Looking At The Personality Theory

Published Date: 23 Mar 2015 Last Modified: 11 May 2017

A person is a flow of powerful subjective life, conscious and unconscious; a whispering gallery in which voices echo from the distant past; a gulf stream of fantasies with floating memories of past events, currents of contending complexes, plots and counterplots, hopeful intimations and ideals…A personality is a full Congress of orators and pressure groups, of children, demagogues, communists, isolationists, war-mongers, mugwumps, grafters, log rollers, lobbyists, Caesars and Christs, Machiavellis and Judases, Tories and Promethean revolutionists.

(Murray, What Should Psychologists 160-61)

The term personality is used by psychologists to denote a consistent pattern of responses to the world that the environment imposes upon the individual internally and externally (Kassarjian and Robertson 194). All the physical, mental and emotional characteristics of an individual as an integrated whole, especially as they are presented to others, form what we commonly term as personality. According to Robert B. Ewen, "personality refers to important and relatively stable aspects of behaviour."(4) During the past one hundred years extensive research has been done by the various psychologists in this field. This research has given birth to what we now call Personality psychology. Personality psychology is a branch of psychology which studies human personality deeply using psychological theories. The scientific study of personality can be traced back to the year 1937, when Gordon Allport published his book 'Personality: A Psychological Interpretation'.

Personality analysis, like art, is subjective in nature. There is no single best recognised definition or theory of personality yet and different psychologists have different definitions and theories regarding personality. "Psychologists themselves cannot arrive at a unifying definition of personality, due in part to its subjective nature." (Schultz 2) According to Sam Smiley, "It is the form, or overall unity, of an individual's traits. It includes the complex of characteristics that distinguish one person from all others, and it admits the behavioural potentials of the individual which transcend all his attitudes and actions. . . . Personality is the totality of a human being's physiological and psychological traits, and therefore it is the epitome of whatever differentiates one human from every other human." (82-83)

Robert B. Ewen gives one of the most comprehensive definitions of personality. He says, "Personality deals with a wide range of human behaviour. To most theorists, personality includes virtually everything about a person-mental, emotional, social, and physical. Some aspects of personality are unobservable, such as thoughts, memories, and dreams, whereas others are observable, such as overt actions. Personality also includes aspects that are concealed from yourself, or unconscious, as well as those that are conscious and well within your awareness." (4)

Some other significant definitions by noted psychologists are:

Cattell offers the opinion that, "Personality is that which permits a prediction of what a person will do in a given situation. . . . Personality is . . . concerned with all the behaviour of the individual, both overt and under the skin." (Liebert and Spiegler 3-4) "Personality refers to the collection of attitudes and knowledge that a person possesses, that is, mainly those personal items that direct behaviour. In this context, personality is synonymous with mind." (McNeal 52)

While defining personality it is only appropriate to remember that the word personality is derived from the Latin word 'persona' which means a mask. One very important observation that has been made in this regard is:

…in early Latin, persona means "a mask" - dramatis personae are the masks which actors wear in a play, that is, the characters that are represented. Etymologically and historically, then, the personality is the character that is manifested in public. In modern psychology and sociology this corresponds rather closely to the role behaviour of a differentiated person. From one point of view, this constitutes a disguise. Just as the outer body shields the viscera from view, and clothing the genitals, so the public personality shields the private personality from the curious and censorious world. It also operates to conceal underlying motivations from the individual's own consciousness. (Murray and Kluckhohn 40)

The study of personality is a broad area and includes various theoretical constructs, conceptual approaches and research methodologies. The major theories include psychodynamic perspective, humanistic perspective, trait perspective, behaviourist perspective and cognitive perspective. The major personality theorists include Sigmund Freud, Carl Gustav Jung, Alfred Adler, Karen Horney, Erich Fromm, Harry Stack Sullivan, Erik Erikson, Carl R. Rogers, Abraham H. Maslow, Rollo May, Gordon W. Allport, Raymond B. Cattell, Henry A. Murray, B. F. Skinner, George A. Kelly and Albert Bandura.

The present study deals with Gordon W. Allport's and Henry A. Murray's theories of personality. The main aim is to study and analyse Michael Jackson's personality with the application of Allport's and Murray's personality theories. The thesis focuses on Michael Jackson as an individual and how his character and personality are similar in several aspects to the character and personality of the picaro - the antihero of picaresque novels. It is essential to study in detail the theories of both the psychologists in order to successfully use them as a tool to analyse the personalities of Michael Jackson and the picaro.

Gordon Willard Allport (1897 - 1967) was a premier American psychologist who is often called the father of Personality theory. He is considered to be the founder of personality psychology as he was one of the first psychologists to have focused extensively on the study of personality. He was the first psychologist who gave thorough thought to the concept of traits in a person. He developed a theory called the 'trait theory' and opined that the trait was the most appropriate way of describing and studying personality.

Allport approached psychology and the issue of personality in a unique way. Allport "revolutionized the world of psychology by moving the study of the personality into the mainstream of psychology. His theories are still debated, and he is considered one of the most controversial psychologists of our time." (Hall and Lindzey 260) Allport's opinions differed from other psychologists. He believed in studying healthy and mature individuals. "He felt the study of animals and neurotic people could not lead to conclusions pertinent to normally functioning adults." (Becoming 18)

Secondly, Allport viewed every human being as unique. Therefore, he believed in studying an individual personality as opposed to studying people in common. He criticized scientists for their avoidance of the individual and their prevalent theory that individuality can only be studied by history, art or biography and not by science. He believed that nomothetic methods (general and universal) should be discouraged and idiographic methods (individual) must be encouraged.

