Defining Personality and Personality Disorders - Research Paper Example

?Running Head: DEFINING PERSONALITY AND PERSONALITY DISORDERS Defining Personality and Personality Disorders Defining Personality and Personality Disorders Introduction Personality disorders are difficult because they deal with the essential elements of an individual that have gone wrong, making their social life cumbersome. They are often disenfranchised from the rest of the world, their ability to function made more difficult by the way in which they perceive and react to the world. The personality is based on traits which are categorized in to different types. The central traits are referred to as the building blocks of personality and are used as a way to construct the more specific identity of an individual. They can be further defined by statistical analysis which presents source traits from which all of the other trait can be traced. There is also some evidence that personality traits are based on biology and that the way in which an individual responds to the world around them can be traced back to the physiological make-up. Building Blocks of Personality There are over 18,000 words in the English language to describe personality traits. The trait approach to personality describes the qualities of a person that they exhibit most of the time. A trait theorist will “attempt to analyze, classify and interrelate traits” (Coon, 2006, p. 464). In 1961 psychologist and trait theorist Gordon Allport found that there were several kinds of traits that could be classified. Common traits are those found in people that identify them as a part of a culture. Individual traits are those traits that can identify the nature of a single person. The combinations of these traits make them uniquely separate from others (Coon, 2006). Allport continued by separating individual traits into cardinal traits, central traits, and secondary traits. Cardinal traits are overriding and almost all actions and reactions that a person does will be traced to those basic traits. Central traits are the building blocks of personality. Although there are a wide number of choices to describe a personality, it is usually boiled down to just a few traits that make up the personality of an individual. When Allport asked students in his studies in 1961 to describe the traits of other people the average number of traits given was seven. Secondary traits are those traits that are more superficial such as political opinions or food tastes and have the capacity to change without significantly changing the individual in the process (Coon, 2006). Raymond Cattell in 1965 examined traits and further divided central traits into surface and source traits. Surface traits tend to group together when experienced so that they seemed to have a deeper singular source, which he identified as source traits. The work that Allport did was subjective in how he classified traits but Cattell used a statistical method to find ways in which to classify the traits he observed. He used a statistical evaluation called factor analysis in order to seek out commonalities among traits. An example that Coon (2006) explores is the source trait of imaginative, which is often the core of a description where a person is creative, original, curious, and innovative. Cattell found that there were sixteen source traits. These sixteen traits can be used to create a personality profile. His survey instrument, the Sixteen Personality Factor Questionnaire can be used to map a personality. This can further be used to discover the occupations that an individual is most inclined to do well in. (Nevid, 2009). Identifying the type of person allows for a researcher to see how they fit into a cultural landscape and how their chosen profession is outlined as appropriate against their personality type. In 1982 Hans Eysenck defined three basic traits from which all other traits emanate. He defined personality through extroversion/introversion, neuroticism, and psychoticisim. Through abstracting from these three main personality dimensions, the individual personality can be described (Griggs, 2010). In order to look at an individual’s personality, one must observe their specific response level. This scheme will have specific behaviors that describe the level. If in watching the way in which someone creates the specific response level it is found that they respond this way repeatedly it can be identified as a habitual response (Burger, 2011). Eysenck went on to describe the cortisol levels as they relate to extroversion and introversion. Those with low levels of cortisol seek out higher levels of socialization because they are seeking stimulation while those with higher levels of cortisol are seeking peace. Those with lower levels are already so stimulated that they need to seek out less chaotic environments. Brain wave analysis shows that both types are similar when asleep, but when awake an introvert is far more sensitive to stimulus and while the cortisol theory is in question, there is a general agreement that sensitivity in relationship to biological response exists (Burger, 2011). Modern psychology professionals look to the Big Five as the best way to look at personality. The Big Five personality traits are extroversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, neuroticism and openness to experience. Answering the questions posed by these five traits can identify the personality of an individual (Coon, 2006). The Big Five is a collaborative model that takes into consideration the multiple trait theories and defines them through the five traits, two of which include the first two dimensions of Eysenck’s model (Nevid, 2009). The Big Five limits the human potential, however, just as the other two models presented and asserts that personality can be described only within the limits of human language and its ability to describe personality traits. Boiling down the personality to five basic traits may be a limited effort to describe a very complex system (Burger, 2011). The Concept of Disorder Creating differentiation between what is normal and what is a disorder means defining behaviors as a result of thoughts as either normal or abnormal. This means that culture has an influence on how a disorder is defined. It is more complex than just culture, however, because behavior as it relates to personal health, human adaptations to their environment, and reproduction dynamics as they relate to family all are linked to defining what is normal and what is not normal for a human being. Sleep habits can be related to culture or to biological need. In some cultures it is considered normal to nap every day for an adult, but in American culture this might be seen as a sign of depression. Myers (2004) writes that in order for a behavior to be seen as part of a disorder it must be consider not only abnormal, but disturbing. There was a time when being homosexual was considered a mental disorder, but cultural