Integrating Personality Structure, Personality Process, and Personality Development (original) (raw)
Related papers
Authors' Response. Working towards integration of personality structure, process, and development
London School of Economics and Political Science Research Online (London School of Economics and Political Science), 2017
Personality psychology is fragmented across heterogeneous subfields each focussing on particular aspects of individuals and from particular paradigmatic perspectives. Attempts for integration into overarching theories as that presented in the target article are therefore important. But the ideas proposed build on vague and often circular definitions of basic terms and concepts that hamper advancement and integration. My critique from philosophy-ofscience perspectives pinpoints central problems and presents alternative concepts to help overcome them. A metatheoretical definition highlights the core ideas underlying common personality concepts and opens new avenues for conceptual integration.
European Journal of Personality, 2020
Over the last few decades, most personality psychology research has been focused on assessing personality via scores on a few broad traits and investigating how these scores predict various behaviours and outcomes. This approach does not seek to explain the causal mechanisms underlying human personality and thus falls short of explaining the proximal sources of traits as well as the variation of individuals’ behaviour over time and across situations. On the basis of the commonalities shared by influential process–oriented personality theories and models, we describe a general dynamics of personality approach (DPA). The DPA relies heavily on theoretical principles applicable to complex adaptive systems that self–regulate via feedback mechanisms, and it parses the sources of personality in terms of various psychological functions relevant in different phases of self–regulation. Thus, we consider personality to be rooted in individual differences in various cognitive, emotional–motivat...
Journal of Consulting Psychology, 1955
Traditionally, personality psychology has been understood as the study of stability in people's dispositions. However, a different strand of personality research has highlighted the importance of acknowledging and explaining the meaningful intraindividual variation in human thoughts, feelings, and behavior across different contexts and time. The goal of this paper is to review this strand, highlight current research, and outline key questions for future research. We summarize historical perspectives on the dynamic processes underlying the emergence of personality within and across individuals (e.g. the pioneering theorizing of Allport; the person-situation debate), recent theoretical and empirical advances in incorporating dynamic processes into the definition and assessment of personality (e.g., the study of personality states; dynamic approaches to personality including Cognitive Affective Personality System [CAPS], Whole Trait Theory, the Knowledge-and-Appraisal Personality Architecture [KAPA] framework, and Nonlinear Interaction of Person and Situation [NIPS]), and new directions in current research (e.g. idiographic approaches; understanding variability in narrative identity). We end with suggestions for future research.
Personality Psychology: A New Perspective Chapter1.pdf
Personality Psychology: A New Perspective by Musek, Janek - ISBN 10: 3031553071 - ISBN 13: 9783031553073 - Springer - 2024 - Hardcover.
This book integratively examines theories and models of the most essential findings of personality psychology with the aim of advancing personality knowledge. Since much empirical research is applied to very specific problems, the larger picture can get lost. Rather, this book starts from a coherent scientific theoretical framework, rather than presenting diverse theories of personality — phenomenological empirical, psychoanalytic behavioral, humanistic and cognitive perspectives — without enough critical examination. In this book, all theories, models and perspectives are reviewed and discussed within a unified theoretical framework of psychology Thus, historically and conceptually different models can be considered by scientific standards. Its insights will be highly relevant to academics, students and professional alike.
Personality theories and models An overview.pdf
The thesis of these volumes is that the study of personality traits has advanced towards "normal science" in the sense of a Kuhnian paradigm (cf. Eysenck, 1981;. That is, most researchers in this area share a set of common core beliefs supported by empirical evidence.
Personality: A Matter Of Multiple Theories
2020
The concept of personality has been explored from a wide range of conceptual viewpoints. This research tries to bring the varied concepts of personality under one roof. The current research explains the concept of different personality theories along with the limitations of those theories, starting with psychoanalytical approach and concluding at cognitive approach. Various implications of these theories, and personality, in general have been discussed. Scope for future research is also mentioned in concluding remarks.
Personality Theories and Models: An Overview
The SAGE Handbook of Personality Theory and Assessment: Volume 1 — Personality Theories and Models, 2008
The thesis of these volumes is that the study of personality traits has advanced towards "normal science" in the sense of a Kuhnian paradigm (cf. Eysenck, 1981;. That is, most researchers in this area share a set of common core beliefs supported by empirical evidence.
Journal of Personality, 2007
A taxonomy of personality-relevant situations will provide a valuable complement to the taxonomy of personality attributes. To identify some of the most important modifying factors, we asked laypersons what modifies expression of their own traits. Spontaneously generated situation descriptors were elicited from 77 university students, leading to over 7,000 reports of situations. We determined the most frequently occurring words and phrases, and developed initial classification categories. Next, we tested the reliability of the categories, and made refinements to focus on those that proved most reliable. Based on results, we propose that situation descriptions involve at least four separable broad domains of variables-locations, associations, activities, and passively experienced processes-each of which appears to have distinct linguistic markers. Psychology has a longstanding custom of dividing the bases for human behavior into two kinds. Dispositional factors (traits or other constitutional tendencies including genetic ones) are commonly differentiated from environmental factors (external and situational conditions). We are grateful to Gale Pearce, Kathy Hadjiyannakis and Brad Lytle for assistance with this research, and to Lewis R. Goldberg and Sarah E. Hampson for helpful suggestions on earlier drafts of the manuscript.