There are many different theories on personality and many different attacks. I am traveling to speak about the Trait. Cognitive. and Motivational attacks and how they apply to me as an person.
Trait theory is based on several premises. The first premise is that any difference between people that is seen as important will hold a name. The 2nd is that these names. knows as traits. and are conceived of every bit uninterrupted dimensions. In general. Trait Theory assumes that people vary at the same time on a figure of personality factors.
The Trait Theory that I am traveling to utilize. is the Five-Factor Model ( FFM ) . or The Big Five. The FFM says that the five major classs of traits are Open mindedness. Conscientiousness. Extraversion. Agreeableness. and Neuroticism. ( OCEAN ) In order to use the FFM theory to my life. I tool the NEO-PI trial. I will name my consequences while seeking to explicate more about myself.
Extraversion is marked by marked battle with the external universe. Extroverts enjoy being with people. are full of energy. and frequently experience positive emotions. They tend to be enthusiastic and action-oriented They like to speak in groups. assert themselves. and draw attending to themselves. I scored “high” on the Extraversion portion of the trial. This means that I am sociable. surpassing. energetic. and lively. I prefer to be around people much of the clip. It rated me on subcategories under extroversion. In order from the highest ( most noticeable traits in me ) to the lowest ( traits that are non strong in me ) here is how I scored: Friendliness. Gregariousness. Assertiveness. Activity Level. Exhilaration seeking. Cheerfulness. I was really defeated to non be considered more cheerful.
Agreeableness reflects single differences in concern with cooperation and societal harmoniousness. Agreeable persons value acquiring along with others. They are hence considerate. friendly. generous. helpful. and willing to compromise their involvements with others’ . Agreeable people besides have an optimistic position of human nature. They believe people are fundamentally honorable. decent. and trusty. Harmonizing to the trial. my degree of Agreeableness indicates a strong involvement in others’ demands. and a concern for their well being. I am pleasant. sympathetic. and concerted. It besides rated me on subcategories under amenity. In order from the highest ( most noticeable traits in me ) to the lowest ( traits that are non strong in me ) here is how I scored: Modesty. Altruism. Sympathy. Trust. Morality. and Cooperation. While I scored really high in most of the subcategories. and the class as a whole. seemingly I am non really concerted. because I merely scored a 4/100 in that country.
Conscientiousness concerns the manner in which we control. regulate. and direct our urges. Urges are non inherently bad ; on occasion clip restraints require a snap determination. and moving on our first urge can be an effectual response. Besides. in times of drama instead than work. moving spontaneously and impetuously can be fun. Impulsive persons can be seen by others as colourful. fun-to-be-with. and zany. I scored low on Conscientiousness. bespeaking that I like to populate for the minute and make what experience good now. My work tends to be careless and disorganised. I was besides rated on subcategories under Conscientiousness.
In order from the highest ( most noticeable traits in me ) to the lowest ( traits that are non strong in me ) here is how I scored: Dutifullnes. Self-Efficacy. Self-discipline. Achievement endeavoring. Cautiousness. Orderliness. This is really really sad but true. While I have a strong sense of responsibility. I tend to be really unorganised. messy. and a postponer. I am confident that I have the ability to acquire things done. yet sometimes miss the motive to make so. I tend to move before I think. and it can acquire me in a batch of problem.
Neurosis refers to the inclination to see negative feelings. Those who score high on Neuroticism may see chiefly one specific negative feeling such as anxiousness. choler. or depression. but are likely to see several of these emotions. I scored high on Neuroticism. bespeaking that I am easy upset. even by what most people consider the normal demands of life. Peoples consider me to be sensitive and emotional. I was besides rated on subcategories under neurosis. In order from the highest ( most noticeable traits in me ) to the lowest ( traits that are non strong in me ) here is how I scored: Anger. Immoderation. Vulnerability. Anxiety. Depression. uneasiness. Unfortunately. this is reasonably accurate. I don’t believe it is this utmost. but I am extremely dying. and have been put on anxiousness medicines before. I tend to be high strung and worry a batch. I expect a batch out of people. and myself. and when things don’t travel harmonizing to my programs. I get huffy.
Openness to Experience describes a dimension of cognitive manner that distinguishes inventive. originative people from earthy. conventional people. Open people are intellectually funny. appreciative of art. and sensitive to beauty. They tend to be. compared to closed people. more cognizant of their feelings. They tend to believe and move in individualistic and nonconformist ways. Intellect is likely best regarded as one facet of openness to experience. My mark on Openness to Experience is high. bespeaking that I enjoy novelty. assortment. and alteration. I am funny. inventive. and originative. My strengths in this class get downing with the strongest are: Imagination. Emotionality. Artistic involvement. Intellect. Adventurousness. Liberalism.
So harmonizing to this. I am loyal. dying. unorganised. adventuresome. smart. zany. modest. and selfless. That sounds approximately right.
The cognitive attack trades with units associated non with traits. but with a person’s idea procedures. including memory. perceptual experience. and linguistic communication. It refers to how a individual processes information refering the ego. and the environment. One of these theories is Julian Rotter’s Social Learning Theory. and that is what I am traveling to be discoursing in footings of myself.