attitudes have changed and it is now considered a normal part of sexual identity determinations. Culture determines behavior to qualify under a disorder when they believe that it is more likely that the behavior is harmful and maladaptive. As an example, nicotine dependence has been added as a disorder, similar to alcohol dependence, because it has been deemed to be harmful to a smoker. Rationality is a criterion for judging behavior. One person may say that they hear the voice of angels and be considered delusional but in other contexts he or she may be considered prophetic and blessed. Determining a disorder is as much culturally relevant as it is scientifically relevant (Myers, 2004). Personality tends to be consistent and can be used to predict what a person is likely to choose to do in any given situation. Coon (2006) writes that “Trait-situation interactions occur when external circumstances influence the expression of personality traits” (p. 466). However, a disorder can mean that the personality of an individual is not operating quite the same as other people’s personality would operate. Stricker, Widiger, and Weiner (2003) write that “when personality traits are inflexible and maladaptive and cause significant functional impairment or subjective distress they constitute personality disorders” (p. 149). A personality disorder can mean that a person may have limited functionality in a social dimension. There is some discussion about eliminating personality disorders and folding them into other psychiatric disorders. The theory is that personality disorders are really manifestations of the other disorders. The fear in doing this, however, is that some patients would be over diagnosed while others would not fit into any diagnostic dimension because their issues are too subtle to qualify for the recognized illnesses with more severe outcomes. Creating dimensions is a reasonable solutions so that the various degrees of problems can be assessed and given weight within a model that is a bit more three dimensional (O’Donohue, Fowler & Lilienfeld, 2007). Specific Personality Disorders The personality disorders can be categorized into ten distinct disorders that are then clustered into three groups. Cluster A is termed odd/eccentric and includes schizoid, schizotypal, and paranoid disorders. Cluster B is termed dramatic/eratic/emotional and includes histrionic, anti-social borderline and narcissistic disorders. Finally, Cluster C is termed anxious/fearful and includes dependent, avoidant, and obsessive compulsive disorders. The DSM-IV also includes two additional categorizations for passive/aggressive and depressive, allowing for an additional category PDNOS, which is for disorders that are yet to be recognized (Stricker, Widiger, & Weiner, 2003). In May of 2013 when the DSM-V diagnostic and statistical model is released this is likely to change. Personality disorders will see major changes with dimensions of diagnoses as opposed to categories being given emphasis. Dimensions would, on a rudimentary level, be determined by cross matching personality traits with personality disorder types to create a much more complex and descriptive diagnosis (O’Donohue, Fowler & Lilienfeld, 2007). Prevalence of Personality Disorders Magnavita (2004) reports that the prevalence of personality disorders in the United States is about one in ten for the number of people who present with traits that can be identified within the criteria of a diagnosable personality disorder. About half of the people being treated for a mental illness have personality disorders. In a study that examined six different studies on the topic of prevalence of personality disorders, the range of identifying the rates of personality disorders across populations was between 6.7% and 33.3%, which indicates that identifying the parameters of personality disorders is a problem. Defining personality disorders is difficult because of cultural differences in how behavior is perceived. The line between mental disorder or culturally defined behavior as maladaptive is so fine that it often is misunderstood either for a diagnosis or left untreated without a diagnosis. Once again, one can look at the concept of homosexuality to see how culture is relevant to how a disorder is defined. As stated, there was a time when homosexuality was considered a personality disorder. There are instances across the world where homosexual behavior is considered a criminal offense, both in the past and currently. In American society homosexual behavior is linked to sexual preference, which is considered a right of both choices in regard to behavior and in regards to biologically influences on sexual preferences. This one instance shows that determining prevalence of personality disorders is difficult because defining personality disorders is a fluctuating concept that has yet to be fully understood. Conclusion Identifying personality disorders is determined by both biology and culture. Personality disorders can commonly be considered relevant when behavior is maladaptive and unhealthy. Currently, there are three clusters of ten personality disorders that are recognized on the DSM-IV diagnostic tool, but this will change in May of 2013. Identifying personality disorders begins by identifying personality traits. The theories of Allport, Cattell and Eysenck have been used to develop the Big Five in order to provide means for identifying the traits of personality. Through looking at these traits, behavior, occupation, and disorders can be identified, but it is not an exact science. Interpretation based on societal norms and expectations have an influence on how personality is judged. Personality disorders are still subjective and determined depending on the perspective that society takes on the behaviors of those who are judged in relationship to how those behaviors place them in the social realm. Personality as a science is still a work in progress and determining the benefits of trait analysis and diagnosis is still under consideration in the discipline of psychology. Resources Burger, J. M. (2011). Personality. Australia: Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Coon, D. (2006). Introduction to psychology: Gateways to mind and behavior. Australia: Thompson/Wadsworth. Griggs, R. A. (2010). Psychology: A concise introduction. New York: MacMillan. Magnavita, J. J. (2004). Handbook of personality disorders: Theory and practice. Hoboken, N.J: J. Wiley. Myers, D. G. (2004). Psychology. New York: Worth Publishers. Nevid, J. S. (2009). Psychology: Concepts and applications. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co. O'Donohue, W. T., Fowler, K. A., & Lilienfeld, S. O. (2007). Personality disorders: Toward the DSM-V. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications. Stricker, G., Widiger, T. A., & Weiner, I. B. (2003). Handbook of Psychology, Volume 8, Clinical Psychology: Volume 8, Clinical Psychology. New York: John Wiley & Sons. Read More