What Makes You What You Are

Dispositional personality theories are quite different from biological personality theories. The two will be compared and dissected in this article. The Big Five Personality Test will also be analyzed and how it is used to study personality will be examined.

Personality and how we behave have been of much interest to psychologists for a long time now and because of this there have been many theories and theorists that have been developed. Personality is defined as consistent behavior patterns and intrapersonal processes originating within and individual (Fritzley, 2012, p. 10). There are six main approaches to personality psychology they include: biological approach, humanistic approach, behaviorist approach, trait approach, psychoanalytic approach and cognitive approach. Each approach shines a little light onto why we behave the way we do and how our personalities are formed, the approaches contain many different theories from

The study of personality traits is beneficial in identifying the many variables that exist from human to human; the combinations of these variables provide us with a true level of individuality and uniqueness. In the field of psychology, trait theory is considered to be a key approach to the study of human personality (Crowne, 2007; Burton, Westen & Kowalski, 2009). This paper aims to identify a number of significant contributors who have played crucial roles in both the development and application of trait theory. This paper then moves focus to these theorists, outlining their theory and analysing both the strengths and weaknesses of those theories. An illustration of the methods used in trait measurement is given and includes the

What is it that makes us who we are? Is it how we were raised? Is it the specific time and location in space during our birth? Or is it by mere choice alone in every moment that makes us who we are at that moment, ever-changing? I could tell you that they are all are true. And I could also tell you that they are all false. And guess what, both statements would be correct. Here’s another shocker, truth is relative. You can turn something from an untruth into a truth and vise versa all with the power of belief, thought, and faith. If you truly believe with all of your heart that you are a product of your upbringing and nothing more, then you have made that true. You’ve also chosen to be a victim of your past but hey if that’s the truth you want you got it. Now if you believe that your upbringing is the past and nothing more, and that you choose moment by moment who you are, then that is true. Truth is based on your reality. And your reality is based on your thoughts and beliefs. There is no set reality. There are no set truths. Reality, just like truth, is relative to the being who perceives it. Now personally I have chosen not to be a victim of my past for that is all that it is, the past. And the past, just like the future, exists only in our minds. Without your mind, without you remembering the past or dreaming of future possibilities, there is no past and there is no future. There is only NOW. The universe has no concept of past or future. It only

in order to analyze the patterns that determine personality, certain issues need to be addressed

Many of our personality traits are developed by the interactions that we have had with others during our informative years. Our behavior is a reflection of our own personality and there is considerable evidence to show that personality can be inherited. Genetics are particular molecular structures of genes, as it is explained through science the effect that these genes have on our behavior and our body’s actions throughout our lives. Both the Endocrine System and Heredity have a large influence on human behavior. They determine our moods, irritability, and even our level of energy, even though the environment still plays a huge role. These personality genes, work by changing the structure of neurotransmitters, or receptors or emitters in the brain, which affects how our brain cells communicate with each other.

Burger (2008), says that there are many theories of personality and psychologists try to explain it with their own approaches. Discussed here will be the psychoanalytic approach, the trait approach, the biological approach the humanistic approach, the behavioural/social learning approach and the cognitive approach. They were devised to search for specific patterns in behaviour and ways of thinking about these

The topic for this week’s paper was to do an analysis about our own personality type and to include supporting documentation for why I either agreed or did not agree with the personality type that was determined from taking the Jung Typology Test.

One of The most common problems that I face in life, is the need to get to know myself a little better. Whereas it is easy for me and others to get to know other people, it is quite difficult to know who you are, what you like, and what your interests are. Fortunately, personality tests such as the ones that are included on this paper, were extremely helpful at giving me some insight about my own personality. As a result, both test indicated some aspects of my personality that I can agree to, and other perspectives about myself that I never took into consideration.

Personality assessment instruments continue to be widely uses by the public and widely examined by the public. Since the early 20th century a number of personality instruments have been very useful in

The world of Genetics is one that is both fascinating and interesting. When tackling how genetics plays a role in behavior, one must look within the scope of what genetics is before dealing with how it plays a significant role in one’s behavior. Simply put, genetics is the study of genes. It is a biological component within the entire study of biology itself. Scientists who study genetics and perform research do so with the intent to learn more about how genetics affects the overall attitudes, behaviors and dispositions of individuals. It could be said that genetics is somewhat of a psychological-biological science as researchers look at the underlying patterns within the genes that cause

Usually I am sarcastic and blunt in nature, I usually don't hold my tongue back with people because people do deserve the truth and not the sugar coated version of it. Being who I am make it seem like I'm this mean person when I really am not. Sometimes I am not this talkative person because there is a time to talk and a time to just be quiet and listen so I know what is asked of me. Now combining sarcastic, blunt, and not so talkative can make seem like I'm standoffish at times and I know that I can be at times. Those closest to me know that I am the one to tell it like it and know that I'm a listener rather be the one that talks. Even with this perception of me when I participate in clubs and school activities usually people see that this is who and that at times I do have my moments. What this shows about me is that for the most part I am the type of person that rather stay to myself at times and that if you want the truth I'll give it to you, I am a simple person.

This paper is a comparison of three different viewpoints on the subject of personality. Carl Jung, B.F. Skinner, and Carl Rogers all had very different outlooks on what defined someone’s personality. As an added feature I have included myself as a theorist because my views are also different from the previous mentioned theorists. This paper will also look briefly into the background of each theorist because their views on life began in their childhood. Amazingly you will notice the all had similar backgrounds, but came up with completely different ways of looking at life.

The following will reflect this researchers understanding and reflection on personality, how it defines one, what it means, and if one’s personality changes to fit certain situations. At the end this researcher may have a better insight into herself as well as the personalities of others. This insight can help her in her future endeavors.

For centuries, philosophers, personality theorists and other thinkers have been trying to answer: what personalities are like, how personalities are developed, why different personalities are developed and how personalities can be changed (Pervin & Cervone, 2013). George A. Kelly, an American psychologist born in 1905 in Kansa, is one of those major contributors in the field of personality psychology (Warren, 1998). In this paper, I am writing to critically review George A. Kelly's perspective on personality. I will first review Kelly's philosophy of