Help
Options
Didn't know it?
click below
click below
Knew it?
click below
click below
Don't Know
Remaining cards (0)
Know
retry
shuffle
restart
0:00
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Exam 4 Personality
Final
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| what is Behavioral Genetics | The study of how/why inherited biological material influences behavioral patterns Specifically, personality traits – broad patterns of behavior |
| phenotype | physical traits, your outward manifestation |
| genotype | genetic composition |
| Monozygotic twins | Monozygotic: identical twins (mono means one zygote- single cell that split) |
| Dizygotic twins | Dizygotic: fraternal twins (di means two zygotes- two cells) |
| The Heritability Quotient | 2 x (rMZ - rDZ) finds correlation of similarity of certain traits for monozygotic and dizygotic twins So if I wanted to see the correlation in extraversion between twins, and one has .6 and one has .4: Heritability quotient = 2 x (.60 - .40) = .40 |
| what does the outcome of the Heritability Quotient mean/give you? | the variance of certain traits between twins so, if my quotient is .40, this means the variance in extraversion explained = 40% |
| Variation | not like a pie chart - just because 40% is due to nurture that doesn’t mean that 60% is due to nature Its looking at amount of differences in a certain trait and what percent of that can be attributed to variance |
| average variance in twin studies? | Variance in traits is ~40% heritable |
| are heritability quotients about individuals? | NO Heritability quotients are about populations, NOT individuals Large samples of people where their DNA is mapped and they calculate how much overlap is there and the heritability quotient. It does not scale down to any individual person |
| is there a 1 to 1 correlation between genes and traits? | NO If you had 2 genes, both coded for extraversion, taking out one wouldn’t leave you with 50% extraversion, it would change the trait completely. |
| Despite the fact that there's a heritability quotient of .40 in most identical twin studies, the true correlation is probably closer to .20 because .... | .40 fails to control for the interaction overlap (so it's not just the genes themselves, it's about how these genes interact, so non-identical twins may not share interactions even though they share genes) |
| True or False: Heritability coefficients reflect % of one’s personality attributable to genes | FALSE |
| True or False: Heritability coefficients tell you how much of your personality are attributable to genes | FALSE |
| True or False: Heritability coefficients from twin studies (.40) are accurate reflections of heritability, in general | FALSE |
| propensities | a strong natural inclination or tendency towards a particular behavior, action, or way of thinking |
| how do genes influence personality? | Genes influence → Neurology → Psychological Propensities → Behavioral Expression Situated in Context (Interactionist approach) |
| Can propensities be measured by just looking at genes? | No They require interaction with the environment You cannot just look at a person or their genes, you have to understand their context, life history, environmental pressures, etc to understand what their traits actually are (interactionist perspective) |
| What is Intelligence? | Mental abilities: the whole range of things your brain can do Combination of: Speed & Effectiveness ex: Problem-solving ability Critical thinking ability Planning ability Reasoning ability Learning ability |
| Mental Ability | Any traits that reflect how well individuals can process various types of information Dimensional Abilities that (most) everyone can acquire or be assigned a score on Not specific or specialized knowledge or skills – something more general |
| Charles Spearman | Invented factor analysis to study mental ability used several intelligence tests, found all intelligences were inter-correlated, labeled this factor g (for “general ability/intelligence”) |
| Louis Thurstone | Found 7 different factors / 7 distinct mental abilities Concluded that Spearmen was wrong about there being a g factor He coined the term “Primary Mental Abilities” - meaning you have multiple important mental abilities |
| Raymond Cattell | ended up with a sort of new, larger “g” factor that combined Spearman’s theory with Thurston’s theory hierarchical structure to intelligence, low-lvl mental abilities that correlate, up to some “primary” mental abilities that also have correlation |
| IQ | Intelligence quotient |
| Deviation IQ | Collect a bunch of “ability” scores Aggregate into a single g factor score Normalize so that mean = 100, SD = 16 So an IQ of 100 is perfectly average 2/3rds of all people fall within one standard deviation of 100 |
