background preloader

Conscientiousness

Conscientiousness
Personality models[edit] Origin[edit] Terms such as 'hard-working,' 'reliable,' and 'persevering' describe desirable aspects of character. Because it was once believed to be a moral evaluation, conscientiousness was overlooked as a real psychological attribute. The reality of individual differences in conscientiousness has now been clearly established by studies of cross-observer agreement. Measurement[edit] A person's level of conscientiousness is generally assessed using self-report measures, although peer-reports and third-party observation can also be used. Lexical[edit] Lexical measures use individual adjectives that reflect conscientiousness traits, such as efficient and systematic, and are very space and time efficient for research purposes. Statement[edit] Statement measures tend to comprise more words than lexical measures, so hence consume more research instrument space and more respondent time to complete. Behavior[edit] Development[edit] Daily life[edit] Subjective well-being[edit] Related:  Personality Psychologyfields related to Cognitive Psychology

Neuroticism Emotional stability[edit] At the opposite end of the spectrum, individuals who score low in neuroticism are more emotionally stable and less reactive to stress. They tend to be calm, even-tempered, and less likely to feel tense or rattled. Although they are low in negative emotion, they are not necessarily high on positive emotion. Being high on positive emotion is an element of the independent trait of extraversion. Measurement[edit] Like other personality traits, neuroticism is typically viewed as a continuous dimension rather than distinct. Extent of neuroticism is generally assessed using self-report measures, although peer-reports and third-party observation can also be used. Lexical measures use individual adjectives that reflect neurotic traits, such as anxiety, envy, jealously, moodiness, and are very space and time efficient for research purposes. Statement measures tend to comprise more words, and hence consume more research instrument space, than lexical measures.

Openness to experience Openness to experience is one of the domains which are used to describe human personality in the Five Factor Model.[1][2] Openness involves six facets, or dimensions, including active imagination, aesthetic sensitivity, attentiveness to inner feelings, preference for variety, and intellectual curiosity.[3] A great deal of psychometric research has demonstrated that these facets or qualities are significantly correlated.[2] Thus, openness can be viewed as a global personality trait consisting of a set of specific traits, habits, and tendencies that cluster together. Openness tends to be normally distributed with a small number of individuals scoring extremely high or low on the trait, and most people scoring moderately.[2] People who score low on openness are considered to be closed to experience. They tend to be conventional and traditional in their outlook and behavior. They prefer familiar routines to new experiences, and generally have a narrower range of interests. Measurement[edit]

Agreeableness Agreeableness is a personality trait manifesting itself in individual behavioral characteristics that are perceived as kind, sympathetic, cooperative, warm and considerate.[1] In contemporary personality psychology, agreeableness is one of the five major dimensions of personality structure, reflecting individual differences in cooperation and social harmony.[2] People who score high on this dimension tend to believe that most people are honest, decent, and trustworthy. People scoring low on agreeableness are generally less concerned with others' well-being and report having less empathy. Therefore, these individuals are less likely to go out of their way to help others. Low agreeableness is often characterized by skepticism about other people's motives, resulting in suspicion and unfriendliness. People very low on agreeableness have a tendency to be manipulative in their social relationships. They are also more likely to compete than to cooperate. History[edit] The Big Five[edit]

Extraversion and introversion The trait of extraversion–introversion is a central dimension of human personality theories. The terms introversion and extraversion were first popularized by Carl Jung,[1] Although both the popular understanding and psychological age differ from his original intent. Extraversion tends to be manifested in outgoing, talkative, energetic behavior, whereas introversion is manifested in more reserved and solitary behavior.[2] Virtually all comprehensive models of personality include these concepts in various forms. Examples include the Big Five model, Jung's analytical psychology, Hans Eysenck's three-factor model, Raymond Cattell's 16 personality factors, the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory, and the Myers–Briggs Type Indicator. In any case, people fluctuate in their behavior all the time, and even extreme introverts and extroverts do not always act according to their type. Varieties[edit] Extraversion[edit] Introversion[edit] Ambiversion[edit] Measurement[edit] Eysenck's theory[edit]

Big Five personality traits The relationship between the big five personality traits That these underlying factors can be found is consistent with the lexical hypothesis: personality characteristics that are most important in peoples' lives will eventually become a part of their language and, secondly, that more important personality characteristics are more likely to be encoded into language as a single word. The five factors are: Openness to experience (inventive/curious vs. consistent/cautious). People who do not exhibit a clear tendency towards specific characteristics chosen from the above-mentioned related pairs in all five dimensions are considered adaptable, moderate and reasonable personalities, but can be perceived as unprincipled, inscrutable and calculating.[6] Overview[edit] The initial model was advanced by Ernest Tupes and Raymond Christal in 1961,[17] but failed to reach an academic audience until the 1980s. Descriptions of the particular personality traits[edit] Openness to experience[edit] Health[edit]

