autonomy. A way of explaining this would be that participants may encounter problems adjusting to

Three characteristics that contribute to high self-esteem are an ambitious attitude, are optimistic about life and choose friends and partners who also have high self-esteem and demand and earn respect from the people in their lives .Three characteristics that contribute to low self-esteem are unable to achieve goals, are pessimistic about life, and form unhealthy, destructive relationships with other people.

A person with a strong sense of self esteem will have a more positive outlook on life and will be strong enough to handle difficult situations through life.

The authors found that the motivating factors of striving for status and accomplishment were mediated by the dimensions of extraversion and conscientiousness.

Extraversion is in essence the trait, which comprises all the optimistic social personality traits (Johnson, 2011). Conscientious individuals are highly organized. They are looked upon as highly dedicated workers, which most of the time leads to complete avoidance of pleasure activities (Johnson, 2011).

There are several models of abnormality in use today (Comer, 2009) lists “The Biological Model…”, “The Psychodynamic Model…”, The Behavioral Model…”, The Cognitive Model…”, The Humanistic-Existential Model…”, The Sociocultural Model…” (p.33). The biggest contrasts would be the Biological model, and the other models. Comparing the biological model, and the cognitive model will highlight those differences.

Research has been done to identify how SJT can affect self-esteem in individuals of both high and low status groups. Jost et al. (2002) suggests that the process of system justification makes way for implicit ramification on the self-esteem for individuals within the lower social system by stating that “members of low as well as high status groups expressed non conscious favoritism toward members of higher status groups on cognitive affective and behavioral measures” (Jost et al., 2002, p. 598). It can be argued that this is representative of a social hierarchy in which those who are lower may socially compare themselves to those on top. According to Myers (2013), social comparisons can be detrimental to personal satisfaction as we compare ourselves upward toward others. It can be assumed that SJT is a form of social comparison, in which the lower group favors the top, thus causing a decrease in satisfaction. This assumption is further supported by Jost et al. (2002) that favoritism later continues to the social hierarchy, thus causing self-esteem problems for those of lower stature. Jost et al. (2002) postulates that “our thoughts, feelings, and actions seem to reproduce biases in favor of high status groups, often

Someone high in extraversion enjoys crowds, social gatherings, and working in groups. Whereas, a person low in extraversion is more comfortable working on his or her own and is less outgoing. As with agreeableness, the level of extraversion that is desired in an employee is dependent on the job (Subica, Allen, Frueh, & Fowler, 2016). Thus, in jobs that involve interacting with others, such as sales, teaching, or public relations, high extraversion may be helpful. However, if a job requires independent work and solitude, such as computer programming, having a person high in extraversion may be difficult, and thus a person lower in extraversion would be

Extraversion, the Big Five personality factor, is a valid predictor for tasks involving social interaction (McCrae & Costa 1988). Extraversion describes the degree to which individuals are gregarious, friendly, compliant, cooperative, nurturing, caring and sympathetic in contrast to introversion, which is characterized by those who are shy, unassertive, and withdrawn (McCrae & Costa 1992). Specifically, high extraversion is featured by a larger number of relationships and a larger proportion of one’s time spent in enjoying them. Low extraversion is characterized by a smaller number of relationships and a smaller proportion of one’s time spent in pursuing those relationships.

The first factor, Extraversion, implies an energetic approach toward the social and material world and would includes traits such as sociability, assertiveness, and positive emotionality. Individuals who are high in extraversion are more likely to approach others at social gatherings and introduce themselves, or take lead in organizing group projects. Extraverts are also more likely to prefer to live in larger cities where they are surrounded by others, and

The first section concerns which of your worlds you prefer. Not world as in “ Would you rather live on Mars or Neptune?”, but your inner or outer worlds. Those who have a preference for the outer world of people and things are grouped in the Extraversion category, represent by an E. People in this group are outgoing, have lots of friends, and are comfortable in groups. Introversion (I) prefers their inner world of ideas and images. That means they like working alone or in (very) small groups, and are considered reflective and reserved. It is important to note that everyone spends time in both worlds, and this only represents their favorite one. Spending time doing both

There are two higher-order factors that both taxonomies clearly share: extraversion and neuroticism. Both approaches broadly accept that extraversion is associated with sociability and positive affect, whereas neuroticism is associated with emotional instability and negative affect.

Several studies have shown significant agreement between self rated traits and rating of these traits by others, mostly if the traits lead to observable behavior. And between self rated traits and observed behavior in traits to relevant circumstances, if these external norms for the self rating are appropriately accumulated over the observers, time, or situations, explicitly; self rating of personality shows substantial validity for observable personality traits (Funder1999). Research shows that the defining feature of the

This theory looks deeper at a personal level of the way one views their self-worth and position in society (Macionis, 2015).

The author explains that these anomalies help us understand new theories and adapt to them, but one things that he emphasizes mostly in this book is the

A recent strand of the empirical literature attempts to design a test for the pecking order (Shyam-Sunder and Myers, 1999; Frank and Goyal, 2003; Watson and Wilson,2002;Lemmon and Zender,2003). Shyam-Sunder and Myers(1999)