1. Traits and Trait Taxonomies
Personality Psychology
Chapter 9
Traits and Trait Taxonomies

2. Dispositional Perspective
People display continuity or consistency across their own actions, thoughts, and feelings
People differ from one another in many profound ways
Major theory under this perspective
Type and Trait Theory

3. Classification
Characteristic of most sciences in their attempt to find order
One of most basic approaches to understanding personality
Common sense approach
To discover order about personality

4. Type and Trait Theory Defined
A dispositional theory that explains personality as a set of stable characteristics within individuals
People exhibit these characteristics across various situations and across time

5. Specific Definitions Types Traits
Original definition: Discontinuous categories
Current definition: Large, continuous categories encompassing traits
Traits
Continuous categories

6. Key Components Types and traits both exist in a hierarchical order
Types and traits are governed by a variety of potential processes
Factor analysis often used to determine hierarchies
Traits can be distilled into a few general categories; “Big 5” Model one of most popular

7. Key People
Allport
Cattell
Eysenck

8. Trait theory…
… is a way to describe/predict but it is NOT a theory of development

9. How do you discover traits? Step 1: Choose your method
Lexical Approach: Collecting words and synonyms of traits
Statistical (Empirical) Approach: Use factor analysis
Theoretical Approach: Borrowing theories, especially from ancient scholars, and determining traits from these theories

10. Step 2: Distill using Factor Analysis
Statistical procedure to identify items that group together and reflect a larger factor
Problems
Selection of traits
Labeling of factors
Number of factors

11. Gordon Allport “Father” of trait theory
Founded upon personal experience
Took a lexical approach to developing trait theory

12. Allport’s view of trait theory
There is value in surface characteristics – there is more to a person than what is at the “unconscious” level
It is not necessary always to emphasize one’s past
To discover what someone is like – Ask them about themselves! They are the best source of information
Traits are both inherited and learned

13. Allport’s view of trait theory
Common Traits
Traits that are defined the same way for all people
Personal Traits
Unique manifestation of traits

14. Types of Personal Traits
Cardinal disposition
One single trait that defines everything everything for a person
Central disposition
5 –10 highly characteristic and frequently seen personal traits
Secondary disposition
Influential traits that are less consistent and generalized than cardinal or central traits

15. Raymond Cattell Empirical approach to trait theory
Factor analysis reduction of 4,500 trait words (left by Allport) to 16 most basic primary personality dimensions
Not as concerned with whether traits were inherited or learned

16. Cattell’s 16 personality dimensions
Reserved vs. Warm
Concrete Abstract
Reactive Emotionally stable
Deferential Dominant
Serious Lively
Expedient Rule-conscientious
Shy Bold
Utilitarian Sensitive
Trusting Vigilant
Practical Imaginative
Forthright Private
Self-assured Apprehensive
Traditional Open to change
Group-oriented Self-reliant
Tolerates disorder Perfectionistic
Relaxed Tense

17. Source versus Surface traits
Source trait
Causal factor trait that determines how a person responds
Surface trait
Manifestation of a source trait

18. Three types of traits
Ability traits
Temperament traits
Dynamic traits

19. Ability traits
Define various types of intelligence and determine how effectively a person works toward a desired goal
Fluid intelligence (innate ability to learn)
Crystallized intelligence (the effects of education; what has been learned)

20. Temperament traits
Inherited source traits that determine the general style of interaction

21. Dynamic traits Motivational traits Ergs (innate motivation traits)
Meta-ergs (learned, environmental origin)

22. Hans Eysenck Theoretical approach to trait theory
Took theories of Hippocrates, Jung, et. al., and conceived of a basic 2x2 matrix of super traits
Believed traits were genetically-based” was very biologically oriented

23. Two dimensions (“Supertraits”)
Introversion/extraversion: Tendencies toward sociability, craving for excitement, liveliness, dominance, activeness
Emotionality/stability: Ease and frequency with which a person becomes upset and distressed, with greater moodiness, anxiety, and depression reflecting greater emotional instability

24. Eysenck’s Two Dimensions
Emotionally Stable Emotionally Unstable |
Introvert | Phlegmatic (calm): Melancholic (depressed)
| passive, careful, controlled quiet, submissive, anxious,
| reserved
Extravert | Sanguine (optimistic) Choleric (irritable)
| sociable, outgoing, active, impulsive,
| lively, carefree excitable, aggressive

25. Trait issues How many categories?
Does the approach used to develop trait theory (empirical, theoretical, lexical) make a difference in outcome?
Did all trait theorists follow the same assumptions presented for dispositional theory? What is the paradigm?

26. Where did trait theory go after
Cattell and Eysenck?
Following Cattell, trait data collected in new, more comprehensive, and multivariate ways
Further factor analysis
Cattell’s data replicated with new, diverse samples, multiple cultures, different languages, children, and over time
“lay-person” trait terms included
More observations and nonverbal assessments
Findings showed 5 factors!

27. The “Big 5” Extraversion (Power) Aggreeableness (Love)
Conscientiousness (Work)
Emotionality (Affect)
Openness to Experience (Intellect)

28. The Fifth Factor? Given different names by different researchers
Cross-cultural differences

29. Reactions to “Big 5” Support Opposition Eysenck and his camp
More robust and replicable than any other taxonomy
Is a well-established basis on which to build
Research for additional factors is not compelling and the factors are not relevant to personality (attractiveness)
Is a framework for phenotypic attributes of personality based in human language
Opposition
There may be more factors (sexiness, attractiveness, faithfulness, spirituality)
Does not capture underlying personality processes