Gordon Allport pursued his way, advocating the importance of the qualitative study of the individual case and emphasizing conscious motivation. Gordon Allport is a personologist who regards the explanation of an individual's uniqueness as the paramount goal of psychology. In addition, he also focuses on the ways in which internal cognitive and motivational processes influence and cause behaviour.
Allport's theory represents a blend of humanistic and personalistic approaches to the study of human behaviour. It is humanistic in its attempts to recognize all aspects on the human being, including the potential for growth, transcendence and self-realization. It is personalistic in that its objective is to understand and predict development of the real individual person. He incorporates insights from philosophy, religion, literature and sociology, blending such ideas into an understanding of the uniqueness and complexity of personality. Allport's belief that each person's behaviour derives from a particular configuration of personal traits is the trademark of his orientation to personality.
During his career Allport received virtually every professional honor that psychologist have to offer. He was elected President of the American Psychological Association and President of the Society for the Psychological Study of Social issues. In 1963 he was awarded the goal medal of the American Psychological Foundation; and in 1964 he received the award of the American Psychological Association for distinguished scientific contributions.
Allport's writings reveal an unceasing attempt to do justice to the complexity and uniqueness of individual human behaviour.
In the case of Allport's theory, a distinction of structures and dynamics is not applicable. Personality structure is primarily represented by traits, and at the same time, behaviour is motivated or driven by traits. Thus, structures and dynamics are for the most part one and the same. Allport's theory is often referred to as trait theory. Within this theory, traits occupy the position of the major motivational construct. Before proceeding to a more detailed consideration of their trait concept, let us examine Allport's definition of personality.
The term 'character' implies some code of behaviour in terms of which individuals or their acts are appraised. Thus, in describing an individual's character the term 'good' or 'bad' are often employed. Allport suggested that character is an ethnical concept and stated that character is personality evaluated, and personality is character devaluated.
Temperament ordinarily refers to those dispositions that are closely linked to biological or physiological determinants and that consequently show relatively little modification with development. The role of heredity is somewhat greater here than in the case of some other aspects of personality. Temperament is the raw material along with intelligence and physique out which personality is fashioned.
A trait is defined as a "neuro-psychic structure having the capacity to render many stimuli functionally equivalent and to initiate and guide equivalent forms of adaptive and expressive behaviour". A personal disposition or morphogenic trait is defined as "generalized neuro-psychic structure, with the capacity to render many stimuli functionally equivalent and to initiate and guide consistent forms of adaptive and stylistic behaviour."
The only difference between the two definitions is that the traits are not designated as being peculiar to the individual. The implication is that a trait may be shared by a number of individuals. Nevertheless, a trait is as much within an individual as a disposition is. Both are neuro-psychic structures, both have the capacity to render many stimuli functionally equivalent and both guide consistent forms of behaviour.
Although, traits and dispositions really exit in the person, they cannot be observed directly but have to be inferred from behaviour. Traits are 'loose' tendencies, each expression of which is slightly different because it occurs in the face of different 'determining conditions'. Traits are inferred from behaviour, not directly observed. Such inferences are made based on the frequency with which a person exhibits a certain type of behaviour, the range of situations in which that behaviour is exhibited, and the intensity of the behaviour when exihibited.
Habits are also determining tendencies but traits or dispositions are more general both in the situations appropriate to them and in the responses to which they lead. Actually the trait to a considerable extent represents the outcome of combining or integrating two or more habits. An attitude is also predisposition, it too may be unique, it may initiate or guide behaviour, and it is the product of genetic factors and learning. An attitude is linked with a specific object or class of objects, while a trait or disposition is not. The generality of a trait is greater than that of an attitude. As the number of objects to which an attitude refers increases, it comes to resemble a trait or disposition more and more. An attitude usually implies evaluation of an object, while a trait does not.
Finally Allport distinguished between traits (or personal dispositions) and types in terms of the extent to which they are tailored to the individual. Types are idealized conceptions of the observer, and the individual can be fitted to them, but only at the less of his or her distinctive identity. The personal disposition can represent the uniqueness of the person. Thus, for Allport, types represent artificial distinctions that bear no close resemblance to reality, and traits are true reflection of what actually exists.
Cardinal Central and Secondary Dispositions-personal dispositions represent generalized predispositions of behaviour. However to distinguish between the varying, degrees, Allport suggested a distinction between cardinal, central , and secondary dispositions. A cardinal disposition is so general that almost every act of a person who possesses one seems traceable to its influence. This variety of dispositions is unusual and not to be observed in many people. Central dispositions represent tendencies highly characteristic of the individual, are often called into play, and are very easy to infer. However, they are very few in number 5 or 10. The secondary disposition is more limited in occurrence, less crucial to the description of a personality, and more focalized in the responses it leads to and the stimuli to which it is appropriate.
Some traits are more impelling and have a more crucial motivational role than others. There is always a previous stimulation that is related to the activation of a trait. An external stimulus or an internal state precedes the operation of the trait. The trait is identifiable by its focal quality. It tends to have a centre around which its influence operates, but he behaviour it leads to is clearly influenced simultaneously by other traits.
In respect to learning theory Allport says, conditioning, reinforcement theory and habit hierarchy are valid principles, when applied to animal, infant and opportunistic learning. They are inadequate to account for propriate learning, which requires such principles as identifiation, closure, cognitive insight, self-imagine, and subsidation to active ego-systems.
Thus, the organism at birth is a creature of biology, transformed into an individual who operates in terms of a growing ego, a widening trait structure and a kernel of future goals and aspirations. Crucial to this transformation is the role played by functional autonomy. This principle makes clear that what is initially a mere means to biological goal may become an autonomous motive that directs behaviour with all the power of an innately endowed drive.
Personal History
Gordon Allport was born in 1897, in Indiana, but grew up in Cleveland where he received his early education in public schools. He completed his undergraduate work at Harvard University. After securing an A.B. in 1919 with a major in economics and philosophy Allport spent a year in Istanbul teaching sociology and English. He then returned to Harvard and complete the requirements for PhD in psychology in 1922. During the next two years he studied in Berlin, Hamburg and Cambridge, England. Allport also served for a decade as one of the chief interpreters of German psychology in America. Returning from Europe he accepted an appointment as instructor in the Dept of social ethics at Harvard University. At the end of two years he accepted an appointment as assistant professor of psychology at Dartmouth College but was invited to return to Harvard in 1930 where he remained until death, October 9, 1967, one month before his seventieth birthday. The year prior to his death he was appointed the first Richard Cabot Professor of Social Ethics. Allport was one of the central figures in the interdisciplinary movement that lead to the formation of the Department of Social Relations at Harvard University, in an attempt to effect a partial integration of psychology, sociology and anthropology.During his career Allport received virtually every professional honor that psychologist have to offer. He was elected President of the American Psychological Association and President of the Society for the Psychological Study of Social issues. In 1963 he was awarded the goal medal of the American Psychological Foundation; and in 1964 he received the award of the American Psychological Association for distinguished scientific contributions.
Allport's writings reveal an unceasing attempt to do justice to the complexity and uniqueness of individual human behaviour.
Structure & Dynamic of Personality
In the case of Allport's theory, a distinction of structures and dynamics is not applicable. Personality structure is primarily represented by traits, and at the same time, behaviour is motivated or driven by traits. Thus, structures and dynamics are for the most part one and the same. Allport's theory is often referred to as trait theory. Within this theory, traits occupy the position of the major motivational construct. Before proceeding to a more detailed consideration of their trait concept, let us examine Allport's definition of personality.
