The Essential Trait Approach - Lecture 6

The Essential Trait Approach 3 main players

• Raymond Catell (1961) :
• 16
• source traits, including:
• nintelligence,
• stability and friendliness.
• Eysenck (1947, 1986) – 3 Super-traits:
• extraversion;
• neuroticism and psychoticism
• The
• Big Five (McCrae
• & Costa, 1987): OCEAN
• Openness,
• Conscientiousness,
• Extraversion,
• Agreeableness,
• Neuroticism
• (also called negative emotionality)

Raymond B. Cattell & Hans J. Eysenck

• Similarities include:
• 1.Both
• of them place great importance on biological and genetic
• factors
• (too much?)
• 2.
• Looking for scientific
• discovery/measurement of
• ‘normal’
• people
• 3.
• Used analyses in different
• ways
• Oblique-
• allows correlation, no guiding theory (Catell)
• Orthogonal-ensure
• factors that come out of data are independent, how hypotheses driven agendas
• (Eysenck)
• Differences Include:
• Catell:
• primary
• factors: source traits
• data
• driven - inductive
• oblique
• rotation - factors can be correlated with each other.
• Eysenck:
• second-order
• factors: ‘supertraits’.
• theory
• driven - deductive
• orthogonal
• rotation - factors are not correlated, they are independent of each other.
• Eysenck analysed existing correlations.

Hans Eysenck (1916-1997)

• Highly
• thought
• of statistician
• Theory emphasised three second-order factors called supertraits- derived
• from intercorrelations
• between source traits.
• Supertraits are genetically determined
• Focus on temperament-- the
• emotional, motivational and non ability related cognitive aspects of behaviour.

Eysenck’s Hierarchical Model of Personality

• Based on three super-traits, often referred to by acronym PEN
• Hierarchal structure:
• Super-traits are broad traits that subsume a large number of source or narrow traits.
• Extraversion vs Introversion
• High extroversion = low levels of cortical arousal.
• Neuroticism vs Emotional stability
• high levels of neuroticism = excessive activity of the autonomic nervous system.
• Psychoticism
• A tendency towards psychotic/sociopathic behaviour
• NB Bio factors will be look at in a future bio lecture with Avril

Slide 5

Slide 6

• 
• Caption: like slide before but with traits inserted

Slide 7

• 
• IIf
• we break this down further:
• Level
• 2: there are 2
• second- order factors: they are the same but need to unpick
• more to get a less complicated picture.
• Level
• 3: habitual acts
• Level
• 4: specific acts

Hans Eysenck (1916-1997)

• Extraversion - Introversion
• includes Cattell's factors of social boldness and privateness.
• Introvert- shy, quiet, enjoys soltitude
• Extravery- outgoing, loud, sociable, enjoys social gatherings.
• Extraversion - Introversion
• results
• from
• the balance of “inhibition” and “excitation” in the brain itself.
• Ascending
• Reticular Activating System (ARAS) structure in brainstem controls overall
• cortical arousal. ARAS acts as gate to arousal.
• individuals
• high on extraversion are
• believed to have low levels of cortical arousal.
• Extraverts:
• Lower levels of activity in the ARAS.
• The
• ARAS system of the extravert allows too little arousal in. Therefore,
• extraverts seek out contexts with high stimulation.
• Individuals
• high on introversion are
• believed to have high levels of cortical arousal.
• Introverts:
• Higher levels of activity in the ARAS
• nIntroverts’
• ARAS allows too much arousal in. Therefore, introverts seek out contexts with
• low stimulation
• To summarise.....
• Extroverted-
• low arousal (so constantly looking for excitement)
• Introverted
• (too much arousal) looking for less exciting things/sensations
• Again this will be covered in a future bio lecture
• Introversion
• perhaps caused by damage from trauma.

Hans Eysenck (1916-1997

• 
• Neuroticism vs Emotional
• stability
• includes
• Cattell’s source factors of emotional stability and apprehensiveness
• people
• who score high on the neuroticism scale are not necessarily neurotics but they
• might be more susceptible to neurotic problems.
• Eysenck
• - some people have a more responsive sympathetic nervous system (limbic
• system). Controls emotional responsiveness to emergency situations. Prepares us
• for fight or flight.
• High
• levels of neuroticism arise from hypersensitivity or excessive activity of the
• sympathetic nervous system. React more to threatening
• environments.
• Archetypal”
• neurotic symptom is the panic attack
• My notes....
• Located
• n with more responsive sympatheitc nervous
• systemCause
• all sorts of problems, linked with depression

Neuroticism and PTSD/disorders

• Holeva
• and Tarrier
• (2001) studied victims of road traffic accidents across 2 time periods (4 weeks
• and 6 months post accident).
• Neuroticism
• (and to a lesser extent psychoticism) is associated with the development of
• Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.
• High
• levels of trait anxiety or heightened conditionability
• appear to increase the risk of developing PTSD.
• Neuroticism/negative affectivity
• and psychological disorders
• Various
• studies highlight a link between neuroticism /negative affectivity and
• psychological disorders including:
• Ormel
• & Wohlfarth, (1991) found links between neuroticism and psychological
• distress in life changing situations.
• Watson
• and Clark (1984) found an association between negative affectivity and the
• experience of aversive emotional states.
• Clark,
• Watson and Mineka (1994) showed associations between temperament, personality
• and the mood and anxiety disorders.

Eysenck’s Theory illustrated for two factors

• 
• Caption: To show original theory was just a 2 factor theory (added third later) It mapped well onto old ideas of Greek methodology

Hierarchical structure of psychoticism (P

• 
• Caption: The came up with psychoticism later than the other two Very unpleasant (said Avril!)
• Added later and less well researched:
• Possibly
• linked to dopaminergic system.
• Includes
• Cattell’s factors of sensitivity and rule consciousness.
• Developed
• from research conducted in mental institutions and prisons.
• A
• tendency towards psychotic/sociopathic behaviour.
• high
• scores on psychoticism measure indicate a certain recklessness, a disregard for
• conventions, a degree of inappropriate emotional expression, a
• tendency to be hostile, manipulative and impulsive.
• My additional notes:
• Added
• later, but developed following research on mental institutions and prisons
• So
• found a trait that could tie in with this behaviour (but
• he was looking for it!)
• Robert
• Hare (recent years) developed ideas around psychopaths and psychopathy
• (will
• be returning to this)

The BIG FIVE, where we are now...

• Decades
• of research have converged on the BIG FIVE (e.g., McCrae & Costa, 1987,
• 1997; Goldberg, 1990)
• Macrae & Costa have taken most of the credit, nut it was Goldberg who contributed most.
• It has a long history.
• This is the approach that we are most likely to work with today.
• The Big Five:
• Openness
• (to experience)
• -High:
• tendency to be an unconventional and independent thinker
• .
• -Low:
• tendency to be conventional and to prefer familiar rather than new.
• Conscientiousness- measures control and self-discipline
• -High:
• tendency to be controlled and organised.
• -Low:
• tendency to be careless, easily distracted and undependable.
• Extraversion/Introversion
• – measures arousal
• -High:
• tendency to be sociable, energetic and assertive.
• -Low:
• tendency to be reserved, independent and even-paced.
• Agreeableness
• -High:
• tendency to be helpful, trusting, sympathetic and cooperative.
• -Low:
• tendency to be antagonistic and skeptical
• Neuroticism
• (also called negative emotionality)
• -High:
• tendency to higher levels of emotional distress and swings in emotions.
• -Low:
• tendency to be calm and well adjusted

The Big Five

• 
• Caption: What does it mean to be a high or low scorer on the Big Five?

