Integrative Personality Theory

 Integrative Personality Theory
Student’s name:
Institutional affiliation:
Integrative Personality Theory
Introduction
Personality psychology is a field of psychology that deals with the analysis of people’s characteristics that make them unique and their variation between different people. In this case, the study is based on the ideology that everyone has unique psychological structures and their exit traits that can only be found on them and not on any other person. The study deals with building up images of the psychological characteristics of people, and their primary psychological process compares the variations between the psychological state and process before different people to determine the basis of human nature and what makes people different and similar. To come up with the analysis above, theories in personality psychology have been developed to examine the various unique and related characteristic between people with each of the taking a different approach to prove the difference and similarities involved. Indeed, each theory has led to the discovery of different results based on the variation in the procedures and mechanism employed. However, there still exists a similarity in all the result from all the theories. This paper will be based on the theories of disposition perspectives, humanistic, behavioristic, psychodynamic, biological, culture and evolutionary personality psychological theories.
Dispositional theory
Dispositional psychological theory ideology is based on conscious motivation, that is behavior, thought and emotion of an individual.

McAdams & Pals (2006) state that personality traits are unique to everyone and they develop throughout an individual lifespan. According to Epstein (1991), depositional theory analyses traits relating to the mood of an individual when reacting to a situation. In this case, the individual either develops a positive mood or negative mood. Before Alport (2006) came up with the dispositional theory, several psychologists confused consciously related traits to physical traits McAdams & Pals (2006) state that disposition traits include all definitive continuous action of an individual. In this case, the genetic or the heritage characteristics of an individual define the way a person presents themselves to other people. Schottenbauer et al. (2006) argue that dispositional theory takes into consideration that the personality traits are finite, and one can be able to observe, measure and draw conclusive ideas out of them. Krueger et al. (2007) goe ahead to argue that the theories tend to control one’s behavior and sustain the individual’s existence within a given societal role or occupation.
Humanistic theory
According to the humanistic theory, people have the choice to act and behave the way they want and possess the freedom to define their behavior and attitudes (McAdams & Pals, 2006). Under the humanistic theory, there were the Abraham Maslow’s theory and Carl Rogers. According to Abraham Maslow’s theory, human begins behaving in a way that portrays them as individuals seeking to attain self-actualization one all their basic needs are satisfied (Epstein, 1991). Some of the humanistic characteristics described by Maslow’s theory include awareness, acceptance, openness and spontaneity of human beings, tendency to work with the view that work enables them to achieve satisfaction in life, good sense of humor, ability to socialize and attract other human beings without acting dependent on them and lastly experiencing events that make them attain satisfaction both spiritually and emotionally (Magnavita, 2002). On the other hand, Carl Roger Person-Centered theory considers self-concept as the most important aspect of defining a person personality. Under self-concept, Fleeson (2001) elements that control an individual personality include personal emotion, beliefs, and thoughts. In most case, Roger state that the human self-concepts differ from what happens.
Behavioristic theory
Block (2002) states that learning and condition serve as the main causes of personality development in a person. Schottenbauer et al. (2006) on the other hand, states that the behavior of an individual depends on the environment the person is brought up in. As a result, people tend to behave in each way about the type of response tendencies they have developed over time within an environment. Krueger et al. (2007) state further that for the behaviors that display positive outcome, people tend to keep them and allow them to manifest into a personality while those with negative outcomes are suppressed until they varnish. Unlike the psychodynamic theory, Block (2002) states that behaviorist theory is driven by the fact that an individual’s personality is not developed only during childhood but rather throughout the life of an individual. Based on Krueger et al. (2007) argument, the responses that people portray tend to change over time depending on the environment of the new situation that people encounter.
Psychodynamic theory
According to the psychodynamic theory, the personality of an individual consists aspects such id, that is, an element describing the instincts and pleasure-seeking characteristics of an individual. The second aspect is the superego with relates to the tendency of the individual to obey laws set by the society or parents. Lastly is the ego which according to Block (2002), acts as a mediator between the id and superego about the situation’s demands. According to this theory, the experiences that a person undergoes while growing up in a child shape their personality observed when they are adults. The basic assumption of the theory according to Schottenbauer et al. (2006), is that the behavioral and emotional characteristics of an individual are influenced by their unconscious motives. Block (2002) explains that the unconscious mind of a person consists of mental activities that cannot be accessed by the conscious mind of the person and directly impact an individual emotional reaction, behavior, and judgment.
Biological theory
According to the biological, psychological ideologies, a human being exists as biological elements originating each from a unique genetic make-up making them seek food, alter their behavior based on the neurological responses that are constructed and interpreted in the individual’s brain (Schottenbauer et al., 2006). Like other theories such as dispositional, the theory tends to analyze the consistency in the behavior of an individual. However, in this case, the theory concentrates on the biological aspects of an individual’s personality. Some of the biological elements consider include the genetic and hereditary path of an individual. The argument put up by Krueger et al. (2007) and biological psychologist state that the gene arrangement and characteristics of an individual based on their hereditary or evolution history control the personality of the given individual. The variation of personalities of different individuals, in this case, is because of hormonal and neurotransmitters influences during the lifespan of an individual.
