Eysencks Three Factor Theory Leadership

Running head: TRAIT MODEL OF PERSONALITY

TRAIT MODEL OF PERSONALITY 7

The Trait Model of Personality

A trait is a unit of analysis used to describe, explain, and predict human thought and behaviour (Lecci, 2015). Traits are the building blocks of personality. The earliest contributors to the trait personality model include Hippocreates & Galen, Carl June, and Gordin Allport. This text traces the development of personality theory, with specific reference to Eysencks’ three-factor model. It also discusses the five personality areas of the Big Five models and uses the results to assess personality.

Eysencks’ Three Factor Theory

Personality models are among the earliest forms of psychology theories. Throughout history, personality theories have evolved as theorists attempt to build the most plausible bases for understanding the foundation of an individual’s personality. The earliest documented works related personality to internal balances within the humors system and the central nervous system, both of which limited quantitative measurement (Lecci, 2015).

Hans Eysenck was among the greatest contributors in the field of personality psychology. He believed that biological factors underlie all human traits (Allemand, Steiger & Hill, 2013). As such, all individuals inherit a type of nervous system that influences how they learn and adapt to the environment. Eysenck viewed people as having three personality dimensions: introversion vs. extroversion, stability vs. neuroticism, and socialization vs. psychoticism (Kussner, 2017; Lecci, 2015). Each aspect of personality can be traced to a different biological cause. For instance, Eysenck believed that extroversion was caused by differences in cortical arousal, with introverts having a lower activity level than extroverts in this area. Neuroticism, on the other hand, was attributed to differences in the limbic system, which is the part of the brain involved in motivation, emotion, and emotional association with memory.

Eysenck posits that an individual’s personality is influenced by the balance between inhibition and excitation processes of the autonomic nervous system (Kussner, 2017). According to the theory, extroverted people are outgoing, sociable, and readily connect with others, while introverts have a higher need to be alone and to engage in solitary behavior (Lecci, 2015). In the stability/neuroticism dimension, people high on neuroticism are anxious and tend to go into a fight reaction mode even with low levels of stress, while those high on stability are more emotionally-stable. In the socialization/psychoticism dimension, people high on socialization have high impulse control and are more cooperative and altruistic, while those high on psychoticism are more antisocial, impulsive, cold, and independent thinkers. Eysenck’s theory was an improvement on the earlier personality trait approaches as it was more quantifiable – psychological theories have been criticized for not being empirically verifiable (McCrae, 2011). However, the theory has been superseded by newer theories such as the Five Factor Model (McCrae, 2011).

Differences between Eysenck’s Theory and Psychodynamic Theory

Eysenck’s theory of personality shares some similarities with Sigmund Freud’s psychodynamic theory of personality. The psychodynamic theory assumes that there is an interaction between innate instincts (nature) and parental influences (nurture). Both models theorize a high-level mental mechanism that either requires the satisfaction of sexual desires (Freud) or stimulation of arousal needs. The psychodynamic model is founded on the sexual desire principle, which is innate and demands instant gratification in an individual (Nettle, 2009). As such, the individual under the psychodynamic model is driven by unconscious processes influenced by sex, and aggression as well as childhood experiences. Conversely, Eysenck argues that personality is driven by brain arousal needs, which lead to extraversion or introversion, stability or neuroticism, and socialization or psychoticism (Netttle, 2009).

Another difference between the two theories has to do with the measurability of variables – Eysenck used statistics to support the existence of these personality factors, while Freud’s psychodynamic theory emphasizes the idea of the human unconscious, which is untestable (Nettle, 2009). The third difference is the mode of inheriting personality – Eysenck argues that an individual acquires their personality at birth and the same does not change in the course of their lifetime. The psychodynamic theory, on the other hand, argues that one’s personality is acquired through their childhood experiences, particularly the influence of parents. In Freud’s view, personality develops through the interplay of one’s environment and instincts during the formative years of life (Nettle, 2009). Parental behavior is crucial for a child’s development and as such, mental health and personality problems in adulthood may be traced back to the first five years of life. The two theories, however, have a common weakness in that they both fail to explain possible changes in an individual’s personality over time.

Part 2: The Big Five Model

The establishment of the big five model of personality was a real turning point in the history of personality psychology (McCrae, 2011). The big five model is the observation that all personality traits are aspects of one or more of five fundamental factors: neuroticism, extraversion, openness to experience, agreeableness, and conscientiousness (McCrae, 2011).

Openness to Experience

This factor features characteristics such as insight and imagination, and concerns the willingness to try out new things or the capacity to think outside the box (Nettle, 2009). Individuals high in openness tend to be adventurous. They also tend to enjoy new experiences, are eager to learn new things, and are curious about the world (Nettle, 2009). Conversely, individuals low on openness tend to struggle with abstract thinking, are not very imaginative, and will often resists new ideas (Nettle, 2009). A score of 58 in the openness factor indicates that I have average creativity and intellect. I am also more likely to avoid venturing into the unknown and will often prefer to follow conventional ways of doing things.

Conscientiousness

Conscientiousness is a trait that focuses on the ability to control impulses and behave in a way that is socially acceptable (Nettle, 2009). People high in conscientiousness are often able to plan their programs effectively and work within the set of rules. People high in conscientiousness will often pursue their goals with significant forethought and are more likely to take up leadership positions. Those low on conscientiousness, on the other hand, are more likely to be impulsive, impetuous and highly likely to procrastinate (Nettle, 2009). I scored 83 percent in conscientiousness, indicating a highly-organized individual who is able to focus their attention on the long-term goal without being side-tracked.

Extraversion

The extraversion factor is characterized by high levels of emotional expressiveness, assertiveness, talkativeness, and sociability. People high in extraversion are outgoing and tend to be excited by social gatherings and situations that bring them close to other people (Nettle, 2009). Conversely, people low on extraversion are more reserved and often prefer to operate in solitude and quiet environments. The low score of 35 per cent in extraversion implies that I am more of an introvert – I work best in solitude, and rarely seeks others’ attention. I dislike being at the center of attention, and feel exhausted whenever I have to socialize a lot.

Agreeableness

This factor covers such attributes as affection, kindness, altruism, and trust (Nettle, 2009). While extroversion focuses on the pursuit of interactions with others, agreeableness has to do with how one interacts with others. People high in agreeableness tend to be more cooperative and hence, are more affectionate and sensitive to the needs of others (Nettle, 2009). Agreeable people are likely to have few enemies and are highly sympathetic, even with strangers. Individuals low on agreeableness tend to be sarcastic, rude, blunt, and callous and are unlikely to be sensitive in what they say to those they interact with (Nettle, 2009). I scored 65 per cent on agreeableness, which indicates that I am slightly above average – I am a bit cooperative and affectionate. However, this may not be the case with all people and under all circumstances. I am particularly harsh with strangers and people that I find unpleasant.

Neuroticism

This factor trait is characterized by emotional instability, moodiness, and sadness (Nettle, 2009). Individuals high on neuroticism experience sadness, irritability, anxiety, and mood swings, while those on the lower end of the spectrum are more emotionally stable and resilient. I scored a low 21 percent on neuroticism, implying that I am less likely to experience negative emotions and unlikely to react to a situation in sadness, anger, and fear. However, I would say that this highly depends on the specific situation and the nature of the audience. For instance, I tend to respond with fear and anger when faced with frustrating situations. As such, I would not say that I am a consistent low scorer in neuroticism because I tend to treat people the same way they treat me. For instance, I am usually more sensitive with people who treat me well.