| Starting with low-level abilities, do IQ scores actually predict important outcomes in life? | Yes Attainment Success in school Job performance Longevity Wellbeing |
| what is Attainment | If you are able to do things with your brain more quickly and accurately than other people, you should be able to attain desirable outcomes more often than others |
| is IQ the only predictor to good outcomes? | NO Boundary conditions, not deterministic social/other determinants of IQ (e.g., SES, access to resources) Remember: Person + Situation The interactionist perspective is the most widely accepted |
| Flynn Effect | James Flynn (1987) – found steady increases in IQ throughout the years- still continue upwards today Norms are recalculated every ~15 years or so Because we don't understand the causes and it keeps going up, you have to “adjust for inflation” |
| Causes of Flynn Effect | Improved living conditions -Schooling, nutrition, fewer diseases More stimulating environments |
| Implications of Flynn Effect | Impacts if people end up in the threshold for mental retardation, the scale moves even though your mental ability doesn't, so you can be considered “normal” one year and super low IQ another year |
| Fundamental question of behavioral genetics: | How much variation in phenotype (physical traits, your outward manifestation) is attributable to variation in genotype (genetic composition)? Key word: variation |
| T or F: 99% of all human genes are identical | T That means if you take any two random human beings and sequence their entire genome, 99% of their genes will be completely identical This means that any variation in characteristics is in that last 1% of variation in the human genome |
| Culture | Definition: customs, habits, beliefs, values that shape emotions, behavior, and life patterns |
| Enculturation | what culture you were born into and raised in (born and raised in texas means enculturated in texas, happens organically) |
| Acculturation | when you’ve already been influenced by 1 culture, then encounter another culture and have to start fitting into that new culture and adapting to it |
| Culture intersects personality in two ways | Culture is an environment that can influence personality Culture may present different dimensions of variation -Different cultures may conceptualize personality completely differently, can shift the landscape of personality traits |
| what is WEIRD | Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic |
| Collectivism has more what in terms of emotions? | Other-focused emotions Happier when “connecting” with others |
| Collectivism has LESS what? | Risk-taking Self-enhancement |
| Collectivism and Individualism are on a _____ dimension | Bipolar dimension - normal distribution, most countries fall somewhere in the middle |
| Verticality/Horizontality of a culture (Trandis and Gelfand) | the degree to which people feel like everyone within a culture is roughly the same, vs. there being an implicit hierarchy to how society is structured |
| Vertical culture | can be collectivistic or individualistic - strict social hierarchy to who has access to resources who has authority |
| Horizontal culture | can also be collectivistic or individualistic - less divide between people, more freedom, more equal access to resources |
| Tightness vs. Looseness | Tightness/looseness refers to the enforcement of social norms You can have a country with the exact same social norms as another, but one strictly enforces them and one doesn't |
| Social norms | Definition: the shared expectations, rules, or standards of behaviors that are considered acceptable within a group, community or society Can be unspoken rules within a society Can also be explicit rules (laws) |
| Tightness vs. Looseness falls on a _____ dimension | Bipolar dimension - normal distribution (some countries tight with social norms, some loose, most in between) |
| 3 dimensions of culture | Honor, Face, Dignity Combo of social norms and cultural values |
| Dignity | each individual is valuable in their own right Every single person has value just by the mere fact that they are a person, and should be treated as such (Carl Rogers type view) |
| Honor | desire to protect oneself Rooted in a sense of a need to protect oneself and one's family in a physical and reputational sense Emerges in places where there's not strong law enforcement (think the Wild West) |
| Face | hierarchies based on cooperation Hierarchy, humility, harmony How you present yourself to other people Emerges strongly in cultures that are collectivistic and vertical, societies that highly value cooperation and respect of social hierarchies |
| Do cultures cause personality or vice-versa? | Probably both - (bidirectional) (Rentfrow) |
