Psychology - With Reference to Trait Theory, Discuss the Differences Between the Idiographic and Nomothetic Approach to Personality

Résumé du document

With Reference to Trait Theory, Discuss the Differences Between the Idiographic and Nomothetic Approach to Personality - Exam Prep Essay

Extraits

[...] There are still limitations when considering the nomothetic approach, the main one being that it is too complex and scientific. It was also suggested by Betz, Wright, Sprague and Molenar (2016) that the nomothetic approach often violates homogeneity across people and time, which is a problem as most analysis should be conducted based on homogeneity assumptions being met. Homogeneity refers to the people being the same. Now that both the idiographic and the nomothetic approaches have been explained the differences between them can be discussed. [...]

[...] With Reference to Trait Theory, Discuss the Differences Between the Idiographic and Nomothetic Approach to Personality Whilst there have been many trait theories developed over the years, this essay will focus on the approaches could be considered as being the most influential in personality research: idiographic approach and the nomothetic approach, and discuss the differences between them, whilst suggesting a possible compromise between the two of them. Personality has been defined as the characteristics of an individual that make them unique (Weinberg & Gould, 1999). [...]

[...] Whilst Allport based most of his research on case studies there is some evidence in support of using the idiographic approach. Shadel, Niavra and Abrams (2000) conducted an experiment using an idiographic approach to assess differences in personality among smokers. They found that three cognitive structures (smoker self-schema, abstainer ideal-possible self and abstainer ought-possible self) had properties that were stable across different situations. Despite having some evidence in support of using the idiographic approach, there are still a number of limitations associated with it personality traits are too many to use practically, a much smaller number would be more appropriate. [...]

[...] Eysenck's model, known as the hierarchical model, posits that personality is made up of a hierarchy. Habits at the bottom of the hierarchy, influence narrower traits, which influence super traits. Suggesting that personality can only be influenced from the bottom part of the hierarchy. Which therefore means that this model also takes into consideration effects of the environment, which neither the idiographic or nomothetic models do. In conclusion, there are a number of differences between the idiographic and nomothetic approaches, both of which have their criticisms and praise. [...]

[...] Beck (1953) stated that in order for a study of personality to be adequate, the study must largely be idiographic, yet nomothetic procedures are seen as an essential part when studying personality. Eysenck (1916-1997) formed his own theory of personality which was a compromised between the idiographic and nomothetic approaches. By using factor analysis he came up with three super traits of extraversion, neuroticism and psychoticism. These super traits were said to be stable across time and they can apply to many different situations, however, they are unrelated to each other. [...]