Good and bad behaviors theory of personality - Research Paper Example

Good and bad behaviors theory of personality Abstract: Good or bad theory of personality explains all factors that determine the personality of an individual and encompasses the biological, social and motivational, and object-oriented factors. The individual’s personality development will be determined by the various factors and not purely by the hereditary and biological factors. The hereditary genes influence behaviors such as self-confidence, temperament while social factors lead to good behaviors like honesty, empathy and compassion. Spiritual or religious factors determine the self-concept and include behaviors like kindness, honesty and modesty. The good and bad behaviors theory is useful in explaining the personality of an individual. Introduction Personality is as psychological field that comprises the aggregate of person’s feelings, responses in different situations and thinking of the individual. The determinants of personality comprise of hereditary and environmental factors (Ashcraft, 2012). Good and bad behaviors theory of personality entails numerous biological, social, object and work-related factors that determine an individual’s personality. The personality of an individual is demonstrated by the day-to-day behaviors that are depicted by the individual in social interactions. Wepman & Heine (2008) are of the idea that the personality has a genetic perspective since previous psychological and personality research has concluded that genetic traits will determine the behaviors of an individual. Biological theories of personality have shown that individuals have different genetic composition (Wepman & Heine, 2008). A clear example is the introverts that have a higher cortical arousal than their extrovert counterparts that have a lower cortical arousal. Kind-hearted individuals and selfish people have different genetic composition in their biological DNA. In this case, the theory postulates that individuals with good behaviors are inherently well mannered. Accordingly, the theory outlines a genetic connection with members of the family since individuals who have had good relationships or are close to their mothers seem to be more caring about women issues such as affirmative action in the workplace. On the other hand, individuals who experienced neglect in their childhood seem to have negative perceptions or disrespect for females (Wepman& Heine, 2008).Thesis statement: This paper will discuss the good and bad behaviors theory of personality and outline the different biological, social, and object-related factors that determine personality according to the theory. Foundations of the good or bad behaviors theory of personality The concept of personality is determined by both nature and nurture. Nature comprises of the inherent genetic traits that include anger, wisdom and generosity. On the other side, nurture explains the behaviors or character traits of a person that are determined by the surrounding social environment and includes the behaviors that an individual will develop from the care extended by the social group (Ashcraft, 2012). The surrounding culture and environment impacts traditions, values, social expectations, norms, rules of behavior and senses of right and wrong that determine the individual’s personality. The social circles such as family, friends and co-workers determine the behaviors that are considered acceptable and influence the personality behaviors of the individual (Matthews, Deary & Whiteman, 2009). Accordingly, the spiritual perspectives of the individual such as religious inclinations determine what is considered good or evil. For instance, Christianity outlines certain behavioral values such as honest, kindness and mercy that are good and other behaviors such as greed and selfishness that are considered as bad behaviors according to Christianity teachings in the Bible. Furthermore, object-oriented or situational factors will also determine the good or bad behaviors of personality. This factors change the behavior of the person over a long period of time and include the person’s behaviors while at the workplace and changes in the behavior when the person moves to a social place with friends in the bar (Wepman& Heine, 2008). Examples of behaviors that are determined by the unconscious mind include cleanliness since an individual will act according to the unconscious drive to stay clean. In addition, picking up a fight is also a unconscious decision that is influenced by natural traits such as anger. Accordingly, self-concept of the individual may impact on the good behaviors since individuals may decide to stop engaging in anti-social activities such as smoking after realizing the detrimental or negative health effects in the society. Some of the good behaviors that include kindness, ambition, faithfulness, patience, honest, cheerfulness and optimism. On the other hand, bad behaviors of personality include rudeness, impatient, unkindness, maliciousness, quarrelsomeness, and unforgiving (Matthews, Deary, & Whiteman, 2009). Biological determinants According to Ashcraft (2012), the hereditary factors determine the biological composition of the offsprings and determine certain variables such as physical characteristics like height, color of eyes and general physical make up of the individual. In addition, the hereditary factors will influence the sex, temperament, physical attraction, muscle reflexes and biological rhythms that determine the behavior portrayed by the individual in the society. This factors are critical in determining the self-awareness, organisational traits, social stimuli and behavior appearances of the individual (Staudinger & Kunzmann, 2005, p 325). For instance, physically attractive individuals are more confident and have high self-awareness thus will display good behaviors such as self-composure, confidence and compassionate. The less physically attractive individuals are associated with bad behaviors like gloominess, nagging and social isolation due to lack of social awareness and inability to form meaningful social relationships in the society (Rothbart, 2007, p 209). The genetic composition of an individual influences the good or bad behaviors that are displayed in social interactions. The good or bad behaviors of an individual can be traced to the composition of brain structures and neural mechanisms that determine the genetic and hormonal composition of the individual (Ashcraft, 2012). Psychologists assert that the brain influence the personality since the parents and child adopt similar brain stimulation and genetic transmission. For instance, Dopamine neurotransmitter promotes exploratory behaviors while serotonin promotes avoidance behaviors and inhibitory pathways thus affecting personality traits like agreeableness, creativity, honest and openness to new challenges (Flynn, 2008, p 714). According to Reinforcement sensitivity theory, the genes will mediate behaviors such as emotional fear while the behavior inhibition system of the individual will mediate the feelings of anxiety and anticipatory pleasure of the individual. In this case, biological factors determine behaviors such as fear, feelings of pleasure, impulsiveness and optimism of the individual (Hiriyappa, 2012). The physical features of the individual are also determined by the biological factors and external appearances like handsomeness, ugly and height will determine the good or bad behaviors of the individual. The biological factors will be displayed through facial expressions such as tight lips, tongue clicking, dark circles under the eyes and forehead sweating which is an indicator of disappointments and cruelness of the individual. The individual’s physical appearances determines the expectations from others, the reactions to other individuals and impacts on the personality development (Hiriyappa, 2012). Traumatic experiences can hinder the normal development of the central nervous system and generate hormones that will affect the personality of the individual. Aggressiveness is one of the bad behaviors that are associated with changes in hormonal composition (Rothbart, 2007, p 208). Criminals have higher testosterone in their brains that will hinder cognitive control thus are more likely to display bad behaviors. Social determinants The social environment factors such as food, living condition and healthcare will also determine the personality development of the individual. These factors affect the appearance, physiology and attitudes of the individual (Hiriyappa, 2012). For instance, the dress code of an individual influences his or her social interactions and worldviews that determining the behaviors that will be portrayed by the individual. The social environment determines the social experiences such as fear, grief, trust and love due to the nature of social interactions (Mroczek & Roberts, 2008, p 33). For instance, individuals living in conflict areas will have more feelings of mistrust towards strangers unlike individuals living in social cohesive neighbors who are capable of extending warm reception to strangers (Flynn, 2008, p 708). The social and moral cooperation of the individual is also learned as group interactions will determine the environmentally learned social responses. Hiriyappa (2012) claims that behavioral constructs like political affiliations and religious inclinations will also influence the learning of social traits. Individuals who are committed to religious beliefs will tend to have more good behaviors such as kindness and mercy as opposed to individuals who are not committed to their religion. Accordingly, political views such as democratic and republican views determine the social behaviors of individuals since democrats have certain ideals that form their political ideology like the need to invest n social welfare programs to enhance the healthcare of the population (Roberts, 2001, p 53). The individual personality predispositions are socially determined since the language and emotional expressions of the society influence what is considered good or bad behaviors (Mroczek & Roberts, 2008, p 32). For instance, some languages require low tones and facial expressions while other language limit the facial expressions since they are considered emotionally offensive. Some individuals have an exaggerated sense of urgency since they perceive their personal goals as important and too demanding (Hiriyappa, 2012). This kind of individuals consider their goals as challenging and are capable of multitasking than ordinary individuals who prefer completing one task a time. According to the big five theory of personality, extroversion, openness, neuroticism, agreeableness and conscientiousness are the key personality traits of an individual. However, the key traits are associated with numerous bad or good behaviors of the individual. For instance, openness trait is associated with individuals who appreciate unusual ideas, adventure and imagination (Ashcraft, 2012). In this case, some good behaviors that individuals display include curiosity, sensitive to beauty, and emotional stability. The trait will determine the breadth and originality displayed by the individual in the daily behaviors such as open-mindedness when approaching challenges, kindness and honesty in new undertaking. Accordingly, neuroticism contrasts the emotional stability and temperedness that is associated with negative emotional behaviors such as sadness, anxiousness and tenseness (Roberts, 2001, p 57). In this case, social factors like the social setup of the school or workplace will determine the individual’s levels of anger or emotional aggression towards colleagues (Hiriyappa, 2012). Conscientiousness implies the self-discipline and ambition for achievement that facilitates the task-oriented behaviors and impulse control which make the individual plan and organize tasks in order to attain pre-determined goals within the expected period. This behavioral trait is associated with individuals with good behaviors such as irresponsibleness and orderly (Tennen, 2012, p 6). Another personality trait according to the Big 5 model is agreeableness that is associated with good behaviors such as trust and cooperation. The negative of agreeableness behavior is antagonism behaviors that are not caring to the other members in the society. In this case, individuals will display good behaviors such as sympathy, modesty and caring attitudes in the society thus are more likely to contribute to social causes in the society and help the less fortunate (Roberts, 2001, p 63) The extroversion or introversion traits are also associated with good and bad behaviors of the individual. For instance, extroverts are more assertive, social and display friendliness in their interactions with other members of the society (Behrendt, 2012). On the other hand, some bad behaviors that limit the interpersonal associations in the society and which are associated with introversion include anxiety and lack of ambition. From the analysis, it is true that all theories of personality are determined by either the good or the bad behaviors of the individual (Ashcraft, 2012). Biblical integration The Bible outlines the good and bad and the evil and tells of different stories that demonstrated disobedience, bad behaviors and good behavior such as story of Adam and Eve who disobeyed God and story of Abraham who exhibited humility. T he Bible talks of kindness, humbleness, and respect as some good behaviors that people must portray in the social interactions. The Bible influences the constructions on self and views on the world as individuals are taught not to place greater value on material possessions like wealth, but focus on the soul and help the needy. For instance, Proverbs 20:27 assert that ‘the spirit of man (the factor in human personality that proceeds from God) is the lamp of the Lord, searching for the innermost parts” (Bible, Revised Version, Proverbs 20:27). The Bible emphasizes on the personality of an individual and good behaviors such as respect while interacting with others in the society. Conclusion Good and bad behaviors theory of personality is a clear reflection of the various factors that determine the unique behaviors of an individual in the society. Although psychologists have advanced numerous theories on the determinants of personality, I believe the good or bad behaviors of an individual will determine the personality type of the individual. The good or bad behaviors are determined by biological, social and object-oriented factors that will determine the nature of behavior of the individual. In this case, hereditary factors like the genetic composition, physical attraction, chemical composition and facial expressions will determine behaviors such as temperament, anger, kindness, honest and interpersonal behaviors like empathy. Some negative behaviors associated with hereditary factors include sadness, gloominess and antagonism. Accordingly, social factors lead to conditioning of the individual to either good or bad behaviors. The social environment determines the concept of self-awareness, development of emotional intelligence and cognitive skills and some good behaviors that are determined by the social factors include confidence, assertiveness and empathy (Staudinger & Kunzmann, 2005, p 327). The spiritual perspective of the individual will determine what the individual considers as good or wrong and influences the behaviors that are displayed by the individual. For instance, the Bible teaches of compassion, love, kindness, honest and modesty and requires individuals to avoid bad behaviors like quarrelsomeness, cruelty, greed, dishonesty and falsehoods. References: Ashcraft, D. M. 2012. Personality theories workbook. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. Behrendt, R. (2012). The evolved structure of human social behaviour and personality: a psychoanalytic insights. London:Karmac Books. Bible. Revised Version, Proverbs 20:27. Flynn, F.J. (2008). ‘Personality and organizational culture and determinants of influence’, Journal of applied psychology, Vol 93 (3): pp 702-710. Hiriyappa, B. 2012. Development of personality and its theories. Bloomington, IN : Booktango. Matthews, G., Deary, I. J., & Whiteman, M. C. 2009. Personality traits. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Mroczek, D & Roberts, B. (2008). ‘Personality trait change in adulthood’, Current directions in psychological science, February 2008, Vol 17(1), pp 31-35. Roberts, A.C. (2001). ‘Personality development across the life course: the argument for change and continuity’, Journal of psychological inquiry, Vol 12( 2), pp 49-67. Rothbart, M.K. (2007). ‘Temperament, development and personality’, Current directions in psychological science, February 2008, Vol 16(4), pp 207-212. Staudinger, U.M & Kunzmann. (2005). ‘Positive adult personality development’, Joiurnal of European psychologist, Vol 10 (4), pp 320-329. Tennen, H. (2012). ‘Personality’, Journal of personality, Vol 81(1), pp 3-23. Wepman, J. M., & Heine, R. W. 2008. Concepts of personality. New Brunswick, N.J: AldineTransaction. Read More