If we accept this dogma concerning the scope and limitations of science we shall have to abandon the person as a person. But we are not yet discouraged. That the individual is a system of patterned uniqueness is a fact. That science likes universals and not particulars is also a fact. Yet personality itself is a universal phenomenon though it is found only in individual forms. Since it is a universal phenomenon science must study it; but it cannot study it correctly unless it looks into the individuality of patterning! Such is the dilemma. (Pattern and Growth 9)

Allport stated that there is no correct or incorrect definition of personality, rather all definitions are "full of pitfalls." (Pattern and Growth 28) He defined personality as "a dynamic organization within the individual of those psychophysical systems that determine his unique adjustments to his environment."(Personality 48) Because this definition reflects some unique phrasing and word choices, Allport's own explanations of terminology and phrasing are presented.

Dynamic Organization

The personality is constantly changing, and any definition of personality must acknowledge this change. However, this change does not occur in the normal adult in a haphazard fashion; rather, it occurs within the boundaries of an organization. (Allport, Personality 48) This change occurs in a self -regulating and motivating fashion. This definition of organized change implies the existence of a reciprocal process of disorganization, especially in those personalities marked by progressive disintegration. (Allport, Pattern and Growth 28)

Psychophysical

This term serves as a reminder that personality is neither exclusively physical nor mental. Instead, the organization of the personality fuses the physical and mental in "some inextricable unity." (Allport, Personality 48)

Systems

A system is a complex of elements in mutual interaction. The personality is composed of many systems. A habit, sentiment, trait, concept, or style of behaving are all systems and are latent in the personality even when they are not active. Systems are our "potential for activity." (Allport, Pattern and Growth 28-29)

Determine

Personality is something, and it does something. Personality is active. Allport contended that the latent psychophysical systems, when called into action, either motivate or direct a specific activity or thought. (Pattern and Growth 29) Personality is not synonymous with behaviour or activity; personality is merely the impression that this activity makes on others. It is what lies behind specific acts and within the individual. (Allport, Personality 48) All systems that comprise a single personality are the "determining tendencies." They exert a direct influence on the adjusting and expressive acts which make up the personality. (Allport, Pattern and Growth 29)

Characteristic

All behaviour and thought are characteristic of the person and are unique to that person. Allport acknowledged the use of this term, and the need to define it, appeared redundant in a definition whose very meaning stressed individuality and uniqueness. He used it, though, to "drive the point home." (Pattern and Growth 29)

Behaviour and Thought

Allport used these two terms to cover anything whatsoever an individual might do. A person's main activity, according to Allport, is to adjust to the environment, but he felt it unwise to define personality only in terms of adjustment. He acknowledged the individual also reflects on the environment, strives to master it, and sometimes succeeds in this mastery of the environment. Thought as well as behaviour, then, make for both survival and growth. (Allport, Pattern and Growth 29) The following diagram depicts a comprehensive view of personality.

Allport summarized his own definition of personality:

My own definition of personality is "essentialist." "Personality is what a person "really is," regardless of the way other people perceive his qualities or the methods by which we study them. Our perceptions and our methods may be in error, just as an astronomer may fall short in studying the constitution of a star. But the star is still there, a challenging object for study. My definition does not, of course, deny that a person is variable over time or that his behaviour may change from situation to situation. It says simply that the person has an internal structure and range of characteristics (variable, to be sure, but ascertainable), and it is this structure that we hope to study. (Pattern and Growth 35)

The discussion in detail of Allport's definition of personality and his approach towards both, personality and psychology, leads us to his theory of traits. According to Allport a trait is:

...a generalized and focalized neuropsychic system (peculiar to the individual), with the capacity to render many stimuli functionally equivalent, and to initiate and guide consistent (equivalent) forms of adaptive and expressive behaviour. (Personality 295)

He believed that a trait exists within a person and is there even when a person is alone and away from the observation of others. Secondly, he believed that traits define behaviour and make it consistent. "Traits, we must note from the outset, are not per se observables. Nor are they real entities. You will never be able to place them under a microscope. They are descriptive schemas that are the product of human reason and imagination. They serve a heuristic purpose, as do all other constructs about the world in which we live: namely, they give a conceptual order to our world and make it more comprehensible than it would be without them. That Allport ([1937] 1961), for example, stipulates that traits - or personality for that matter - have neuropsychic referents does not turn them into things (reify them so to speak)." (Dumont 149)

Allport clearly distinguished traits form types.

Unlike traits types always have a biosocial reference. A man can be said to have a trait; but he cannot be said to have a type. Rather he fits a type....types exist not in people or in nature, but rather in the eye of the observer. Type includes more than is in the individual. Traits, on the contrary, are considered wholly within the compass of the individual. The crux of the distinction is that in a "type" the reference point is always some attribute, or cluster of corresponding attributes abstracted from various personalities. (Personality 295-296)

Yet Allport was aware of the limitations involved in the study of traits: generalities of names; variability of emotions; the ability to observe only the act, which is the result of the trait rather than the trait itself. (Allport, Pattern and Growth 333-334) Even with the limitations involved in trait research, Allport believed them to be one of the strongest means for personality study.

He did not blindly study personality traits, but tried to take into account all of the variables, for example:

No trait theory can be sound unless it allows for, and accounts for, the variability of a person's conduct. Pressures from the surrounding environment, the companions he is with, and the counter current in the person himself may delay, augment, distort, or inhibit completely the conduct that we would normally expect to issue from a person's traits. . . . All this is true; yet in a person's stream of activity there is, besides a variable portion, likewise a constant portion; and it is this constant portion we seek to designate with the concept of trait." (Pattern and Growth 333)

Allport draws a distinction between common traits and individual traits. A common trait identifies a trait which to some extent is reflected in many personalities. An individual trait, however, or personal disposition (as Allport came to call them), is peculiar to the individual. He points out that all traits are unique and no one trait can be found in more than one person. But at the same time for the science of personality and psychology to function properly it is important to compare individuals. Allport states that "for all their ultimate differences, normal persons within a given culture-area tend to develop a limited number of roughly comparable modes of adjustment. The original endowment of most human beings, their stages of growth, and the demands of their particular society, are sufficiently standard and comparable to lead to some basic modes of adjustment that from individual to individual are approximately the same."(Pattern and Growth 298)

Common traits are developed, according to Allport, because the human nature develops similar modes of adjusting to a similar environment, though varying degrees of individualism still exist (Pattern and Growth 349). Allport felt common traits were less important to the individual personality because they actually reflect the social mores developed through socialization, rather than personal choices. Therefore, common traits are constantly changing according to the growth, development, and fads of a particular society. Allport felt the very nature of the common trait made it less influential to the individual. Individual traits, on the other hand, "have the capacity to initiate and guide consistent forms of adaptive and stylistic behaviour." (Allport, Pattern and Growth 373).

