Introduction

Personality is the unique combination of patterns that influence behaviour, thought ,motivation and emotion in a human being . an individual’s personality is the combination of traits and patterns that influence their behaviour , thought motivation and emotion.

Meaning

The word personality is derived from a Greek word “persona” which means “to speak through.” Personality is the combination of characteristics or qualities that forms a person’s unique identity. It signifies the role which a person plays in public. Every individual has a unique, personal and major determinant of his behavior that defines his/her personality. Personality is a complex, multi-dimensional construct and there is no simple definition of what personality is. 

Definition

• According to GORDON ALLPORT, “Personality is the dynamic organisation within the individual of those psychological systems that determine his unique adjustment to his environment.”
• According to FLOYD L. RUCH, “Personality includes external appearance and behaviour, inner awareness of self as a permanent organizing force and the particular pattern or organisation of measurable traits, both inner and outer.”
• According to FRED LUTHANS, “Personality means how a person affects others and how he understands and views himself as well as the pattern of inner and outer measurable traits and the person-situation interaction.”
• According to SALVATORE MADDI, “Personality is a stable set of characteristics and tendencies that determine those commonalities and differences in the psychological behaviour (thoughts, feelings and actions) of people that have continuity in time and that may not be easily understood as the sole result of the social and biological pressures of the moment.”

Characteristics of Personality

• Personality refers to both physical and psychological qualities of an individual.
• It is unique in the sense that no two individuals are same in terms of their personality.
• Personality is the manner of adjustment of individual to the organisation, environment and the group.
• Personality is dynamic. It changes with the time and situation.
• Personality is a system. It has input, processing and output mechanisms.
• Personality influences goal achievement and performance of an individual.

Nature of Personality

1. PSYCHO-PHYSICAL SYSTEM : Personality happens to be such a system which combines two types of qualities-psychological and physical traits. Psychological traits include character, temperament, intelligence, etc. On the other hand, the physical qualities are characterised by complexion, weight, health, etc. Personality is neither completely psychological, nor physical, instead it is a mixture of both.
2. DYNAMIC ORGANISATION: Personality is a dynamic organisation. Organisation simply means the combination of some qualities both psychological and physical. In other words, we can say that when we look at all the qualities of a person collectively, we can call it organisation. The different traits of an organisation cannot be separated. To be dynamic means, which is subject to change. There are always some changes in the traits of the organisation from time to time. It is because of this that the personality has been given the name of being a dynamic organisation. For example, somebody can be honest and punctual today but it is quite possible that he may not be honest and punctual tomorrow.
3. CONSISTENCY : Consistency happens to be the third chief characteristics of personality. It simply means the consistent behaviour of an individual on two different occasions. For example, if a person possesses the quality of being punctual at home, he would be punctual in the office as well.
4. ADJUSTMENT ABILITY : Personality and adjustment ability have a deep relation. It is only on the basis of his personality that a person makes adjustment with the atmosphere or surroundings. In case a person fails to make adjustment with his surroundings, it can be said that he lacks personality. In other words, personality happens to be the power or strength that helps an individual to make adjustment with his surroundings. Everybody possesses a different personality. It is because of this that different people adjust differently to some similar surroundings.
5. UNIQUENESS : Personality has the quality of being unique. Any two individuals, however similar they may be, cannot be having the similar personality. That is precisely the reason that an individual behaves differently. Every individual happens to be a combination of various unique qualities Consequently, every individual has a unique personality of his own.
6. WHOLENESS : Every individual possesses a variety of psychological and physical traits. All these traits go to form personality. In other words, every trait or quality forms a part of personality. The sum total of all the qualities alone go to form personality. In this way, it can be said that personality is a complete unit in itself. These inherent qualities cannot be separated. In case these qualities get separated the very existence of personality vanishes
7. PERSISTENCY : Persistency happens to be a significant quality of personality. If we take away persistency from personality, what is left is simply a failure. It is only the people with a strong personality who can adjust themselves with every kind of condition or circumstance and it is only such people who achieve success. A personality that lacks persistency cannot be called a good personality.
8. SOCIABILITY : It is an undoubted fact that personality gets influenced by social interaction. When an individual comes in contact with different people in society, he undergoes different types of experiences. These experiences richly contribute to the development of personality. When personality comes in contact with social influences, it achieves maturity which gives a glow or a sparkle to personality.
9. SELF-CONSCIOUSNESS : Self-consciousness means ‘knowledge of the self or ‘consciousness about the self. When a person gets conscious about his self, personality gets reflected. In other words, so long a person does not get to know his ownself the question of personality is simply irrelevant. It is a common knowledge that a child lacks self-consciousness, so he lacks personality also. As he grows and starts getting to know himself, his personality also starts reflecting itself

INTRODUCTION

Besides the grand theories in personality, there is much more to be incorporated in the study of personality. There are several issues in the study of personality that have either remained unresolved or are still in the process of resolution.In this unit you will learn about the impact of heredity on personality and the various research studies that have been conducted to ascertain the relationship between these two factors. The unit also gives a glimpse of the heredity versus environment debate and points out the many research work in regard to this area and the conclusions that have been arrived at based on the research. An attempt has also been made in this unit to present the person versus situation controversy wherein it has been pointed out as to how the consistency in behaviour across situations is questioned. The interactionist approach in regard to this issue has been elaborated.

GENES AND PERSONALITY

Nature versus nurture is probably the oldest issue in psychology. This is an age old dispute among behavioural psychologists, philosophers, theologians, and theorists of consciousness. “Nature versus nurture” is a term coined by the English Victorian Polymath Francis Galton regarding the influence of heredity and environment on the development of personality..

Nature versus Nurture Debate

The nature versus nurture debate basically relates to the relative importance of an individual’s inherent traits versus the personal experiences that lead to individual differences in physical and behavioural traits.

Some scientists are of the view that genetic predispositions or even animal instincts are the push factors behind people’s behaviour. Others believe that the way one behaves is directly dependent upon the manner in which the person has been taught to behave. The former is known as the “nature” theory of human behaviour whereas the latter is termed as the “nurture” theory of human behaviour. Sir Francis Galton was fascinated by the idea of genetic pre-programming and tried to uncover the predestined ways of human beings. However, many of his experiments proved ill-conceived but yet his contribution has been vital to the study of personality issues. The technique of finger printing and the Word Association Test are the end products of Galton’s contribution.

It has been stated that at the time of birth the child has no specific traits except that it functions through its reflexes. As the child grows day by day, and in the process of socialisation it learns many things in regard to the environemtn. It is said that the child thus at birth is in a blank state of mind or ‘tabula rasa’, and whatever one wants to put into it, the same would be absorbed and the child’s behaviour accordingly will change. This view which holds that “nurture” yields all or almost all the behavioural traits in the individual child. Thus the environment (nurture) plays a significant role in the development of the child’s personality.

However, the fast growing understanding of the human genome has come up with the information that both the sides are right in their own part. Whereas nature provides us with inherent abilities and traits, nurture reshapes these genetic tendencies and molds them with progressive learning and maturity. This view point which agrees that both nature and nurture play crucial roles in human personality development has come to be known as interactionism.

The Nature Theory – Heredity

It has been demonstrated by scientists that traits such as eye color and hair color are decided by specific genes that are embedded and encoded in each human cell. The things have been taken a step further by the nature theory that formulates in more recent times it has also been shown that the more abstract traits such as intelligence, personality, aggression and sexual orientation are also encoded in an individual’s DNA. This has led to the concept of behavioural genes which can justify criminal acts or criminal behaviours.

Another debated issue in context of nature theory is the occurrence of “gay gene” that points to a genetic component to sexual orientation.

If there is no role of genetics, then fraternal twins brought up under the same environmental conditions, would be alike, even though differences exist in their genetic make up. But, according to the studies, they closely resemble each other as compared to non-twin brothers and sisters.

The Nurture Theory – Environment

The proponents of the nurture theory are of the view that genetic tendencies ultimately do not matter. They believe that our behavioural aspects originate only from the environmental forces in our upbringing.

American psychologist John Watson, a strong proponent of environmental learning, demonstrated that disorders like phobia could also be explained by classical conditioning.

Today, known as the Father of Behavioral Science, B.F. Skinner proved that human behaviour could be conditioned in much the same way as animals.

Even if reared apart, identical twins should have been exactly the same in all respects if environment had no role to play.

Twin Studies

Twin studies are an important tool in resolving the nature versus nurture argument. Identical twins or Monozygotic twins, are siblings who have exact duplicates of their genotypes. They best indicate that whether biological dispositions affect traits and psychopathology in human beings.

Fraternal twins, disygotic twins share exactly half the number of genes with each other. They are a very good basis for comparison of identical twins. Twin studies usually rely on samples of identical and fraternal twins. Some of the important studies on twins and related findings are presented below.

A study was conducted to determine the heritability of attitudes among twins, as well as the genetic variables, such as intelligence, that can play a role in affecting the attitudes among pairs of twins. The results of the study showed partial correlation between the attitudes of the participants with their genetic factors. Also, correlation existed between the attitudes related to self-reported perspectives or to activities. For example, the subjects were asked to rate themselves on the trait of sociability through a survey. The trait was correlated with 5 out of 6 attitudes factors that the subjects had towards sociability.

It was also found that non-shared environment experiences between pairs are the strongest cause of attitude variances that overshadowed genetic predispositions as well as shared environment experiences (Olson et al., 2001). Non-shared environment refers to a condition in which something in the environment directly affects one twin but no impact occurs on the other at all (Van denOord, 2000).

A Swedish study was conducted to measure personality traits of extraversion and neuroticism among the twin pairs, impulsivity trait and family environment and socio-economic status. The findings showed that the genotypes and the environment interaction is an important concept in twin studies as it can also be applied to the way people with the same genotypes might respond to similar environment.

Our particular genotype environment, labeled Type I, indicates that the environment plays a more significant role with a genotype for low scores on a specific personality trait. It means that individuals with low genotypes for extraversion would also score low on extraversion. Type-II genotype that is, the environment interaction, on the other hand, is exactly the opposite of Type-I.

Infant Shyness

An adoption study was conducted to uncover the reasons behind why some infants are open and responsive to attention, some take a bit longer to open up while some others are withdrawn. It is difficult to tell whether babies are shy because of the environment in which they are brought up as their mothers are shy or because they inherit the shyness traits from their mothers.

Adoptive parents were given questionnaires that asked them to rate their infants on the measure of shyness. The results revealed that in non-adoptive families, the parents with high shyness rates also had shy infants. One significant conclusion revealed that those biological mothers who rated high on shyness, had their adopted babies as also shy. This shows some evidence of the effect of a genetic link on family environment (Daniels & Plomin, 1985).

Anti-social Personality Disorder

Attempts have been made to see whether children who are at risk for antisocial personality disorder develop symptoms in an adoptive family or gets protection against the disorder in such environment. Results have revealed that anti-social personality disorder is more prevalent in adopted children having biological risk factors. Results further revealed that if both the biological parents and adoptive parents come from criminal background, there is high incidence of an element of criminal tendencies in the offspring,

For various reasons the interpretation of the results of adoption studies is very difficult and valid conclusions cannot be made. Genetic factors are “simulated” when the adoptive family environment is similar to the biological environment.

Family Studies

However, not as valid as twin and adoption studies, but still family studies play an important role in resolving the heredity versus environment debate. These are mainly used to identify the degree of risk of developing mental disorders by relatives and other family members. Such studies are mainly used to determine the risk of inheritance of mental disorders to offspring within families. These types of studies are performed using molecular genetic studies where the DNA from the participant’s blood samples is taken and the observed behaviour is projected.

CROSS CULTURAL ISSUES

Personality and culture are interwoven and still their relationship cannot be comprehended well. But it is also true that the culture of an individual is not the sole determiner of an individual’s personality. The framework of individualism versus collectivism can be utilised to observe this as it predisposes individualism or collectivism. It is one of basic differences that have been described in varying national cultures. Factors such as personal achievement, egalitarian relationships, role flexibility team and familial connections etc. are used to describe personality traits and differences between individuals of various cultures (Hofstede, 2001). However, it is not possible to attribute all the factors under individualismcollectivism web only to the cultural influence. The framework of individualism collectivism is mainly used to describe personality characteristics traits and habits generating from within cultures where certain individualist or collectivist traits occur. An element of doubt gets raised up while applying the principles of this framework in personality perception of an individual as it may lead to stereotyping and misinterpreting of an individual’s personality and his characteristic of behaviour. The individualism famework can be of more use in describing cultural tendencies as a whole rather than describing individual characteristics and traits. However, this does not imply that the individualism collectivism paradigm is naïve and can be excluded in studying the domain of personality. It can be easily inferred from the above discussion that the interplay between personality and culture is quite complex. It is also clear that even in adulthood, personality can be affected by cultural expectations. Simultaneously, this is also to be acknowledged that this individualism -collectivism orientation is not the only determining factor of personality.

PERSONALITY TRAITS AND FIVE FACTOR MODEL

As defined by McCrae & Costa in 1990, “Personality traits are the dimensions of individual differences in tendencies to show consistent patterns of thoughts feelings and actions.” Psychologists working in the area of personality like Raymond Cattell, Eysenck have noted that organisation of traits can be done in much smaller clusters of similar trait rather than studying each of the 4,000 traits as identified by Allport and Odbert. Thus, a parsimonious structure of traits can help a great deal in personality research.

Ending the decades long dispute about the mot suitable personality structure, the Five Factor Model developed by McCrae & John, 1992 came up with five factors or dimensions viz. Neuroticism (N), Extroversion (E), Openness to Experience (O), Agreeableness (A) and conscientiousness (C). Individuals high in neuroticism are likely to be anxious, irritable and low at emotional end and those low in neuroticism are calm and emotionally stable. Extroverts are sociable, cheerful and outgoing; introverts are shy and sober. Open men and women are curious whereas closed people are run by conventions. Agreeable people are compassionate, modest whereas conscientious are mainly driven by punctuality and purposefulness.

Originally, the five factor model was discovered by analysing the English language trait names and individuals standing on each of the five factors could be measured by asking them to rate themselves on a series of adjectives (Goldeberg, 1992). The most widely used measure of the Five Factor Model is the Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R, Costa & McCrae, 1992). It assesses 30 specific traits, six for each of the five factors.

The Five Factor Model Across Cultures

Personality factors in trait adjectives from different languages have been examined with lexical studies and mixed results have surfaced from these studies which show that E, A and C factors almost always appear but N and O disappear from the picture sometimes. It is not clear whether these factors are not there in the culture itself or are missing from the set of adjectives studied. 

Thus, great caution should be used while comparing the personality scores across cultures. Personality traits are expressed differently in different cultures and a single set of questionnaire items does not suffice in every culture.

ISSUES RELATING TO THEORETICAL MODELS

For the understanding and explanation of personality, various theoretical models have been proposed. The different models have explained personality with respect to their theoretical propositions e.g. the Psychoanalytic theory explains personality taking intra-psychic and conscious-unconscious mind into account whereas the Behaviorist model totally rejects this approach and emphasises the role of learning and environment in the shaping and development of personality. The Humanistic Model takes a different approach. It is true that every model seems to be correct from its own perspective but when we consider the other models, many of their features become redundant, irrelevant and may be invalid. Therefore, one, who is interested in understanding the phenomenon of personality by going through various theoretical accounts, may not be able to have a clear view of the personality as construct. Therefore, there is a need of an eclectic model which incorporates the features of various models into it and aids in shaping of personality.