Personality, character and temperament
Allport attempted to define personality by combining the best elements of previous definitions, while avoiding their major shortcomings. First, he suggested that one may briefly define personality as "what a man really is". Later he proceeded to a better known definition: "personality is the dynamic organization within the individual of these psychopysical systems that determine his unique adjustments to his environments". The term "dynamic organization" emphasizes the fact that personality is constantly developing and changing, although at the same time there is an organization or system that binds together and relates the various components of personality. The term "psycho-physical" indicates that personality is neither exclusively mental or exclusively neural. The organiation entails the operations of both body and mind, inextricably fused into a personal unity. The word "determine" makes clear that personality is made up of determining tendencies that play an active role in the individuals behaviour: Personality is 'something' and 'does' 'something'; it is what lies behind specific acts and within the individual. For Allport, the personality has a real existence involving neural or physiological concomitants.The term 'character' implies some code of behaviour in terms of which individuals or their acts are appraised. Thus, in describing an individual's character the term 'good' or 'bad' are often employed. Allport suggested that character is an ethnical concept and stated that character is personality evaluated, and personality is character devaluated.
Temperament ordinarily refers to those dispositions that are closely linked to biological or physiological determinants and that consequently show relatively little modification with development. The role of heredity is somewhat greater here than in the case of some other aspects of personality. Temperament is the raw material along with intelligence and physique out which personality is fashioned.
Traits
Allport differentiated between individual and common traits. He used the term traits to indicate the common traits, and the term personal disposition, to explain the individual traits. Allport also referred to personal dispositions as morphogenic traits.A trait is defined as a "neuro-psychic structure having the capacity to render many stimuli functionally equivalent and to initiate and guide equivalent forms of adaptive and expressive behaviour". A personal disposition or morphogenic trait is defined as "generalized neuro-psychic structure, with the capacity to render many stimuli functionally equivalent and to initiate and guide consistent forms of adaptive and stylistic behaviour."
The only difference between the two definitions is that the traits are not designated as being peculiar to the individual. The implication is that a trait may be shared by a number of individuals. Nevertheless, a trait is as much within an individual as a disposition is. Both are neuro-psychic structures, both have the capacity to render many stimuli functionally equivalent and both guide consistent forms of behaviour.
Although, traits and dispositions really exit in the person, they cannot be observed directly but have to be inferred from behaviour. Traits are 'loose' tendencies, each expression of which is slightly different because it occurs in the face of different 'determining conditions'. Traits are inferred from behaviour, not directly observed. Such inferences are made based on the frequency with which a person exhibits a certain type of behaviour, the range of situations in which that behaviour is exhibited, and the intensity of the behaviour when exihibited.
Habits are also determining tendencies but traits or dispositions are more general both in the situations appropriate to them and in the responses to which they lead. Actually the trait to a considerable extent represents the outcome of combining or integrating two or more habits. An attitude is also predisposition, it too may be unique, it may initiate or guide behaviour, and it is the product of genetic factors and learning. An attitude is linked with a specific object or class of objects, while a trait or disposition is not. The generality of a trait is greater than that of an attitude. As the number of objects to which an attitude refers increases, it comes to resemble a trait or disposition more and more. An attitude usually implies evaluation of an object, while a trait does not.
Finally Allport distinguished between traits (or personal dispositions) and types in terms of the extent to which they are tailored to the individual. Types are idealized conceptions of the observer, and the individual can be fitted to them, but only at the less of his or her distinctive identity. The personal disposition can represent the uniqueness of the person. Thus, for Allport, types represent artificial distinctions that bear no close resemblance to reality, and traits are true reflection of what actually exists.
Cardinal Central and Secondary Dispositions-personal dispositions represent generalized predispositions of behaviour. However to distinguish between the varying, degrees, Allport suggested a distinction between cardinal, central , and secondary dispositions. A cardinal disposition is so general that almost every act of a person who possesses one seems traceable to its influence. This variety of dispositions is unusual and not to be observed in many people. Central dispositions represent tendencies highly characteristic of the individual, are often called into play, and are very easy to infer. However, they are very few in number 5 or 10. The secondary disposition is more limited in occurrence, less crucial to the description of a personality, and more focalized in the responses it leads to and the stimuli to which it is appropriate.