However, Allport felt that for a complete and thorough study of personality both common and individual traits are essential: "...individual and common trait [concepts] are complementary in the study of personality. What is unique and what is universal both need to be explored." (Personality 299)

Allport described traits by names. He identified approximately eighteen thousand words in the English language which named distinctive forms of personal behaviour. Though incomplete, Allport believed that, this list of words had an infinite scope. Allport categorized the 18,000 trait names: 30% have an evaluative flavour; 25% are comparative; 25% refer to temporary states of mind, mood, emotion, or activity, and 25% are metaphorical (Pattern and Growth 354-355).

Allport was dissatisfied with the limitations of verbal tags. He recognized the weaknesses found in the subjective and limited nature of labelling:

A trait of personality may or may not coincide with some well-defined, conventional social concept. . . It would be ideal if we could . . . find our traits first and then name them. But honesty, loyalty, neatness and tact, though encrusted with social significance, may likewise represent true traits of personality. The danger is that, in devising scales for their measurement, we may be bound by the conventional meanings and thus be led away from the precise integration as it exists in a given individual. Where possible, it would be well for us to find our traits first and then seek devaluated terms with which to characterize our discoveries. (Becoming 135)

Allport understood that no single act is the product of only one trait, and a trait is only one factor in determining an act. (Allport, Pattern and Growth 334 and 360) This recognition of the complexity of the human nature led Allport to the conclusion that it is ridiculous to try to reduce human nature to a single element simply for the sake of explanation:

We view personality-- in the only way it can be intelligibly viewed--as a network of organization, composed of systems within systems, some systems of small magnitude and somewhat peripheral to the central or propriate structure, other systems of wider scope at the core of the total edifice; some easy to set into action, others more dormant; some so culturally conforming that they can readily be viewed as "common"; others definitely idiosyncratic. But in the last analysis this network-complying billions and billions of nerve cells, fashioned by a one-time heredity and by environmental experiences never duplicated-is ultimately unique. (Pattern and Growth 360)

Although there is a certain degree of consistency found within the personality, the personality is not completely predictable. The inconsistency of dispositions could be due to a specific situation, or to the actual existence of opposite dispositions within an individual (Allport, Becoming 135). Allport felt that contradictory behaviour is often not contradictory at all, but a contrasting stylistic demonstration of the same personal disposition. What must be identified is the deepest disposition that is operating within an individual:

Take the case of Dr. D., always neat about his person and desk, punctilious about lecture notes, outlines, and files; his personal possessions are not only in order but carefully kept under lock and key. Dr. D is also in charge of the departmental library. In this duty he is careless; he leaves the library door unlocked, and books are lost; it does not bother him that dust accumulates. Does this contradiction in behaviour mean that D lacks personal dispositions? Not at all. He has two opposed stylistic dispositions, one of orderliness and one of disorderliness. Different situations arouse different dispositions. Pursuing the case further, the duality is at least partly explained by the fact that D has one cardinal (motivational) disposition from which these contrasting styles proceed. The outstanding fact about his personality is that he is a self -centred egotist who never acts for other people's interests, but always for his own. This cardinal self -centeredness (for which there is abundant evidence) demands orderliness for himself, but not for others. (Allport, Pattern and Growth 363)

A particular trait can be identified and determined in a particular person only if the behaviour it characterises occurs repeatedly in by and large similar situations. According to Allport:

A specific act is always the product of many determinants, not only of lasting sets, but of momentary pressures in the person and in the situation. It is only the repeated occurrence of acts having the same significance (equivalence of response) following upon a definable range of stimuli having the same personal significance (equivalence of stimuli) that makes necessary the inference of traits and personal dispositions. (Pattern and Growth 374)

Allport put forward his classic doctrine of traits:

A trait has more than nominal existence.

A trait is more than a generalized habit.

A trait is dynamic, or at least determinative.

The existence of a trait may be established empirically or at least statistically.

Traits are only relatively independent of each other.

A trait of personality, psychologically considered, is not the same as a moral quality.

Acts, and even habits, that are inconsistent with a trait are not proof of the nonexistence of the trait.

A trait may be viewed either in the light of the personality which contains it, or in the light of its distribution in the population at large. (What is a Trait 368)

Allport reasoned that some traits have more influence on an individual than other traits. He categorized these traits into three levels: Cardinal traits, Central traits and Secondary traits.

Cardinal Traits

A cardinal trait is so pervasive and outstanding in any given individual that almost every act can be traced to its influence and almost every aspect of a person's life is touched by it. A person is so dominated by the cardinal trait that it can rarely be hidden from others. (Allport, Pattern and Growth 365) Such a trait is so dominant in a person that the person comes to be known for that trait. It becomes almost synonymous to his personality. Examples of cardinal traits can be: narcissist and Casanova. A cardinal trait is considered to be rare and tends to develop in an individual at a later stage in his life. A person does not necessarily have only one cardinal trait, and this trait may change as a person matures and changes. (Allport, Pattern and Growth 365)

Central Traits

A central trait is less dominant as compared to a cardinal trait. Central traits form the foundation of an individual's personality. "Central traits are easily detected characteristics within a person, traits that all people have a certain number of, five to ten on an average according to Allport." (Schultz 201)

Secondary Traits

On a less conspicuous level of influence are secondary dispositions. These traits are less generalized and less consistent than central dispositions. (Allport, Pattern and Growth 365) They might reflect something only a best friend would know. (Schultz 201).

Allport did not set down any particular number of dispositions an individual might possess.

How many dispositions has a person is a most audacious question, and can be answered in only a preliminary and speculative way. For many reasons the question is audacious: Behaviour is in continuous flow; dispositions never express themselves singly; people manifest contradictory dispositions in contradictory situations; furthermore, diagnostic methods are too ill developed to enable us to discover the answer. (Pattern and Growth 366)

Allport's trait theory can be summed up through the following diagram.

Habits and attitudes are often confused with traits because of their similarities. Allport clearly defined habits and attitudes to avoid all confusion. According to Allport, a habit can function as a trait, but a trait is not always a habit. Habits are inflexible and specific in response to specific stimuli; traits are more generalized and variable in expression. (Allport, Pattern and Growth 346) A number of habits may be blended together to develop a trait; however, habits do not integrate automatically into traits. They do so when the person has some general concept or self image which leads to the fusion of the habit into a trait. (Allport, Pattern and Growth 346) Allport cites the example of a child brushing his teeth.

A young child may be regarded as forming a specific habit when he learns (with difficulty) to brush his teeth night and morning. For some years this habit may stand alone, aroused only by appropriate commands or by the appropriate environmental situation. With the passing of years, however, brushing teeth becomes not only automatic (as is the way of habits) but likewise firmly woven into a much wider system of habits, viz., a trait of personal cleanliness. . . . The adult is uncomfortable if he omits brushing the teeth from his daily schedule, not only because a single habit is frustrated, but because the omission violates a general demand for cleanliness. (Allport, Personality 292)

Allport explained that a trait is a "fusion of habit and endowment rather than a colligation or chain of habits alone." (Personality 293) The transformation of habit to trait is simply when the motivation shifts from simple conditioned responses to a sheer liking of the activity as motivation. Then "trait has become autonomous." (Allport, Personality 293)

Allport distinguishes between a trait and an attitude in two ways. First, an attitude always has an object of reference; whereas, a trait does not direct itself specifically toward something. Second, an attitude is usually favourable or unfavourable, for or against. (Allport, Pattern and Growth 347) It involves a judgement or evaluation (pro or con), which a trait does not. (Schultz 200)

Motivation

According to Allport, the pivot of the theory of personality is the analysis of the nature of motivation. He defined motivation as any internal condition in a person that induces action or thought. (Pattern and Growth 196) Allport also believed a theory of motivation should meet four requirements: contemporaneity, pluralistic, cognitive process, and concrete uniqueness. (Schultz 201)

Contemporaneity

A theory of motivation must acknowledge the contemporaneity of motives. (Pattern and Growth 220) In other words, the importance of the present should be stressed: "Motives leading to activity, it may be argued, are always operative at the time the activity takes place." Allport added, "That which drives, drives now." (The Use of Personal 80) Allport was aware, however, that in complex adult motives the past is, to some degree, alive in the present. He considered it, however, the task of the psychologist to discover "how much of the past is fire and how much of it is ashes." (Allport, Pattern and Growth 219) To think that the motives of mankind are essentially unchanged from birth until death seemed to Allport inadequate at best. (Pattern and Growth 203) That which once motivated, does not necessarily motivate always. It is important to realize the past is only important if it exists as a present or current motivating force, or is "dynamically active in the present." (Allport, Pattern and Growth 220)

More precisely stated, it is the unfinished structure that has this dynamic power. A finished structure is static; but a growing structure, tending toward a given direction of closure, has the capacity to subsidiate the guide conduct in conformity with its movement. (Allport, Becoming 91)

Pluralistic

Allport believed that a theory of motivation must have room for multiple motives. Motivation cannot be reduced to one general phase or drive.

Some motives are transient, some recurring; some are momentary, others persistent; some unconscious, others conscious; some opportunistic, others propriate; some tension-reducing, others tension-maintaining. Motives are so diverse in type that we find it difficult to discover the common denominator. About all we can say is that a person's motives include all that he is trying (consciously or unconsciously, reflexly or deliberately) to do. (Pattern and Growth 221)

Simplification does not explain motivation. Neither does reducing "its strands to the simplified model of the machine, the animal, the child, or the pathological." (Pattern and Growth 222) A theory of motivation should allow that there may be some truth in each theory. (Pattern and Growth 221)

Cognitive Process

A theory of motivation must acknowledge the importance of the cognitive processes - e.g. planning and intention. (Allport, Pattern and Growth 222) Allport's requirement of cognitive process gives emphasis to the individual's conscious plans and intentions. These conscious intentions represent, above all else, the individual's primary mode of addressing the future. (Becoming 89) Thus, cognitive process stresses the importance of the future in the motivating process of the personality.

Alport believed that all individuals possess the power of thought and it is this thought process which leads them to form decisions. Hence, an individual's intent should be central to understanding his personality.

Allport defined intention as "what an individual is trying to do," and he included several features of motivation derived from the concept of intention:

The cognitive and emotive processes in personality become fused into an integral urge.

The intention, like all motivation, exists in the present, but has strong future orientation. Use of the concept helps us to trace the course of motivation as lives are actually lived--into the future and not, as most theories do, backward into the past. It tells us what sort of future a person is trying to bring about and this is the most important question we can ask about any mortal.

The term has a flavour of "tension maintained" and thus reflects the true condition of all long range motives.

When we identify major intentions in a life we have a device for holding subsidiary trends in perspective. (Pattern and Growth 223).

Allport believed the present should be explained more in terms of the future, not the past. It is more important to identify what a person intends to do and how they are presently acting out this intention, than to look toward the past of an individual's childhood or development.

Unfortunately the concept of intention is not prominent in current psychology. The reason is that it connotes purpose, the efficacy of conscious planning, and a "pull" that man's image of the future exerts on his present conduct. . . . the more favoured "physicalistic" conception would say that he is pushed by his motives (not pulled by his intentions). Many psychologists would say that "drives" take entire care of what we here call intention. Yet drives as such are blind. They do not allow for organization and direction by cognitive attitudes, by foresight, by cortical control. (Allport, Pattern and Growth 224)

Concrete Uniqueness

Concrete uniqueness of motives is essential in the theory of motivation. Motives must be concrete and not abstract. Motives should be identified in concrete terms rather than abstract terms. Abstract terms classify motives in only general or common terms. Hence, there is a lack of clarity and exactness.