The chief thought in Julian Rotter’s Social Learning Theory is that personality represents an interaction of the person with his or her environment. One can non talk of a personality. internal to the person. which is independent of the environment. Neither can one focal point on behaviour as being an automatic response to an nonsubjective set of environmental stimulations. Rather. to understand behaviour. one must take both the person ( i. e. . his or her life history of acquisition and experiences ) and the environment ( i. e. . those stimulations that the individual is cognizant of and reacting to ) into history. Rotter describes personality as a comparatively stable set of potencies for reacting to state of affairss in a peculiar manner. Rotter sees personality. and hence behavior. as ever mutable. Change the manner the individual thinks. or alter the environment the individual is reacting to. and behaviour will alter.
Rotter has four chief constituents to his societal acquisition theory theoretical account foretelling behavior. These are behavior possible. anticipation. reinforcement value. and the psychological state of affairs. Behavior potency is the likeliness of prosecuting in a peculiar behaviour in a specific state of affairs. In other words. what is the chance that the individual will exhibit a peculiar behaviour in a state of affairs? In any given state of affairs. there are multiple behaviours one can prosecute in. For each possible behaviour. there is a behavior potency. The person will exhibit whichever behaviour has the highest potency. For case. I am pregnant. so in a state of affairs where ice pick is being given out. there is a high chance that I will eat the ice pick.
Anticipation is the subjective chance that a given behaviour will take to a peculiar result. or reinforcing stimulus. How likely is it that the behaviour will take to the result? Having “high” or “strong” anticipations means the person is confident the behaviour will ensue in the result. Having low anticipations means the single believes it is improbable that his or her behaviour will ensue in support. If the results are every bit desirable. we will prosecute in the behaviour that has the greatest likeliness of paying off ( i. e. . has the highest anticipation ) . Anticipations are formed based on past experience. The more frequently a behaviour has led to reinforcement in the yesteryear. the stronger the person’s anticipation that the behaviour will accomplish that result now. So. presuming that in the old state of affairs. I took the ice pick. I expect that if my behaviour is repeated. I will derive delay. I have learned through past experiences that eating fatty nutrients makes me derive weight.
Reinforcement is another name for the results of our behaviour. Reinforcement value refers to the desirableness of these results. Thingss we want to go on. that we are attracted to. hold a high support value. Things we don’t want to go on. that we wish to avoid. hold a low support value. If the likeliness of accomplishing support is the same. we will exhibit the behaviour with the greatest support value ( i. e. . the one directed toward the result we prefer most ) . So. I have determined that my craving for ice pick has a higher support value to me at this clip. than does being skinny.
Although the psychological state of affairs does non calculate straight into Rotter’s expression for foretelling behaviour. Rotter believes it is ever of import to maintain in head that different people interpret the same state of affairs otherwise. Again. it is people’s subjective reading of the environment. instead than an nonsubjective array of stimulation. that is meaningful to them and that determines how they behave. This states that I can construe a state of affairs wholly different from person else so so our anticipations would alter.
In the simplest of footings. the motivational attack asks the inquiry. why? Why do we move like we do? We have to see what our motivations are for making things. The theory I am traveling to utilize for this is Freud’s Drive theory.
Sigmund Freud proposed that the human mind could be divided into three dependent parts. the Idaho. the self-importance and the superego. The first of these “consisted of amoral. irrational. driving inherent aptitudes for sexual satisfaction. aggression. and general physical and animal pleasance. The superego constituted the external moral jussive moods and outlooks imposed on the personality by its society and civilization. The self-importance stood as the go-between between the urges of the Idaho and the asceticism of the superego. The self-importance allowed the personality to get by with the inner and outer demands of its being.
In my life. the Id would be represented in many ways. I am now 6 months pregnant. so evidently my Id produced a demand for sexual pleasance. I tend to be really aggressive and crave instant satisfaction. These are the subconscious desires of my Id. harmonizing to Freud. However. the Id is non the strongest. in my life. between the Idaho. self-importance. and superego.
Then there is the Superego. which is an icon for the moral subdivision of our logical thinking. and contains the ideals and ideas that we strive for. and how we expect to be punished for non run intoing those ideals. For case. my Superego prevents me from taking money from the junior-grade hard currency box at work. I could likely really easy take it. but I know that it is incorrect and understand that I will be punished if I do so. This portion of my head urges me to follow the Torahs. and abide by the moralss that govern me. This lets me cognize the nature and order of things. and tells me to esteem that. That is why I am a good. law-obeying citizen. because my Superego is a strong force in commanding my behaviour.
The 3rd portion is the Ego. The Ego tries to take what the Id wants. and do it go on. while still maintaining conformity with the Superego. It puts my desires. demands. and ideas into world for me. My self-importance controls me in certain ways. and allows me to show my Id. without piquing my Superego. For case. Id desires sex. yet my Superego wants to be ethical. therefor my self-importance governs that it is all right for me to hold sex. but non with my friends husband. Or non at church. Or my Id desires that I be aggressive and physical. so my self-importance lets me be aggressive. but lets my Superego state me that I can’t be so aggressive that injury or pique another individual.
I have now explained the three major attacks to personality. and described a theory of each. and how they relate to me. Out of all the research I did. I found that the FFM was the most accurate in depicting who I am.