Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Louise Barkhuus
ID: 4187741
Concordia University
PSYC 326/4
Patricia Csank
Date: April 19, 1999
Gordon W. Allport (18971967) was the first psychologists who gave thorough thought to the
concepts of traits. He developed his own trait theory and he continued to view the trait as the most
appropriate way of describing and studying personality. He is, by many, actually considered to be the
first psychologist dealing with personality at all and was the first to offer a class in this field at Harvard
University in 1924 (Schultz, 1976; Pervin & John, 1997). Throughout his life, Allport continued to
develop and work with his trait theory and he inspired many other psychologists who also adopted this
approach to personality or developed their own trait theory (e.g. Eysenck, McClelland).
The aim of this paper is to review Allports trait theory as described in his own published
material supplemented by comments from other scholars. The papers focus is on the theory of traits
and Allports view of personality. Although much literature has been published on the concept of
personality traits, seen from other perspectives, this will not be dealt with. Allports other aspects of
personality psychology will only be mentioned briefly or in connection to his trait theory.
Allports View of Personality
In order to understand Allports theory of traits, it is important to know how he approached
psychology and in particular the issue of personality. In many ways, his views were opposite from the
ones of the psychoanalysts but they were also very different from the behaviourists.
Allport viewed psychology as the study of the healthy person. He believed, in contrast to for
example the psychoanalysts, that studying the healthy personality is much different and incompatible
with that of the pathological personality (Schultz, 1976). Another basic approach he takes, is that of the
individual human as unique. Each person is different from the other and should therefore be studied
accordingly. Individuals can still be compared but Allports understanding of psychology goes beyond
just comparison. He emphasises this individuality in virtually all aspects of his psychology, another
Intelligence
II.
Temperament
1. Emotional Breadth
2. Emotional Strength
III.
IV.
Socialty
8. Social Participation
Allport and Allport mention that measuring human nature requires interpretation and argue that
correlation between the three associates ratings should therefore not be expected to be to high.
Even a .30 or .40 should be considered with optimism.
After describing the test and mentioning that any correlation below .25 has resulted in dismissal
of the individuals score for that trait, Allport and Allport take a closer look at some of the
personalities. This approach reflects Gordon Allports view of personality at an early stage; Each one
is a unique mixture of varying degrees of divers traits (Allport & Allport, 1921, p. 23). They draw out
extreme personalities, for example ones with highly contradictory traits. An example of such a
personality is the introverted social type. Evaluating this individual, Allport and Allport conclude that
there is evidence of almost a pathological character within this person.
Allport and Allport conclude by stating that characteristics of Intelligence and Temperament
are most likely to be inborn, where Self-expression and Socialty are probably acquired upon social
surroundings, but still on the basis of hereditary structure. Finally they state the importance of isolating
these fundamental traits in order to refine the ratings of individuals as well as developing the tests.
A Case Study
Another of Allports studies, contrasting the previous, is a case study from 19661. It analyses a
series of letters written by Jenny Masterson from 1926-1937. The interpretation shows Allports
developing view of personality (evidently affected by his 30 years of professorship at Harvard
University). This is evident in the way that he evaluates and interprets the letters from different
viewpoints. He includes Freudian, Jungian as well as Adlerian analysis in his publication as well as his
1This
is actually one of Allports last publications. It should be noted that it is purely coincidental that the two reviewed
Allport finds many of his original statements and considerations of traits to be supported. First, the
traits do not seem to exist independently of each other. In the documents it is evident that for example
Jennys aggressiveness is closely related to her quarrelsomeness and her sentimentality is linked to her
Aggressive
Sentimental
Independent-autonomous
Quarrelsome-suspicious
Sentimental
Sexuality
Sentience
Aesthetic-artistic
Martyrdom
Self-centred
Allport compares the list to the original list of eight clusters and concludes that almost all traits
of the one list overlap with traits from the other list. There are few exceptions. The original analysis for
example does not find the trait of sexuality according to Allport. One thing he seems to have
overlooked though, is the fact that the trait analysis finds the trait of incestuous and categorise it as
unclassified traits along with 13 others. The sexuality trait is, in the content analysis, derived from
Jennys description of romantic experiences with her son (e.g. rides by the moonlight, trips to the
country) and the two traits therefore seem to be same.
The trait analysis cynical-morbid and dramatic-intense categories are not found in the content
analysis. The last two categories clearly show the limitations of computational power. Cynicism is a
subtle trait that cannot be measured by counting the number of cynical words; neither can counting