Some other issues in personality that need to be attended to at length are:

1. Free will vs determinism. Means that whether our behaviour is directed by freedom intrinsic to our nature or by the ultimately determined forces.
2. Uniqueness vs Universality. Implies that whether each person is unique in his own existence or is driven by some universal behaviour patterns.
3. Physiological vs purposive motivation. Some researchers assume that we are pushed by basic physiological needs like food, water etc. while others are of the view that we are pulled by our purpose, goals, values, principles etc.
4. Conscious vs Unconscious motivation. Some researchers believe that our behaviour and experience are determined by conscious forces whereas others say that we are not aware of the forces driving our behaviour, i.e. the unconscious element.
5. Stage vs Non-stage theories of development. It is an extension of the nature nurture issue that whether or not we all pass through predetermined stages of development like fetal, childhood, puberty, adulthood, senescence-controlled basically by genetics.
6. Cultural determinism vs Cultural transcendence. To what extent our personality is molded by our cultures is the issue here. If not determined by culture, our transcendence is some other kind of determinism.
7. Early Vs Late Personality Formation. This issue deals with if our personality characteristics are established in early childhood or it is quite flexible in adulthood. This question relates to the issues of genetics, external determination etc. Here, the major limitation resolution is the confusion in defining personality characteristics.
8. Optimism Vs Pessimism. Whether humans are basically good or bad is the central issue here. The attitude determines what we see when we look at humanity.

The Eastern perspective on personality is deeply rooted in philosophical, religious, and cultural traditions that emphasize harmony, balance, collectivism, and spirituality. Unlike Western psychology, which tends to focus on individuality, traits, and cognitive processes, Eastern psychology views personality as interconnected with nature, society, and cosmic forces. This perspective is primarily influenced by philosophies such as Hinduism, Buddhism, Confucianism, Taoism, and Zen traditions, each of which offers unique insights into human personality.

Hindu Perspective on Personality

Hindu philosophy, particularly as outlined in the Vedas, Upanishads, and Bhagavad Gita, presents a holistic view of personality, seeing it as a composite of body, mind, and soul. One of the most influential concepts in this regard is the Triguṇa (three gunas) theory, which categorizes personality into three fundamental qualities:

1. Sattva (Purity, Harmony, Knowledge) – Individuals dominated by Sattva are calm, wise, and selfless. They prioritize knowledge, peace, and spirituality.
2. Rajas (Passion, Activity, Ambition) – Rajasic personalities are dynamic, competitive, and driven by desires. They seek success, power, and material gains.
3. Tamas (Inertia, Darkness, Ignorance) – Those with Tamasic traits exhibit laziness, confusion, and a lack of motivation. They may be prone to destructive behaviors.

Hinduism also emphasizes the concept of Dharma (duty and righteousness), which suggests that personality development is tied to fulfilling one’s moral and social responsibilities. The Karma theory further reinforces this by asserting that an individual’s actions (past and present) shape their personality and future experiences.

Buddhist Perspective on Personality

Buddhism offers a unique, non-self-based understanding of personality. The doctrine of Anatta (non-self) argues that there is no permanent, unchanging core of personality; rather, it is an ever-changing flow of experiences and consciousness. The Buddhist analysis of personality is structured through the Five Aggregates (Pañca-Khandha):

1. Rūpa (Form) – The physical body and material aspects of existence.
2. Vedanā (Feeling/Sensation) – Emotional responses to sensory experiences.
3. Saññā (Perception) – Cognitive recognition and interpretation of experiences.
4. Saṅkhāra (Mental Formations) – Desires, habits, and volitions that shape personality.
5. Viññāṇa (Consciousness) – Awareness and the ability to experience the world.

Buddhism further outlines The Four Noble Truths and The Eightfold Path, which describe how suffering arises from attachment and how enlightenment can be achieved through right thought, right action, and meditation. A person’s personality transformation is linked to mindfulness (Sati), compassion (Karuna), and wisdom (Prajna).

