Personality

1. Personality • PERSONALITY TRAIT = • 1.) HERITABLE (I.e., genetically influenced; approximately half of variation is due to genetic differences) • 2.) INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES • 3.) REASONABLY STABLE • 4.) RELATING TO A PERSON'S EMOTIONAL, INTERPERSONAL, EXPERIENTIAL, ATTITUDINAL, AND MOTIVATIONAL STYLES.

2. Personality • 1.) EACH PERSONALITY DIMENSION REPRESENTS VARIATION IN AN EVOLVED SYSTEM. EVERYONE HAS THE SYSTEM, BUT SOME PEOPLE ARE HIGHER ON THE DIMENSION THAN OTHERS; • E. G., WE ALL HAVE THE MECHANISMS UNDERLYING FEAR, BUT SOME PEOPLE ARE MORE FEARFUL THAN OTHERS • 2.) EACH EVOLVED SYSTEM IS A BIOLOGICAL ADAPTATION WITH A SPECIFIC SURVIVAL FUNCTION. E.G., FEAR FUNCTIONS TO AVOID DANGERS

3. Personality • 3.) EXTREMES TEND TO BE MALADAPTIVE • BEING AFRAID OF DANGEROUS THINGS IS ADAPTIVE, BUT BEING AFRAID OF EVERYTHING ISN'T

4. Personality • 4.) PERSONALITY TRAITS OR SYSTEMS ARE NOT TYPES OF PEOPLE. • Individuals are high or low on a given personality system, but it’s misleading to describe people as “the shy type” or the conscientious type as if they don’t have other facets to their personality.

5. Behavioral Approach System • (1) BEHAVIORAL APPROACHVARIATION IN: SOCIAL DOMINANCE, ATTRACTION TO REWARD, SENSATION SEEKING, IMPULSIVITY, RISK-TAKING, ASSERTIVENESS, AGGRESSION • EMOTIONS: POSITIVE AROUSAL, EXHILARATION, HAPPINESS, CONFIDENCE,POSITIVE SELF-REGARD, ANGER • SURVIVAL FUNCTION: ACTIVE INTERFACE WITH ENVIRONMENT (Get stuff): Mates, status, other resources

6. Behavioral Approach (Go) System • EXTREMES MALADAPTIVE • High extreme: Extreme on sensation seeking, impulsivity and reward sensitivity. • Low extreme: Depression, lack of interest in rewards. • PHYSIOLOGICAL MECHANISM: • REWARD SENSITIVITY; • AROUSAL REGULATION; • SENSATION SEEKING GENES • Emotion centers of the left cortex; the left cortex has inhibitory connections to right cortex responsible for negative emotions (Table 3.1) • SEX DIFFERENCES: MALES > FEMALES • AGE CHANGES: HIGHEST IN LATE ADOLESCENCE, YOUNG ADULTHOOD: • THE "YOUNG MALE SYNDROME"

7. Behavioral Approach (Go) System: “Young Male Syndrome” Murder arrests by age

8. STOP SYSTEM (BEHAVIORAL INHIBITION SYSTEM) • VARIATION IN: FEAR, CAUTION, WORRY ABOUT THREATS TO SELF OR NOVELTY • THERE IS VARIATION IN FEAR AND ANXIETY IN NOVEL (SCARY) SITUATIONS OR WITH UNFAMILIAR PEOPLE BEGINNING IN SECOND HALF OF FIRST YEAR • KAGAN: 15% OF 2-YEAR-OLDS ARE BEHAVIORLY INHIBITED;CONSIDERABLE STABILITY OF BEHAVIORAL AND PHYSIOLOGICAL MEASURES (HIGH AND STABLE HEART RATE, STRESS HORMONES)

9. STOP SYSTEM (BEHAVIORAL INHIBITION SYSTEM) • EMOTIONS: FEAR, ANXIETY, TENSION • SURVIVAL FUNCTION: RESPOND TO DANGERS • EXTREMES MALADAPTIVE: High end: Phobic; Low end: fearless • SEX DIFFERENCES: FEMALES > MALES

10. Affectional (Love/Nurturance) System • 3.) AFFECTIONAL SYSTEM VARIATION IN: TENDENCIES TOWARD LOVE, WARMTH, ALTRUISM, SYMPATHY, COMPASSION, TRUST, COMPLIANCE, EMPATHY • EMOTIONS: LOVE, SYMPATHY, EMPATHY • SURVIVAL FUNCTION: • FAMILY AS UNIT OF REPRODUCTION; • PAIR BONDING; • BRING FATHER INTO FAMILY: Paternal Investment • RAISING HIGH QUALITY CHILDREN

