Talk:Personality psychology/Archive 1

Confusing phrase
"with Cattell using oblique, Eysenck orthogonal, rotation to analyse the factors..." What does this mean? 128.12.59.246 01:17, 4 March 2007 (UTC)


 * It means that they used different methods in factor analysis. Orthogonal factors are completely unrelated. Oblique factors are only partially independent of one another. Ewen 08:03, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Another confusion it seems: "or worse offer advice, based on a superficial analysis of their personality" implies people offer advice based on their own personality profile. I assume this is meant to be that people "seek advice" or "receive advice" instead of "offer advice" ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mark56435 (talk • contribs) 09:44, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I revised this to be more clear. ThreeOfCups (talk) 03:08, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Traits section
there are some names that need to be fixed, and im not sure if they are supposed to be bold or if theyre supposed to be links to something else

would it be more effective under the first theory to list the different points that were suggested? right now it seems to all run together and doesn't jump out to a reader as a highlight of the theory.

Yes to merging in Personality Psychology
I think they should be merged. For more discussion go to Talk:PersonaltyRsugden 23:44, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

I agree, Personality psychology is relating to personality. New-plague 23:13, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Done. See talk page at "Personality type". --Halcatalyst 03:12, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Extraversion / Extroversion
I understood that Jung coined the term extravert and spelled it that way. Can anyone confirm? TeamCoachingNetwork 06:34, 4 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure about Jung, but I know Eysenck spelled it "extraversion," and this is also the spelling used by McCrae and Costa in their Big Five personality test, the NEO PI-R. I prefer extraversion because it suggests that these folks go outside of or "extra to" themselves. Jcbutler 21:35, 14 November 2006 (UTC)

"Extraversion" is the correct term, both with regard to how Jung spelled it and the way it is derived from Latin. "Extroversion" is what Microsoft Word's spell-check forces on you for unclear reasons. [Oliver C. Schultheiss] 13:48, 3 January 2007


 * Extroversion is unfortunately now the predominant English spelling, a back-formation from introversion (most dictionaries will confirm this). However, in the Myers-Briggs and Keirsey theories, the spelling Extraversion is used. I'm not sure how Jung fits into it, since he didn't write in English. ThreeOfCups (talk) 06:31, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Individual differences
This may require the knowledge of experts. I have found articles that seem related to personality psychology and I'm not sure if these discplines are independent from personality. In any case, I need someone to take a look and give your responses. The articles are individual differences psychology and differential psychology. --Janarius 00:20, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Clean up
Upon looking into the various sections, some of them seem to not relate to personality and more into other subjects. Please make edits that is relevant to the mechanism and theories that define personality and not about treatment or the history of a theory. these overlap with other articles and some of them are more approriate to others.--Janarius 19:58, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Agreement, especially with respect to cognitive theories
 * I wish to express how much I agree with the last comment - certainly I felt the section on cognitive theories in this article was less about cognitive approaches to personality than about cognitive therapy (I really wonder whether a section on Albert Ellis belongs here). I have, therefore, added a little to this section, and added references at the end. I do not have full references to the papers by Lefcourt (1966) and Rotter (1966) at present (I know that these came respectively from Psychological Bulletin and Psychological Monographs). If any one wishes to extend my contributions, please do, as the section on cognitive models could certainly receive some major edits. ACEO 20:59, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I finally got around to some cleanup on this page. Specifically, I folded Type A into trait theory, revised the intro and definition, put the reference section in APA style, and cleaned up the formatting, along with other odds and ends. Does anyone else think that the psychoanalytic section is too long, and that objects relations should be included under that section?


 * There is still much that needs to be done. Someone really needs to go through each major heading revising and editing where appropriate. Jcbutler 21:32, 14 November 2006 (UTC)


 * I believe so myself that many parts of the article is overlapping with other topics and some are too long, I'm addressing this issue myself with some anonymous users (someone from Keene State College who put redundant statements. (see my talk page)--Janarius 14:28, 15 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Can someone do something about the Behavioural model section. Particularly the part about Pavlov's research, which is excruciating. 163.1.143.122 23:13, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Can some one please indicate which edition of the Ryckman book the 2004 edition, cited at the end list of references, is, please? This book has gone through several editions. ACEOREVIVED 19:43, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Duplicated passage
The start of the article - referring to Roman masks and the three different approaches to personality is duplicated lower down. Is this intentional? It's a bit odd if it is. 212.183.136.194 (talk) 07:28, 16 May 2008 (UTC) Ugh! Fix this grammer!

