Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Discussion
Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages Description/Paper Instructions
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Discussion
Boston Columbus Indianapolis New York City San Francisco Amsterdam Cape Town Dubai London Madrid Milan Munich Paris Montréal Toronto
Delhi Mexico City São Paulo Sydney Hong Kong Seoul Singapore Taipei Tokyo
Perspectives on Personality
Eighth Edition
Charles S. Carver University of Miami
Michael F. Scheier Carnegie Mellon University
Acknowledgements of third-party content appear on page 282, which constitutes an extension of this copyright page.
Copyright © 2017, 2012, 2008 by Pearson Education, Inc. or its affiliates. All Rights Reserved. This digital publication is protected by copyright, and permission should be obtained from the publisher prior to any prohibited reproduction, storage in a retrieval system, or transmission in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise except as authorized for use under the product subscription through which this digital application is accessed.
For information regarding permissions, request forms and the appropriate contacts within the Pearson Education Global Rights & Permissions department, please visit www.pearsoned.com/permissions/.
PEARSON and ALWAYS LEARNING are exclusive trademarks in the U.S. and/or other countries owned by Pearson Education, Inc. or its affiliates.
Unless otherwise indicated herein, any third-party trademarks that may appear in this work are the property of their respective owners and any references to third-party trademarks, logos or other trade dress are for demonstrative or descriptive purposes only. Such references are not intended to imply any sponsorship, endorsement, authorization, or promotion of Pearson’s products by the owners of such marks, or any relationship between the owner and Pearson Education, Inc. or its affiliates, authors, licensees or distributors.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Names: Carver, Charles S., author. | Scheier, Michael, author. Title: Perspectives on personality / Charles S. Carver, Michael F. Scheier, University of Miami, Carnegie Mellon University. Description: Eighth Edition. | New York : Pearson, 2016. | Revised edition of the authors’ Perspectives on personality, 2012. | Includes index. Identifiers: LCCN 2016001740| ISBN 9780134415376 | ISBN 013441537X Subjects: LCSH: Personality. Classification: LCC BF698 .C22 2016 | DDC 155.2–dc23 LC record available at http://lccn.loc.gov/2016001740
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 EB
ISBN-10: 0-13-441537-X ISBN-13: 978-0-13-441537-6
Editor in Chief: Ashley Dodge Program Team Lead: Amber Mackey Managing Editor: Sutapa Mukherjee Program Manager: Carly Czech Sponsoring Editor: Priya Christopher Editorial Project Manager: Michelle Hacker, iEnergizer Aptara®, Ltd. Editorial Assistant: Casseia Lewis Senior Marketing Coordinator: Susan Osterlitz Project Team Lead: Vamanan Namboodiri Project Manager: Purnima Narayanan Operations Manager: Mary Fischer
Operations Specialist: Carol Melville Associate Director of Design: Blair Brown Interior Design: Kathryn Foot Cover Art Director: Maria Lange Cover Design: Heather Marshall, Lumina Datamatics, Inc. Cover Art: misu/Fotolia Full-Service Project Management and Composition: Megha Bhardwaj, iEnergizer Aptara®, Ltd. Printer/Binder: Courier Kendallville Cover Printer: Phoenix
http://www.pearsoned.com/permissions
http://lccn.loc.gov/2016001740
To Youngmee Kim
CSC
To Meredith and Jeremy, who bring great joy to my life
MFS
This page intentionally left blank
v
9: Psychosocial Theories 125
10: The Learning Perspective 144
11: Self-Actualization and Self- Determination 164
12: The Cognitive Perspective 183
13: The Self-Regulation Perspective 201
14: Overlap and Integration among Perspectives 219
1: What Is Personality Psychology? 1
2: Methods in the Study of Personality 9
3: Issues in Personality Assessment 20
4: The Trait Perspective 30
5: The Motive Perspective 50
6: Genetics, Evolution, and Personality 67
7: Biological Processes and Personality 86
8: The Psychoanalytic Perspective 105
Brief Contents
This page intentionally left blank
3.1.4: Subjective versus Objective Measures 22
3.2: Reliability of Measurement 22 3.2.1: Internal Consistency 22 3.2.2: Inter-Rater Reliability 23
Box 3.2 A New Approach to Assessment: Item Response Theory 23
3.2.3: Stability across Time 24
3.3: Validity of Measurement 24 3.3.1: Construct Validity 25 3.3.2: Criterion Validity 25 3.3.3: Convergent Validity 26 3.3.4: Discriminant Validity 26 3.3.5: Face Validity 26 3.3.6: Culture and Validity 26 3.3.7: Response Sets and Loss of Validity 27
3.4: Two Rationales behind the Development of Assessment Devices 28
