User:Phaedrus101/Beharvioural and Learning theories of personality

Introduction
Personality and behaviourism are often considered to be antithetical to each other: personality is the study of internal structures that constitute our individual self; while behaviourism searches for true for all principles of learning, ignoring any internal elements. However, learning and behavioural theories of psychology do have something to say about personality, though they choose to redefine the meaning of the term personality. Learning and behavioural theories define personality as stable reaction pattern exhibited by a person throughout time and space, though the reaction pattern can differ in different contexts, whereas personality is generally defined as the sum of individual differences that makes each person unique.

Freud, Marx and the development of learned personality
Freud was among the first theorists to postulate that personality was, to some extent, learned. Freud claimed that conflict between three brain structures, the ego, id and superego, were the root cause of all human behaviour - and thus of personality. Of the three, the superego is the aspect of personality that is learned, the influence of society on the psyche of the individual. As an infant, the id, the part of the brain that obeys biological drives, was said to reign supreme over the mind. Thus, young children often behave in inappropriate ways to seek the ends of these biological needs. However, as they grow and are socialized, children acquire a superego, placing the constraints of societal pressure on their drives; and an ego to mediate the desires of the id and the superego. Thus, Freud believed that part of our personality is learned from society. We engage (or do not engage) in certain acts, thoughts or feelings because we have been taught to (or not to).

Another early proponent of learned personality was Karl Marx.

Skinner's radical Behaviourist perspective
B.F. Skinner, despite being the founder of Behaviourist theory, did consider the subject of personality. According to Skinner: "A self or personality is at best a repertoire of behaviour imparted by an organized set of contingencies". Skinner's perspective is based on the premise that personality is tantamount to a stable pattern of behaviour. He simply holds that these patterns of behaviour are learned, and are occasioned by stimuli that differ depending on the scenario. He claims this can explain both why people's behaviour is relatively stable in one situation, but also why people's behaviour can be so radically different across different scenarios. Skinner even revisits Freud's ideas on the matter. However, he states that the id, ego and superego are not inherently different structures - but ones that have learned to respond to different stimuli (the id to unconditioned stimuli, the ego to "practical contingencies of everyday life" and the superego to social stimuli). The internal conflict we experience is that each structure would like to react to certain environmental stimuli. Part of the learning of personality is learning which voice to listen to.

Associative learning and personality
Personality and psychophysiology are tied by the notion of conditioning: the notion that a neutral stimulus can occasion a response normally signalled by an unconditioned stimulus. Classical conditioning was first discovered by the Russian scientist Ivan Pavlov, when he discovered dogs could be conditioned to salivate at the sound of a bell. Equally important is the notion that such conditioned responses can be generalized - or occasioned by similar stimuli; but also that we can discriminate - or determine when we should react to a stimulus. As a result of this, classical conditioning can explain many behaviour patterns we experience in our everyday lives. Such patterns directly influence the notion of personality if we consider personality as stable reaction patterns over time.

One notable experiment that made use of the effects of conditioning on personality was Watson's and Rainer's "Little Albert" experiment, wherein an infant was trained to fear white rats and similar stimuli using the principles of classical conditioning. In a broader context, many phobias are likely the result of such conditioning. Thus, certain aspects of our personality may result directly from learning in the mode of classical conditioning.

The input of social learning theory
Learning theories of personality intersect with social learning theory in the context of drives. Drives re internal compulsions that lead us to act - usually to alleviate the drive. Social learning theory states that our usual modes of response are built on drives that are learned by the individual in situations they encounter. These drives differ from the "primary" drives, which are fundamentally survival based (hunger, thirst, sex, avoidance of pain). However, secondary drives are thought to evolve from primary drives as children develop, through the consequences that various actions have on internal states and future behaviours. Thus, personality is said to be learned as the internal drives we experience and that lead us to think, feel and act in certain ways in specific situations are learned.

This theory was expanded by Miller and Dollard in the 1940s. They postulated that individuals used these secondary drives to determine which behaviours could elicit a reward in a specific scenario. These hierarchies of responses result in stable patterns of behaviour in situations with certain stimuli, but also differ from person to person - accounting for certain individual differences in responses.