Primary Concepts 

Prior to beginning work on this assignment, review sections 1.2, 1.3, and 1.4 of Chapter 1 in the text.

We have now covered five of the seven major psychological models that serve as frameworks for understanding personality. Each model has several theorists and numerous concepts that describe personality. That is what theories are—collections of related concepts meant to explain development. It is time for you to begin to analyze these concepts to determine which you think are most useful and applicable. For this assignment, you will identify one concept from each of the following models that you think is the best description for personality development from that model (the last three will be addressed in your Final Paper). Be sure to use proper APA headings to separate your conceptual sections. Address the following models:

• Psychodynamic
• Neurobiological
• Trait
• Cognitive

For each of the concepts chosen:

• Apply a proper APA heading to separate the section. (For specifications for writing proper headings and other document elements, see the Ashford University Writing Center’s APA Style Elements (Links to an external site.).)
• Describe the concept.
• Identify the theorist associated with the concept.
• Provide a rationale for why that is the most applicable concept from that model.

Keep in mind that the object of this assignment is to identify and discuss a specific concept from each model and not to focus on just one model or provide overviews of the models per se.

To review examples of the main concept from the psychodynamic model,

CLICK HERE

.

For each concept, you must use a scholarly source related to the concept from Ashford University Library to support your statements in the paper. Thus, the paper will have a total of four scholarly sources (as noted below) in addition to the textbook. Popular websites and your textbook may be used to augment these scholarly sources, but they will not count toward the minimum number of sources needed for the paper.

To assist you in completing the library research required for this assignment, view this

Ashford University Library Quick ‘n’ Dirty (Links to an external site.)

tutorial, which introduces the Ashford University Library and the research process and provides some library search tips.

The Primary Concepts paper

• Must be five double-spaced pages in length (not including title and references pages) and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center’s APA Style (Links to an external site.) resource.
• Must include a separate title page with the following:

  Title of paper
  Student’s name
  Course name and number
  Instructor’s name
  Date submitted
  For further assistance with the formatting and the title page, refer to APA Formatting for Word 2013 (Links to an external site.).

• Must utilize academic voice. See the Academic Voice (Links to an external site.) resource for additional guidance.
• Must include an introduction and conclusion paragraph. Your introduction paragraph needs to end with a clear thesis statement that indicates the purpose of your paper.

  For assistance on writing Introductions & Conclusions (Links to an external site.) as well as Writing a Thesis Statement (Links to an external site.), refer to the Ashford Writing Center resources.

• Must use at least four scholarly sources in addition to the course text.

  The Scholarly, Peer Reviewed, and Other Credible Sources (Links to an external site.) table offers additional guidance on appropriate source types. If you have questions about whether a specific source is appropriate for this assignment, please contact your instructor. Your instructor has the final say about the appropriateness of a specific source for a particular assignment.
  To assist you in completing the library research required for this assignment, view this Ashford University Library Quick ‘n’ Dirty (Links to an external site.) tutorial, which introduces the Ashford University Library and the research process and provides some library search tips.

• Must document any information used from sources in APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center’s Citing Within Your Paper (Links to an external site.)
• Must include a separate references page that is formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center. See the Formatting Your References List (Links to an external site.) resource in the Ashford Writing Center for specifications.

 

Required Resources

Text

Lecci, L. B. (2015).

Personality

. Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu

• Chapter 5: Behavioral Models of Personality
• Chapter 6: Cognitive and Cognitive-Behavioral Approaches to Personality

Articles

Boyce, A. (2012, December 6).

Cognitive behavioral therapy techniques that work (Links to an external site.)

. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/in-practice/201212/cognitive-behavioral-therapy-techniques-work

• This article explains how diverse cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) techniques can effectively be “mixed and matched” by therapists and patients, or by individuals conducting self-help treatments, to obtain outcomes that meet individual circumstances and needs. The article will assist you in completing the Week 3 Cognitive Behavioral Interventions discussion.
  Accessibility Statement does not exist
  Privacy Policy (Links to an external site.)

Combs, D. R., Tiegreen, J., & Nelson, A. (2007).

The use of behavioral experiments to modify delusions and paranoia: Clinical guidelines and recommendations

. International Journal of Behavioral Consultation and Therapy, 3(1), 30-37. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0100177

• The full-text version of this article is available through the EBSCOhost database in the Ashford University Library. The authors of this article address the use of behavioral experiments in treating patients with paranoid delusions. The article also provides students the structure of a behavioral experiment to use in formatting the Week 3 Cognitive Behavioral Interventions discussion.

Weck, F. (2014).

Treatment of mental hypochondriasis: A case report

. Psychiatric Quarterly, 85(1), 57-64. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11126-013-9270-6

• The full-text version of this article is available through the EBSCOhost database in the Ashford University Library. The author of this article addresses the use of cognitive behavioral experiments in treating patients with hypochondriasis. It provides another example of the process. The article will help you in completing the Week 3 Cognitive Behavioral Interventions discussion.

Web Pages

Lebon, T. (2012, February 5).

CBT and behavioural experiments (Links to an external site.)

. [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://cbtfortherapists.blogspot.com/2012/02/cbt-and-behavioural-experiments.html

• This blog post provides information and a case study on cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) and cognitive behavioral experiments. It will assist you in completing the Week 3 Cognitive Behavioral Interventions discussion.
  Accessibility Statement does not exist
  Privacy Policy does not exist

Lebon, T. (2009, September 27).

Giving a rationale for CBT (Links to an external site.)

[Blog post]. Retrieved from http://cbtfortherapists.blogspot.com/2009/09/giving-rationale-for-cbt.html

• This blog post advocates providing a rationale for CBT to patients early in their treatment and argues that explaining how the treatment works helps to motivate patients and provide them an opportunity to engage the CBT process better. The resource will assist you in completing the Week 3 Cognitive Behavioral Interventions discussion.
  Accessibility Statement does not exist
  Privacy Policy does not exist

PolkaDot/Thinkstock

Learning Objectives

After reading this chapter, you should be
able to:

• Describe the importance of behaviorism in the
development of scientific psychology.

• Discuss Edward Thorndike’s impact on psy-
chology, and explain his law of effect.

• Describe Ivan Pavlov’s discovery of classical
conditioning, and explain the learning model
he discovered in his studies on dogs.

• Explain the impact that John B. Watson and
his demonstrations with Little Albert had on
our understanding of the acquisition of fears
and other forms of learning.

• Describe B. F. Skinner’s view that psychology
should concern itself with what is observable
and the effect this notion had on the study of
consciousness and personality.

• Explain Skinner’s learning model of operant
conditioning and the importance of the sched-
ule of reinforcement.

Behavioral Models of Personality 5

Chapter Outline
Introduction

5.1 Major Approaches and Historical Figures
in the Development of Behaviorism
• Pavlov’s Classical Conditioning
• Watson’s Application of Classical Condition-

ing to Humans
• Operant Conditioning

5.2 The Neobehaviorists
• Skinner’s Radical Behaviorism
• Skinner’s View on Personality

5.3 Theoretical Models Applied to Personality
• Salter’s Conditioned Reflex Theory
• Dollard and Miller’s Learning Theory
• Mowrer’s Two-Factor Theory
• Wolpe’s Behavioral Applications
• Applied Behavior Analysis

• Discuss how Dollard and Miller advanced behavioral theory by explaining how personality can be conceptualized
using learning principles.

• Explain Wolpe’s systematic desensitization and how it can be used for behavior change.

• Explain why some phobias/fears are more likely to be acquired and maintained.

• Explain Martin Seligman’s concept of learned helplessness and how it might be used to explain depression.

• Use behavioral principles, to describe how anxiety can affect personality adaptation.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 133 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5

Introduction
In a disturbing but classic film, A Clockwork Orange (1971), director Stanley
Kubrick depicts a gang of men who, in futuristic Britain, terrorize others, savagely
beating men and raping women. The gang’s leader, Alex, is apprehended, and
he volunteers for an experimental, government-developed, aversion therapy. The
approach was modeled after the behavioral principles that were quite popular in
the 1970s, and the intent was to eradicate society’s problem with crime by asso-
ciating aversive responses (such as physical illness induced by drugs) with aggres-
sive behavior.

Although this was a fictional account, it captured the belief and some of the fears
associated with the assumption that controlling behavior using scientific methods
would lead to the betterment of humankind. Of course, subsequent research indi-
cated that such fears were not well-founded, as behavior is not quite as pliable as
the filmmaker suggests. Nevertheless, many modern-day applications of behav-
ioral principles are used to shape behavior. For example, Antabuse (also known
as Disulfiram) is an FDA-approved drug used to create an aversive association
(e.g., nausea, vomiting, headaches, syncope, vertigo, blurred vision) with the con-
sumption of alcohol for those diagnosed with either alcohol dependence or alco-
hol abuse (see Kitson, 1977; Rosenthal, 1973). More recent research suggests that
naltrexone and especially acamprosate may be especially effective at achieving
abstinence, though these compounds function in different ways by altering brain
neurochemistry associated with addiction (see Rosenthal, 2006). Buzzer pants are
used to help children with enuresis (bed wetting), by associating the urge to uri-
nate with waking up prior to wetting the bed. Even outside of the therapeutic
context, behavioral principles are widely seen, sometimes with intentional pair-
ings, and sometimes not. If you enjoy McDonald’s, there’s a good chance that you
might salivate when you see the golden arches or hear the phrase, “I’m loving
it” (assuming that advertisers have done their job well). A pizza box is also likely
to elicit the same salivation response. If you have a dog, picking up the keys is a
surefire way to get him or her to the door. In all likelihood, whatever tone or signal
your smartphone has to indicate an incoming text or email results in what is now a
well-trained behavioral response by you (checking the device). In fact, even if you
hear that tone from another source, you might find yourself automatically check-
ing your own phone for a text out of habit.

Introduction

5.4 Component Subsystems of
Behavioral Theory
• Seligman’s Concept of Learned

Helplessness
• Goldfried and Merbaum: Changing

Behavior Through Self-Control
• Barlow: The Nature of Anxiety

5.5 Assessment Strategies and
Behavioral Tools
• Assessing With Applied Behavior

Analysis
• Behavioral Assessments of Children

and Adolescents
• Behavioral Assessments of Adults

Summary

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 134 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5

5.1 Major Approaches and Historical Figures in the Development of Behaviorism

Such attempts to modify or control behavior raise many questions with regard to
personality, of course. Are we really completely controlled by our environments?
Do we have any autonomy at all in terms of how we think, what we value, who we
are? Does the very concept of personality exist at all? In contrast to the psycho-
analytic and humanist perspectives (see Chapters 2 and 9, respectively), behavior-
ism prompts us to look more closely at the world outside of ourselves to see what
factors and conditions influence how we behave and who we are.

This chapter provides an overview of behavioral theory, some of its applications,
and the assessment tools commonly employed, as well the research attempting
to evaluate its accuracy.

5.1 Major Approaches and Historical Figures in
the Development of Behaviorism

When it emerged as a movement in psychology, behaviorism (also referred to as learning theory) was not interested in the mind or personality. What it offered was a radically different approach to understanding behavior—an approach that was the polar oppo-
site of the psychoanalytic model. Whereas the psychoanalytic model dealt with invisible, internal
processes, behaviorism dealt with objective, observable events. Not only was the emphasis on
behavior, but in its most radical formulations (see the work of B. F. Skinner), cognition and affect
(thought and emotion) were essentially characterized as epiphenomena—in other words, they
only exist secondarily, as effects of behaviors, rather than as the causes of behaviors.

In general, the behaviorists rejected any formalized theory of human behavior. There is inher-
ent tension in personality science related to the fact that theorizing often seems to require that
theorists engage in speculation—that they move beyond empirical and clinical data. However,
not everyone would agree that this endeavor is worthwhile. Many believe that theorizing without
empirical support is pseudoscience. In fact, when the field was dominated by psychodynamic the-
ory, many proponents of behaviorism would not consider personality theory relevant and worthy
of scientific investigation. As a result, none provide a cohesive explanation of personality.

Behaviorism has its roots in empiricism and animal behavior because animals can be experimented
on and, therefore, yield more concrete data. It rapidly became popular with the promise that it
would make a true science out of psychology (Hunt, 2007). As an objective science concerned with
what could be observed and measured, behaviorism has largely rejected the overly theoretical,
speculative thinking of other models of personality. Its emphasis on studying only what is observ-
able has challenged psychology and personality researchers to meet higher empirical standards.
This emphasis on science and on clear empirical standards is vitally important to the development
of a science. In the absence of scientific evidence against which to check our beliefs, there is a high
potential for error and bias (Lilienfeld & O’Donohue, 2007).

Behaviorism is based mainly on inductive reasoning: It starts with data, often related to simple
relationships, and induces laws of human behavior from this data. A simple example can illustrate
this form of reasoning. If you observe that every time you eat shellfish you swell up and find it
hard to swallow (the data), you might conclude that you are allergic to shellfish (the law). This
perspective seeks the simplest explanation for behaviors, following the law of parsimony. Some of
the laws it has generated have proven to be fundamentally important for understanding behavior.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 135 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.1 Major Approaches and Historical Figures in the Development of Behaviorism

In fact, a great deal of behavioral
research has been designed spe-
cifically to explore various com-
ponent systems of personality,
such as learning, anxiety, learned
helplessness, and conditioning.
Results of this research continue
to influence our understanding
of how personality is formed and
how it can be modified by various
external factors.

The behavioral perspective can
be organized into two broad types
of learning: (1) classical condition-
ing and (2) operant conditioning. Classical conditioning involves a simpler form of learning by tem-
poral association, and it focuses only on reflexive actions. In contrast, operant conditioning involves
nonreflexive action and learning as a result of consequences that are typically not occurring at the
same point in time (i.e., temporal associations are no longer necessary). Both types of conditioning
can be referred to as forms of associative learning—that is, a process by which an association is
made between two stimuli or between a behavior and a stimulus. The next sections review methods
for the acquisition and maintenance of behavior.

Pavlov’s Classical Conditioning
During the course of his research with dogs, Russian physiologist Ivan Pavlov observed that dogs
would begin to salivate not only when they were being fed, as would be expected, but even prior
to feeding, at the mere sight of the assistant who fed them. In 1902, Pavlov began to study this
occurrence, designing a demonstration of what may well be the best-known of all phenomena
in psychology: classical conditioning. What he did was implant a tube in one of the dog’s salivary

glands, connecting it to a mea-
suring device. The dog was then
placed in a harness and given a
small amount of food, often in the
form of food powder that could
be injected directly into the dog’s
mouth (see Figure 5.1). When
the food was delivered, the dog
would automatically begin to sal-
ivate. Pavlov termed this behav-
ior an unconditioned reflex (or
response) because it was a natu-
ral response wired into the ani-
mal’s physiological system (Pav-
lov, 1927).

Beyond the Text: Classic Writings

In this early paper, John Watson, one of the founders of the
behavioral movement in the United States, writes about how
the process of learning in animals (and presumably some
understanding of their mental life) can be helpful to our
understanding of human behavior. Read it at http://psych
classics.yorku.ca/Watson/Animals/index.htm.

Reference: Watson, J. B. (1907). Studying the mind of animals.
The World Today, 12, 421–426.

Beyond the Text: Ethical Considerations

According to the American Psychological Association (APA),
7–8% of research in psychology uses animals as its subjects,
and the vast majority of these studies (90%) use rodents or
birds. The APA has published a position paper on the use of
animals in psychological research, and includes a discussion
of such issues as how animal models have helped inform our
understanding of human phenomena and the ethical issues
and safeguards in place for animal research. Read it at http://
www.apa.org/research/responsible/research-animals .

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 136 5/21/15 12:39 PM

http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Watson/Animals/index.htm

http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Watson/Animals/index.htm

http://www.apa.org/research/responsible/research-animals

http://www.apa.org/research/responsible/research-animals

CHAPTER 5

A device similar to the one shown here was used to
capture and quantify the saliva produced by a dog
in response to stimuli such as food. The saliva is
captured in the tube and a balancing mechanism is
activated, which in turn records the amount on the
revolving drum. The window was used to pair other
visual stimuli with the food.

5.1 Major Approaches and Historical Figures in the Development of Behaviorism

Figure 5.1: Pavlov’s research documenting an unconditioned reflex

In the next phase of the demonstration, Pavlov would present the dog with a neutral stimulus
(one that would not create salivation in and of itself) such as a bell or buzzer. When presented
alone, the neutral stimulus would produce only a raising of the dog’s ears. When paired on sev-
eral occasions with the delivery of food (e.g., food-bell, food-bell, food-bell), a conditioning (i.e.,
learning) process occurred. Following this, the sound (bell) alone would now produce salivation.
At this point, the sound of the bell or buzzer has become a conditioned stimulus (meaning that it
was learned), which now leads to the conditioned response (meaning a learned response, which
Pavlov also called a conditioned reflex) of salivating to the sound of the bell. See Figure 5.2 for an
illustration of this type of associative learning.

NS

Bell

BEFORE CONDITIONING

U

CS

Foo

d

UCR

Salivation

• elicits No response
(or neutral response)

• elicits

CS
Bell

AFTER CONDITIONING

CR
Salivation

• elicits
CS
Bell

CONDITIONING PROCESS
(REPEATED SIMULTANEOUS PAIRING)

+
UCS

Food
UCR

Salivation
• elicits

Figure 5.2: An illustration
of Pavlov’s classical
conditioning

The images in panel 1 illustrate that the
dog naturally salivates (unconditioned
response) to the food (unconditioned
stimulus), but does not salivate to the
handler (neutral stimulus). In panel 2,
we see the repeated pairings of the
food with the handler. In panel 3, the
dog eventually learns to salivate (now
a conditioned response) to the handler
alone (now a conditioned stimulus).
Pavlov noticed this association, and
it was considered a serendipitous
example of classical conditioning. He
recorded the same responses when
using bells and buzzers as the neutral
(and eventually conditioned) stimuli.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 137 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.1 Major Approaches and Historical Figures in the Development of Behaviorism

Now that the bell is able to produce the salivation in the dog (this is what makes the bell a condi-
tioned stimulus), it is possible to consider the consequence of repeatedly ringing the bell and not
delivering any food. Eventually, the bell will stop producing the salivation response, and at that
point in time, it can be said that the response has become extinct. Therefore, extinction in this
context is defined as when the conditioned stimulus (the bell) is no longer able to produce the
conditioned response (the dog salivating). Interestingly, it is possible for the conditioned response
to reoccur, and this can happen even without having to again pair the food with the bell. Instead,
sometimes the response will return even if the dog is simply given a break from the conditioning
environment, and this is known as spontaneous recovery (i.e., the previously learned response,
which had become extinct, returns without any additional pairing with the food).

So what other types of learning can occur from this basic paradigm of classical conditioning? One
option is to pair the conditioned stimulus (in the current example, the bell) with another neutral
stimulus (e.g., a light) until this neutral stimulus also produces the conditioned response (bell-light,
bell-light, bell-light). Notice that the secondary stimulus is never paired with the unconditioned stim-
ulus. This form of learning is termed higher order conditioning, or secondary conditioning. Here,
a conditioned stimulus (the bell) is paired with a neutral stimulus (e.g., a light), until that neutral
stimulus also becomes a conditioned stimulus by producing the conditioned response (salivating).

Consider what would happen if Pavlov used a stimulus that was similar to, but not exactly the same
as, the original conditioned stimulus. For example, if Pavlov rang a bell that was pitched differently,
would the dog salivate? Discrimination occurs when the conditioned response is only produced for
a very specific conditioned stimulus. In an example of discrimination, the dog would only salivate in
response to the exact bell that was used originally, and no other similar-sounding bells would pro-
duce a salivation response. Generalization is said to occur when the conditioned response is pro-
duced in response to a similar conditioned stimulus. In a situation of generalization, the dog would
also salivate to similar-sounding bells. Generalization can be an adaptive function that allows an
organism to rapidly respond to new stimuli that are related in some way to a previously learned
stimulus. In this way, an individual doesn’t have to experience learning with every single stimulus,
and this means learning can be more efficient. However, generalization can also be maladaptive.
For example, imagine a child who is viciously attacked by a neighbor’s new pet Rottweiler. As a
result of this attack, the child is now afraid of all dogs. On the surface, this might seem adaptive, as
the dog that attacked him was clearly a threat. However, being afraid of familiar dogs, even docile
dogs, and perhaps even other pets (e.g., cats) represents a form of generalization that is not adap-
tive. What would be more adaptive would be the child generalizing his learning to a smaller range
of stimuli, such as a growling dog, or a dog that bares its teeth and moves forward aggressively.
Unfortunately, we don’t get to choose when we generalize and when we don’t.

