UPI Study › Courses › Psychology of Personality › Free lessons › Lesson 13.7 Free with a free account
Contemporary Developments and Critiques of Trait-Based Personality Models
Psychology of Personality · Chapter 13: Trait Theory, Personality Disorders, and CultureSection 13.7 · lesson 83 of 83video coming soon
← Trait Theory in Clinical and Applied Psychological Settings
In this lesson
A framework that describes and predicts well, and explains less than it appears to.
- Say what HEXACO adds to the Five-Factor Model
- Summarise the person-situation debate and its resolution
- Explain the description-versus-explanation critique
- Reach a balanced conclusion about trait theory
Free study notes
Get this lesson's notes by email
The key points and 4 practice questions with answers, in your inbox. One email, free.
One email. Unsubscribe in one click.
Transcript
Everything said in the video, section by section (878 words). Read along, or search it.
Trait Theory, Personality Disorders, and Culture
Contemporary Developments and Critiques of Trait-Based Models
Trait theory earned its place by measuring well. The criticisms it faces are mostly about what measuring well does not give you. Consistency across situations. And an explanation of mechanism. This section covers where the field has moved recently. The five standing critiques of trait-based models. And the responses that have been developed to each of them. Some of those responses are stronger than others.
Extension
HEXACO and a Sixth Factor
Trait research continues to evolve. The Five-Factor Model remains the dominant framework. But it has been extended, and challenged, by newer models. The HEXACO model adds a sixth factor. Honesty-humility. Its argument is that this factor captures important variance in ethical behaviour. Variance that the five factors miss. Notice that the claim is empirical, rather than philosophical. It is not that ethics deserves a factor of its own. It is that some variance is being left unexplained by the existing five.
Finer Grain
Facets Within Domains
Researchers also increasingly study traits at finer levels. Examining narrow facets within each broad domain. A facet is simply a narrow trait sitting inside a broad one. This runs against the field's long trend toward parsimony. The history in this chapter moved from sixteen factors down to five. Facet-level work moves back toward detail. And the reason is practical. Broad domains can hide differences that matter for prediction.
Not Fixed
Traits Develop and Change
Researchers also explore how traits develop and change across the lifespan. Rather than treating them as wholly fixed. Longitudinal studies document meaningful change. Such as gradual increases in conscientiousness across adulthood. And gradual increases in agreeableness. A longitudinal study follows the same people over time. That design matters for what can be claimed. It supports statements about change within people. Rather than only differences between age groups.
Foundations
Genetics and Neuroscience
Other developments connect traits to their foundations, and to their consequences. Behavioural genetics clarifies the heritable and environmental contributions to traits. Neuroscience seeks their biological correlates. Together with longitudinal work, these strands do something specific. They enrich the trait approach beyond static description. Which matters, because static description is exactly what it is most often accused of being.
The Big Debate
Person Versus Situation
Trait models face several enduring critiques. The first is the person-situation debate, sparked by Walter Mischel. It questioned whether behaviour is consistent enough across situations. Consistent enough to justify talking about broad traits at all. Mischel noted that situations often strongly shape behaviour. That is a serious challenge, not a technical quibble. If it held generally, it would undercut the first assumption of the whole trait perspective.
The Resolution
Interactionism and Aggregation
The modern resolution is called interactionism. Interactionism holds that behaviour reflects both stable dispositions and situational influences. Alongside it sits a second point, called the aggregation principle. Traits predict aggregated behaviour over time better than they predict single acts. That second point is what rescued the first. Trait theory was never well-suited to predicting one act on one day. Judged on averaged behaviour across many occasions, its predictions hold up. A concrete case makes the resolution clear. A normally reserved person becomes lively at close friends' gatherings. That does not refute their introversion. It shows interactionism at work. The trait sets a baseline that specific, comfortable situations can shift.