Personality Tests
The examples given in the 'Personality Tests' section are fine but the list would be improved by including a number of tests that are very widely used in recruitment and career development and that are, arguably, much more well-known than most of the ones shown. The ones that I'm thinking of are (in no particular order): 1) 16PF (Professor Raymond Cattell) 2) Occupational Personality Questionnaire, or OPQ (Saville & Holdsworth) 3) Eysenck Personality Questionnaire, or EPQ (Professor Hans Eysenck) 4) Personality Profile Analysis (Thomas International; based on William Marston's work and the 'DISC' theory). Numbers 1, 2 and 4 above are registered tests with the British Psychological Society and I think number 3 may be as well. This gives them considerable credibility.Snookerrobot (talk) 16:18, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but "registering with the BPS" doesn't mean much. There are hundreds of such tests, see http://www.psychtesting.org.uk/. Besides, the BPS registration process seems to be more like a commercial enterprise -- you must pay £15 just to see a test review! What really give a test considerable credibility, are scientific publications. Judging by this criterion, your 1, 2, and 3 are clearly visible and important, whereas your no. 4 (Thomas' PPA) doesn't exist at all (not a single publication using it in PsycInfo). Historically, 16PF and EPQ are, of course, more important than OPQ. Lebatsnok (talk) 13:08, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Freud
I moved this from the article:

In Sigmund Freud : In Freud’s Psychoanalytic Theory of personality, human psychological make-up comprises three structural components-id,ego, and super ego.

a)	The id, represents the instinctual core of the person, is irrational, impulsive and obedient to the pleasure principle. It consists of everything psychologically that is inherited and present at the time of birth. Id represents a storehouse of all instincts, containing in its dark depths – all wishes, desires that unconsciously direct, and determine our behavior. Id is largely childish, irrational, never satisfied, demanding, and destructive of others. But id is the foundation upon which all other parts of personality are erected. Reflex actions and primary process thinking are used by the id in obtaining gratification of instinctual urges.

i)	Primary: Attempts to discharge a tension by forming a mental image of desirable means of releasing the tension. But this kind of tension release is temporary and mental and would not satisfy the real need. II)       Reflex Actions: The rendition release is reflected in the behavior of individual such as blinking of eyes, eyebrows, rubbing the cheeks, etc.

Id is instinctive, often unconscious and unrecognized and is unaffected by socially or culturally determined restrictions. Id basically represents an individual’s natural urges and feelings. b)	Ego: The ego represents the rational component of personality and governed by the reality principle. Through secondary production, its thinking is to provide the individual with a suitable plan of action in order to satisfy the demands of the id within the restrictions of the social world and the individual’s conscience. Ego constantly works to keep a healthy psychology balance between id’s impulsive demand and superego’s restrictive guidance. Ego is the rational master. The ego is said to be the executive part of the personality because it controls the gateway to action, selects the features of the environment to which it will respond and decides which instincts will be satisfied. Ego performs its tasks by –

i)	Observing accurately what exists in the outside world ii)	Recording these experiences carefully (remembering). iii)	Modifying the external world in such a way as to satisfy the instinctual wishes (acting).

C) Super Ego: The super ego, the final structure developed represents the moral breach of personality. As a child grows and absorbs parental and cultural attitudes and values, he or she develops a superego. It is also labeled as “ego-ideal” - it tells an individual what is acceptable. Superego is the moral segment of the human personality. The primary concern of the "super" is to determine whether the action proposed by “ego" is right or wrong so the individual acts in accordance with the values and standards of the society.

The superego, in some respects, is the antithesis of Freudian Theory of personality. The instinctual drives of id and superego are constantly battling each other and seeking to break out of bonds of reason – the ego. As a person becomes torn between these conflicts, a friction develops and results in anxiety, an ominous feeling all is not well. Anxiety creates tension and as such a person resorts to defensive mechanism in order to reduce tension. This defense mechanism may be aggression, repression, rationalization, reaction, projection, and introjections. -

Is this throey particularly relevant to personality, or more to psych as whole? It doesn't seem to say anything about personality traits, or answer any of the questions posed immediately above it. I'm sure someone must have extended this to give a Freudian view of personality, but this isn't it. This could just as easily apply to identity for exampleDillypickle (talk) 09:38, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh, it is already summarised in a better way later on! Many of the other sections have similar problems though. This article shouldn't be giving the basic approaches and histories of the various psych schools, only how these approaches have been used in personality psych. Has Pavlov's dog experiments made a major impact on personality psych (apart from indirectly via psych in general?) the paragraph on him described his experiments in detail, but made no indication about how this had anything to do with personality.Dillypickle (talk) 10:00, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree. The way this article is phrased does not support scientifically unifying psychological theory-- if there's no experimental support for a theory that you can cite, it shouldn't be given a spot in a modern description of the field of Personality Psychology. If there is support, then cite it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.20.57.33 (talk) 20:04, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

cognitive
Albert Ellis, an American cognitive-behavioral therapist, is considered by many to be the grandfather of cognitive-behavioral therapy. In 1955 Ellis developed Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT), which later came to be known as Rational Therapy (RT). REBT required the therapist help the client understand — and act on the understanding — his personal philosophy contains common irrational and self-defeating interpretations and evaluations that contribute to his own emotional pain. The basic theory of REBT is people to a large degree create and construct their own emotional consequences and behavioral disturbances through their beliefs and implicit and explicit philosophies of life they bring to their experiences. Ellis explains this through his ABC-framework of psychological disturbance and psychological change. In this model (A), is the activating event or adversity a person experiences which is followed by (B), the belief system the person holds and then (C), the emotional and behavoral consequence. What the theory states is (A) does not alone cause (C); but (C) is considerably also determined by (B). In other words, disturbed or non-disturbed emotional consequences are substantially determined by what the person believes in regard to (A). Aaron Beck, who is widely noted as the father of cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), suggested nearly all psychological dilemmas can be redirected in a positive (helpful) manner with the changing of the suffering individual's thought processes. He has worked extensively on depression and suicide, and is now redirecting his theories towards those with borderline personality disorder, and the various anxiety disorders (OCD, neurosis, phobias, PTSD, etc.). Extensive evidence has proven the effectiveness of combining CBT with pharmacotherapy in treating the most severe psychiatric disorders such as bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. Aaron Beck's continuing research in the field has proven to be a greater success over time.

---

So, what has the above got to do with personality psych as defined in this article? Yes, they are important and influential men, but this doesn't say anything about their research on personality (did they do any?). CBT is effective in treating psychiatric disorders - So what? Is having a personailty a disorder?Dillypickle (talk) 10:07, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

To be fair, there are possibly some links between psychopathologies and extremes of personality to be made, but a discussion of that topic should be made before the idea of behavioral therapy is introduced, if behavioral therapy should be involved at all- a link to it would suffice. It's really not directly relevant to this topic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.20.57.33 (talk) 20:12, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Adorno and authoritarian personality
Shouldn't the article include mention of Theodor W Adorno's personality research? Also some of the newer research on Right Wing Authoritarian Personality (Altemeyer) might be included.·Maunus· ƛ · 00:40, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Nettle
I just read the book by Nettle, simply called "personality." It was the best summary of the big five I have ever read. Not sure if it is worth mentioning here. I checked wikipedia for any article about Nettle, but there was none. Anyone on here think he is worth establishing as a leading advocate of personality theory? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.204.190.195 (talk) 01:10, 19 June 2009 (UTC) You are not responsible for your true personality.~ SOUP —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.176.122.188 (talk) 20:12, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Online and Offline Personalities
I have been observing my students' online (i.e., logged in cyberspace) and offline personalities. There were indications that many of my students' offline personalities are more authentic than their offline personalities. For instance, they are more spontaneous and participative online. Are there studies on this? FadulJA (talk) 06:04, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
 * This is consistent with the Myers-Briggs concept of introversion. According to Myers' theory, introverts use their auxiliary cognitive function, rather than their dominant one, when interacting with others face-to-face. It stands to reason that in an online environment, as with any form of written communication, the dominant function is more likely to show through. It's not that the online personalities of introverts are more authentic. It's just that introverts express their dominant function more openly online than they do face-to-face. Their authentic personality is operating offline. They just don't usually show their dominant function to other people. Instead, introverts generally reserve their dominant function for their internal processes, which introverts consider more important than interacting with other people. (No offense to all you extraverts out there.) ThreeOfCups (talk) 01:23, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Human Design and Personality
Ah., you are not going to like this. I am sure of that. People interested in Psychology and PErsonality all say, ah, it must be from this theory and that history of ideas.