The above-mentioned example also helps illustrate another important concept in learning theory:
one-time conditioning. This refers to learning that occurs after only one trial (as opposed to the
numerous trials needed to make an association in the typical classical conditioning research). This
is a very unique type of learning because it involves more rapid acquisition, and it tends to be
much more resistant to extinction. Returning to the dog-attack example, the child did not require
repeated instances in order to acquire the fear of dogs (note that this type of rapid learning can be
adaptive, as repeated trials would be life threatening), but now it will take some time and effort
to extinguish the fear response.

Classical conditioning can therefore be a very powerful model for explaining the development of
many maladaptive behaviors and clinical disorders, such as post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).
For example, when fear is triggered in a truly threatening situation, the stress-response system
may activate anxiety, which may later be triggered by previously neutral stimuli (such as smells,

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 138 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.1 Major Approaches and Historical Figures in the Development of Behaviorism

sights, or sounds) that were present at the time of the threat. The concept of generalization could
also be used to explain PTSD, as the individual might learn to generalize a fear response to other
similar stimuli, even if they were never directly associated with the initial learning experience.

Beyond the Text: Research Spotlight

How does the concept of generalization manifest in human learning with respect to post-traumatic
stress disorder?

Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a psychiatric illness involving an acute and severe anxiety
response to a stressor. The stressor could result from a number of experiences, including witness-
ing or experiencing some form of abuse, a physical assault, disaster, or war. PTSD can involve such
symptoms as an exaggerated startle response, avoidance of situations that are similar to the original
stressor/trauma, and the re-experiencing of the original stressor/trauma in the form of flashbacks or
possibly nightmares; symptoms must last for at least one month and result in some form of dysfunc-
tion (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). PTSD can also be conceptualized as a form of general-
ization, as the individual experiences a generalized fear response to situations/stimuli that are similar
to the original stressor/trauma.

In an interesting study, researchers examined whether heart rate (HR) responses to trauma-related
pictures (i.e., a generalization response) can be used to differentiate between trauma survivors with
and without acute PTSD (Ehlers et al., 2010). Participants were 162 individuals who had survived
either a motor vehicle accident (n 5 98) or a physical assault (n 5 64) and were recruited from the
emergency room of a major hospital between 2004 and 2006. Sixty-six individuals (approx. 41%) met
PTSD criteria one month following the trauma (the acute PTSD group) using the Structured Clinical
Interview for DSM-IV (SCID), an instrument discussed in Chapter 1. Ninety-six individuals (approx.
59%) did not meet criteria for PTSD.

The PTSD group showed greater HR responses to trauma-related pictures than those without PTSD
(less pronounced mean deceleration, greater peak response, and a greater proportion showing HR
acceleration of more than one beat per minute). No group differences in HR (i.e., fear) response
emerged for the generally threatening or neutral pictures (Ehlers et al., 2010). The current findings
are consistent with research showing that HR acceleration to trauma-specific cues (reminders) pre-
dicts the duration of PTSD symptoms (e.g., Elsesser, Sartory, & Tackenberg, 2005).

This study illustrates both generalization and discrimination of a fear response. First, it appears that
those with acute PTSD can be defined as showing generalization (as measured by heart rate) to
threat-related stimuli relative to those who experienced trauma, but did not meet criteria for PTSD.
However, both groups demonstrated discrimination in that they did not show the fear response to
nonspecific stimuli or to neutral stimuli. The research also offers some insights into potential inter-
ventions. For example, could repeated exposure to the threat-specific (feared) pictures result in
extinction of the fear response when the participant habituates to the image? Of course, because
researchers did not measure HR response to the stimuli prior to the trauma and because group
assignment was not randomized, the findings are necessarily limited.

Critical Thinking Questions:

• PTSD emerges from trauma exposure, but this study and desensitization treatments treat
the disorder with further exposure. In what important ways do the two forms of exposure
differ that results in such different outcomes? What do you think are some of the personality
traits or other factors that determine who is more predisposed to experiencing PTSD
symptoms after trauma exposure?

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 139 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.1 Major Approaches and Historical Figures in the Development of Behaviorism

Watson’s Application of Classical Conditioning to Humans
Give me a dozen healthy infants, well-formed, and my own specified world to
bring them up in and I’ll guarantee to take any one at random and train him to
become any type of specialist I might select—doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant-
chief and, yes, even beggar-man and thief, regardless of his talents, penchants,
tendencies, abilities, vocations and race of his ancestors. (Watson, 1930, p. 104)

The spread of behaviorism in the United States owes much of its acceptance and popularity to the
efforts of John B. Watson, who applied Pavlov’s work to humans. Watson believed that psychol-
ogy should deal only with actual behavior and not with mental states, heralding a dramatic shift
away from the use of introspection and the study of consciousness. As noted in the above quote,
Watson believed that the environment was the critical factor in predicting behavior.

Watson and James R. Angell are both given credit for coining the term behaviorist. But Watson’s
use of the label in the title of an article he published in 1913 (“Psychology as the Behaviorist
Views It”) was in essence a declaration that behaviorism was independent of other schools of psy-
chology that were interested in the mental processes of individuals (Hunt, 2007). The behaviorist
manifesto, as it later came to be known, made three fundamentally important points: (1) that
psychology should concern itself with behavior, not consciousness; (2) objective methods should
be used rather than introspection; and (3) the primary focus should be the prediction and control
of behavior, rather than trying to understand the meaning of mental events (Hunt, 2007).

Watson began studying conditioned reflexes in infants in 1916 while a professor at Johns Hopkins
University. Working at the Harriet Lane Hospital in Baltimore, he observed over 200 babies, cata-
loguing their reflexes (for example, sneezing, sucking, grasping, and reaching) and studying their
emotional responses (such as fear, rage, and love). Note that each of these reflexes and emo-
tions has observable behavioral
components—such as crying and
cooing in the case of emotions.

The experiment that brought
Watson the greatest attention
was one he conducted with his
assistant, Rosalie Rayner. He and
Rayner attempted to produce a
conditioned fear response in an
11-month-old boy who became
known as Little Albert (J. B. Wat-
son & Rayner, 1920). First, they
placed a white rat near 9-month-
old Albert; he showed absolutely
no fear of the animal. Then they
hit a steel bar with a hammer
right behind little Albert, and the
sudden, very loud noise fright-
ened him. They repeated this
procedure a number of times on

Beyond the Text: Research Spotlight

There is no record that Watson and Rayner made any effort
to extinguish the experimentally produced fear they had cre-
ated. By today’s ethical standards for human experimenta-
tion, the type of experiment conducted on Little Albert would
never be approved. Now all institutions that conduct human
as well as animal research are required to follow strict ethi-
cal guidelines. All research proposals need to be approved
by a committee of peers, ensuring that harmful treatment
is avoided or at least minimized. Recently, a team led by
Dr. Sharman Levinson identified Little Albert as Douglas Mer-
ritte, who died at age 6 of acquired hydrocephalus, a condi-
tion unrelated to the conditioning experiments. For more
details, see “ ‘Little Albert’ Regains His Identity,” published
in the 2010 edition of the APA Monitor, available online at
http://www.apa.org/monitor/2010/01/little-albert.aspx.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 140 5/21/15 12:39 PM

http://www.apa.org/monitor/2010/01/little-albert.aspx

CHAPTER 5 5.1 Major Approaches and Historical Figures in the Development of Behaviorism

different occasions, always pairing the rat with the frightening noise. Within a very short period
of time, Albert’s behavior had changed drastically. Now, whenever he saw the white rat, he would
begin to cry and attempt desperately to crawl away.

