Class Notes (837,548)
Canada (510,312)
Psychology (7,785)
PSYC35H3 (97)
Lecture

PSYC35lecturenotes.docx

12 Pages
130 Views
Unlock Document

Department
Psychology
Course
PSYC35H3
Professor
Lianne Tripp
Semester
Winter

Description
1 Lecture 2 - Personality structure - relatively stable relationships as they pertain to variables - external structure - what is the pattern of relationships in regards to other variables? - Personality psychology is concerned with looking at the person as a hole and looking at the individual differences. - Psychology will use clinical settings (laboratory base settings) to study a phenomena, but most often what is ethical/allowed is often benign. - correlation coefficient * -1 to +1 * + and - indicate direction * r= .10 (small) * r= .30 (medium) * r= .50 (large) * index of effect size - validity coefficient: correlation that indicates the degree of association between predictor and criterion. - reliability coefficients: - interpretive biases: we tend to overemphasize the degree of the relationship. - reliability: refers to the consistency of the measure. - validity coefficients are lower, reliability coefficients are higher. - Walter Mishel - wrote a “book” on trait relevant behaviours of all existing literature and made a drastic conclusion. It was called: “Personality + Assessment” - said behaviour is not a function of traits, but a function situation. - this was so empowering, psychologists were apologizing for the low coefficients. - even small correlations can be considered powerful in terms of the population. - you want to have a predictor either broad or narrow to help predict what you are looking for. - the more complex, the more broad, the more personality traits may be included. - Five Factor Model - Neuroticism = negative emotionality - Extraversion = energetic approach to the social world 2 - Agreeableness = prosocial - Conscientiousness = socially described impulse control - Openness = depth/complexity to our inner world -> all relatively independent of one another - goal = predict broad outcomes in personality psychology - no real consensus on what is desirable to people. We guess. - Ozer + Benet-Martinez (2006) - individual outcomes: do not inherently involve a social process in order to define or give meaning to the outcome variable. - interpersonal outcomes: inherently involve specific individuals to define/give meaning to the outcome variable. - social/institutional outcomes: outcomes from impersonal social processes/interactions with generalized others. - personality is a predictor of happiness - individual outcomes: - happiness and subjective well-being - affective component (high PA, low NA) - cognitive component (high life satisfaction) - are all modestly related to one another. Over time, they are less correlated. - extraversion and neuroticism are the highest predictors for positive and negative affect. - extraversion = PA - neuroticism = NA - E and N -> PA and NA (strong) - A, C, and O -> SWB (weak) - contributes instrumentally - personality is predictor for how long you will live - extraversion and conscientiousness - personality health process - predicts disease factors (A) - predicts health risk factors (C) - predict health relevant coping behaviours (N) - interpersonal outcomes - peer relationships - “getting along” - in childhood and adolescence (low A and E predict peer rejection) - “getting ahead” - in young adults “E” positively predicts social status for men and women, where “N” negatively predicts social status for men. 3 - romantic relationships - high N and low A predict poor quality of relationships - central to adult life - foster SWB and physical health - Most important for work environment productivity: * conscientiousness -> strong, broad effects on job performance * extraversion and low neuroticism (emotional stability) -> moderate, broad effects * openness and agreeableness -> weak, narrow effects - social/institutional outcomes - volunteerism: E and A predict prosocial behaviour - criminality: low A and C predict antisocial behaviour - each trait has a broad relation to various outcomes, with the exception of openness to interpersonal outcomes * Think of the various components of the traits, how they are the same and how they differ * * - how is the robert’s review different? - much more narrow (mortality, divorce, occupational attainment) - design of the study had to be prospective - had to include a measure of personality and either a measure of IQ or SES -> to show personality is equally important - important life outcomes - mortality * IQ: r= -.06 * SES: r= -.02 * conscientiousness: r= -.09 * extraversion: r= -.07 * neuroticism: r= .05 * hostility: r= .04 - divorce * IQ: N/A * SES: r= .05 * neuroticism: r= .17 * conscientiousness: r= -.13 - educational attainment * adolescent personality traits predict outcomes decades later, even after controlling for IQ - why? - attraction effects 4 - recruitment effects - shaping effects - attrition effects - direct effects Lecture 3 - structural equation modelling - drawing inferences of variables between observed and unobserved variables - observed variables = manifest - unobserved variables = latent - rectangular = measured - circular = not measured - essentially, if you are using two different assessment models the way you can tell they are correlated is by some latent trait variable - 2 independent researchers found the Big Five - the lexical approach - the questionnaire approach - omnibus questionnaires = broad coverage - alternatives to the Big Five: - Big 3 - Eyesenck (extraversion - neuroticism - psychoticism) - Tellegen, Watson, and Clark (PA - NA - DvC) - Big 4 - five factor model - openness/intellect - strengths of the Big Five: * replicable factor structure * self-other agreement * temporal stability 5 * predictive validity - baggage in the Big Five: * items we chose not to measure any trait also show non-independence - traits don’t appear to be relatively independent -> Jack Digman - collected archived data sets to test his hypothesis that there may be higher-order traits beyond the Big Five - Alpha = socialization abilities - Beta = personal growth - an integrative trait theory - from study 1 and 2: - we move from the Big Five down to two potential traits on both studies - the way each trait breaks down is identical to both studies - neuroticism, for example, would appear to be larger than the other 2 traits within the meta traits. One is more representative earlier on than the others - high-order factors in MTMM data - Biesanz and West (2004) questioned the validity of the higher-order factors because the only results found were from self-reports - in the self-report only - 1st factor = N, A, and C - 2nd factor = E, O - in the self report and reports of others - found no correlation with the Big Five -> result of method artifacts - why trait-descriptive adjectives suck? - there is one word, and people attach their own idiosyncrasies. With everyone having their own, of course there won’t be any correlation between the Big Five - if you rely on more than self report data and a better measurement tool of the underlying traits the two meta-traits will exist -stability (alpha) - need to maintain stable organization - N, A, C - reflect serotonergic system functioning - plasticity (beta) - need to explore and incorporate novel information - E, O - reflects dopaminergic system functioning 6 o DeYoung(2006) -conformists = higher on stability, lower on plasticity o Halo-Alpha-Beta -can tell you alpha and beta are correlated and when they are not. - “halo” – tendency for raters to give more positive choices on an instrument to represent themselves. - just because you have a “halo” when you self-report, does not mean your friends or others will have a “halo” too when the report about you. o The general factor of personality -evidence: - shows in some personality questionnaires - more correlation among monozygotic twins and dizygotic twins - predicts self-esteem - peer related likability and popularity - traits that show up higher in the hierarchy tend to be more broader than those lower in the hierarchy Lecture 4 -Nomothetic approach o How variables correlate in a population o Measure of choice “factor analysis” -search for traits -goal= find patterns of variability that co-occurs with others in the data set -Ideographic approach o How traits are organized in an individual o “types” – configuration of personality attributes in a single individual o Measure of choice “inverse factor analysis” - Looking for clusters of people who show similar clusters of personality
More Less

Related notes for PSYC35H3

Log In


OR

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit