Background Information
Psychological studies explain the existence of different personalities as being influenced by the environment, genetics and other hereditary factors. Loehlin and Nichols (2012, p. 1) posited that the significance of the influence of environment and genetics on personality was first advanced by Galton in 1875 in the study “ The history of twins as a criterion of the relative powers of nature and nurture. ” Since then biologists and psychologists have actively pursued the association between heredity and environment, and their role on the development of biological and psychological characteristics – personality. An individual’s personality is defined by the set of characteristics that they exhibit and how they react to different social situations presented over a given amount of time to form a consistent pattern of behavior. While genetics may have a predetermined influence on an individual personality, the influences of environmental factors including social and cultural are varied. The influences of genetics and environment have been studied concurrently. This paper proposes an independent exploration of the influence of environmental factors on personality development to justify their evolutionary account as advanced in MacDonald (2012).
Social and cultural factors in the immediate family environment have the potential to shape behavior of members. The possibility that the environment provides lifelong patterns that present personality differences has been demonstrated in Kander (2012). Riesman (2002) advanced the theory that the three personality types: traditional-oriented, inner-directed, and other-directed were direct outcomes of social trends of population growth. One can argue that the social environment is responsible for setting norms and practices that influence people behavior, hence developing their personalities from the same. However, contradicting evidence about the role of social environment has been advanced. Moss and Wilson (2010) posited that social and organizational psychology inhibited the development of productive personality theories. Perhaps what such assertions fail to capture is that individuals cannot be removed from their social contexts that play a crucial role in influencing their personality. Nevertheless, the outcomes of social influences on behavior have been contradictory in some instances. Piff, Kraus, Côté et al. (2010) stablished that individuals from lower social classes who were associated with less resource, exposed to threats, and a reduced sense of self-control demonstrated high levels of prosocial behavior contrary to the expected outcomes of prioritizing self-interests. Therefore, it can be theorized that environment has contradictory influences on personality development, thus highlighting the need for contextualization of the association between the two phenomena.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
As noted in MacDonald (2012) there is need to develop evolutionary perspectives of the association between social factors in the environment and personality development. This study will contribute towards understanding of the associations between social environment and personality development. The study is conceptualized on the view that existing literature adopts a general approach in presenting the effects of environment on personality development, despite empirical evidence showing that individuals are exposed to different social settings at different stages in life.
The differential outcomes have been illustrated by a number of studies. A study conducted by Lucas and Donnellan (2011) in a German setting established the existence of differential stability in personality development in the continuum of life. The differential stability was observed to increase among young adults, peak in later stages of life, and then decline among the elderly. Such changes can be attributed to the social contexts in which individuals immerse themselves during different stages in life. In the same vein, McAdams and Olson (2010) posited that personality development across a lifespan can be observed from three different perspectives: the person as actor (behaving), agent (striving), and author (narrating). The standpoints progress through infancy, childhood, adolescence, and adulthood, during which an individual is exposed to different social phenomena that influence their personality. Therefore, it is important to explore specific social factors and their influence rather than generalizing the association between environment and personality.
Thesis Statement
The association between environment and personality development has been determined, but there is need for exploration of the evolutionary account of the role of social factors in specific social contexts.
Research Design
The study seeks to establish the role of social factors in a chosen setting in influencing personality development. Given that the study intends to establish the existence of cause and effect, a phenomenological research design will be used. This qualitative approach is appropriate for studying phenomena in its natural setting. Phenomenology allows for the presentation of individual lived experiences by capturing their opinions and perceptions about the phenomena being studied. The choice of social environment for the study will be based on the theoretical frameworks advanced in Riesman (2002).
Participants
Total of 14 participants will be drawn from 7 different social settings (two from each) to ensure a balanced sample and address the problem of bias as their responses will crosscheck one another. The low sample is based on the data collection method to be used, which combines observation and interviews. Both male and female participants aged over 18 of different ethnic and racial backgrounds would be recruited to take part in the study, with the objective to establish differences in the influence of social environments on personality development (Kander, 2012). Therefore, convenience sampling will be used to come up with the study sample.
Data Collection and Analysis
Observations and interviews would be employed to collect data. These will be done individually and video or voice recording taken depending on the method used. In the case of observations, individual behaviors and actions that are important in describing the participant’s personality will be noted. Where face to face interviews will be used, Given the nature of the phenomena being studied, frameworks for assessment of personality types would be employed in both data collection and analysis. Data will be largely opinion based implying that it cannot be quantified; hence a thematic approach will be used to develop emerging themes that are important in the characterization of personality.
Ethical Considerations
The nature of the study implies that participants will develop sensitivity about the outcomes. Therefore, there is need to conform to ethical standards governing the use of people in social science research. Approval will be sought from the institutional ethics committee and the researcher will clarify that participation is voluntary. The researcher will solely be responsible for protection of participant’s identity and information to ensure that no harm comes to them due to their involvement.
References
Kander, C. (2012). Nature and nurture in personality development. the case of neuroticism and extroversion. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21 (5), 290-296.
Loehlin, J. C., & Nichols, R. C. (2012). Heredity, environment, and personality: A study of 850 sets of twins . Texas: University of Texas Press.
Lucas, R. E., & Donnellan, M. B. (2011). Personality development across the life span: Longitudinal analyses with a national sample from Germany. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101 (4), 847-861.
MacDonald, K. (2012). Social and personality development: An evolutionary synthesis . Springer Science & Business Media.
McAdams, D. P., & Olson, B. D. (2010). Personality development: Continuity and change over the life course. Annual review of psychology , 61 , 517-542.
Moss, S. A., & Wilson, S. (2010). Integrating the most unintuitive empirical observations of 2007 in the domain of personality and social psychology into a unified framework. New Ideas in Psychology , 28 (1), 1-27.
Piff, P. K., Kraus, M. W., Côté, S., Cheng, B. H., & Keltner, D. (2010). Having less, giving more: the influence of social class on prosocial behavior. Journal of personality and social psychology , 99 (5), 771-784.
