Four Fold Flowering
Four Fold Flowering
Four Fold Flowering
Fourfold flowering of personality concepts Our account of the next 50 years of personality
psychology is framed in terms of the four elements or classes of theory and variables and theories
introduced by Winter (1996): “traits, motives, cognitions, and social context”.
1) Personality traits:
In personality psychology, the concept of trait has been used to denote consistent inter
correlated patterns of behavior, especially expressive or stylistic behavior (see Winter et al.,
1998, pp. 232-233). Personality psychologists have used three different strategies.
I Murray's Explorations in Personal•ity the Thematic Apperception Test is most famous and
widely used. Although psychologists developed many ways to interpret and score the TAT.
Rogers's (1959) concept of actualization as a motivational force, i.e., that capacities create
motivation;
Self-Related Personality Variables: “Self" related variables in personality psychology: the self,
self-esteem, selfmonitoring, and self-awareness. Classic early 20th-century concepts of the role
of the "generalized other" (George Herbert Mead) and the "looking-glass self" (Charles 12
Horton Cooley) were blended in with later conceptions to create the symbolic interactionism
approach. With the advent of postmodernism and the notion of multiple selves (Gergen, 1991)
came the related personality concept of a "dialogical self" (Hermans, Kempen, & van Loon,
1992).
Marcia and his colleagues developed methods for meas•uring different aspects of the identity
concept. Given its conceptual status as a bridge between the individual and society, identity also
proved particularly useful in analyzing social identity, or the role that social variables, such as
gender, race, class, and nationality play in the formation.
Since cognitive per•sonality theory focuses on internal processes that are in principle
modifiable, rather than on objec•tive conditions of existence, as the major media•tors (if not
"causes") of behavior and well-being, it is especially congenial to an individualist (rather than
collectivist or contextual) perspec•tive.
The culture and personality movement was born in the 1930s, as anthropologists and
psychoanalysts became interested in each other's disciplines. The underlying theoretical notion
was that a cultures distinctive pattern of childrearing, derived from its broader characteristics
and values, formed distinctive personalities in its children; thus the adults in each culture would
have similar or "modal" adult personalities.
By the late 1950s, however, the culture and personality movement seemed to have run its
course. Cul•ture and personality research, they argued, over•simplified "culture" by assuming
uniformity and homogeneity, while neglecting social structure.
During the last decade of the century, perhaps as a response to the increasing globalization of
economic, social, and intellectual life, personality psychology began to be influenced by the
perspectives of cultural psychology. Hofstede (1980) identified four dimensions along which
cultures can be compared: individualism-collectivism, power distance, orientation to
uncertainty, and gendering of malefemale relations. So far, though, only the first dimension has
received much attention from personality psychologists interested in culture.