Understanding social behavior is an essential concept in day-to-day relations, as well as in guiding, assessing, and evaluating human performance. Characterizing human personalities can enable one to define and explain personal differences and determine an ideal individual to undertake a given task. Accordingly, several psychologists have endeavored to characterize personalities through different models to give an inclusive discernment of human behavior. The big five facets of the personality model are among the approaches that scholars have applied to comprehend the human mind. The models categorize human traits into five essential components: openness, conscientiousness, introversion, agreeableness, and neuroticism, which are commonly denoted by the acronym OCEAN.
The big five theory is important in the field of psychology in numerous ways. For example, the human elements differentiate various human characters and enhance theory building (De Raad & Mlačić, 2015). Moreover, they provide a broad summary of essential personality building blocks, such as a clear examination of psychological development progression and authenticates the transforming personality tendencies and assist individuals to understand how they equate to others and put titles to their individualities. They also explore interactions between behavior and several other life indicators; for instance, consequential effects, such as physical health and well-being and accomplishment in social, educational, and career contexts. According to psychologists, big five theory shows how individuals demonstrate associations between how they rate on characteristic scales and how they feel about numerous facets of their lives. Overall, the big five factors personality model is essential in dealing with individuals by describing and interpreting their unique behavior differences and altering situations and settings.
Social Learning Theory by Albert Bandura
The Social Learning Theory by Albert Bandura asserts that behaviors are cultured through interactions with numerous socializing agents to which an individual is exposed, though this concept is underexplored. According to the model, behaviors are either adopted or avoided through these interactions children have (Burdick, 2014). Moreover, minors learn from what they practice daily, therefore, the regular activities children engage in influence their character development, social relations, and aptitudes (Burdick, 2014). Nonetheless, the supposition has been criticized for being too artificial in its findings. For instance, if an adult acts fiercely to a child, other minors are not likely to replicate the behavior. Furthermore, other children will not be manipulated into repeating the aggressive act. The experiment of the Bobo used in supporting the model is also underexplored. Critics of social learning theory highlight the difference between Bobo, the doll, and other normal children. Whereas children are quick to imitate bellicosity when the object is a doll, the behavior is rare when dealing with another child.
Bandura maintains that children begin to realize and nurture their capabilities and associate with the frontrunners of the actions. Nonetheless, even though Bandura’s Social Learning theory maintains that it is the imitation of behaviors that nurture the character of the youth, the theory is underexplored due to the existence of other genetic disorders, such as psychiatric conditions, which significantly contribute to behavior change among children. Therefore, Bandura’s biological theory disregards biological states and autonomic nervous system responses since some behaviors and responses are not only adopted but partly inherited. Other avenues, such as the media, are also a medium of learning, which influence the behavior of children. The feature of the media as a socializing agent can make Bandura’s model more relevant where minors spend most of their time in the media, for instance, watching television. Nonetheless, in some instances, watching television actually decreases the amount of belligerent behavior among minors since children can relate with characters involved in a vicious act and release their vehement feelings. Therefore, despite the significance of Bandura’s Social Learning theory in understanding children’s behavior, the model is underdeveloped.
“Feud’s Perspective on Women”
As the author of the article also noted, I find Freud’s sentiments interesting because while the scholar, in most cases, claimed that he knew less about women, several female figures were significant in his personal life. In the first place, Freud was the eldest son of his mother, who loved him. Besides, his relationship with his wife was cordial. Therefore, one cannot stop thinking that Freud’s opinion regarding women was misguided. This argument is supported by various women scholars who have played an essential role in shaping the psychoanalysis field.
In the article, Sigmund Freud’s observations on women were controversial, particularly during his lifetime. The views continue to induce substantial debate even currently (Swaim, 2020). I also find interesting why many such Freud assumed that women’s bodies functioned in a specific way, and they could not assume certain positions or were unfit for specific social responsibilities. Although Sigmund had this perception with regard to the article, I do not blame him for his mistaken association between individuals’ sex and body functioning to social roles, which is referred to as biological determinism. I am certain that the inclination during his time could have played a significant role in the subjugation, stereotyping, and discernment of women. However, the attitude is interesting since I do not understand how an individual can sacrifice all the love and care he is receiving only to think the way society functions. Besides, the scholar should have championed for the interest of women who played an essential role in his life other than propagating a backward form of thought process that barred women from participating in essential activities, such as voting and assuming public roles. Therefore, Freud’s depiction of women, as represented in the article, could have been triggered by the old thought of biological determinism, which he could not confront.
Personality Psychology and Social Psychology
Personality psychology and social psychology integrate since they perform the same role: they seek to understand the expressive, consequential, and the social behaviors of humans. The two models have the same roots (Lanning, 2017). Social psychology focuses on the study of what individuals have in common, particularly circumstances that change what people do. On the other hand, personality seeks to understand how individuals differ from each other psychologically and determine approaches to depict and assess these differences. Cognitive psychology, biological psychology, and developmental psychology are the foundations for the common concern of social and personality psychology, which is aimed at comprehending what individuals do every day. Therefore, the two fields are essential and relate as they pursue an intrinsically significant knowledge regarding human behavior.
Personality Psychology and Politics
Studies that link psychology and politics have demonstrated that personality characters, for instance, extroversion and openness to circumstances, are conditioning aspects to political activism. However, these two concepts’ relation is not clear. Most political scientists have continually depicted a connection between personality traits, assessed using the Ten Item Personality Inventory (TIPI) battery, and people’s political approaches and behaviors. Those associations provided a causal intervention to personality in influencing political outcomes. Therefore, though not extensively researched, personality psychology plays an essential role in political decisions.
Burdick, C. L. (2014). The merits, limitations, and modifications of applying Bandura’s social learning theory to understanding African American children’s exposure to violence. American International Journal of Social Science, 3(5), 183-190.
De Raad, B., & Mlačić, B. (2015). Big five factor model, theory and structure. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences, 2 (2), 559-566.
Lanning, K. (2017). What is the relationship between “personality” and “social” psychologies? Network, community, and whole text analyses of the structure of contemporary scholarship. Collabra: Psychology, 3(1), 2-15.
Swaim, E. (2020). Freud’s perspective on women. Retrieved from https://www.verywellmind.com/how-sigmund-freud-viewed-women-2795859