| what influences your personality within a culture and vice versa? | Social influence Selective migration Ecology |
| Social influence | Idea that when you’re born into a place you learn the culture around you in a natural way, by interacting with others, and picking up the norms around you |
| Selective migration | people move where they want (“This place will be good for you if you have these certain characteristics and traits”) so people move to these places |
| Ecology | The literal climate/weather within a given region has an influence on personality and culture Think of seasonal affective disorder, places with less sunlight tend to show higher traits related to neuroticism and lower traits related to extraversion |
| Endogenous trait scales | asked people of all cultures to give them list of any word to describe people and anything to describe certain traits, basically making the Big 5 applicable to all cultures because they have the right language for the specific culture being tested |
| Different cultures, same personality structure? | Not really Big Five misses other traits in Spanish samples Openness does not appear in all cultures/emerge from trait measures doesnt mean these traits don't exist in these cultures, they’re just not conceptualized the same way as they are in the west |
| Homogeneity biases | Greater variation within cultures than between Basically, the way we conduct science is designed to detect differences between groups, there's a publication bias where we only publish findings where we find differences |
| T or F: theres more similarities across cultures than differences | T We always look for differences but there's far more similarities across cultures than there are differences (like how most cultures aren’t solely collectivist or solely individualistic, they fall in the middle) |
| Ethnocentrism | viewing, interpreting, and judging another culture from the viewpoint of our own Comes up alot in colonization, people come from one culture to another and call the people “backwards” |
| what do people generally think of their own cultures values & beliefs | Normal, boring, “obvious” The stuff we grow up with feels intuitive and obvious (fish in water effect) therefore when we go somewhere where people do things differently, it feels off or wrong or misguided |
| what do people generally think of OTHER'S cultures values & beliefs | Ignorant/silly, exotic, “random” |
| Cultural relativism | the idea that all cultural views are equally valid; ethnocentric to judge other cultures Essentially saying every culture is different, its misguided to judge one's culture from the perspective of another culture -but take w/grain of salt |
| What is a personality disorder? | Personality traits/systems that are maladaptive to one’s environment |
| Adaptive inflexibility | A certain amount of rigidity to a person's traits, they are unable to adapt to many situations Inability to be adaptive to the changing demands of different situations |
| Vicious circles (PDs) | Becomes a self-perpetuating process between the person and other things in the environment If you’re paranoid and suspicious of others, you engage with others in a paranoid type of fashion, leading to them feeling negative about you, reinforcing your cog |
| Tenuous stability (PDs) | Stability in terms of affect, emotional instability Traits that are nestled within the disorders themselves |
| 5 characteristics of PDs | Unusual** Causes problems** Impacts social relations Stable over time Egosyntonic |
| Unusual traits in PDs | Unusual in and of itself is not necessarily a problem, anything that is extreme is by definition unusual (like if you’re extremely extroverted) Becomes a problem when the things that are extreme become problematic But, accounting for context |
| Problematic traits in PDs | Cause some degree of suffering, distress, harm, or other disruption to self and/or others Just some degree of conflict within a person's life, doesn’t have to be super extreme |
| Self versus other (PDs) | a major distinction for PDs People diagnosing PDs often start out asking if the PD is problematic for other people in someone's life |
| Social traits in PDs | Relative degree of extremity Interpersonal Other people required for expression of traits Think of someone who has very violent tendencies, you'd never know unless they’re around others Expression of traits often problematic for others (not self) |
| Stable traits in PDs | Like other aspects of personality Patterns usually emerge in late childhood or early adolescence Difficult to change |
| Ego-dystonic | Does not serve the needs/goals of the ego, not consistent with self-views When there's something about yourself that you feel is inconsistent with who you are “This isn’t me" |
| Egosyntonic | Opposite of dystonic, it IS who you are The behaviors you engage in feel like a true representation of yourself |
| why are egosyntonic traits hard to treat? | If someone has very problematic traits, but they feel like thats just who they are, and it perfectly aligns with who they are and there goals, theres little reason for these people to seek any type of change |
| Where do PDs come from? | interactionist perspective Some degree of heredity/predisposition But also early experience plays a role No easy 1:1 causal factors |
| Enduring, Pervasive Experiences | broad classes of things thought to contribute to development/onset of PDs: Parental feelings and attitudes Methods of behavior control Family communication styles Family structure Traumatic experiences |
| Parental feelings and attitudes | Essentially for a child, if you get a lot of mixed/negative messages from caregivers, (general sense that parents don't like you, hot and cold parent/s, etc.), could lead to a PD |
| Methods of behavior control | Punitive methods Contingent reward methods Overprotectiveness Inconsistency -these factors could lead to a PD when having these experiences as a child |
| what are Punitive methods of behavior control? | parents who are incredibly harsh in a physical and or psychological sense - especially those that are socially humiliating (embarrassing/intimidating the child) |
| what are Contingent reward methods of behavior control? | making everything contingent on rewards, only doing things because they get something out of it, not because it's morally good/right - teaches them that all interactions are transactional |
| Family communication styles | Defective comm. styles: poor communication styles, where info is not conveyed clearly/accurately Lack of grounding in reality: a parent who gives you bizarre answers to questions, (like parents who have a PD) could lead to PD |
| Family structure | having a lack of role models as a child could lead to a PD |
| Traumatic experiences | It's hard to define what trauma actually is, but really extreme things play a role in development of a PD |
| Can PDs be treated? | Kind of PD is very hard to treat Hard to make really solid treatment plans Self-reports are often not good to use in this therapeutic context because people might not be consciously aware of their issues |
| how many of those with PDs drop out of treatment? | Over 1/3rd drop out of treatment Why? Because of the ego syntonic thing: if you don't think anything is wrong with you, why would you go get treatment? “This therapist is trying to change who I am… but other people are the problem” |
| Limitations of categorical systems like DSM-5 | DSM-5 is like a typological view, ex: you either have borderline PD or you don't, you either have x PD or you don’t, etc. Typological approach is not the way to go, dimensional approach for traits is accepted |
| modern dimensional frameworks | ICD-11 and HiTOP |
| ICD-11 (International Classification of Diseases) | Many different subsections, conceptualizes personality disorders in a general way Focus on general personality dysfunction Call traits for PD’s mild, moderate, or severe Don't look at defining characteristics |
| how to meet diagnostic criteria for a PD in the ICD-11? | For someone to meet diagnostic criteria, one has to have ALL the features of a PD, if you’re missing just one, you will not get diagnosed with a PD |
| how are PDs classified in the ICD-11? | Mild, Moderate, or Severe Tailored treatment plans based on severity (remember all traits of PD have to be there to be diagnosed at all) |
| Strengths of ICD-11 | simpler, flexible, tailored treatments Can identify problems in day to day life as a result of negative traits, and it can be treated Focus on changing problematic traits in treatment (using something like CBT) |
| Weaknesses of ICD-11 | less specific for research, loss of nuanced subtypes Similar to issues from the Big 5 Levels of traits don't actually capture the true nuance of who you are as a person, do not characterize you perfectly |
| HiTOP | Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology research-driven dimensional model somewhere between DSM and ICD It factor analyzed all problematic traits (similar to how the big 5 does), and came up with main factors |
| what spectrum does HiTOP organize psychopathology into? | internalizing and externalizing |
| Internalizing (HiTOP) | types of traits/PD’s that are only observable to yourself, your mental world (thoughts and feelings, anxiety, maladaptive thoughts, catastrophizing, etc.) |
| Externalizing (HiTOP) | traits/PD’s that involve some type of interaction with the outside world, (negative interactions with others, abusive behaviors, controlling behaviors, substance use disorders, etc.) |
| Goal of HiTOP | reduce comorbidity and reflect underlying traits Minimizes overlap of symptoms/traits for disorders Wanted to make traits specific to certain disorders |
| HiTOP organizational hierarchy | Broad dimensions down to specific traits Top level: p-factor P-factor = “General factor of psychopathology” Single factor that is an umbrella under which all of the PD’s (and other mental disorders) fall |
| Benefits of HiTOP | emphasizes traits, better for research and treatment planning |
| Challenges of HiTOP | complexity, developmental stage for clinical use Super long interviews with people to measure every last little part of the HiTOP traits for specific PD’s (8-9 hours) Not super clear what to do with the info once you get it in a clinical setting |
| Pathologizing normal variation | There's no clear line where something is beneficial vs. pathological for a certain person, it's not specific enough That's why HiTOP is best: it asks how does a person's traits fit into the rest of their life-problem for 1 person might not be for another |
| a disorder being genetically caused corresponds to what? | having a high estimated heritability |
| nature-nurture debate | historically referred to the disagreement between whether traits are caused by ones biology (nature) or the environment (nurture) |
| When traits are claimed to be genetic, this usually means that they have a high _______ estimate | heritability Geneticists quantify the proportion that genes contribute to a disorder using a heritability estimate, represented as h² |
| "depression is 70% heritable” would correspond to what heritability estimate? | h² of 0.7 |
| "depression is 70% heritable” - does this mean that 70% of an individual’s depression is genetic, with the environment making up the other 30%? | No The interplay of genes and environment for individual traits is recognised by geneticists, and cannot be broken down in to percentage values. |
| heritability estimates can only be applied to _______ | populations |
| Heritability | concerns how much variation in traits is caused by variation in genes. tells us if variation occurs because people have different genes or because they live in different environments |
| T or F: “walking on two legs” has an h² close to 0 | True This does not mean that genes are not necessary for humans to walk on two legs. What it means is that variation in this trait is caused by primarily non-genetic factors. (accident where someone loses function of legs) |
| Q: What was the primary aim of the Binet-Simon scale developed in 1905? | A: To identify children in need of special education by measuring mental age. |
| Q: What key concept did Binet and Simon introduce in their intelligence scale? | A: Mental age – a child’s level of intellectual functioning compared to average children of the same age. |
| Q: Who revised the Binet-Simon scale for use in the United States and when? | A: Lewis Terman, in 1916, creating the Stanford-Binet Intelligence Scale. |
| Q: What major concept did Terman introduce in the Stanford-Binet? | A: Intelligence Quotient (IQ), calculated as (Mental Age / Chronological Age) × 100. |
| Q: How did World War I influence intelligence testing? | A: The U.S. Army developed group intelligence tests (Army Alpha and Beta) for mass screening of recruits. |
| Q: What were the Army Alpha and Beta tests designed for? | A: Alpha for literate recruits; Beta for non-literate or non-English speakers. |
| Q: What was David Wechsler’s main criticism of the Stanford-Binet? | A: It focused too heavily on verbal and academic tasks and was not suitable for adults. |
| Q: What did David Wechsler develop in response to limitations of earlier tests? | A: The Wechsler-Bellevue Intelligence Scale in 1939. |
| Q: What was innovative about the Wechsler-Bellevue test? | A: It introduced verbal and performance (nonverbal) subscales and used a deviation IQ score. |
| Q: How did Wechsler define intelligence? | A: As the global capacity to act purposefully, think rationally, and deal effectively with the environment. |
| Q: What is deviation IQ, and why was it important? | A: It compares an individual’s performance to the average performance of their age group, solving issues with mental age in adults. |
| Q: How did intelligence testing evolve in clinical neuropsychology? | A: Tests like the Wechsler scales became core tools for assessing cognitive functioning and brain damage. |
| Q: What are the three primary approaches to studying personality in cultural contexts? | A: Etic (universal), Emic (culture-specific), and Combined Emic–Etic approaches. |