Well here goes. There is a new set of ideas, which reaches into many areas of scientific and empirical knowledge. It is from NOWHERE. I mean from NOWHERE. A tramp living in a tree got a revelation in 1987, and the problem is, for me, and others, some parts of the ideas he now calls Human Design, are solid as scientific theory, in my own opinion and evaluation over 7 years now.

I don't suppose anyone is interested to consider this today, but I would really really really appreciate others who do know Psychology and Personality and all that - I only studied it at cambridge, way back when - to discuss maybe these possibly powerful and fascinating and - well, empirically testable - ideas about personality.

Here is what I blurted on my own userpage, realising that when the article currently at User:Mikemahalo/Human Design, or whereever else it is being developed, goes online, it will start to reach into other areas of knowledge. Here is what I wrote, yes I am a newbie, yes I am personally fascinated by this topic, and please, at this time, I seek discussion, thank you.

Personality Psychology - traits --

Ra Uru Hu, Genoa Bliven, Richard Rudd, Chetan Parkyn, and other published authors in the field of Human Design, propose a nested set of opposite personality traits, hard-wired into each individual and revealed consistently by a complex calculation derived from the date time and place of birth.

Personality Psychology - Human Design

Ra Uru Hu, Chetan Parkyn, and others have mapped a new system of personality "types" and "traits" within these types, known as the Human Design System. Human Motivation consists of 6 possible categories, arranged as 3 opposite binary pairs - Fear opposed to Need, Hope opposed to Duty, and Greed opposed to Observation. These are also called personality colors, and numbered from 1 to 6. Most people tend to polarise to the exact opposite ot their own natural and immutable motivation, effectively living a false and chaotic life.

The six personality colors alternate between active and passive, and so each opposite pair has one active and one passive polarity.

1, Fear - is the motivation to accumulate resources for survival in the face of unpredictable change. The polarity is 4. Need, the motivation to "travel light", and accumulate only what is necessary for survival in each moment.

2. Hope - is the motivation to notice what needs to be fixed and do nothing about it. The polarity is 5. Duty, the urge to fix things.

3. Desire - is the motivation to get whatever you want in life. The polarity is 6. Observation, the motivation to witness and wait.

--Digital witchdoctor (talk) 01:58, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Human design has no place in this discussion. It is a commercial mind control cult based on pseudoscience and the cold reading skills to be found in any fairground fortune tellers tent, packed into a shiny media package. The "tramp" referred to in this instance was a Canadian marketing executive, or depending on you believe, somebody with a background in physics e sufficiently strong to insist that neutrinos have mass, and build a fairy tale around it.

File any references to the individuals or organisation mentioned under "cult". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Designed out (talk • contribs) 19:53, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Book title change
Two references to Dr. Travis Bradberry's The Personality Code were changed to "Self-Awareness," another book he authored. No explanation was given in the edit summary. Was the wrong book cited in the first place? Was the name of the book changed in a newer edition? Can anyone confirm that the title change is accurate? ThreeOfCups (talk) 04:49, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Can I use pasages from wiki in a book?
Hey. I am writing a book about psychology. It would be great if I could use pasages to quote from Wiki. Can somebody tell me what is the situation with the copiright? Thanks Raffethefirst (talk) 22:58, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
 * It isn't actually appropriate to ask questions like that on article talk pages, but yes, you can quote Wikipedia if you properly attribute the information. However, you should note that Wikipedia is not considered a reliable source because anyone can edit it. So you risk losing credibility with readers. If the information you use isn't properly attributed to Wikipedia, there's a very good chance that publishers or readers will discover the source anyway, thanks to plagiarism detection software (or Google). Your best bet is to go to the source material referenced in the article, rather than using the article itself as your source material. ThreeOfCups (talk) 23:45, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

Untitled
My group and I are working on expanding to the Personality section within Psychology. More specifically we would like to help expand on the Biology and Genetics topics within Personality. We would like to focus on molecular genetics and evolutionary ideas of personality psychology. Our research will help guide us with what we need expand on, but this is what we mainly want our focus to be. Another thing we may be doing is adding and deleting other topics in the Personality section and moving them around to fit our add section. Once again, our research will help direct us with what information our topic will include. Please comment on this let us know what you think of our idea. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jennifer7463 (talk • contribs) 21:23, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Picture
What's picture of skull penetrated by iron has to do with topic of this page? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 114.110.44.112 (talk) 13:19, 15 December 2011 (UTC)