If we accept, then, that personality is in some
ways determined by our physiology, which is inherited from our parents, then it would be logical to assume that our personalities are also inherited, wouldn’t it? So how do theorists prove this? Well, the most common method for investigating genetically-inherited characteristics is carrying out ‘twin studies’ … with identical (or monozygotic) and fraternal (dizygotic) twins.
If we want to look at this in a bit more detail we
can to go back to trait theory. There are trait theorists who take the view that the Big Five personality traits are inherited. In your core text, Psychology (the 6th
edition was published in 2003)
Gleitman reports Borkenau’s study of German adult twins, from the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2001, which showed a 40–60% correlation between the behaviour of identical twins, in comparison with a 20–30% correlation for fraternal twins. Quite convincing evidence, I think.
By the way, I see that some of you are using the
Cornell note-taking system. That’s very good. Do you all know about this? No? Right, well, if you want to know more about it, I suggest you look at How to study in college by Walter Pauk, the 9th edition, published in 2007. It’s very good, and it should be in the university library. I’m sure that you all know the importance of taking good notes – and this system is particularly useful.
Anyway, getting back to the point … the link
between genes and personality. In spite of compelling evidence in its favour, there are objections to the theory that personality is genetically determined. I’ll just mention two for the moment. Both are based on weaknesses in twin studies as a research method. The first, as Borkenau comments, is that the majority of twin studies into genes and personality have been based on self- and peer-reporting. Of course, the main disadvantage of self-reporting is bias (a tendency to be influenced by personal preferences). Personally, I think Borkenau’s research is more convincing because his information is based on reports from detached observers, who assessed the behaviour of twins over a range of situations on video recordings. The second objection to twin studies as a research method is the question of how upbringing affects twins’ personalities. For example, twins brought up in the same environment may be similar for that very reason, rather than because they were genetically disposed to a certain personality.
On the other hand, there is more evidence of the
link between biology and personality. If we go back to Eysenck’s model … remember he created a two- dimensional model based on Jung’s theory of introversion and extroversion … we’ll find support
154
for his work in experiments carried out in Sweden in 1980 … You can find this in Gleitman, again. More recent research, carried out by Schwartz in 2003, is described in Pervin. This study aimed to discover whether introverts or extroverts react differently to images of familiar and unfamiliar faces. The participants in the experiment were adults (but not twins, in this case) who had already been classified as introverts or extroverts when they were children. Their reactions to the images were measured on a fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imaging) scanner, an instrument for calculating brain activity. The results demonstrated quite clearly that the introverts were more sensitive to new stimuli than the extroverts.
I’m afraid we really have run out of time … which
is a pity, because I was planning to talk about the influence of environmental factors on personality as well. Anyway, I’ll sum up what we have covered in today’s lecture … we’ve looked at four theories of personality … trait theory, social-cognition, humanism and genetic inheritance … and we’ve had a look at ways of measuring personality.
Are there any questions so far? … No, good.
Now, when I see you in tutorials, we’ll look in more detail at personality theories. In the meantime, I’m going to set you a research task. Right, now listen carefully ... your task is to find out about the effect of the environment on the development of personality. I’d like you to work in groups of four. Each group should find out about how the development of one of the Big Five traits can be affected by the environment and report back on their findings.
≤Exercise D
Tell students that lecturers will often give references while they talk and it is important to note down any references. The kinds of information may differ – they may just be names of books or articles; they may be an exact quotation (a ‘direct quote’) or they may be a paraphrase (sometimes called an ‘indirect quotation’). Refer students to the table and check that they know what each row represents.
Play each extract and allow students time to complete the sections of the table. Check with the whole class.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188 |
Page 189 |
Page 190 |
Page 191 |
Page 192 |
Page 193 |
Page 194 |
Page 195 |
Page 196 |
Page 197 |
Page 198 |
Page 199 |
Page 200 |
Page 201 |
Page 202 |
Page 203 |
Page 204 |
Page 205 |
Page 206 |
Page 207 |
Page 208 |
Page 209 |
Page 210 |
Page 211 |
Page 212 |
Page 213 |
Page 214 |
Page 215 |
Page 216 |
Page 217 |
Page 218 |
Page 219 |
Page 220 |
Page 221 |
Page 222 |
Page 223 |
Page 224 |
Page 225 |
Page 226 |
Page 227 |
Page 228 |
Page 229 |
Page 230 |
Page 231 |
Page 232 |
Page 233 |
Page 234 |
Page 235 |
Page 236 |
Page 237 |
Page 238 |
Page 239 |
Page 240 |
Page 241 |
Page 242 |
Page 243 |
Page 244 |
Page 245 |
Page 246 |
Page 247 |
Page 248 |
Page 249 |
Page 250 |
Page 251 |
Page 252 |
Page 253 |
Page 254 |
Page 255 |
Page 256 |
Page 257 |
Page 258 |
Page 259 |
Page 260 |
Page 261