Thus, the conditioning of fear in Little Albert paralleled the conditioning of salivation in the dog by
Pavlov. In this situation, the unconditioned stimulus (US) is the loud noise. It is termed uncondi-
tioned because it reliably leads to a response (in this case, fear) in the absence of any prior learn-
ing. For the same reason, the fear reaction in response to the noise is an unconditioned response.

In this demonstration, the neutral stimulus (one that does not elicit the unconditioned response
of fear) is the white rat. The neutral stimulus becomes a conditioned stimulus (CS) as a result of
being paired with the US over a number of trials. It is now a conditioned stimulus because it reli-
ably elicits the fear response after having been paired with the loud noise. Fear of the white rat is
then defined as a conditioned response (a learned response), which can be elicited by the condi-
tioned stimulus. Continued investigations showed that Albert had developed conditioned fear to
a number of other furry white things, such as a rabbit and a seal coat, or Watson wearing a Santa
Claus mask. Thus, they had demonstrated how generalization might be used to experimentally
induce a form of “neurosis” or intense fear.

Watson (J. B. Watson, 1924, 1930) used the term “habit system” to refer to various categories or
clusters of individual habits, which are the building blocks of personality. Because he believed that
personality is largely learned (through conditioning), he also believed that it is malleable: No indi-
vidual’s personality remains consistent over time. Watson thought that concepts from normal or
experimental psychology could be expanded to explain abnormal behavior (Rilling, 2000).

Modern psychology has retained some of Watson’s fundamental assumptions. There has been
a clear shift to experimental methods of research and a distinct move away from introspection
(research is no longer published based on this method). Modern psychologists have multiple out-
comes of interest, including behavior, cognition, and affect, and there is a strong interest in chang-
ing behavior. Perhaps one area where psychology has remained close to its pre-behavioral roots
is the strong emphasis that is still placed on understanding psychological phenomena, as opposed
to simply predicting behavior.

Operant Conditioning
As noted earlier, operant conditioning applies to nonreflexive actions, and it suggests that the
incidence of a behavior is tied to its consequence(s). Importantly, the consequences don’t have
to be temporally associated; they can occur considerably later, provided the organism connects
the consequence to the behavior. Terms such as reinforcer and punisher (i.e., categories of conse-
quences) have became common concepts in psychology. By relying heavily on the elemental laws
of learning, it has become possible to account for a much wider range of behaviors.

Thorndike’s Elemental Laws of Learning

One of the major influential figures in the development of behaviorism was Edward Lee Thorn-
dike. In the basement of his home, Thorndike created mazes of stacked books and studied how
chicks found their way to reinforcers such as food, water, and other chicks, typically improving
their performance with repeated trials. He later did research at Columbia, building puzzle boxes

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 141 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5

from vegetable crates to study how cats, and sometimes dogs, figured out how to escape from
their cages.

On the basis of these studies, Thorndike formulated two fundamental laws of learning. These
laid the foundation for a model of psychology applicable to humans as well as animals, and they
represented major advances in the scientific understanding of behavior: the law of effect and the
law of exercise.

The Law of Effect
In essence, the law states that every behavior has a consequence and the nature of that conse-
quence determines if the behavior will reoccur. There are two possible consequences or effects
of most behaviors, explained Thorndike: An effect (an outcome) can be “satisfying” or it can be
“annoying.” Simply stated, the law of effect says that behaviors that are followed by a satisfying
state of affairs are more likely to be learned and repeated when the organism is again in the situa-
tion that first led to that outcome. In Thorndike’s words, responses that have satisfying outcomes
are more likely to be “stamped in.” In contrast, responses that are followed by an annoying state of
affairs are likely to be eliminated or weakened (“stamped out” in Thorndike’s words). The funda-
mental contribution this law made to psychology’s understanding of behavior is that it recognized
the importance of the consequences of behavior. As a result, it paved the way for reinforcement
theory, which was later elaborated by Skinner.

The Law of Exercise
Thorndike’s research also led him to a second law of learning, the law of exercise, based on the
observation that the more often a response has been connected with a stimulus, the more likely it
is to be repeated. In other words, practice and repetition strengthen learning. The more a stimu-
lus-response association is repeated, the stronger the connection between the two and the more
persistent the response will be. For example, this seems to be the case for addictive behavior.
The pleasant state (“satisfaction”) brought about by a stimulus such as a drug, a computer game,
or pornography leads to the repetition of exposure—and the more frequent the exposure, the
stronger the connection between it and the situation that triggers it. This might explain why some
people stay up all night, glued to their smartphones, Facebook pages, and Twitter accounts, with
each sound signaling an incoming message serving as the ultimate reinforcer.

Reinforcers and Punishers

There are two classes of consequences: reinforcers and punishers. At the most fundamental
level, reinforcement is anything that results in an increase in the behavior with which it is associ-
ated. Money (a universal reinforcer, as it can be used to obtain many other things), food, sex, and
attention are common reinforcers for human behavior. Punishment has the opposite effect; it is
designed to reduce the probability of a response occurring. Fines, restrictions, and the removal of
any valued possessions or privileges are examples of some typical punishers.

5.1 Major Approaches and Historical Figures in the Development of Behaviorism

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 142 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.1 Major Approaches and Historical Figures in the Development of Behaviorism

Figure 5.3: Understanding reinforcement and punishment

Punishment should always weaken the behavior, whereas reinforcement should always strengthen it.
The terms positive and negative simply refer to whether something is being added or removed to the
environment.

Another important concept in understanding the consequences of reinforcement and punishment
is whether the consequence involves adding (referred to as positive) or removing (referred to as
negative) something from the environment. Thus, positive reinforcement involves adding some-
thing to the environment that results in an increase in the behavior (e.g., giving money, food,
attention, etc.). Negative reinforcement is when an aversive stimulus is withdrawn in response
to a behavior, with this too resulting in an increase in the behavior. For example, if a rat has been
receiving electric shocks (an aversive stimulus) and the current is turned off when it depresses the
lever, turning the current off becomes the negative reinforcement for bar pressing. The important
point is that both positive and negative reinforcement increase the probability of a behavior. Posi-
tive reinforcement increases the likelihood of the reinforced response as a result of something
being added to the situation (e.g., getting $5 for cleaning your bedroom). Negative reinforcement
is effective as a result of something being removed from a situation (e.g., removing the chore of
washing the dishes if you clean your bedroom).

Positive punishment involves adding something to the environment that decreases the probabil-
ity of the behavior occurring. For example, giving someone an electrical shock or a child a slap on
the hand could be examples of positive punishment. Negative punishment involves the removal
of something desirable, and it, too, results in a decreased probability of the behavior occurring.
Removing phone privileges would be an example of negative punishment. See Figure 5.3 for addi-
tional illustrations of these concepts.

Positive punishment

Example: Bobby is given
detention for talking

in class

Positive
reinforcement

(reward)

Example: Bobby
is given $10 for

getting an A in math

Added to the
situation after

a response

Pleasant Stimulus
(Appetitive)

Unpleasant Stimulus
(Aversive)

Taken away from
a situation after

a response

Negative
reinforcement (relief)

Example: Bobby is let
out of detention when

he promises to be quiet

Negative punishment

Example: Bobby has his
$10 taken away for
painting his sister

B
e

h
a
vi

o
r

st
re

n
g

th
e

n
e

d
B
e
h
a
vi
o
r
st
re
n
g
th
e
n
e
d
B
e
h
a
vi
o
r

w
e

a
ke

n
e
d
B
e
h
a
vi
o
r
w
e
a
ke
n
e
d

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 143 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5

5.2 The Neobehaviorists

5.2 The Neobehaviorists

More complex versions of behaviorism evolved from the 1920s to the 1960s and became popular in American psychology. Much of the research used animals as the subjects, but even when humans were used, the subject matter was focused on the prediction of
behavior rather than arriving at any complex meaning behind the behavior.

Skinner’s Radical Behaviorism
One of the most well-known and influential psychologists of the 20th century was B. F. Skinner.
Consistent throughout his prolific career was his belief in radical behaviorism—radical meaning
“root.” Like Watson, Skinner spent his career advocating for an extreme behaviorist view. Skinner
had no interest in the human psyche: He was concerned with the external, observable, and mea-
surable causes of behavior. Nor did he have a theory of psychology or personality, a concept he
considered illusory and a distraction to the scientific study of behavior. In this respect, it might
appear that Skinner’s perspective would offer little to the study of personality. However, his firm
belief in radical behaviorism had a profound impact on the field. It challenged personality theo-
rists to be more scientific to avoid being dismissed as irrelevant to scientific psychology. He also
forced theoreticians to form a stronger and, in some cases, a practical connection between any
mental constructs, such as affect or cognition, and observable behavior.

Skinner was responsible for many
discoveries and advances in our
knowledge of learning. He had great
mechanical aptitude and designed and
constructed an experimental appa-
ratus that much improved the ones
designed by Thorndike—most notably
the Skinner box, which became enor-
mously popular in psychological labo-
ratories throughout the world. The
box is basically a cage equipped with a
lever that controls the administration
of food pellets or water. It is generally
used with white rats or pigeons and
provides an easy, highly controlled way
of investigating learning. It is especially
useful for studying the relationship
between rate, kind, and amount of

reinforcement and measures of learning, such as rate of acquisition, response rate, and rate of
extinction. The Skinner box lent itself exceptionally well to creating a truly empirical science.

Skinner described two different kinds of behaviors, each of which can be explained with different
models. On the one hand are respondents. Respondents are responses that occur as reactions
to a specific stimulus. Ducking when someone throws a punch at your head is an example of a
respondent. Respondents are usually explained by a model of classical conditioning. In contrast,
operants are responses that are simply emitted by the organism rather than elicited by specific
stimuli. Whether an operant will occur again depends on its consequences. Hence a model of
operant conditioning is used to explain operant learning. Thus, if a hungry rat presses a bar and
receives a food pellet, the immediate consequences of the rat’s bar pressing are instrumental

Mimi Forsyth/age fotostock/SuperStock

The Skinner box was the first version of modern reinforcement
chambers such as this one, which allows scientists to study
factors that influence the acquisition of behaviors.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 144 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5

in increasing the probability of the bar-pressing response when the rat is again placed in this
situation.

Skinner pointed out that punishment is not especially effective as a shaper of behavior. With
respect to his experiments on punishment, he writes, “The effect of punishment was a temporary
suppression of the behavior, not a reduction in the total number of responses” (Skinner, 1953,
p. 184). Skinner’s conclusion is interesting when considered within the context of childrearing,
where punishments like timeouts are commonly employed. Of course, one important difference
is that Skinner emphasized positive punishments, whereas a timeout would be an example of a
negative punishment (i.e., the removal of any reinforcers).

When a response is not emitted for a long period of time, it may be forgotten. For example, if the
rat that has learned to depress a lever for reinforcement is not placed in the Skinner box for a
period of months or years, it might no longer run over and depress the lever when it finally enters
the box again. Skinner distinguishes between forgetting—the loss of a response as a function of

the passage of time—and a pro-
cess we earlier defined as extinc-
tion. Extinction occurs when a
response becomes progressively
less likely and finally disappears
as a result of not being reinforced.
If, after learning bar-pressing
behavior, the rat is allowed free
access to the Skinner box but is
never reinforced again, the bar-
pressing response will weaken
and eventually disappear.

Schedules of Reinforcement and Punishment

As a result of his experiments, Skinner discovered that various schedules of reinforcement either
increase the probability of a behavior occurring or reduce it. The schedules can either be focused
on the passage of time between responses or the number of responses. Temporally based sched-
ules are characterized by the term interval, meaning that reinforcement (or punishment) occurs
after the first response is given following a period of time. In contrast, ratio schedules focus on the
number of responses, irrespective of the time. Schedules can also be differentiated with respect
to whether they are unchanging or changing. If the schedule is stable, meaning it is not changing
from trial to trial, then it is referred to as a fixed schedule. When the schedule is changing from
trial to trial, then it is referred to as a variable schedule. By crossing these two descriptive fea-
tures, four schedules can be identified (see Table 5.1), and each results in a different pattern of
responding. If a rat is given a pellet of food every fifth time it presses a bar, then this is a fixed ratio
schedule. If the rat receives the food for the first bar press following a 2-minute interval, then this
is a fixed interval schedule. If the rat receives the food first after 3 bar presses, then 100, then 20,
etc., this is referred to as a variable ratio scale. Finally, if the rat receives the food for the first bar
press after 5 minutes, then the first bar press after 45 seconds, then 20 minutes, etc., then this is
a variable interval schedule.

When learning something new, the best way to effect behavioral change is to reinforce (if trying to
acquire a behavior) or punish (if trying to extinguish a behavior) every instance of that behavior.

Beyond the Text: Classic Writings

Do you engage in superstitious behavior, such as not step-
ping on sidewalk cracks or rituals for good luck? In this brief
1948 paper, Skinner characterizes the acquisition of “super-
stitious” behavior in a pigeon. Read it at http://psychclassics
.yorku.ca/Skinner/Pigeon/.

Reference: Skinner, B. F. (1948). Superstition in the pigeon.
Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38, 168–172.

5.2 The Neobehaviorists

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 145 5/21/15 12:39 PM

http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Skinner/Pigeon/

http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Skinner/Pigeon/

CHAPTER 5 5.2 The Neobehaviorists

This is referred to as a continuous schedule (technically, this is also a fixed ratio schedule, with the
ratio being one response). However, this is not necessarily the best way to maintain behavior, as
constant reinforcement or punishment can result in satiation, a process by which the reinforcer
or punisher loses its value. For example, imagine if students were given a piece of chocolate each
time they asked a question in class. Within a short period of time, the frequency of questions
would increase dramatically due to the presence of what would likely be defined as a continuous
reinforcer (as most people love chocolate). Despite its success in initiating a behavior, the effec-
tiveness of this schedule of reinforcement would eventually decrease because the students would
eventually have enough chocolates or grow tired of chocolates, and as a result, the appeal of yet
one more piece would diminish. Thus, following the acquisition of behavior, the best approach is
to move to a variable schedule, as variable schedules are more resistant to extinction, they can be
less costly and time consuming to maintain, and they are less likely to result in satiation.