Cultural theory
Studies conducted by cultural psychologists revealed that there is a tendency of the personality of people varying because of being raised in different cultural setup. In this case, a comparison between self-concept among American and Asian differ since the American culture tends to promote a self-concept that encourages its citizens to view themselves as being self-independent. Furthermore, the American children grow up developing conceptions of self that make them see themselves regarding their attributes, achievements, and values. Because of the different cultural setup, the human beings tend to have varying level of aggressiveness when it comes to a situation where resources like scares or where there exist threats to basic human needs. Cacioppo et al. (1999) state that culture theory explains the origin of altruism is some culture as the tendency of children growing up in a culture that encourages sharing and help each other tend to easily offer support and unselfish ideas to other people.
Evolutionary theory
The evolutionary theory majors its argument on the tendency of human being to develop a series of adaptive strategies, in this case, behavior that ensures their survival. Therefore, the evolutionary theory tries to explain the origin of human personality based on the Charles Darwin’s evolution concept of sexual and natural selection. Magnavita (2002) states that the evolutionary theory study personality as either being favorable, in this case, adaptive or unfavorable. Schottenbauer et al. (2006) further state that the evolutionary theory is partially innate and biological. Furthermore, the personality characteristics are inherited. An example it the level of aggression in some regions. According to Fleeson (2001), aggression in communities has been proved to be an inherited trait.
Excluded Concepts
The first theory that I exclude from the list is the psychodynamic theory. As much as the theory gives a belief ideology on the causes of personality citing examples such as childhood traumas, the theory still lacks an empirical study proof to back up the concepts it states. As a result, the ideas behind the theory are subjective hence does not have scientific validity. Furthermore, psychodynamic theory puts more focus on sexual issues undermining the need to consider interpersonal and social elements as potential factors in altering an individual personality. The second theory that is excluded from the list if the evolutionary theory. As much as the theory explains the human behavior and psychological state which both are significant elements in human evolution theory, the approach lacks the concept of culture as being part in altering the biological process result to change in human personality. Even though Krueger et al. (2007) and Fleeson (2001) state that culture is stated as the cause of development in human instinct, still, it can be noted that it has been partially stated as a factor supplanting instinct. Furthermore, some behaviors are hard to distinguish is they are born of innate or learned. The third theory I refute as part of the list is the behavioristic theory. As much as the has scientific facts that enables one differentiate facts from beliefs and has been successfully applied by people, the theory applies more to animals than human beings. It can be noted that the experiment used to proof the various concepts within it were conducted on animals. Because human being portrays several personality characteristics that differ from animals, there are chances that they may not respond to the variable as home animals reacted. Also, the theory is deterministic as people have limited freedom to make their own choices and hence are not able to be blamed if they act inappropriately. As a result, the theory undermines free will.
The Differences between Healthy and Unhealthy Personalities
A healthy personality trait involves ability of one to accept responsibility and portray high level of confidences when faced with challenges in life, is independent in terms of thoughts and actions and ready to adapt to the cultural environment they are situated, is goal oriented and is an extrovert, that is respects, other people, show empathy and has a friendly approach when interacting with other people. On the other hand, unhealthy personality traits involve characteristics that state to cause negative energy or outcomes. In this case, they include highly irritable, hyperactivity, shows hostility to authority, finds fun in mocking other people, lacks a sense of humor and responsibility, constantly lying and pessimistic in the face of life. Fleeson (2001) explains that healthy personality is found within people who have a sense of humor and are emotionally sensitive while people showing unhealthy personalities tend to have a high level of neuroticism which drives they negative psychological mindset. According to Magnavita (2002), people with healthy personality tend to easily manage any form of social interaction and relationships while those with unhealthy personality in most cases end up engaging in a fight, criminal activities or even engage in abusive fights since their personality is being controlled by their superego. As a result, people consider having unhealthy personality tend to lack the ability to think rationally and in most case act as if they are insane.
The Roles of Heredity, the Environment, and Epigenetics
Each person is unique in natures and it is impossible to find someone with the same personality as another. Twins are no exception. Heredity entails genetic inheritances developed during conception. According to Magnavita (2002), every human being starts off from a zygote, single cell. Out of the 23 chromosomes in sperm and ovum, one will be tasked with defining the sex of the person. Furthermore, the chromosomes contain innumerable genes that define the heredity characteristics of an individual originating from the person’s ancestors. When the gene of the mother and father fuse, the traits of the offspring are defined. Considering environment to refer to the surrounding areas of the child while in the mother’s womb and when born. Like heredity, environment plays a key role in defining the personality of the infant. The environmental factors, in this case, affect the personality of the individual when they are still in the initial stages of development. Cacioppo et al. (1999) hormones within the mother’s body are important for the normal development of the infant and in case there exist defects with the secretion process, there is a chance that the child will develop congenital deformities. On the other hand, epigenetics refers to the natural process that can alter the behavior of individuals. Cacioppo et al. (1999) state that conduct can switch on and off firm hereditary characteristics of an individual. Change in the genetic factors controlling the gene coding can result in disorders in an individual. Fleeson (2001) explains that a genetic disorder refers to the abnormality within an individual. They further explain that such abnormities might be because of mutations and passed to offspring. Such disorders include sickle cell anemia and cystic fibrosis.
Assessment and Measurement of the Theory
Some of the measurement concepts used in the determine accurate personality data include interview method consisting of either or both structured and unstructured interview. Allport (1937) used 4,500 traits like words structure in the form of cardinal traits, central traits, and secondary traits. Another measurement methods were Cattell’s where he made use of factor analysis to study the correlation that existed between personality traits and separate the most significant traits. In his assessment, he placed the traits in the form of source, surfaces and made use of 16 dimensioned traits structured from personality adjectives referring to the common language people use (Krueger et al., 2007).
Other measurements and assessment techniques include the self-report test where interviews used forced-choice instruments since the answer provider are limited. Secondly is the performance-based test also known as the free-response test. In this case, the interviewees are given a task to carry out, for example interpreting inkblot.
Self-Reflection
Over the course of this unit, I have managed to improve my understanding of the personality theories, and further research has made me clarify some of the concepts that I had difficulty in understandings. In the process of studying the various personality theories, I discovered that some of them are more complex to understand and require a high level of concentration. Also, some of the concepts that I studied, such as the psychodynamic theory were only based on the subjective opinion of the psychologist and lacked clear evidence to prove the concepts being stated under it. In this case, more research needs to be done to experiment the theory. On the other hand, I discovered theories such as behaviorist theory made their case out of experiment done on animals and not human beings making the concepts to be weak since human being exhibit several different characteristics from animals. I decided to explore my personality using the various experimental procedures and relate them to the theories so that I can relate what I have learned to a real-life example. Referring to the cultural theory, I discovered that my personality is inclined to being independent, self-reliant and highly competitive since I was raised in an American culture where such aspects are installed in children while they grow up.
In conclusion, integrative personality theories try to give a picture of the origin and how people develop their personality traits. Based on the theories such as the biological and evolutional theories, every person develops a unique type of traits are a result of a genetic and environmental process that takes place while they are still young. Furthermore, the environment people live have a significant impact on the traits people develop while they grow up and since traits are dynamics, there exist possibilities that one’s personality traits may change over time.
The theories have their weakness while some such as psychodynamic theory relying on the psychologist’s subjective opinion rather than measure and assessed scientific data. Concerning the roles that heredity, environment, and epigenetics play in the development of a person’s personality, the three factors have a significant influence on the personality of the infant and child while at their early stages. Heredity and environmental factors have the potential to define a constant trait of an infant from the days after conception. Finally, to come up with accurate scientific results from measurement and assessment of the theories, techniques such as interviews, cardinal trails, central traits and secondary traits and Cattell’s factor analysis were used.
References
Allport, G. W. (1937). Personality: A psychological interpretation.
Block, J. (2002). Personality as an affect-processing system: Toward an integrative theory. Psychology Press.
Cacioppo, J. T., Gardner, W. L., & Berntson, G. G. (1999). The affect system has parallel and integrative processing components: Form follows function. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(5), 839-843.
Epstein, S. (1991). Cognitive-experiential self-theory: An integrative theory of personality. The relational self: Theoretical convergences in psychoanalysis and social psychology, 111-137.
Fleeson, W. (2001). Toward a structure-and process-integrated view of personality: Traits as density distributions of states. Journal of personality and social psychology, 80(6), 1011-1027.
Krueger, R. F., Markon, K. E., Patrick, C. J., Benning, S. D., & Kramer, M. D. (2007). Linking antisocial behavior, substance use, and personality: An integrative quantitative model of the adult externalizing spectrum. Journal of abnormal psychology, 116(4), 645-653.
Magnavita, J. J. (2002). Theories of personality: Contemporary approaches to the science of personality. John Wiley & Sons Inc.
McAdams, D. P., & Pals, J. L. (2006). A new Big Five: fundamental principles for an integrative science of personality. American Psychologist, 61(3), 204-210.
Schottenbauer, M. A., Rodriguez, B. F., Glass, C. R., & Arnkoff, D. B. (2006). Religious coping research and contemporary personality theory: An exploration of Endler’s (1997) integrative personality theory. British journal of psychology, 97(4), 499-519.