3.4.1: Rational or Theoretical Approach 28 3.4.2: Empirical Approaches 28
3.5: Never-Ending Search for Better Assessment 29 Summary: Issues in Personality Assessment 29
4: The Trait Perspective 30 4.1: Types and Traits 30
4.1.1: Nomothetic and Idiographic Views of Traits 31
4.2: What Traits Matter? 31 4.2.1: Factor Analysis 31 Box 4.1 A Closer Look at Factor Analysis 32
4.2.2: Let Reality Reveal Itself 33 4.2.3: Start from a Theory 33 4.2.4: The Interpersonal Circle as Another
Theoretical Starting Point 35
4.3: The Five-Factor Model 35 4.3.1: What Are the Five Factors? 36
4.4: Reflections of the Five Factors in Behavior 37 4.4.1: Extraversion and Agreeableness 37 4.4.2: Conscientiousness, Openness, and
Neuroticism 38
4.5: Relations to Earlier Trait Models 39
4.6: Other Variations 39 4.6.1: Expanding and Condensing the
Five-Factor Model 40 4.6.2: Are Superordinate Traits the Best Level
to Use? 40
4.7: Traits, Situations, and Interactionism 40 4.7.1: Is Behavior Actually Traitlike? 41
Box 4.2 How Stable Is Personality over Long Periods? 41
Preface xiii
About the Authors xv
1: What Is Personality Psychology? 1 1.1: Defining Personality 1
1.1.1: Why Use the Word Personality as a Concept? 1 1.1.2: A Working Definition 2 1.1.3: Two Fundamental Themes in Personality
Psychology 2
1.2: Theory in Personality Psychology 3 1.2.1: What Do Theories Do? 3 1.2.2: The Role of Research in Evaluating Theories 3 1.2.3: What Else Makes a Theory Good? 4
1.3: Perspectives on Personality 5 1.3.1: Perspectives to Be Examined Here 5 1.3.2: Perspectives Reconsidered 6
1.4: Organization within Chapters 6 1.4.1: Assessment 6 1.4.2: Problems in Behavior, and Behavior Change 7
Summary: What Is Personality Psychology? 7
2: Methods in the Study of Personality 9 2.1: Gathering Information 9
2.1.1: Observe Yourself and Observe Others 9 2.1.2: Depth Through Case Studies 9 2.1.3: Depth from Experience Sampling 10 2.1.4: Seeking Generality by Studying
Many People 10
2.2: Establishing Relationships among Variables 11 2.2.1: Correlation between Variables 12 2.2.2: Two Kinds of Significance 14 2.2.3: Causality and a Limitation on Inference 14 2.2.4: Experimental Research 15 2.2.5: Recognizing Types of Studies 16
Box 2.1 Correlations in the News 17 2.2.6: What Kind of Research Is Best? 17 2.2.7: Experimental Personality Research and
Multifactor Studies 17 2.2.8: Reading Figures from Multifactor
Research 18 Summary: Methods in the Study of Personality 19
3: Issues in Personality Assessment 20 3.1: Sources of Information 20
3.1.1: Observer Ratings 20
Box 3.1 What Does Your Stuff Say about You? 21 3.1.2: Self-Reports 21 3.1.3: Implicit Assessment 21
Contents viii Contents
4.7.2: Situationism 41 4.7.3: Interactionism 41 4.7.4: Other Aspects of Interactionism 43 4.7.5: Was the Problem Ever Really as Bad as
It Seemed? 43
4.8: Interactionism as Context-Dependent Expression of Personality 43
4.8.1: Fitting the Pieces Together 44
Box 4.3 Theoretical Issue: What Really Is a Trait? 45
4.9: Assessment from the Trait Perspective 46 4.9.1: Comparing Individuals Using
Personality Profiles 46
4.10: Problems in Behavior, and Behavior Change, from the Trait Perspective 47
4.10.1: The Five-Factor Model and Personality Disorders 47
4.10.2: Interactionism in Behavior Problems 47 4.10.3: Behavior Change 48
4.11: Problems and Prospects for the Trait Perspective 48 Summary: The Trait Perspective 49
5: The Motive Perspective 50 5.1: Basic Theoretical Elements 51
5.1.1: Needs 51 5.1.2: Motives 51 5.1.3: Press 52
5.2: Needs, Motives, and Personality 52 5.2.1: Motive States and Motive Dispositions 52 5.2.2: Measuring Motives Using the Thematic
Apperception Test 53
5.3: Studies of Specific Dispositional Motives 53 5.3.1: Need for Achievement 53 5.3.2: Need for Power 55 5.3.3: Need for Affiliation 57 5.3.4: Need for Intimacy 57 5.3.5: Patterned Needs 58
5.4: Implicit and Self-Attributed Motives 59 5.4.1: Incentive Value 59 5.4.2: Implicit Motives Are Different from
Self-Attributed Motives 59
5.5: Approach and Avoidance Motives 60 5.5.1: Approach and Avoidance in
Other Motives 61
5.6: Motives and the Five-Factor Trait Model 61 5.6.1: Traits and Motives as Distinct and
Complementary 61
5.7: Personology and the Study of Narratives 62
5.8: Assessment from the Motive Perspective 62
Box 5.1 The Process Underlying the TAT or the PSE 63
5.8.1: Other Implicit Assessments 63
5.9: Problems in Behavior, and Behavior Change, from the Motive Perspective 64
5.9.1: The Need for Power and Alcohol Abuse 64 5.9.2: Focusing on and Changing Motivation 64
RUBRIC
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper. GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
CLICK ON THE LINK HERE: https://www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow
Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME]and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!