions
High motivation (+)
Not enough practice (‒)
From a wealthy family (+)
Weak national economy (‒)
Outcome attributions
 Three dimensions for classifying the attributed causes of personal
outcomes: the stability dimension. the causal locus dimension, and the
controllability dimension
 The causal locus dimension has the most weight in determining how
good or bad people feel about their positive (success) or negative
(failure) outcomes.
 The stability dimension has the most weight in determining whether
people predict that the same outcome will occur in the future.
 The attribution approach suggests that achievement motivation can
often be changed by changing the person’s attributions (Perry,
Stupnisky, et al., 2010).
The Type A–Type B Distinction
The Type A and Type B behavior patterns
 The Type A pattern of behavior was identified




by two cardiologists, Meyer Friedman and Ray
Rosenman.
They developed a Structured Interview
Technique to distinguish Type A individuals
from Type B individuals.
Type A and Type B actually form a continuum.
Type As are time urgent, impatient, and highly
competitive. They drive themselves (and, often,
others as well) and are easily frustrated and
angered by obstacles and delays.
In contrast, Type Bs are more easygoing and
relaxed. They are less likely to push themselves
to compete, and they are also less upset by
obstacles and delays.
Type A as a personality variable
 Compared to Type Bs, Type As are impatient, time urgent,
competitive, hard driving individuals who can’t stand to see time
wasted. They act as if they have a strong motive to control the people
and events they encounter.
 This pattern of behavior is reflected in their watch settings, their
driving habits, their study habits, their reactions to failure, and their
reactions to persuasive messages.
 Type As are more likely than Type Bs to dominate a group discussion,
less likely to give up control of a task, and more likely to want
something after being told they can’t have it.
 Type As are less likely than Type Bs to acknowledge stress. This may
occur because Type As are better than Type Bs at “tuning out”
anything they regard as task-irrelevant stimuli.
Type A and achievement
 In general, Type As work harder and are more productive than Type





Bs.
On the other hand, their motivation can wane if the task is too easy.
As college students, Type As receive more academic honors. They also
participate in more outside activities, including sports, and receive
more rewards and recognition in these domains as well.
Type A research psychologists publish more articles and get cited
more than their Type B counterparts, even controlling for gender and
other relevant variables.
A survey of 12 large companies found that managers were more likely
to be Type As than Type Bs.
On the other hand, Type As work longer hours, stress themselves (and
others) more, and may not be as happy as Type Bs.
Type A and health
 In early studies, Type A proved to be a risk factor for heart disease,
along with hypertension and obesity. In fact, it was a better risk factor
in predicting heart attacks than cholesterol level or smoking.
 Later studies often yielded less impressive results, however. Why was
this so?
– Measuring Type A: a question of validity
• The Structured Interview Technique (SIT)
• The Jenkins Activity Survey (JAS)
– Identifying the “toxic component” of Type A as anger and hostility
– Why does the anger and hostility component predict heart disease?
•
•
•
•
High blood pressure
Compromised immune system
Poor social support system
Unhealthy lifestyle
Adding a Type A personality to other risk
factors, such as obesity, can be fatal
Type A and health
 In early studies, Type A proved to be a risk factor for heart disease,
along with hypertension and obesity. In fact, it was a better risk factor
in predicting heart attacks than cholesterol level or smoking.
 Later studies often yielded less impressive results, however. Why was
this so?
– Measuring Type A: a question of validity
• The Structured Interview Technique (SIT)
• The Jenkins Activity Survey (JAS)
– Identifying the “toxic component” of Type A as anger and hostility
– Why does the anger and hostility component predict heart disease?
•
•
•
•
High blood pressure
Compromised immune system
Poor social support system
Unhealthy lifestyle
Some health consequences of high anger and
hostility
Physical illness
High hostility scores predict an increased
incidence of many illnesses
Immune system
High anger is related to weakness in the immune
system, especially after conflict
Pain
High anger is associated with lower pain
tolerance
Cholesterol
High trait anger is correlated with higher
cholesterol levels
Cardiovascular disease
High hostility is related to a higher incidence of
many cardiovascular disorders
Death
High scores on measures of anger and hostility
are associated with death from CHD and other
causes
Blood pressure response of male participants to
social interactions (Guyll & Contrada, 1998)
120
119
High hostility
Low hostility
118
117
116
115
Not talking
Talking
Shyness and Social Anxiety
Shyness and social anxiety
 Measures of shyness and social anxiety correlate so highly with each
other that it makes sense to regard them as synonymous constructs.
Other highly related constructs include dating anxiety, communication
anxiety, reticence, and stage fright.
 Shyness, or social anxiety, is not the same as introversion. Whereas
introverts often choose to be by themselves, most shy or socially
anxious people do not like the social isolation imposed by their
condition.
Today, people with shyness can also get help
(and dates) through on-line support websites
Characteristics of socially anxious people
 They feel awkward, nervous, and self-conscious when they meet new