Supertraits and subordinate traits

• Two of the five super traits/factors, neuroticism and extraversion, are practically identical with two of those identified by Eysenck.
• The 5-factor model is commonly measured by the NEO-PI (Costa & McCrae, 1985).
• Each of the five supertraits is measured by 6 subordinate traits.
• -Neuroticism (e.g., ‘hardy-vulnerable’ and unemotional-emotional).
• -Agreeableness (e.g., ruthless-soft-hearted and suspicious-trusting)
• 
• Caption: O-openness C- conscientiousness E- extroversion A- agreeableness N-neuroticism

The Big 5 and behaviour

• The
• Big Five personality factors have emerged in studies of school children and
• appear to be fairly stable over time (Soldz & Vaillant,
• 1999).
• The
• Big Five have been associated with various behaviours:
• -People
• high in extraversion exercise more, drink more alcohol and are more honest.
• -People
• high in conscientiousness get better grades and are seen as more honest.
• -People
• high in openness are more likely to play a musical instrument.
• -Highly
• agreeable people are consistently found to smoke less
• (see
• Paunonen,
• 2003)
• my additional notes... Well
• established measure,
• if use in research, you can run a ‘confirmatory’
• Think
• will be looking at this at a later date
• Can
• also to exploratory
• These
• extra searches will hopefully confirm what you know.

The Big 5 and Job Performance

• Barrick,
• M. R., & Mount, M. K. (1991). The Big Five personality dimensions and job
• performance: A meta-analysis. Personnel
• Psychology, 44 (1), 1-26.
• C
• showed consistent relations with all job performance criteria for all
• occupational groups
• E
• predicted success in management and sales (requiring social interaction)
• O
• and E predicted training proficiency
• A
• and N predict performance when employees work in groups
• this shows that there are relationships between the traits.
• The
• Big 5 and Job Satisfaction
• Judge,
• T. A., Heller, D., & Mount, M. K. (2002). Five-factor model of personality
• and job satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Journal
• of Applied Psychology, 87 (3).
• Job
• satisfaction was correlated with each of the traits individually.
• Only
• the relationships between N and E and job satisfaction generalized across all
• studies

The Big 5 - problems

• Can be reproduced cross-culturally, but problems remain, not always same five (nor are they always five)
• Sex differences found on three of the big five.
• women score consistently higher than men in
• neuroticism, agreeableness and
• conscientiousness
• my notes...
• Openness
• isn't always
• found (individual culture more likly to have I, collectivist culture, don’t
• fine openness
• as often)
• back to the slides...
• The big five traits keep popping up, albeit with some variation, irrespective of measures and populations studied.
• This has led to claims that these traits make up the essential “structure” of
• personality (e.g., Costa & McCrae, 1998).
• but is it capturing everythinng?
• Some traits just can't be explained by aspects of the big 5
• --high
• neuroticism, high conscientiousness, low openness and low agreeableness, but
• that seems to miss the essence of the construct.-
• - It
• fails to account for authoritarian characters being deferential and agreeable
• with those of higher rank but mean and nasty to those of lower rank.
• Are
• the Big Five orthogonal, separate and independent traits?
• Eysenck
• (1991) argued that advocates of the Big Five mix superfactors
• (extraversion, neuroticism) with primary traits (agreeableness and
• conscientiousness).
• Draycott and
• Kline (1995) analyzed both Costa and McCrae’s NEO-PI and the revised Eysenck
• Personality Questionnaire (EPQ-R). They support Eysenck’s claim, the Big Five
• mixes lower order with higher order factors.
• Are
• the Big Five orthogonal, separate and independent traits?
• Eysenck
• (1991) argued that advocates of the Big Five mix superfactors
• (extraversion, neuroticism) with primary traits (agreeableness and
• conscientiousness).
• Draycott and
• Kline (1995) analyzed both Costa and McCrae’s NEO-PI and the revised Eysenck
• Personality Questionnaire (EPQ-R). They support Eysenck’s claim, the Big Five
• mixes lower order with higher order factors.
• my notes..
• Arguments
• around methodology, mixing the traits.
• Big
• 5 mixes
• up
• higher order
• with lower
• order
• factor- this matters
• But
• this is as good as it gets…
• Last
• 2 decades something that works in parallel to this?.... to return to
• THE END!!!!
• .