Now let’s consider some human examples. Many students are on their smartphones during class
checking for texts or updates on social networking sites. This would represent the initial behav-
ior. If the consequence is receiving a favorable text or message update (a reinforcer), then the
use of the smartphone during class will increase. This is especially true given that the schedule
of reinforcement is likely to be variable interval in nature, one that is highly resistant to change.
The acquisition of a behavior in this context is clear because it’s a simple behavior in an isolated
setting, but it becomes more difficult when trying to account for complex behaviors. Similarly,
learning theory works well to explain simple phobias that involve a single, specific feared stimulus,
but they do not work well in predicting complex phobias (such as agoraphobia) or more complex
psychological phenomena (such as personality disorders or even introversion).

Table 5.1: Types of schedules

Schedule Description Example Typical behavioral response

Fixed
interval

After a specific interval
of time has passed,
reinforcement is given
following the first response.

Paychecks delivered every
two weeks.

Lengthy breaks until the
interval approaches, then
bursts of activity.

Fixed
ratio

After a specific number of
responses, reinforcement is
given.

After every five completed
assignments, the student
receives five bonus points.

Substantial decrease in
productivity following the
reinforcer.

Variable
interval

After a variable period of
time, reinforcement is given
following the first response.

You are trying to get through
on a busy phone signal and
the call finally goes through.

Slow but steady rate.
Generally harder to
extinguish than the fixed
schedules.

Variable
ratio

After a variable number of
responses, reinforcement is
given.

A slot machine could result
in a jackpot after one pull or
no wins after thousands of
pulls.

Most productive schedule
with minimal pausing. Also,
this schedule is the hardest
to extinguish.

One way to address the acquisition of more complex behavior is to consider the process of shap-
ing. Shaping involves learning by breaking complex behaviors down into simpler behaviors (i.e.,
steps) and then reinforcing each successive step in the sequence. With each step, the behavior
is closer to the desired outcome (this is sometimes referred to as shaping by successive approxi-
mations). Using operant shaping procedures, Skinner taught pigeons to play “ping pong” and a

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 146 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5

5.3 Theoretical Models Applied to Personality

pig to put dirty clothes in a hamper. He also applied these techniques to education, develop-
ing “programmed instruction”—a teaching technique where learners are reinforced for correct
responses to each of a sequence of related questions. The use of operant conditioning techniques
soon spread to mental institutions, and in many of these established “token economies,” patients
could receive some token (for example, a poker chip) that could later be exchanged for a variety
of reinforcers, such as food or books. In general, though the use of token economies has its critics
(Corrigan 1995), the research literature suggests that they can be effective in improving patient
behavior (e.g., Ghezzi, Wilson, Tarbox, & MacAleese, 2009), even in individuals diagnosed with
schizophrenia (for a review see Dickerson, Tenhula, & Green-Paden, 2005).

Skinner’s View on Personality
Although Skinner did not recognize the need to explain or even address personality, he pro-
posed that it is possible to predict the occurrence of behaviors by analyzing observable events,
conditions, situations, and history. For example, Skinner (1953) described the traits of submis-
siveness and dominance, believing that when a bully attempts to dominate others, he or she
is reinforced when others acquiesce and show deference to the bully. Likewise, submissiveness
can be reinforced by the lack of conflict. As these practices become habitual, they present as
personality traits.

Although Skinner could explain what would typically be called personality, it is important to reiter-
ate that he would not consider this personality, but rather a behavioral phenomenon. Of course,
current models of personality do tend to be more behaviorally focused as well. Therefore, much
of Skinner’s objection with the term personality has more to do with how the psychodynamic
theorists used the term (i.e., emphasizing internal, unseen variables).

5.3 Theoretical Models Applied to Personality

Behavioral psychologists often express their deeply held belief that if behavior changes, “personality” is sure to follow. In other words, when individuals change their habits and behaviors, it is not important whether or not we believe some arbitrary construct such as
personality changes. As we saw, the behavioral approach emphasizes the principles by which
individuals learn and the ways in which behavior can be modified. In contrast, psychodynamic
approaches emphasize far more mentalistic constructs. The dialectic process resulting from the
clash between the overly elaborate theoretical system of psychoanalysis and the pragmatic sci-
ence of behaviorism has done much to propel the entire field of psychology forward.

In this section, we will present some of the theoretical formulations of personality that emerged
toward the latter part of the behavioral era, which includes some more elaborate attempts to
explain complex behavior. We will also examine some of the more recent ways in which behavioral
theory has been applied in practice (i.e., Applied Behavior Analysis).

Salter’s Conditioned Reflex Theory
A little-known figure in the field of behavioral personality is Andrew Salter. Although Salter’s work
is not ordinarily mentioned in personality texts, it represents an interesting theoretical attempt
to explain personality from a behavioral viewpoint. Salter is perhaps best known for two pub-
lications: The Case Against Psycho-Analysis (1952) and Conditioned Reflex Therapy: The Direct
Approach to the Reconstruction of Personality (1949). In the latter book, he established what has

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 147 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.3 Theoretical Models Applied to Personality

been credited as the first assertiveness training guide, and it was couched in the language of learn-
ing theory. Salter wrote about such topics as shyness, stuttering, addictions, anxiety, inhibition,
masochism, and homosexuality. He believed that personality should be explained with as few
concepts as possible and in the simplest way available; this premise remains consistent with the
behavioral tradition.

Salter (1949) identified and used three prototypes (models) to characterize personality: what he
terms excitatory personality, inhibitory personality, and psychopathic personality. For example, he
used General Dwight Eisenhower as a prototype for the excitatory personality (similar to an asser-
tive personality), characterizing this prototype as anxiety-free, happy, direct, energetic, respond-
ing outwardly to the environment, and focused on constructive and immediate action in response
to problems. Salter also characterized this prototype as a quick decision maker, who gravitates to
responsibilities, and who likes individuals, but doesn’t care what they think.

Salter (1949) described the psychopathic personality as egocentric in perspective, callous and
cold, insincere, unreliable, infantile, and hostile. Much like the current antisocial personality dis-
order, these individuals often take advantage of others and have problems with the law.

Salter (1949) believed most people have an inhibitory personality (also known as non-assertive,
and which he describes as “living death”), essentially navigating life with extreme caution and
trepidation with respect to emotional expression and actions. Salter associated this inhibitory
personality with psychological and physical problems, working on the assumption that to withhold
emotions and actions results in “toxicity.” This was his rationale for engaging in what would now
be characterized as assertiveness training to help people both identify and behaviorally express
their experiences. His ideas served as the conceptual basis for Wolpe’s systematic desensitization.