Allport gave the following example:

Concrete: Patricia loves to entertain guests in her home.

Abstract: The desire for competence is the root.

It is true that Patricia is in a sense manifesting "competence" in her entertaining. But there are surely a million kinds of competence in life which do not interest Patricia at all. Her motive is highly concrete. Entertaining, not abstract competence, is the bread of life to her, and any abstract scheme misses that point completely, and therefore sheds little or no light on her personality as it actually functions. It is a caricature of a person to view his interests merely as changes rung on a common pattern. (Pattern and Growth 226)

Functional Autonomy

Allport developed the motivational theory of functional autonomy. Though he himself believed that the theory did not explain all human motivation yet he felt that it was more effective than the other motivational theories. He felt it was an attempt to escape "the limitations of uniform, rigid, abstract, backward looking theories," and to recognize instead "the spontaneous, changing, forward-looking, concrete character that much adult motivation surely has." (Pattern and Growth 227)

Functional autonomy regards adult motives as varied, and as self-sustaining, contemporary systems, growing out of antecedent systems, but functionally, independent of them. Just as a child gradually outgrows dependence on his parents, becomes self -determining, and outlives his parents, so it is with many motives. The transition may be gradual but it is nonetheless drastic. As the individual (or the motive) matures, the bond with the past is broken. The tie is historical, not functional. (Pattern and Growth 227)

Motivation is always contemporary. (Allport, Pattern and Growth 227) Motive, in the normal, mature adult, is not functionally related to the past experiences in which the original motivation may have first appeared. The motive has become independent of the original circumstances. Therefore, the adult motive cannot be understood by exploring the childhood of the adult because the motive has changed. It may have originated in childhood, but time and maturity have developed it into an entirely different motivation. Allport explains:

An ex-sailor has a craving for the sea, a musician longs to return to his instrument after an enforced absence, a miser continues to build up his useless pile. Now the sailor may have first acquired his love for the sea as an incident in his struggle to earn a living. The sea was "secondary reinforcement" for his hunger drive. But now the ex-sailor is perhaps a wealthy banker; the original motive is destroyed, and yet the hunger for the sea persists and even increases in intensity. The musician may first have been stung by a slur on his inferior performance into mastering his instrument; but now he is safely beyond these taunts, and finds that he loves his instrument more than anything else in the world. The miser perhaps learned his habit of thrift in dire necessity, but the miserliness persists and becomes stronger with the years even after the necessity has been relieved. (Pattern and Growth 227)

The activity of a particular individual, according to Allport, originated due to some earlier motive which now no longer exists. Yet that activity now serves itself. The adult motive now serves the self-image or self-ideal of the person. "Childhood is no longer in the saddle; maturity is." (Pattern and Growth 229) Allport feels that childhood causes behaviour need not be investigated at all because all adult motives are functionally autonomous. "A functionally autonomous motive is the personality … [and we] need not, and cannot, look 'deeper.'" (Pattern and Growth 244)

However, functional autonomy is not always achieved. If in adulthood a person does not mature, motivation does not become functionally autonomous. Instead the motivation continues to be tied to the original activity found in childhood. This person Allport considered immature, and thus emotionally ill. (Schultz 208) For example, what if the young musician had not developed a love for the instrument, but continued to play out of anger and spite over those first hurtful words. His actions could not be considered functionally autonomous; neither would he be considered a normally functioning, mature adult.

Maturity

He also distinguished between maturity and adulthood, recognizing that maturity of personality does not have any necessary relation to chronological age. (Pattern and Growth 277) "Although the healthy adult personality is complicated by the presence of numerous dispositions, intentions, and instincts, it is organized around those matters that are most personal and important." (Ewen 266)

Allport believed that a normally functioning mature personality demonstrates the following:

The extension of the sense of self to persons and activities beyond the self. (Pattern and Growth 283) It is not enough for a person to simply be busy with the activities of life. Instead, mature individuals must involve a personal part of themselves (while still maintaining their individuality) in at least one of the spheres of human concern: economic, educational, recreational, political, domestic, and religious. (Pattern and Growth 284-5) Self is important, but the mature individual is able to decentre personal attention and extend that attention beyond the self.

Warm relations of self toward others. (Pattern and Growth 285) Allport believed this concept of warm relations went beyond intimacy to include compassion, and was valid in terms of individual and general relationships. Intimacy is reflected by an individual's capacity to develop deep and lasting relationships, yet this intimacy must be balanced by compassion. Allport related compassion to a person's ability to respect and appreciate another person as an individual. In other words, the intimacy found in a relationship must never impede the freedom of another individual to find their own identity. (Pattern and Growth 285)

Emotional security (self - acceptance) (Pattern and Growth 287): Self - acceptance includes the ability to avoid overreaction to matters pertaining to temporary situations. Mature individuals may not be happy and positive at all times, but they have learned to accept their emotional state so it does not interfere with the well-being of others or themselves. They are able to express their convictions and feelings with consideration for the convictions and feelings of others, and they possess a sense of proportion and reality. (Pattern and Growth 288)

Realistic perceptions, skills, and assignments. (Pattern and Growth 288) Maturity is not a reflection of a particular IQ score. Maturity, rather, is the ability to be realistic in the observations of life, to be able to solve objective problems, and to be able to be "problem-centred." This means that mature individuals will be in close touch with "the real world," they will see objects, people, and situations for what they are, and they will have important work to do. (Pattern and Growth 290)

Self-objectification: Insight and Humour. (Pattern and Growth 288) Allport believed that insight into one's self and a sense of humour work together to create self-objectification: the ability to look at oneself objectively. Mature individuals who have the most complete sense of proportion concerning their own qualities and cherished values are able to perceive their incongruities and absurdities in certain settings. (Pattern and Growth 293)

A unifying philosophy of life. (Pattern and Growth 295) Allport believed maturity required a clear and comprehensive theory regarding life. This theory (or theories) can be considered practical, spiritual, or philosophical in nature. Despite the individual preference toward the nature of the actual philosophy, a philosophy of life which unifies and directs all aspects of a person's life should develop in the mature individual. (Schultz 208)

"Allport believed that an individual's philosophy is founded upon their values, or basic convictions that he holds about what is and is not of real importance in life." (Hjelle and Ziegler 202-206) A unifying philosophy gives meaning to one's life. It can be evaluated in term of value - orientation or value - direction. Allport developed an inventory containing 45 questions (The Study of Values), which he felt gave insight into the value-direction of an individual. He built on the theories of E. Spranger, a European psychologist, in regard to six value-directions found in the individual: theoretical, economic, aesthetic social, political and religious. Of the six values presented, Allport felt his inventory on values showed that only one or two values were dominant in any given individual's life, although all of the values were present to some degree. (Allport, Pattern and Growth 297)

The values are:

Theoretical - This value is concerned with the pursuit of truth, usually through the empirical, critical, and rational methods. (Pattern and Growth 297) For example, by becoming a scientist or a philosopher.

Economic - This value is concerned with what is practical, useful, and relevant. The strength of this value might be manifested in some aspect of the business world. (Pattern and Growth 297)

Aesthetic - This value is concerned with beauty and artistic experiences. This value is not limited to artistic talent, but includes also the enjoyment or pursuit of the aesthetic. (Pattern and Growth 298)

Social - This value is concerned with human relations and the love of others, whether conjugal, filial, friendly, or philanthropic. (Pattern and Growth 298)

Political: This value is concerned with power and influence, but is not limited to the narrow world of politics. (Pattern and Growth 299) The pursuit of power and control can be found anywhere from general occupation goals to personal relationships.

Religious: This value is concerned with unity, harmony, and understanding of the world (or universe) as a whole. It strives to relate the individual life to the workings of the cosmos. (Pattern and Growth 299) It is the pursuit for a spiritual understanding as an end-in-itself.

The classification of values is partly nomothetic and partly idiographic. These six values contribute vitally to the integration of a mature personality.

Another major area that Allport considered important for the analysis of personality is behaviour. He believes that the physical body - that which is visible to the eye - reveals considerable amount of information about a person and hence, leads to a better understanding of his personality.

Behaviour

Allport carried out extensive research in the area of behaviour. He identified two types of behaviour: expressive behaviour and coping behaviour. Expressive behaviour is so spontaneous that it shows one's true personality. It has no specific goal or purpose, and is usually unconsciously displayed. Coping behaviour, on the other hand, is consciously planned and formally carried out toward a specific purpose (directing a change in one's environment). He believed all behaviour was both expressive and coping in nature, although one is usually more influential than the other:

Every act that we perform copes with our environment. Even rest and sleep and play are no exceptions. There is a task in hand (the what of behaviour). We must repair a lock, seek relaxation, summon a doctor, answer a question, or blink a speck of dust from our eyes. To cope with the task we employ our reflexes and habits or call upon our skills, our judgment and knowledge. But into this stream of activity there enter deeper trends in our nature. There are styles of repairing locks, calling a doctor, relaxing, answering a question, or blinking the eye. Every action betrays both a coping and an expressive aspect. (Pattern and Growth 426)

Allport summarized the difference between coping and expressive behaviour:

Coping is purposive and specifically motivated; expressive behaviour is not.

Coping is determined by the needs of the moment and by the situation; expressive movement reflects deeper personal structure.

Coping is formally elicited; expressive behaviour spontaneously "emitted."

Coping can be more readily controlled (inhibited, modified, conventionalized); expressive behaviour is harder to alter and often uncontrollable. (Changing our style of handwriting, e.g., can be kept up for only a short time)

Coping usually aims to change the environment; expressive behaviour aims at nothing, though it may incidentally have effects (as when our manner of answering questions in an interview creates a good impression and lands us the job).

Typically coping is conscious, even though it may employ automatic skills; expressive behaviour generally lies below the threshold of our awareness. (Pattern and Growth 463)

Allport explains, "What an individual is voluntarily doing or saying constitutes the adaptive aspect of his behaviour; how he is doing or saying it, the expressive aspect." (The Use of Personal 111) Coping behaviour can act as a restrainer, sometimes even a destroyer, of the basic rhythms of individual expression. In order to perceive the individuality of expressive behaviour, the focus of behaviour must move beyond the specific intent of an act, beyond the conscious control, and beyond the conventions and skills employed in coping. (Pattern and Growth 465) Allport observes that as people become adults their expressive behaviour becomes more controlled. Consequently this leads to a physically limited expressive behaviour.

He gives the example of a child who is irritable. This child expresses the irritability in almost all aspects of behaviour: crying, whining, fighting, etc. An adult on the other hand might express the same irritability only through restless fingers or shifting eyes. (Pattern and Growth 469) Allport felt this was an example of a broader phenomenon: various features of expression are of unequal significance in different people.

Some faces are open books; some are "poker faces." For some people gestures are merely conventional; for others, highly individual. Sometimes the style of clothing or the handwriting seems "just like" the person; in other cases, entirely non expressive. One person reveals himself primarily in his speech; another, in his posture and gait; a third, in his style of clothing or ornamentation. As a promising hypothesis we suggest that every person has one or two leading expressive features which reveal his true nature. If this is so, it is somewhat futile to study all people by the same cues, e.g. voice, eyes, or handwriting. The cue that is revealing for one person is not necessarily revealing for another. (Pattern and Growth 469)

Allport also gives the example of public speaking. The speaker communicates with the audience on two levels. The first level is the formal level which includes the content of the speech. This speech is planned and thus constitutes coping behaviour. The second level includes the informal unplanned body movements, gestures, facial expressions, postures, voice modulations etc. These exhibit the expressive behaviour. The speaker might be nervous and this might reflect in his voice or he might stammer. This spontaneous behaviour brings out the true elements of the speaker's personality.

According to Allport, there are various determinants of expressive behaviour, emotions and mood being two of them. But he believes that these two factors can only determine the intensity of expression whereas the pattern of expression remains the remains the same.

Other determinants which affect behaviour to some degree are:

Cultural tradition

Regional convention

Passing emotional moods

Conditions of strain and fatigue

Age

Sex

Native muscular structure and bodily build

Conditions of health and disease

Accidental deformations of the body

Special training (e.g. Dramatics, military drill)

Conditions of physical environment (e.g. The ground and climatic factors in walking)

Any region of the body which can move is--either in rest or in that movement--expressive; consequently, any region of the body can be analyzed for its expressive nature, whether separately or in combination. (Pattern and Growth 479) Allport considered it impossible to discuss them all or to try to discuss ne completely. However, he discussed a few examples in order to demonstrate the significance of this research.

The Face

Allport considered the face to be the most expressive region of the body due to the fact that it is mostly unclothed and the most visible part of the body. (Pattern and Growth 479) The face contains several features which are very expressive themselves; the eyes, facial muscles, the mouth, eyebrows and the forehead. According to Allport, most research has been done on not what a facial expression reveals but on what the observer interprets it to reveal. (Pattern and Growth 480)

Voice and Speech

While most of the research has been done on speech, it has been found that an untrained voice is comparatively a more expressive instrument. The following tendencies have been revealed though through research: untrained voices are more often correctly matched in terms of actual personality and true expression than trained voices; age can usually be distinguished within a ten year accuracy; other physical features (height, complexion, appearance) cannot be distinguished with any accuracy; deeper traits (such as dominance, extra-version, etc.) can be judged with a fair success; complete sketches of personality can be matched with an even higher degree of success. This means voice-as-a-pat tern is highly congruent with personality-as-a-whole. (Pattern and Growth 483)

Posture, Gesture and Gait

Posture, gesture, and gait are affected by the influence of coping motivations, expressive motivations, cultural conventions, and personality. (Allport, Pattern and Growth 485) Allport quotes an anthropological investigation's finding that the human body is capable of assuming about one thousand different steady postures; that is, static positions that can be maintained comfortably for a period of time. (Pattern and Growth 486) Posture during sleep is also highly consistent in regards to a personal characteristic. Allport recognized gestures as highly individualized and revealing; however, he felt little research existed that was not artificial in nature. (Pattern and Growth 486) In regards to gait, Allport quotes a study which suggests a person's gait can be measured by regularity, speed, pressure, length of stride, elasticity, definiteness of direction, variability and rhythm.

Coping behaviour is taken as the foreground and expressive behaviour as the background in personality analysis. Allport felt that it was easier to document the research on coping behaviour in scientific terms but expressive behaviour was more important in terms of personality analysis. Therefore, Allport said that more research should be done on expressive behaviour because of its potential insight into the human personality. (Pattern and Growth 494)

Personality Analysis

Allport is credited with writing more about the specific methods appropriate to personality assessment than almost any other theorist. (Schultz 209) As is typical of the work of Allport, he recognized that there was no one best method of personality assessment due to the complexities of the human personality. Allport believed that knowledge of others is available only in fragments, so at best people only catch "glimpses" of each other. (Pattern and Growth 407)

No person can understand any other person completely, for it is impossible for one human being to share directly the motives, thoughts, and feelings of another. This unbridgeable chasm between mind and mind has led philosophers to ponder the egocentric predicament of the human race, and poets to lament the ultimate solitude of each soul. It is, they assure us, only through circuitous routes and through the study of "shadows" that we are able to achieve our imperfect glimpses of one another. Since psychology can do nothing to change this "metaphysical solitude," it must recognize at the outset that the problem of understanding people is always a problem of partial understanding. We may understand one another relatively well but never completely. (Allport, Personality 499)

Allport believed that the perception of someone's personality is a subjective analysis based on an objective reality. This subjectivity can lead to errors in analysing a personality. Three of the main errors which Allport discussed are discussed below as they are relatively more important.

Emotions: Emotions play an important role in perception. Emotional bias affects both the message being sent and the way the message is perceived. Even if one strives for an objective perspective, personal feelings turn the objective perspective into a subjective perspective. A person in love is often a poor judge of a lover's personality. (Pattern and Growth 498) Research shows, for example, that when in a threatening or humiliating situation, other people are rated as far "less attractive" than in situations which flatters the individual's self-esteem. (Pattern and Growth 498)

Openness: Some people are open about themselves and reveal their natures to others whereas some people like to keep their lives or certain personal matters a secret. Therefore, people vary widely in the amount of information they are willing to disclose, and in whom they are willing to confide. (Pattern and Growth 499) This willingness to disclose oneself is an essential factor in accurate perceptions, yet it does not necessarily imply a conscious disclosure. Some people, in their spontaneous daily activities, allow their natures to be revealed, while other people analyze closely their actions in order not to reveal their motives. (Pattern and Growth 500)

First Impressions: There is a famous saying that the first impression is the often the last impression. An immediate judgment made upon meeting an individual for the first time often undergoes a change as contact with that person increases. Because Allport believed knowledge of others comes indirectly and in fragments, he was highly sceptical of the judgement which tries to instantly organize a complex pattern of interrelated cues. (Pattern and Growth 501) Yet, first impressions are often long standing, and despite their inaccurate nature, are very difficult to change.

Allport listed eleven different techniques for assessing the human personality:

constitutional and physiological diagnosis

socio-cultural setting, membership, role

self -appraisal

conduct sampling

ratings

test and scales

projective techniques

depth analysis

expressive behaviour

synoptic procedures

personal documents and case studies (Pattern and Growth 396)

All of these techniques use the basic scientific (and common sense) method of observation followed by an interpretation of the significance of what has been observed. (Allport, Pattern and Growth 396) Allport acknowledged that the list of assessment techniques did not include literary or philosophical contributions to assessment, although he did recognize the contribution of literature and philosophy. (Pattern and Growth 396)

1. Constitutional and Physiological Diagnosis: How the biological aspects of the human body correlate to the personality are important. (Pattern and Growth 398)

2. Socio-cultural setting, Membership, Status and Role: Sociocultural studies analyze the framework within which the personality develops: social conventions, customs, codes, religious and occupational groups, etc. Through these studies a certain amount of "probable knowledge" can be ascertained in regards to trait and behaviour.

