China
Africa
Explore chapters and articles related to this topic
Personality and stress
Published in Tony Cassidy, Stress, Cognition and Health, 2023
While personality theories focusing specifically on stress are relatively recent in origin, the relationship between personality and both mental and physical illness have been recognised for a much longer time. Hippocrates (380 bc) linked personality types with mood and health in terms of the combination of black and yellow bile. In fact, many of the personality theories that have dominated psychological thinking over the past century began as attempts to explain abnormal behaviour or psychiatric disorder. Freud’s psychodynamic perspective clearly links personality and health through the individual’s attempts to cope with internal conflict, albeit at the unconscious level. The psychometric approach to personality is predicated on the assumption that personality types or traits range from normal to abnormal, with some traits, such as psychoticism, being developed specifically to describe and explain abnormal behaviour. It is assumed that those who score at the extremes on dimensions are prone to psychiatric disorder. In fact, many instruments were derived specifically for clinical diagnoses, for example, the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) (Hathaway & McKinley, 1945). Humanistic perspectives too were largely derived from the clinical field. George Kelly (1955), who derived personal construct theory, was a clinical psychologist. It is true that many would now feel more comfortable in describing Kelly’s theory as a cognitive rather than a personality theory.
Performance profiling
Published in Richard J. Butler, Sports Psychology in Action, 2020
Performance profiling evolved as a method of increasing the coach's awareness whilst acknowledging the importance of the athlete's perspective. It is embedded in a psychological model, personal construct theory, which emphasizes each individual's unique way of making sense of the 'world'. Performance profiling illustrates the athlete's perceived strengths and weaknesses, described in terms meaningful to the athlete. This enhances the coach's understanding of the athlete, information the sensitive coach will take account of when designing a training programme.
ISQ – Psychology
Published in Bhaskar Punukollu, Michael Phelan, Anish Unadkat, MRCPsych Part 1 In a Box, 2019
Bhaskar Punukollu, Michael Phelan, Anish Unadkat
False – The repertory grid (Bannister) is not an intelligence test. George Kelly’s personal construct theory emphasizes an individual’s self-appraisal in studying his or her own personality. The theory is that a person’s mental processes are psychologically channelled by the way they anticipate events. The repertory grid created by Bannister is a tool used between a patient and a therapist to consider the dimensions of the patient’s personality – it is based on the personal construct theory.
Implementation and evaluation of a standardized performance profile intervention with collegiate athletes: A comparison of the original and revised techniques
Published in Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 2022
Elmer A. Castillo, Matthew D. Bird, Graig M. Chow
Theoretically, the performance profile technique is based on Personal Construct Theory (PCT; Kelly, 1991) in understanding the uniqueness of each athlete’s perception of his or her sport performance. PCT attempts to develop a more holistic understanding of personal meaning-making and how an individual’s personal meaning guides his or her behavior (Gucciardi & Gordon, 2009a, 2009b). In addition to PCT, the technique is rooted within the principles of Deci and Ryan’s (1985) Cognitive Evaluation Theory (CET) by considering the social and environmental factors (e.g. feedback, coach behavior toward athletes, rewards) that may support or thwart an athlete’s intrinsic motivation to engage in sport. CET emphasizes the role of basic psychological need (i.e., autonomy, competence, relatedness) satisfaction in facilitating more self-determined motivation, which in turn bring about more positive cognitive (e.g., concentration), affective (e.g., interest, enjoyment) and behavioral (e.g., performance, effort, perseverance) outcomes (Deci & Ryan, 1985). Specifically, performance profiling is proposed to enhance athletes’ perceptions of (a) autonomy through its client-centric nature, (b) competence through engaging in performance profiling over time (e.g., pre-, mid-, post-season) to monitor progress and improvement, and (c) relatedness through delivery of the profiling process in a group setting to encourage teammates to interact and discuss performance-related issues—all of which, in turn, are believed to facilitate intrinsic motivation (Weston et al., 2013).
Exploring the relationship between narrative complexity and recovery from substance misuse
Published in Journal of Substance Use, 2021
David Rowlands, Donna Youngs, David Canter
The study of cognitive complexity has its roots in Kelly’s (1955) Personal Construct Theory, which proposes that individuals interpret the world through psychosocial constructs that relate to people and psychological domains; in other words, experiential concepts, prefiguring narrative approaches. Defined as the number of different concepts individuals bring to considering phenomena (Scott, 1962), cognitive complexity has been measured in terms of differentiation within personal construct systems (O’Keefe & Sypher, 1981; Suedfeld et al., 1992). Furthermore, studies have related individuals’ ability to process different points of view in decision-making with flexible coping strategies (Labouvie-Vief and Diehl, 2000).
Re-introducing Cognitive Complexity: A Meta-analysis and Agenda for Future Research
Published in Human Performance, 2020
Haley M. Woznyj, George C. Banks, Alexandra M. Dunn, Gregory Berka, David Woehr
Shortly after Kelly (1955) published his seminal piece on personal construct theory, Bieri (1955) introduced cognitive complexity as an individual difference variable based on the theory. Cognitive complexity was meant to reflect how people differ in terms of the complexity of the cognitive schema used to process information with respect to their environment (Dierdorff & Rubin, 2007; Woehr et al., 1998). Drawing upon Kelly’s (1955) theory of personality, cognitive complexity can be formally defined as “the degree to which the entire and/or sub segment of cognitive sematic space is differentiated and integrated” (Streufert & Castore, 1971, p. 17). That is, people vary in the extent to which they perceive and process information in a multidimensional way (Bieri, 1955; Carraher & Buckley, 1996; Dierdorff & Rubin, 2007; Goodwin & Ziegler, 1998; Woehr et al., 1998). Individuals high in cognitive complexity tend to perceive and process information in a more complex, multidimensional manner than individuals with lower cognitive complexity (Carraher & Buckley, 1996). In other words, cognitively complex individuals tend to process stimuli in terms of a larger number of different dimensions (e.g., happy-sad and outgoing-shy; Bieri et al., 1966; Goodwin & Ziegler, 1998). In addition, individuals higher in cognitive complexity are thought to better predict the behaviors of others as well as organizational events (Bieri, 1955). Evidence has also linked lower cognitive complexity to leniency in performance appraisals (Schneier, 1977). In addition, cognitive complexity attempts to address limitations in information processing (Dierdorff & Rubin, 2007; Morgeson & Campion, 1997).