people, have to talk in front of an audience, or are concerned about
having to make a good impression.
They are very concerned about what they are doing wrong, how stupid
they must sound, and how foolish and awkward they must look.
They often show outward signs of nervousness, such as stammering,
perspiration, and shakiness.
Sometimes their social anxiety is so extreme that they retreat into
themselves and can no longer carry on an effective conversation.
They are more reluctant to ask other people for help when they need it.
They tend to be hypervigilant for negative feedback, and to interpret
even neutral feedback in a negative manner.
Correlations of the men’s and women’s
shyness with dyad-level measures of behavior
Men’s shyness
Women’s shyness
Perceived interaction quality
-.49
-.27
Amount of talking
-.45
-.27
Number of questions asked
-.38
-.14
Amount of smiling
-.36
-.22
Amount of eye contact
-.39
-.25
Dyad-level measure
Correlations of the men’s shyness with the
men’s and women’s individual behaviors
Correlation of the men’s shyness with
Men’s behavior
Women’s behavior
% negative self-focused
thoughts and feelings
.50
.34
% partner-focused thoughts
and feelings
-.37
-.33
# mutual gazes initiated
-.01
-.63
# mutual gazes terminated
-.12
-.54
# expressive gestures
-.40
-.49
Degree of body orientation
-.04
-.35
Openness of body posture
-.36
.04
Individual-level measure
Explaining social anxiety
 Social anxiety (shyness) is a reaction to evaluation
apprehension that results in a self-protective strategy. This
strategy prescribes that the shy person should:
– Avoid social encounters
– However, if you must interact with someone:
•
•
•
•
Avoid eye contact
Keep the conversation brief and non-threatening
Agree, restate, clarify
Limit self-disclosure
 A lack of specific social skills, such as the ability to initiate a
conversation
 A lack of confidence in one’s ability to make a good impression
Emotional Aspects of Personality
Emotional affectivity: two dimensions, not
one
High positive affect
High negative affect
Active
Distressed
Elated
Fearful
Enthusiastic
Hostile
Excited
Jittery
Peppy
Nervous
Strong
Scornful
Low positive affect
Low negative affect
Drowsy
At rest
Dull
Calm
Sleepy
Placid
Sluggish
Relaxed
Positive affect and social activity
 Researchers consistently find that positive affect is related to social
activity. But what are the possible reasons for this association?
– One reason may be that social activity causes positive affect.
• Planned social activities tend to be pleasant and enjoyable.
• Social contact is often intrinsically rewarding and often provides other
rewards in the form of help and assistance, social support, and so on.
– Alternatively, people may engage in social activity because they
experience positive affect (i.e., positive affect causes social
activity).
• Happy, upbeat people might make friends more easily.
• Happy, upbeat people might get along better with others (experience
less conflict and resolve conflicts more effectively).
• Happy, upbeat people might keep their friends longer.
Negative affect and health problems
 With regard to mental health problems, negative affect has consistently
been found to be related to:
– Psychological stress
– Emotional problems
 With regard to physical health problems, negative affect has
consistently been found to be related to:
– Complaints about health
– Stress-related illness
 Why is negative affect related to physical health problems?
– Negative affect may interfere with health-promoting behaviors such as
avoiding smoking/drinking, eating right, and getting enough sleep.
– People who already have a lot of health problems may become more
negative about their lives in general (the reverse causal ordering)
Affect intensity
 Affect intensity refers to the strength or degree to which people
typically experience their emotions.
 Surprisingly, perhaps, when researchers compare people with high
versus low affect intensity, they find that they go to the same number
of parties and concerts and have the same numbers of hassles and
setbacks.
 The difference lies in how they react to these events.
– High affect-intensity people imagine that they would have more intense
reactions to hypothetical events.
– They are more likely to draw unwarranted conclusions based on one good
or bad experience.
– They experience happiness and well-being as exhilaration, whereas low
affect-intensity people experience it as contentment.
– Artists score higher in affect intensity than scientists.
Affect intensity
 Affect intensity refers to the strength or degree to which people
typically experience their emotions.
 Surprisingly, perhaps, when researchers compare people with high
versus low affect intensity, they find that they go to the same number
of parties and concerts and have the same numbers of hassles and
setbacks.
 The difference lies in how they react to these events.
– High affect-intensity people imagine that they would have more intense
reactions to hypothetical events.
– They are more likely to draw unwarranted conclusions based on one good
or bad experience.
– They experience happiness and well-being as exhilaration, whereas low
affect-intensity people experience it as contentment.
– Artists score higher in affect intensity than scientists.
Emotional expressiveness
 Emotional expressiveness refers to the extent to which people express