| Q: What characterizes the etic approach in cross-cultural personality research? | A: It applies standardized Western personality models across cultures to test for universality and measurement equivalence. |
| Q: What is the main focus of the emic approach? | A: It emphasizes developing personality constructs and assessments rooted in specific cultural contexts, often through indigenous methods. |
| Q: Why do the authors advocate for a combined emic–etic approach? | A: To integrate the methodological rigor of the etic approach with the cultural sensitivity of the emic approach, capturing both universal and culture-specific personality aspects. |
| Q: What is the Chinese Personality Assessment Inventory (CPAI), and why is it significant? | A: The CPAI is an indigenous personality assessment developed in China that includes culturally relevant dimensions like Interpersonal Relatedness, demonstrating the value of emic approaches. |
| Q: How does the South African Personality Inventory (SAPI) exemplify the combined approach? | A: The SAPI integrates indigenous South African personality constructs with universal traits to create a culturally appropriate assessment tool. |
| Q: What are the implications of adopting a combined emic–etic approach for psychology as a science? | A: It promotes a more inclusive and accurate understanding of personality across cultures, enhancing the validity and applicability of psychological theories globally. |
| Q: What are the primary treatment approaches for personality disorders? | A: Psychosocial treatments (e.g., psychotherapy) and pharmacotherapy. |
| Q: Which treatment is recommended as the primary intervention for borderline personality disorder (BPD)? | A: Psychological or psychosocial interventions are recommended as the primary treatment for BPD. |
| Q: What is the role of pharmacotherapy in treating personality disorders? | A: Pharmacotherapy is advised only as an adjunctive treatment, not as the primary approach. |
| Q: What are some challenges in the existing evidence base for treating personality disorders? | A: Challenges include small sample sizes, short follow-up periods in clinical trials, varied outcome measures, and poor control of coexisting psychopathology. |
| Q: Why is there a need to study the interaction between psychotherapies and pharmacological treatments? | A: To understand their synergistic or antagonistic effects and mechanisms of change throughout treatment development. |
| Q: What is suggested about the future of interventions for personality disorders? | A: Increasing research into the psychological and biological processes underlying personality disorders could lead to more effective interventions. |
| Q: What is the general conclusion regarding the treatment of personality disorders? | A: While psychosocial interventions are primary, the evidence base is limited, and more research is needed to develop effective treatments. |
| Q: What is the central thesis of Hopwood's 2024 article? | A: Hopwood argues that if personality disorders (PDs) are defined solely by maladaptive traits, then the concept of PD loses its distinctiveness and may not constitute a separate category of mental disorder. |
| Q: How do the DSM-5 Alternative Model (AMPD) and ICD-11 define personality disorders? | A: Both models use two criteria: Criterion A assesses the level of personality functioning (severity of impairment), and Criterion B identifies maladaptive personality traits. |
| Q: What concern does Hopwood raise about relying solely on maladaptive traits for PD diagnosis? | A: He notes that maladaptive traits are not unique to PDs; they are also present in other psychopathologies, making it insufficient to define PDs based only on these traits. |
| Q: Why is the stability of maladaptive traits questioned in distinguishing PDs? | A: Research indicates that maladaptive traits are not more stable than traits in other disorders, challenging the notion that stability is a distinguishing feature of PDs. |
| Q: What alternative perspective does Hopwood suggest for understanding PDs? | A: He proposes viewing PDs through a developmental lens, focusing on impairments in self and interpersonal functioning, as originally conceptualized in psychodynamic theories. |
| Q: What is the implication of redefining PDs as "interpersonal disorders"? | A: It emphasizes the unique relational dysfunctions in PDs, distinguishing them from other disorders that may share similar traits but lack the same interpersonal impairments. |
| Q: How does Hopwood's argument impact the classification of mental disorders? | A: It challenges the current trait-based models and suggests a need to reconsider how PDs are defined and diagnosed, potentially leading to a reclassification that better captures their distinct features. |
Created by:
jennawilk
Popular Psychology sets