Addressing Personality Structure

One of the most crtical decisions in studying personality psychology, is how best to divide the system. A complex system such as personality can be validly divided in more than one way. The Systems Framework for ersonality sychology !SF " suggests several innovations in regard to understanding personality structure. First, complex systems can be divided in more than one valid way. Second, not all divisions are e#ually valid. Third, criteria can be divised !and met" for good divisions !$ayer, %&&'".

Personality Can Be Divided in More Than One Valid Way

Consider the analogy to another complex system -- a city. A city str ct re can !e conceived o" in a variety o" valid #ays. Di""erent maps #ill depict di""erent aspects o" the str ct re. $n the case o" Manhatten% "or example% one valid str ct ral depiction is o" the s !#ay system...

As an alternative% one co ld divide Manhatten !y neigh!orhood...

Similarly, Personality Can Be Divided in Multiple Ways

There are a n m!er o" #ays that have !een employed to divide personality. Well !e"ore the advent o" modern psychology% Moses Mendelsohn had divided personality into motives% emotion% and cognition &'ilgard% ()*(+. ,re d divided personality into the conscio s% preconscio s% and nconscio s% and later% into the id% ego% and s perego &,re d% ()-./()01+. More recently% a n m!er o" trait psychologists have s ggested that personality can !e divided into 2 Big Traits &3old!erg% ()).4 Costa 5 McCrae% ()*2+. The 6ystems ,rame#or7 "or Personality Psychology allo#s the "ield to reconcile these di""erent divisions o" personality !y nderstanding that the di""erent divsions serve di""erent p rposes. ,or example% ,re d8s division o" the mind help disting ish !et#een areas o" personality that di""er in their level-o"-processing. Whereas the id represents evol tionarily early-developing processes% the ego represents later-evolved processes. Mendelssohn8s division% on the other hand% "oc sses on !asic " nctionality o" personlaity -- the !asic tas7s that carries o t personality. That is% the motivational system helps direct the organism% emotions help it navigate the social #orld% and cognition helps it nderstand and reason a!stractly a!o t the #orld more generally. The Big ,ive trait divisions% on the other hand% devide personality according to its most commonly perceived styles o" social expression &Mayer% -11(+. At the same time as the 6ystems ,rame#or7 allo#s "or seeing the relation and p rposes o" these divisions% it also indicates that the divisions are not all e9 ivalent. :ather% there are !etter and #orse division o" miind. Any " ndamental division o" mind s ch as the a!ove m st meet speci"ic criteria "or #hat #ill "orm a good division o" personality. 'ere is one set o" s ch criteria &adapted "rom Mayer% -11(% Ta!le (% pp. ;0--;0.+< Specific Criterion (. $s the set composed o" primary parts= -. $s there a general "it #ith personality= .. $s the n m!er appropriate= 2. Are the parts empirically > sti"ia!lel= ;. Are the parts nearly niversal= 0. Are the parts distinct= Further description $s each part composed o" !road% "lexi!le% " nctional systems= $s the scope o" the primary parts division generally appropriate to personality= $s the n m!er o" parts employed to divide personality economical= $s there ade9 ate empirical evidence that the parts tr ly exist= 'o# many o" the primary parts are to !e "o nd in most or all personalities= Can the vario s parts proposed !e disting ished according to the

di""erent tas7s they carry o t= ?. Are the " nctions comprehensive= Do the " nctions represented !y the parts ade9 ately and comprehensively represent the " nctions carried o t !y personality= When traits are associated to the vario s primary parts% do they res lt in an ade9 ate and comprehensive organi@ation o" 7no#n personality traits=

*. Can the parts organi@e traits=

). Are there di""erent Does the " nction o" each primary phenomenologies part "eel conscio sly di""erent than associated #ith each part= that o" the others= (1. $s there a ne ropsychological division consistent #ith the division= ((. Are there correspondences #ith social instit tions= Do there exist !rain str ct res parallel to the proposed divisions= Do there exist social str ct res parallel to the divisions o" mind=

Personality 6tr ct res< (. Partial 6tr ct res

One o" the most crtical decisions in st dying personality psychology% is ho# !est to divide the system. A complex system s ch as personality can !e validly divided in more than one #ay. The 6ystems ,rame#or7 "or Personality Psychology &6,PP+ s ggests several innovations in regard to nderstanding personality str ct re. 6ome#here !et#een the consideration o" individ al personality parts &e.g.% n achievement% extroversion% intelligence+% covered in the preceding s rvey page&s+% and glo!al personality str ct re &e.g.% !road areas o" personality " nction s ch as conation% a""ect% motivation+% it ma7es sense to tal7 a!o t the str ct re o" gro ps o" personality parts as a transitional topic. This topic concerns ho# gro ps o" individ al parts -especially traits% "or example -- ! ild into larger str ct res. E ample !" Supertraits An example o" a partial personality str ct re is a s pertrait. 6 per traits are str ct res made p o" distinct ! t intercorrelated traits. An example o" s ch a s per trait is Axtraversion. Axtraversion is a so-called s per trait !eca se it has a str ct re to it that incl des several additional traits. That is% $t is composed o" a n m!er o" distinct% smaller traits. ,or example% "rom some perspectives% extraversion is composed o" lively a""ect &also called s rgency+% socia!ility% and imp lsiveness.

E ample #" Personality $ypes %or Personality Forms& A second example o" a partial personality str ct re is a Bpersonality type.B A second 7ind o" str ct re that m ltiple traits can "orm co ld !e called a B" nctional trait gro pB &or may!e % B" nctional "ormsB o" traits+. These traits are gro ped together !eca se the have a tendency to #or7 o t #ell #hen they co-occ r together% rather than !eca se they correlate. ,or example% the !rilliant -1th-cent ry diagnostician Pa l Meehl pointed o t that certain distinct MMP$ patterns occ r m ch more "re9 ently than others. Those patterns &he #o ld arg e% i" $ nderstand him correctly+ occ r together% again% !eca se they " nction together to create a meaning" l mental &or !ehavioral+ pattern. Many people are more "amiliar #ith the typology o" the Myers-Briggs Type $ndicator. Certain MBT$ pro"iles are li7ely to occ r more o"ten than others% and others are m ch rarer. ,or example% the $CTD type &an $ntroverted-$nt itive-Thin7ing-D dging type+ is a "airly common type among personality psychologists% so $8m told% and #o ld also potentially represent a " nctional "orm s ited "or s ch #or7% perhaps. &,or example% introversion #o ld promote st dio sness+.

Personality Structure" # Full Personality Structures

,irst% complex systems can !e divided in more than one valid #ay. 6econd% not all divisions are e9 ally valid. Third% criteria can !e divised &and met+ "or good divisions &Mayer% -11(+. Consider the analogy to another complex system -- a city. A city str ct re can !e conceived o" in a variety o" valid #ays. Di""erent maps #ill depict di""erent aspects o" the str ct re. $n the case o" Manhatten% "or example% one valid str ct ral depiction is o" the s !#ay system... There are a n m!er o" #ays that have !een employed to divide personality. Well !e"ore the advent o" modern psychology% Moses Mendelsohn had divided personality into motives% emotion% and cognition &'ilgard% ()*(+. ,re d divided personality into the conscio s% preconscio s% and nconscio s% and later% into the id% ego% and s perego &,re d% ()-./()01+. More recently% a n m!er o" trait psychologists have s ggested that personality can !e divided into 2 Big Traits &3old!erg% ()).4 Costa 5 McCrae% ()*2+. The 6ystems ,rame#or7 "or Personality Psychology allo#s the "ield to reconcile these di""erent divisions o" personality !y nderstanding that the di""erent divsions serve di""erent p rposes. ,or example% ,re d8s division o" the mind help disting ish !et#een areas o" personality that di""er in their level-o"-processing. Whereas the id represents evol tionarily early-developing processes% the ego represents later-evolved processes. Mendelssohn8s division% on the other hand% "oc sses on !asic " nctionality o" personlaity -- the !asic tas7s that carries o t personality. That is% the motivational system helps direct the organism% emotions help it navigate the social #orld% and cognition helps it nderstand and reason a!stractly a!o t the #orld more generally. The Big ,ive trait

divisions% on the other hand% devide personality according to its most commonly perceived styles o" social expression &Mayer% -11(+. At the same time as the 6ystems ,rame#or7 allo#s "or seeing the relation and p rposes o" these divisions% it also indicates that the divisions are not all e9 ivalent. :ather% there are !etter and #orse division o" miind. Any " ndamental division o" mind s ch as the a!ove m st meet speci"ic criteria "or #hat #ill "orm a good division o" personality. 'ere is one set o" s ch criteria &adapted "rom Mayer% -11(% Ta!le (% pp. ;0--;0.+<

Personality Dynamics
Personality dynamics concern the #ay in #hich one part o" personality in"l ences another. T#o !road types o" dynamics are disting ished in the 6,PP. The "irst concerns dynamics o" the sel". These are dynamics that in"l ence the conscio s sel"% and/or !y #hich the conscio s sel" in"l ences the rest o" personality. ,or example% Dynamics of Self Control attempt to manage one or another aspects o" personality. 6ometimes these attempts are conscio s and p rpose" l% and other times they occ r o tside o" a#areness. A great deal o" research is no# occ rring in the area o" conscio s sel" control. :egarding more a tomatic sel"-control% one "ascinating #indo# into the area is the proced re o" hypnosis. Another is the st dy o" de"ense mechanisms.

Better Divisions of Personality 'sing the Systems Frame(or)

Once the a!ove criteria are in place% the possi!ility is at least raised that a more po#er" l division o" personality is possi!le than has !een s ggested !e"ore. To see #hether this #as possi!le% the 6ystems 6et division o" personality #as developed. To learn more a!o t it% clic7 on the B6ystems 6etB men ! tton to the le"t.

:e"erences
Costa% P. T.% Dr.% 5 McCrae% :. :. &()*2+. (evised )*O ersonality +nventory !)*O, +, (" and )*O Five,Factor +nventory !)*O,FF+"- rofessional manual. Odessa% ,E< Psychological Assessment :eso rces% $nc. 'ilgard% A. :. &()*1+. The trilogy o" mind< Cognition% a""ection% and conation. .ournal of the /istory of the 0ehavioral Sciences, '1, (1?-((?. ,re d% 6. &()-./()01+. The ego and the id. D. :iviere &Trans.+% D. 6trachey &Ad.+. Ce# For7% CF< W. W. Corton. 3old!erg% E. :. &()).+. The str ct re o" phenotypic personality traits. American sychologist, 23% -0-.;.

Mayer% D. D. &-11(+. Primary divisions o" personality and their scienti"ic contri! tions< ,rom the trilogy-o"-mind to the systems set. .ournal for the Theory of Social 0ehaviour, 4' &;+% ;;)-;??. Mayer% D. D. &-11.+. 6tr ct ral divisions o" personality and the classi"ication o" traits. (eview of 5eneral sychology, 6, .*(-;1(.