their emotions outwardly.
For example, in one study, emotionally expressive women displayed
visible signs of joy when told that they had answered some difficult
problems correctly.
Individual differences in this trait are relatively stable.
Women tend to be more emotionally expressive than men.
Emotionally expressive people tend to report fewer problems in their
romantic relationships than more inexpressive people do.
Emotionally expressive people also report greater happiness, less
anxiety, less depression, and higher self-esteem than more inexpressive
people do.
Optimism and Pessimism
Optimism . . . and . . . Pessimism
Dispositional optimism
 Research findings show that positive expectations help people cope better





with many life adjustment problems.
The personality variable of dispositional optimism distinguishes chronic
optimists from chronic pessimists, as measured by the Life Orientation
Test (LOT) developed by Charles Carver and Michael Scheier.
Optimists usually achieve more than pessimists.
They tend to set their goals higher and believe that they can reach these
goals.
They are less likely to be deterred by setbacks and temporary failures (in a
study of new insurance salesmen, the pessimists were twice as likely as the
optimists to quit within the first year).
There are cultural differences in dispositional optimism (for example,
Japanese are more pessimistic than Canadians).
Dispositional optimism and dealing with
adversity
 Israeli citizens who were threatened by SCUD missile attacks during




the first Persian Gulf War coped better with the stress if they were
dispositional optimists than if they were pessimists.
Women caring for an Alzheimer’s patient reported less stress and
depression if they were optimists than if they were pessimists.
Patients dealing with breast cancer, rheumatoid arthritis, or coronary
artery bypass surgery coped better if they were dispositional
optimists.
Compared to pessimistic students, optimistic students reported having
an easier time adjusting to the demands of their first college term.
Optimists are more likely than pessimists to use active coping
strategies. Pessimists are more likely to distract themselves or resort
to denial (i.e., to use avoidance coping strategies instead).
Optimism and health
 A longitudinal study revealed that optimists at age 25 reported better
health at ages 45-60 than pessimists did.
 Why are optimists healthier than pessimists? Some possible reasons
are suggested by the following research findings:
– Optimists are more likely to develop wide social networks and
turn to friends for help in time of need.
– Optimists appear to have stronger immune systems than
pessimists do.
– Optimists also tend to have lower blood pressure, lowering their
risk for cardiovascular disease.
– An optimistic outlook leads to the kinds of attitudes and values
that promote good health (good diet, exercise, use of seat belts,
etc.)