11. Affectional (Love/Nurturance) System • EXTREMES MALADAPTIVE: Sociopathy on low end, dependency disorder on high end. • PHYSIOLOGICAL MECHANISM: DOPAMINERGIC REWARD SYSTEM; OXYTOCIN • SEX DIFFERENCES: FEMALES > MALES; females more likely to have dependency disorder, males more likely to be sociopathic

12. Conscientiousness • 4.) CONSCIENTIOUSNESS SYSTEM VARIATION IN: DEPENDABILITY, RESPONSIBILITY, PLANFULNSS,THOROUGHNESS, ATTENTION TO DETAIL, DUTIFULNESS,ACHIEVEMENT STRIVING, DELIBERATENESS, EFFICIENT,LACK OF SELF-INDULGENCE, ABILITY TO DELAYGRATIFICATION, FOCUSED EFFORT • Mechanism: Prefrontal inhibitory mechanisms control output of sub-cortical mechanisms • EMOTIONS: GUILT, SELF-ESTEEM; HOPE FOR GOAL ATTAINMENT • SURVIVAL FUNCTION: TAKING CARE OF BUSINESS; ACHIEVE LONG- TERM GOALS BY ENGAGING IN BEHAVIOR WHICH IS NOT INTRINSICALLY FUN, OR PLEASURABLE;FORM COHESIVE GROUPS

13. Conscientiousness • EXTREMES MALADAPTIVE: High extreme: Obsessive/compulsive; low extreme: ADHD • SEX DIFFERENCES: FEMALES > MALES • AGE CHANGES: BECOMES STRONGER WITH AGE

14. Reactivity/Emotionality 5.) REACTIVITY/EMOTIONALITY: VARIATION IN THE TENDENCY TO BECOME EMOTIONALLY AROUSED FOR ALL OF THE EMOTIONS. HIGH REACTIVE CHILD: Low Threshold for Arousal POSITIVE AFFECT NEUTRAL AFFECT ________________________________________________ NEGATIVE AFFECT LOW MEDIUM HIGH LEVEL OF STIMULATION

15. Reactivity/Emotionality 5.) REACTIVITY/EMOTIONALITY: VARIATION IN THE TENDENCY TO BECOME EMOTIONALLY AROUSED FOR ALL OF THE EMOTIONS. LOW REACTIVE CHILD: High Threshold for Arousal POSITIVE AFFECT NEUTRAL AFFECT ________________________________________________ NEGATIVE AFFECT LOW MEDIUM HIGH LEVEL OF STIMULATION

16. Reactivity/Emotionality • A.) MODALITY SPECIFICITY: DIFFERENT SENSORY SYSTEMS MAY HAVE DIFFERENT REACTIVITIES • B.) ETHNIC DIFFERENCES IN REACTIVITY:MONGOLOID < CAUCASIAN OR AFRICAN-AMERICAN • C.) DEVELOPMENTAL SHIFTS: TERRIBLE TWO'S ANDADOLESCENCE

17. Reactivity/Emotionality • D.) ENVIRONMENTAL INFLUENCES(E. G., PREMATURITY, PRENATAL DRUG EXPOSURE) • SURVIVAL FUNCTION: MOBILIZE BEHAVIORAL RESOURCES • EXTREMES MALADAPTIVE: High end: Bipolar affective disorder; • SEX DIFFERENCES: FEMALES > MALES • AGE CHANGES: CHILDREN BECOME LESS EMOTIONAL WITH AGE; young children “wear their emotions on their sleeve”; can’t inhibit expressions of displeasure when they are upset.

18. General Principles 1.) ALL PERSONALITY TRAITS ARE HERITABLE (Heritability = 0.50) 2.) ACTIVE AND EVOCATIVE G→E EFFECTS; ACTIVE G→E EFFECTS IMPLY SELF-REGULATION; • EVEN EMOTIONALITY (REACTIVITY) HAS SELF-REGULATORY EFFECTS 3.) EXTREMES TEND TO BE MALADAPTIVE

19. General Principles • 4.) PERSONALITY TRAITS OR SYSTEMS ARE NOT TYPES OF PEOPLE. INDIVIDUALS ARE HIGH OR LOW ON A GIVEN PERSONALITY SYSTEM. • 5.) DIFFERENT SITUATIONS BRING OUT DIFFERENT PERSONALITY SYSTEMS: CONTEXTUAL TRIGGERS • GO: PARTY • STOP: DARK ALLEY • CONSCIENTIOUSNESS: FINALS • AFFECTIONAL SYSTEM: FAMILY LIFE