The Deeper Critique
Description Is Not Explanation
A second critique cuts deeper, and has no easy answer. Traits describe, but they do not fully explain. Knowing that someone is extraverted labels a pattern. It does not reveal the underlying mechanism. The label summarises what happens. It does not say why it happens. And it is easy to mistake a good summary for an account of causes. The response to this is not a denial. It is to combine trait work with mechanism research. Which is precisely what the genetics and neuroscience strands are attempting.
Two More
Cultural Bias and the Limits of Self-Report
Two further concerns are more familiar by now. The first is possible cultural bias in trait models. Models developed largely in Western samples. Cultural bias here means distortion arising from limited samples. The second is the limitations of self-report. Self-reports can be distorted by limited insight. Or by social desirability. Answering in a favourable rather than an accurate way. Both of these have method-level answers rather than arguments. For cultural bias, test and adapt across cultures. For self-report, add observer and behavioural data alongside it.
The Defence
What Trait Theory Has Going for It
Defenders of trait models respond with three points. Broad traits replicate widely across studies and samples. They predict important outcomes. And they can be supplemented by other methods where they fall short. Which leads to the balanced conclusion. Trait theory is a powerful descriptive and predictive framework. And it is strongest when combined with attention to three things. Situations. Mechanisms. And cultural context. Each of those is precisely where a critique landed.
Consolidate
Five Critiques and Their Responses
The five critiques, with their responses. The person-situation critique says situations drive behaviour. The response is interactionism, and aggregate prediction. The description critique says traits label rather than explain. The response is to combine them with mechanism research. Cultural bias says the models are Western-derived. The response is to test and adapt across cultures. Self-report limits mean distortion, and low insight. The response is to add observer and behavioural data. And the stability assumption treats traits as fixed. The response is that longitudinal change has been documented. Knowing these limits is what keeps trait use rigorous. So predict from traits across many situations, rather than single acts. And add other methods, and cultural checks, wherever the stakes are real.
About Psychology of Personality at UPI Study
Psychology of Personality (Psychology 300) is a self-paced online course of 83 video lessons in 13 chapters, from Freud, Adler and Jung to biological, behavioral, cognitive, existential and humanistic theories, traits, personality disorders and culture. It carries a NCCRS credit recommendation for 3 semester credits.
Every lesson transcript is free on pages like this one, and the videos are free with a free UPI Study account. Enrolling adds a practice quiz after each lesson, the graded work and final exam that earn the credit, lifetime access, and an official transcript on completion. UPI Study has helped over 130,000 students with college credits. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Enroll now → Course details Download the syllabus All Psychology and social science courses Every course with PRO →
Why take it here
Why students take Psychology of Personality with UPI Study
Where the credit goes
Universities that work with NCCRS
Psychology of Personality carries a NCCRS credit recommendation. These universities work with NCCRS; some are UPI Study's signed partners. ACE and NCCRS have over 2,100 cooperating colleges that will consider accepting credits; the final decision is with the universities.
Thomas Edison State UniversitySigned partner
University of the PeopleSigned partner
Charter Oak State CollegeSigned partner
Strayer UniversitySigned partner
Columbia Southern UniversitySigned partner
Indiana TechSigned partner
Penn StateWorks with NCCRS
Southern New Hampshire UniversityWorks with NCCRS
SUNYWorks with NCCRS
+many more cooperating universitiesFind my college →Find my college → Not listed? Ask Athena in the corner of this page, or book a 15-minute call.
FAQ
Questions students ask us
About Contemporary Developments and Critiques of Trait-Based Personality Models
What is the HEXACO model of personality?
Why do personality researchers study narrow facets as well as broad traits?
Do personality traits change with age?
Do personality traits explain behavior or just describe it?
About the Psychology of Personality course
How many college credits is Psychology of Personality?
How much does Psychology of Personality cost and what is included?
Which universities accept UPI Study credits?
How long does Psychology of Personality take?
How are the exams done?
How do my credits reach my college?
Ready for the full course? Earn 3 credits in Psychology of Personality.
83 video lessons, a quiz after each one, and the graded work that earns the credit. Recommended for credit by NCCRS.
3 credits · NCCRSEnroll →