Some traits are more impelling and have a more crucial motivational role than others. There is always a previous stimulation that is related to the activation of a trait. An external stimulus or an internal state precedes the operation of the trait. The trait is identifiable by its focal quality. It tends to have a centre around which its influence operates, but he behaviour it leads to is clearly influenced simultaneously by other traits.
Development of Personality
Allport's theory proposes important changes between infancy and adulthood.The infant
Allport considered the newborn infant almost altogether a creature of heredity, primitive drive and reflex existence. At birth the infant is innately endowed with certain physique and temperament potentialities, although fulfillment of these must wait upon growth and maturation. In addition, it is able to respond with some highly specific reflexes, such as sucking and swallowing, to rather clearly delimited kinds of stimulations. Finally, it displays mass action or gross undifferentiated responses in which most or all of the individual's muscular apparatus seems to be involved. The child is largely a creature of segmental tensions and pleasure-pain feelings. Motivated by the need to minimize pain and maximize pleasure and with these conditions largely determined by the reduction of visceral, segmental tensions, the child proceeds to develop. Some of the infant's behaviour is recognized as a forerunner of subsequent patterns of personality. By the second half of the first year the infant is definitely beginning to show distinctive qualities that presumably represent enduring personality attributes.Transformation of the infant
The process of development takes place along multiple lines. A wide variety of mechanisms or rinciples is considered appropriate by Allport to describe the changes that take plae between infany and adulthood.In respect to learning theory Allport says, conditioning, reinforcement theory and habit hierarchy are valid principles, when applied to animal, infant and opportunistic learning. They are inadequate to account for propriate learning, which requires such principles as identifiation, closure, cognitive insight, self-imagine, and subsidation to active ego-systems.
Thus, the organism at birth is a creature of biology, transformed into an individual who operates in terms of a growing ego, a widening trait structure and a kernel of future goals and aspirations. Crucial to this transformation is the role played by functional autonomy. This principle makes clear that what is initially a mere means to biological goal may become an autonomous motive that directs behaviour with all the power of an innately endowed drive.
The Adult
The mature person is an individual whose major determinant of behaviour are a set of organized and congruents traits. To a considerable extent the functioning of the traits is conscious and rational. Normal individuals know as a rule, what they are doing and why they do it. Their behaviour fits into a congruent pattern and at the core of this pattern lie the functions Allport termed propriate.Summary
Gordon Allport's trait theory represents a blend of humanistic and personalistic approaches to the study of human behaviour. Believing that the explanation of an individual's uniqueness is the paramount goal of psychology, Allport viewed personality as the dynamic organization of those internal psycho-physical systems that determine a person is characteristic behaviour and thought within the individual personality. It is 'what a person really is'.
Allport regarded trait as the most valid unit of analysis or understanding and studying personality. In his system trait are pre-dispositions to respond in an equivalent manner to various kinds of stimuli. Traits account for a persons behavioural consistencies over time and across situations. They may be classified under one of the 3 headings: cardinal, central or secondary-according to their degree of pervasiveness within a personality. Allport also distinguished between common and individual traits, the former being generalized dispositions to which most people within a given culture can be compared, where as the latter refer to personal dispositions peculiar to an individual, which do not permit comparison to others.
The overall construct that unifies traits and provides directions for the person's life is termed the proprium. This concept essentially refers to the 'self-as-known', including all aspects of personality that contribute to an inward sense of utility. Another of Allport's personality concept, is that of functional autonomy. This principle asserts that adult motives are not related to the earlier experiences in which they originally appeared. Allport further distinguished between perseverative functional autonomy, and propriate functional autonomy. The latter follows the development of a truly mature person. A mature person is one who has an extended sense of self, is warm relating to self and others, has emotional security, realistic perception, is capable of self-objectification, and has a unifying philosophy of life.