20. General Principles REACTIVITY/EMOTIONALITY: not triggered by a particular context. It is a general behavioral energizer. Go Stop Conscientiousness Love Reactivity/Emotionality

21. General Principles • 6. There may be conflicts between personality systems in particular situations. • E.g., deciding to go to a party (GO) or study for finals (Conscientiousness). • Paradigm: Approach/Withdrawal conflict

22. THE HERMAN'S HEAD THEORY OF PERSONALITY: CONFLICT AMONG THE INDEPENDENT PERSONALITY SYSTEMS • Mutual Inhibitory Connections between Approach Systems (Go) and Withdrawal Systems (Stop) • Conscientiousness involves inhibitory connections to Approach (Go) system and Affectional (Nurturance/Love) System.

23. THE HERMAN'S HEAD THEORY OF PERSONALITY: CONFLICT AMONG THE INDEPENDENT PERSONALITY SYSTEMS G S A C Balanced G S A C Prone to conflicts between G and C G S A C One system dominant: A Fearful Person

24. Levels of an Evolutionary Perspective on Personality • I. Personality Systems as Universal Psychological Mechanisms: • A. Personality Systems as Universal Design Features of Humans Homologous with Similarly-Functioning Systems in Other Vertebrates • B. System X Context Interactions: Contexts trigger systems • C. System X System Interactions: Mutual inhibitory connections between systems

25. Levels of an Evolutionary Perspective on Personality • I. Personality Systems as Universal Psychological Mechanisms: • D. System X Context X Trait Interactions: The outcome of System x System interactions influenced by individual differences: A person with a strong Go system will be biased on the side of approach in conflicts between Go and Stop Systems • E. System-Specific Environmental Influences During Development: Environments during development that influence the Stop system have no effect on the Affectional system.

26. Levels of an Evolutionary Perspective on Personality • II. Approaches to Group Differences in Universal Mechanisms Based on Evolutionary Theory • A. The Evolutionary Theory of Gender Differences in Personality • B. Evolutionary Approaches to Age Differences in Personality Systems • C. Evolution and Birth Order Differences in Personality • D. Life History Theory and Personality

27. Levels of an Evolutionary Perspective on Personality • III. Evolutionary Perspectives on Individual Differences • A. Individual Differences within the Normal Range seen as Variation in Viable Strategies • B. Individual Differences at the Extreme Ends of the Normal Range as Maladaptive (phobias) or High-Risk Strategies (High Sensation Seeking)

28. Levels of an Evolutionary Perspective on Personality • III. Evolutionary Perspectives on Individual Differences • C. Social Evaluation: Individual Differences in Others' Personalities as a Resource Environment: • We evaluate others’ personalities depending on our interests. • D. Self-Evaluation and Self-Presentation of Personality Traits as Mechanisms for Maximizing One's Resource Value in the Social Environment: • Putting your best foot forward, as on a first date or job interview.

29. Attachment vs. Nurturance/Love/Warmth: Part 1: Nurturance/Love/Warmth Dimensions of Parenting Permissive Authoritative Neglectful Authoritarian Uninvolved high Control Low High Warmth low

30. Authoritative Parenting AUTHORITATIVE PARENT CHILDREN'S BEHAVIOR Firm enforcement of rules Energetic, friendly Confronts disobedience Good peer relations Shows pleasure at child’s Accepts adult values constructive behavior Considers child’s wishes and opinions Warm, involved, responsive Achievement-oriented Expects mature, age-appropriate behavior Family activities Educational standards

31. Authoritarian Parenting Authoritarian Parent Child’s Behavior Rules rigidly enforced Fearful Apprehensive Confronts Disobedience Shy Shows Anger Aggression Views child as evil Harsh, punitive discipline Passively hostile, guileful No family activities Does not accept parental values No educational demands

32. Permissive Parenting Permissive Parent Child’s Behavior Rules not enforced Non-compliant Yields to child coercion Low in self-reliance Low in achievement striving Inconsistent discipline Lack of self-control Few demands for mature, Aggressive, impulsive independent behavior Moderate warmth Hides annoyance Domineering child’s behavior Does not accept adult values Glorifies free expression

33. Neglectful Parenting Neglectful Parent Child’s Behavior Minimize costs of parenting Rejects adult values Uninvolved with children Peer group orientation Focus on own needs Fails to monitor children’s delinquent activities, impulsivity, or school performance Aggression Psychopathology Alienated from family (e.g., depression, drug use) Poor school achievement Parents dislike friends Drug and alcohol use, precocious sexual activity

34. WARMTH AS A MOTIVATOR "PART OF THE CHALLENGE IS TO TEACH CHILDREN THE RULES. PART IS TO HELP THEM GAIN GRATIFICATION [=intrinsic motivation] BY OBEYING THE RULES" WARMTH AS A MOTIVATOR: INTRINSIC (WARMTH) VERSUS EXTRINSIC (PUNISHMENT) MOTIVATION IN PARENTING HOW WARMTH MOTIVATES: • WARM PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP IS MUTUALLY REWARDING • CHILD IN WARM PARENT-CHILD RELATIONSHIP THEREFORE VALUES RELATIONSHIP AND BEHAVES IN A MANNER WHICH PARENT APPROVES. • CHILD THUS ACCEPTS ADULT VALUES, IS COMPLIANT, CHILD VALUES PARENTAL APPROVAL.

35. WARMTH AS A MOTIVATOR WARMTH AS A MOTIVATOR: INTRINSIC VERSUS EXTRINSIC MOTIVATION IN PARENTING • AUTHORITATIVE PARENTING: PARENT HAS STANDARDS, CHILD HAS INTERNAL MOTIVATION TO CONFORM TO THE STANDARDS • INDULGENT/PERMISSIVE PARENTING: PARENT FAILS TO SET STANDARDS; CHILDREN MORE DRAWN TO THE PEER WORLD • AUTHORITARIAN PARENTS HAVE STANDARDS, BUT MOTIVATION IS EXTERNAL • NEGLECTFUL/INDIFFERENT PARENTS: NO STANDARDS, NO MOTIVATION; STRONG PULL TO PEER WORLD

36. WARMTH AS A REWARD SYSTEM The brain has several reward centers that make various behavior pleasurable. For example there are reward systems for food, drugs (cocaine, heroin), sex. The result is that these behavior are pleasurable and people are therefore motivated to engage in them. Warmth/love also depends on its own reward centers that make close, intimate relationships pleasurable. People high on the personality system of warmth/love are therefore motivated to seek out and maintain close relationships.

37. Warmth as a Reward System Low motivation High motivation

38. Warmth as a Reward System • Warm parenting results in making the child more sensitive to the reward value of positive social interaction: • Moves child to the right on the curve. • Lack of warm parenting may more child to the left. • This is a system-specific environmental influence. • Analogy with effects of experience on nerve cells? • Stimulation results in elaboration of neural networks • Lack of stimulation results in atrophy

39. EVOLUTION OF THE NUCLEAR FAMILY • EVOLUTIONARY TRENDS IN PARENTING: • 1.) PRIMITIVE MAMMALIAN PATTERN: LOW INVESTMENT: • MANY YOUNG • LARGE LITTERS • SHORT LIFESPAN • SMALL BRAINS COMPARED TO BODY SIZE, • SHORT PERIOD OF DEPENDENCE ON PARENTS • MALES NOT INVOLVED IN PARENTING: MOTHER AND OFFSPRING IS FAMILY UNIT

40. EVOLUTION OF THE NUCLEAR FAMILY • EVOLUTIONARY TRENDS IN PARENTING • 2.) HUMANS: HIGH INVESTMENT: • FEW YOUNG, • LONG LIFESPAN • LARGE BRAINS • LONG PERIOD OF DEPENDENCE ON PARENTS • HIGH LEVEL OF PLASTICITY AND LEARNING ABILITY • NEEDED TO DO WELL IN COMPETITIVE OR HARSH ENVIRONMENTS • MALE INVOLVEMENT IN PARENTING • WARMTH IS PARTLY A MECHANISM FOR FACILITATING MALE INVOLVEMENT (ALSO FACILITATES MOTHERING/NURTURANCE).

41. DEVELOPMENT OF DIFFERENT REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGIES LOW INVESTMENT HIGH INVESTMENT A. FAMILY CONTEXT • MARITAL DISCORD SPOUSAL HARMONY SINGLE PARENTING PATERNAL COMMITMENT NEGLECTFUL PARENTING SIBLING REARING B. CHILDREARING IN INFANCY/EARLY CHILDHOOD • HARSH, REJECTING WARM, RESPONSIVE INSENSITIVE STIMULATING UNSTIMULATING NO PARENT-CHILD PLAY PARENT-CHILD PLAY