Knowledge organization The term knowledge organization (KO) (or "organization of knowledge", "organization of information" or "information organization") designates a field of study related to Library and Information Science (LIS). In this meaning, KO is about activities such as document description, indexing and classification performed in libraries, databases, archives etc. These activities are done by librarians, archivists, subject specialists as well as by computer algorithms. There exist different historical and theoretical approaches to and theories about organizing knowledge, which are related to different views of knowledge, cognition, language, and social organization. Traditional human-based activities are increasingly challenged by computer-based retrieval techniques. The leading journal in this field is Knowledge Organization[1] published by the International Society for Knowledge Organization (ISKO). A broad introduction to knowledge organization can be found in Hoetzlein (2007).[3]

Personality psychology A picture of the depictions of personality dimensions. Personality psychology is a branch of psychology that studies personality and its variation among individuals. Its areas of focus include: construction of a coherent picture of the individual and their major psychological processesinvestigation of individual psychological differencesinvestigation of human nature and psychological similarities between individuals "Personality" is a dynamic[clarification needed] and organized set of characteristics possessed by a person that uniquely[clarification needed] influences their environment, cognitions, emotions, motivations, and behaviors in various situations. The word "personality" originates from the Latin persona, which means mask. Personality also refers to the pattern of thoughts, feelings, social adjustments, and behaviors consistently exhibited over time that strongly influences one's expectations, self-perceptions, values, and attitudes. Philosophical assumptions[edit] John L.

Procedural knowledge Procedural knowledge, also known as imperative knowledge, is the knowledge exercised in the performance of some task. See below for the specific meaning of this term in cognitive psychology and intellectual property law. Procedural knowledge, or implicit knowledge is different from other kinds of knowledge, such as declarative knowledge, in that it can be directly applied to a task. For instance, the procedural knowledge one uses to solve problems differs from the declarative knowledge one possesses about problem solving because this knowledge is formed by doing.[1] In some legal systems, such procedural knowledge has been considered the intellectual property of a company, and can be transferred when that company is purchased. One limitation of procedural knowledge is its job-dependence; thus it tends to be less general than declarative knowledge. Contexts[edit] Artificial intelligence[edit] Cognitive psychology[edit] Educational implications[edit] Intellectual property law[edit] Notes[edit]

Four Temperaments Choleric, melancholic, sanguine, and phlegmatic temperaments Four temperaments is a proto-psychological theory that suggests that there are four fundamental personality types, sanguine (pleasure-seeking and sociable), choleric (ambitious and leader-like), melancholic (analytical and quiet), and phlegmatic (relaxed and peaceful). Most formulations include the possibility of mixtures of the types. The Greek physician Hippocrates (460–370 BC) incorporated the four temperaments into his medical theories as part of the ancient medical concept of humorism, that four bodily fluids affect human personality traits and behaviors. Later discoveries in biochemistry have led modern medicine science to reject the theory of the four temperaments, although some personality type systems of varying scientific acceptance continue to use four or more categories of a similar nature. History and development[edit] Choleric, sanguine, melancholic, and phlegmatic temperaments The four temperament types[edit]

Descriptive knowledge Descriptive knowledge, also declarative knowledge or propositional knowledge, is the type of knowledge that is, by its very nature, expressed in declarative sentences or indicative propositions. This distinguishes descriptive knowledge from what is commonly known as "know-how", or procedural knowledge (the knowledge of how, and especially how best, to perform some task), and "knowing of", or knowledge by acquaintance (the knowledge of something's existence). The difference between knowledge and beliefs is as follows: A belief is an internal thought or memory which exists in one's mind. Most people accept that for a belief to be knowledge it must be, at least, true and justified. The Gettier problem in philosophy is the question of whether there are any other requirements before a belief can be accepted as knowledge. Acquiring knowledge[edit] People have used many methods to try to gain knowledge. Types of knowledge[edit] Knowledge in various disciplines[edit] Knowledge in history[edit]

Metacognition Metacognition is defined as "cognition about cognition", or "knowing about knowing". It comes from the root word "meta", meaning beyond.[1] It can take many forms; it includes knowledge about when and how to use particular strategies for learning or for problem solving.[1] There are generally two components of metacognition: knowledge about cognition, and regulation of cognition.[2] Metamemory, defined as knowing about memory and mnemonic strategies, is an especially important form of metacognition.[3] Differences in metacognitive processing across cultures have not been widely studied, but could provide better outcomes in cross-cultural learning between teachers and students.[4] Some evolutionary psychologists hypothesize that metacognition is used as a survival tool, which would make metacognition the same across cultures.[4] Writings on metacognition can be traced back at least as far as De Anima and the Parva Naturalia of the Greek philosopher Aristotle.[5] Definitions[edit] [edit]

Piaget's theory of cognitive development Piaget's theory of cognitive development is a comprehensive theory about the nature and development of human intelligence, first developed by Swiss developmental psychologist Jean Piaget (1896–1980). It is primarily known as a developmental stage theory but, in fact, it deals with the nature of knowledge itself and how humans come gradually to acquire, construct, and use it. To Piaget, cognitive development was a progressive reorganization of mental processes as a result of biological maturation and environmental experience. Accordingly, children construct an understanding of the world around them, then experience discrepancies between what they already know and what they discover in their environment.[1] Moreover, Piaget claimed the idea that cognitive development is at the center of human organism, and language is contingent on cognitive development. Nature of intelligence: operative and figurative[edit] Operative intelligence is the active aspect of intelligence.

Related: