The theory that I thought made the most sense was the five factor theory or the OCEAN of personality. In this theory, there are 5 basic traits that all the other aspects of personality fall into.
Openness to experience -- ranging from outgoing to reserved.
Conscientiousness -- ranging from organized to careless.
Extroversion/Introversion -- extrovert liking group activities and social endeavors; introvert preferring solitude and quiet.
Agreeableness -- stubborn vs. easy going or suspicious vs. trusting.
Neuroticism -- emotional stability. High neuroticism = instability, low neuroticism = calm and reserved.
To me, this one made the most sense because it had the right amount of categories - not too many but not too few. Hans Eysenck had 4 basic dispositions - but I felt like this was too few. Gordon Allport had different kinds of traits - but didn't list specific ones. Raymond Cattell had 16 traits - which was way too many and they overlapped.
I thought that many traits could fall into each of these categories and they didn't really overlap or weren't repetitive.
Which theory made the most sense/did you like most?
To me, it seems like the Five Factor Theory is good, but even it overlaps a little. It looks like openness to experience and extroversion/introversion are kind of the same, as they both assess how outgoing or "not-outgoing" a person is. I don't know that any one theory especially speaks to me, as they all incorporate a slightly different perspective and include different traits. However, I did like the Five Factor Theory the best because, like you said, it's pruned down to the most important things, and it's not too many or too few.
ReplyDelete