If the aim of psychology is to understand and explain why individuals think, feel and act and react as they do then the study of personality is a key aspect in our understanding. This essay will discuss the key influences on the development of personality within Social and Developmental Psychology. It will discuss definitions of personality and outline the approaches behind the different types of theories that have evolved. For the purposes of this essay the distinct theoretical approaches in personality explanation will be described in terms of the three major perspectives of Psychodynamic, Biological and Genetic, and Social Learning.
These approaches will be critically debated concluding with a discussion of current Trait theories focusing on the ‘Big Five’ and its applications. Research into personality was very popular in the early part of the 20th century with Freud’s Phsychodynamic approach. This went out of favor as Behaviourism came to the fore highlighting weaknesses in measuring personality. The behaviorists argued that only measurable features should be studied if they are to be considered to be valid scientific judgements.
Personality as Gross (1996) describes it, is a hypothetical construct and as such it is abstract and can not be observed. In recent years the study of personality has returned with renewed interest especially in the area of childhood and with applications such as personality testing in recruitment programs. There are two distinct types of Personality theories. The nomethetic approach, which assumes there are norms that apply to everyone and takes an objective more scientific and quantitive approach.
Eysenck and Catell who attempt to compare individuals in terms of a specific number of common traits favour the nomethetic approach. In contrast the idiographic approach attempts to identify an individuals unique characteristics and qualities in a more subjective and qualitative way. Kelly’s personal construct theory, for example, stresses the uniqueness of the individual. Defining personality in itself is not straightforward as definitions depend in part on theoretical orientation.
For example, Eysenk includes measurable traits such as ‘character, temperament, intellect and physique’, in his definition of personality. Allport on the other hand takes an idiographic approach and defines personality as ‘the dynamic organisation within the individual of those psychophysical systems that determine his unique adjustments to his environment. Liebert & Speigler(1998). With these different approaches in mind this essay will now review the three major perspectives and their explanations of personality.