It has been argued that such knowledge of membership is the best predictor of a person's future conduct. To know that he or she is an Arab, an army engineer, a Salvation Army lassie, an actor, or even a mother, is to know a good deal about the probable present and future course of the life in question. (Pattern and Growth 400)

3. Self-appraisal: Self - appraisal includes all methods that invite individuals to report explicitly and deliberately concerning selected aspects of their own personality. (Pattern and Growth 410) The individual's response, whether correct or incorrect gives an insight into his personality.

4. Conduct Sampling: Conduct sampling is the systematic observation of behaviour in an everyday situation. Time sampling or time budgeting spot checks behaviour at chosen intervals either through observation, (time-sampling) or a written record which is later analyzed (time-budgeting). (Pattern and Growth 414-415)

5. Ratings: This formal technique estimates the strength of one or more qualities in a personality based on direct acquaintance with the personality and compared with other people with respect to a particular trait. (Pattern and Growth 418)

6. Expressive Behaviour and other Assessment Techniques: Expressive behaviour has been discussed above along with coping behaviour. The other types of assessing techniques discussed by Allport are based on scientific and analytical aids. They are tests and scales, depth analysis, and synoptic procedures.

7. Personal Documents and Case Studies: Allport had a strong interest in personal documents and conducted an extensive research in this area.

No understanding of general laws is possible without some degree of acquaintance with particulars. If we may assume that the concrete and the general are of equal importance in the production of psychological understanding, it follows that case materials (including personal documents) should claim half of the psychologist's time and attention. (The Use of Personal 151)

Allport also saw the importance of personal documents in interdisciplinary terms: He realized they were of interest not only to the psychologist but to the historian, biographer, and novelist. (Pattern and Growth 401) He defined a personal document as "any freely written or spoken record that intentionally or unintentionally yields information regarding the structure, dynamics, and functioning of the author's mental life." (The Use of Personal xii) These include both first person and third person documents: autobiographies, whether comprehensive or topical; diaries, whether intimate or daily log-inventories; letters; open-ended questionnaires (but not standardized tests); verbatim recordings, including interviews, confessions, narrative; certain literary compositions; case studies; life-histories; biographies. (Pattern and Growth 401) Allport further explains:

As a self-revealing record of experience and conduct the personal document is usually, though not always, produced spontaneously, recorded by the subject himself, and intended only for confidential use. Its themes naturally revolve around the life of the writer, its manner of approach is naturally subjective (phenomenological). Such documents vary greatly in candour, scope, authenticity, and psychological value. Sometimes they are deceptive and trivial; but sometimes they represent distillations of the most profound and significant experiences of human life. And always they are interesting to the psychologist who must ask even of the deceptive and trivial documents why they were written and, further, why they are dull or deceptive. (The Use of Personal xiii)

An important consideration in personal documents is determining the original motivation for the document's existence. Allport listed thirteen such motivations in order to illustrate a methodological problem:

Unless we know how and why the document came into being we cannot decide how much trust to place in it, nor can we evaluate its completeness of coverage. (Pattern and Growth 403)

He felt it was highly unlikely though that only one specific reason would motivate the writing of a personal document. (The Use of Personal 69) He identified and explained each motive:

1. Special pleading: A writer may outdo himself to prove that he is more sinned against than sinning. Perhaps no autobiography is entirely free from self- justification, but the intensity of the motive varies greatly from document to document.

2. Exhibitionism: Closely related is the document in which egotism runs riot. The author seeks to display himself --both sins and virtues--in as vivid a light as possible. Rousseau opens his Confessions with the following bit of self -display: "I have entered upon a performance which is without example, whose accomplishment will have no imitator. I mean to present my fellow-mortals with a man in all the integrity of nature; and this man shall be myself." (Rousseau 7)

3. Desire for order: Just as there are people who continually tidy their rooms and order their possessions, so there are diary keepers who cannot sleep at night until certain experiences of the day are entered in writing. This motive seems compulsive but the product may be valuable simply because it is circumstantial, as in the case of Pepys' famous diary.

4. Literary appeal: Many personal documents are written in an artistic form to give the author and reader a sense of symmetry and perfection. The result may be as idyllic as Selma Lagerlof's Marbacka or as vigorous as Richard Wright's Black Roy.

5. Securing personal perspective: Many sincere documents are attempts to take stock at a crossroads in life, often in the middle age H.G. Wells gives this as his prime motivation for writing Experiment in Autobiography.

6. Catharsis: Many documents are written to secure relief from tension. Documents of this type are both action-substitutes and action -silencers. The writer who cannot gain relief in action may express himself in a rush of writing.

7. Monetary gain: Sometimes students, the unemployed, refugees, are attracted by the psychologist's offer of payment in return for autobiographical documents. Judging from productions under this incentive the quality is not necessarily compromised. But whenever cash fetches forth good documents it is probable that the authors were attracted to the task for other reasons as well.

8. Assignment: In college courses students can be invited to write autobiographies.

9. Assisting in therapy: A patient who produces an autobiography or other personal document for his therapist does so in order to assist in his own cure. Although documents of this type are likely to be trustworthy, they are tipped toward the side of disorder than to normal functioning.

10. Redemption and social reincorporation: The confessions of the ex-criminal, the spy, the alcoholic, the dope addict contain implicit pleas for forgiveness and social reacceptance. They are generally motivated also by a true conversion and desire to help others.

11. Public service: Similar are documents motivated to achieve a social or political reform. Clifford Beers in A Mind That Found Itself wished to improve the lot of the insane. Autobiographies of some Negroes, set