Confucian Perspective on Personality

Confucianism, which profoundly influences personality development in East Asia, views personality as deeply embedded in social relationships, ethics, and moral cultivation. Confucius emphasized the development of Ren (humaneness), Li (propriety), and Xiao (filial piety) as essential aspects of a virtuous personality.

A well-developed personality, according to Confucian thought, is harmonious and duty-bound, guided by the following principles:

• Ren (Benevolence, Kindness) – The foundation of a moral personality that prioritizes kindness and empathy.
• Li (Rituals, Order, Etiquette) – The cultivation of discipline and adherence to societal norms.
• Yi (Righteousness) – Acting with integrity and fairness.
• Xin (Trustworthiness) – Developing credibility and reliability in interpersonal relationships.

The ideal Confucian personality is the Junzi (gentleman or superior person), who exemplifies wisdom, respect, and moral responsibility. Unlike Western personality theories that emphasize individual achievement, Confucianism sees personality as a function of ethical behavior within a community.

Taoist Perspective on Personality

Taoism, founded by Laozi, takes a more naturalistic and spontaneous view of personality. Central to Taoist psychology is the concept of the Dao (The Way), which represents the natural order of the universe. A well-balanced personality is one that follows the Dao through:

• Wu Wei (Effortless Action) – Allowing things to unfold naturally rather than forcing them.
• Yin-Yang Balance – Recognizing the complementary forces of nature within oneself.
• Ziran (Spontaneity) – Emphasizing authenticity, simplicity, and living in harmony with nature.

Taoism suggests that rigid structures and artificial expectations can distort personality and lead to psychological suffering. A person who embodies the Taoist ideal flows effortlessly with life’s circumstances, embracing change and adaptability.

Comparison with Western Perspectives

While Western psychology is primarily concerned with defining personality through fixed traits and behaviors (e.g., Big Five Personality Traits, Freud’s Psychoanalysis, or Jung’s Archetypes), the Eastern perspective sees personality as fluid, relational, and deeply intertwined with cosmic and social order.

• Self vs. No-Self: Western theories emphasize an independent, stable self, while Eastern traditions, particularly Buddhism, argue that the self is an illusion shaped by transient experiences.
• Traits vs. States: Western models focus on stable traits (e.g., extroversion, neuroticism), whereas Eastern psychology considers personality dynamic and shaped by context.
• Individualism vs. Collectivism: Western theories prioritize personal identity and self-actualization (e.g., Maslow’s hierarchy of needs), while Eastern traditions stress duty, interdependence, and harmony within society.
• Material vs. Spiritual Development: Western personality theories often emphasize biological and cognitive aspects, while Eastern traditions incorporate spirituality, meditation, and mindfulness into personality development.

Modern Implications and Integration

Contemporary psychology is increasingly recognizing the value of Eastern perspectives in understanding personality. Mindfulness-based therapies (MBT), Yoga Psychology, and Compassion-Focused Therapy (CFT) integrate elements of Buddhist and Hindu thought into mental health practices. Research suggests that meditation, gratitude, and ethical living—core aspects of Eastern psychology—enhance emotional resilience, self-regulation, and well-being.

Moreover, studies on neuroplasticity and consciousness align with Buddhist ideas of impermanence and change, supporting the notion that personality is malleable rather than fixed. In multicultural psychology, the Eastern emphasis on collectivism and moral cultivation provides insights into personality development in non-Western societies.

Conclusion

The Eastern perspective on personality in psychology offers a holistic, interconnected, and evolving view of human nature. Rooted in philosophy, spirituality, and social harmony, it contrasts with Western individualism by emphasizing ethical behavior, mindfulness, and adaptability. While Hinduism explores personality through gunas and karma, Buddhism presents a non-self framework, Confucianism focuses on moral cultivation, and Taoism advocates for natural spontaneity. Integrating these perspectives into modern psychology enhances our understanding of personality as a dynamic, fluid, and relational construct that extends beyond individual traits to include spiritual, ethical, and social dimensions.