42. DEVELOPMENT OF DIFFERENT REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGIES LOW INVESTMENT HIGH INVESTMENT C. PSYCHOLOGICAL/BEHAVIORAL DEVELOPMENT • INSECURE ATTACHMENT SECURE ATTACHMENT MISTRUSTFUL INTERNAL WORKING MODEL RECIPROCALLY REWARDING OPPORTUNISTIC INTERPERSONAL STYLE INTERPERSONAL STYLE D. SOMATIC DEVELOPMENT • EARLY LATER MATURATION/PUBERTY MATURATION/PUBERTY E. REPRODUCTIVE STRATEGY • EARLIER SEXUAL ACTIVITY LATER SEXUAL ACTIVITY UNSTABLE PAIR BONDS STABLE PAIR BONDS LOW INVESTMENT HIGH INVESTMENT PARENTING PARENTING

43. Attachment vs. Nurturance/Love/Warmth: Part 2: Attachment • DETERMINING ATTACHMENT STATUS: • 1. STRANGE SITUATION TEST (See Table 6.9, p. 150) • 2. REUNION EPISODES ARE PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT for scoring

44. Attachment vs. Nurturance/Love/Warmth: Part 1: Attachment • DETERMINING ATTACHMENT STATUS: • 3. CATEGORIES OF ATTACHMENT: • A. INSECURE AVOIDANT (A BABIES): • OFTEN DO NOT CRY MUCH AT SEPARATION; • DO NOT SEEK PROXIMITY AND ACTIVELY AVOID THE MOTHER AT REUNION; • DO NOT RESIST CONTACT IF MOTHER INITIATES IT; • DO NOT CRY MUCH AT REUNION

45. Attachment vs. Nurturance/Love/Warmth: Part 1: Attachment • DETERMINING ATTACHMENT STATUS: • 3. CATEGORIES OF ATTACHMENT: • B. SECURE ATTACHMENT (B BABIES): • ACTIVELY SEEK PROXIMITY AND CONTACT AT REUNION; • OFTEN DISTRESSED DURING SEPARATION, BUT CALM DOWN QUICKLY AT REUNION

46. Attachment vs. Nurturance/Love/Warmth: Part 1: Attachment • DETERMINING ATTACHMENT STATUS: • 3. CATEGORIES OF ATTACHMENT: • C. INSECURE AMBIVALENT (C BABIES) • VERY UPSET AND DISTRESSED DURING SEPARATION; • ACTIVELY SEEK PROXIMITY AND CONTACT AT REUNION; • RESIST CONTACT AT REUNION, OFTEN SHOWING ANGER; • CONTINUE CRYING AT REUNION; • THEY DO NOT CALM DOWN EASILY AT REUNION

47. ATTACHMENT THEORY • 1.) LEARNING THEORY: • a.) OLD VIEW: LOVE AS GENERALIZED CONDITIONED RESPONSE; • MOTHER SATISFIES BASIC DRIVES FOR FOOD, ETC., • BABY THEREFORE DEVELOPS POSITIVE ATTITUDES LOVE (ALSO FREUDIAN); • ETHOLOGICAL CRITIQUE: HARLOW'S MONKEY STUDY

48. ATTACHMENT THEORY • 1.) LEARNING THEORY: • b.) MORE RECENTLY: MOTHERS AND BABIES AS MUTUALLY REINFORCING, INCLUDING PLEASURE OF SOCIAL INTERACTION • ETHOLOGICAL CRITIQUE: • 1.) THE THEORY IS INCOMPLETE BECAUSE IT DOESN'T EXPLAIN WHY SOCIAL INTERACTIONS ARE SO PLEASURABLE IN THE FIRST PLACE • 2.) THEORY CAN'T EXPLAIN ATTACHMENT IN ABUSED INFANTS

49. ATTACHMENT THEORY • 2.) COGNITIVE-DEVELOPMENTAL MODELS: • a.) ATTACHMENT AS INVOLVING COGNITIVE MODEL (SCHEMA) OF "MOMMY & ME"; IF SEPARATED, BABY BECOMES FEARFUL AND DISTRESSED BECAUSE OF DISCREPANCY WITH SCHEMA OF 'MOMMY & ME' • b.) ATTACHMENT INVOLVES INTERNAL WORKING MODEL OF MOTHER'S TYPICAL BEHAVIOR; the IWM is a cognitive model of relationships based on relationship with mother as a prototype

50. ATTACHMENT THEORY • 2.) COGNITIVE-DEVELOPMENTAL MODELS: • CRITIQUE: CAN'T ACCOUNT FOR THE AFFECTIVE INTENSITY OF ATTACHMENT PHENOMENA • WHY NOT DEVELOP SUCH SCHEMAS ABOUT BOOKS OR TOYS? • WHY SHOULD VIOLATING A SCHEMA OF "MOMMY AND ME" WHEN MOM LEAVES RESULT IN SUCH INTENSE DYSPHORIA, BUT VIOLATION OF OTHER SCHEMAS IS NO BIG DEAL?