What is interesting about Salter’s use of conditioning to explain human personality is that he also
acknowledges the importance of emotion and interpersonal relations for personality adjustment.
Dollard and Miller (1950), too, recognized the importance of emotion.

Photri Images/SuperStock Nomad/SuperStock

Though on very different sides of the political spectrum, these former presidents both
appear to possess many of the traits associated with the excitatory personality.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 148 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.3 Theoretical Models Applied to Personality

Dollard and Miller’s Learning Theory
One of the most systematic efforts to produce a comprehensive behavioral theory of personality
was forwarded by John Dollard (an anthropologist) and Neil Miller (a psychologist). Dollard and
Miller (1950) were not interested in traits or personality structure. Like other behaviorists, they
were concerned with habits and how these are acquired. Behaviorists believe that we are born
with reflexes that are shaped by the environment through the action of primary drives and the
effects of reinforcement. Because of their role in reducing drives, various behaviors are strength-
ened or weakened. Dollard and Miller believed that certain early experiences, such as feeding, toi-
let training, learning about sex, and resolving conflict (i.e., the same activities that psychoanalytic
theorists considered important), offer highly charged learning experiences in which behavior will
be shaped and strengthened into individual habit patterns or personality traits.

Dollard and Miller’s theory describes what they consider the four essential components of learn-
ing: drive, cue, response, and reinforcement. These components shape learning and, in so doing,
shape our behavior and our personality.

• Drives are “[s]trong stimuli which impel action” (Dollard & Miller, 1950, p. 30). Unlearned
drives, such as hunger, thirst, sex, fatigue, and pain, are labeled primary drives. The
strength of the primary drives is related to the degree of deprivation: The longer you have
been without food or sex, the stronger your hunger or sex drive. Learned drives, such as
those related to fear or the need for approval, are termed secondary drives. The notion of
secondary drives provided far greater explanatory power than did the concept of primary
drives alone, and this was especially important in the attempt to provide a comprehensive
explanation of human personality and the development of neurosis.

• Cues are stimuli that direct attention to certain aspects of the environment. They deter-
mine what we will respond to and how. For example, internal hunger cues or the golden
arches direct our attention toward food.

• Response: Under certain drive conditions (for example, strong hunger) we respond to
cues (we eat when we have the banana in front of us). Responses can be weak at first,
explain Dollard and Miller, but reinforcement can strengthen them. In addition, a variety
of different responses are possible in a given situation. In a sense, there are hierarchies of
responses. Some are more likely (i.e., more “dominant”) than others. Among the various
ways in which habits are acquired, they suggest that trial and error is the least efficient.
Dollard and Miller also suggest that learning takes place through imitation, a notion that
has become an important part of contemporary social learning theory (see Chapter 6 for
a review of these concepts).

• Reinforcement: Any stimulus (S) that increases the probability of a response (R) occur-
ring is defined as a reinforcement. In Dollard and Miller’s theory, any stimulus that
reduces a drive will be reinforcing. For example, food is reinforcing precisely because it
reduces the hunger drive. In fact, they claim that reinforcement is impossible without
some level of drive, as there is nothing to reduce (if you are satiated, the offer of food
will not be reinforcing). They also point out that after reinforcement, the level of drive
will diminish and unless something occurs to increase drive, the same stimulus will no
longer be reinforcing. Thus, after you have eaten your fill—that is, your hunger drive has
been reduced to zero—eating is no longer reinforcing.

An important construct in Dollard and Miller’s theory, used to explain complex behavior, is the
notion of learned drives. Learned or secondary drives develop because of reinforcement that
occurs in complex social systems. Thus, many have strong drives to achieve or to become famous.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 149 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.3 Theoretical Models Applied to Personality

These are learned drives, unlike the primary drives of hunger, sex, thirst, and avoidance of pain.
Dollard and Miller suggest that these secondary drives are so powerful because they are linked
with the early satisfaction of primary drives. But unlike primary drives, when they are not rein-
forced, secondary drives will weaken.

Another important construct defined by Dollard and Miller is frustration, which they describe as a
blocked attempt to reduce a drive (i.e., a blocked goal), such as a failed attempt to quit smoking or
drinking. They also define frustration as the inability to pursue two goals at once. When the frus-
tration is severe, Dollard and Miller call it conflict, and we will here review three types of conflict:

• Approach-approach conflict is the choice between two desirable outcomes (approach
means moving toward an outcome). In this situation, you tend to choose whichever out-
come is closer, as this emphasizes the immediacy of drive reduction. Thus, as you move
closer to one goal, your drive for that goal increases.

• Avoidance-avoidance conflict is the choice between two undesirable outcomes (avoid-
ance means moving away from an outcome). As one moves closer to an undesirable
outcome, it increases in its aversive quality.

• Approach-avoidance conflict is when a single behavior results in both a desirable and an
undesirable outcome. Importantly, as one moves closer to engaging in the behavior and
experiencing the desirable and undesirable outcomes, the aversiveness for the undesir-
able outcome increases, as does the drive for the desirable outcome, but the aversiveness
increases at a faster rate relative to the desire. It was Lewin (1935) who first postulated
that from a distance, positive valence looms larger, whereas the closer one gets, the larger
the negative valence. Imagine that you have not dated in quite some time and someone
appealing is introduced to you. As you consider whether to call the person, there is likely to
be an approach (getting to know them better)—avoidance (being rejected) conflict. As you
move closer to contacting the individual, the fear of rejection increases, as does the desire
to get to know them better, but the fear usually wins out.

Translating Psychodynamic Concepts in Learning Theory

One of the most important contributions of Dollard and Miller’s (1950) work was their translation
of Freudian concepts, including the defense mechanisms, into behavioral terms, as this provided
theoreticians and researchers a common framework for dialogue. This work also demonstrated
that learning theory could be used to explain some complex behaviors that underlie personality.

For example, Dollard and Miller suggest that unconscious behaviors are those where the indi-
vidual is unaware of the cues triggering the drive. Unconscious functioning could also reflect being
unaware of the drive itself. Thus, unconscious simply means unlabeled. Although Dollard and
Miller conceptualize the defense mechanisms in behavioral terminology, it is important to note
that the primary difference is that Freud would assign an underlying (unconscious) motivation to
the defense mechanism (i.e., repression is intentional, but unconscious). In contrast, Dollard and
Miller’s account does not assume intentionality, but it can account for it being unconscious (i.e.,
an unlabeled drive). Table 5.2 provides a summary of the defense mechanisms in the language of
learning theory.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 150 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.3 Theoretical Models Applied to Personality

Table 5.2: Freudian defenses explained using behavioral constructs

Freudian defense mechanism Behavioral explanation

Repression Unlabeled drives, cues, and responses are equivalent to the
unconscious.

Suppression The changing of an anxiety-provoking topic by a group of people
talking about something unpleasant reinforces its suppression by
reducing anxiety.

Regression “When the dominant habit is blocked by conflict or extinguished
through nonreward, the next strongest response will be expected
to occur” (p. 171). This next strongest response is often reinforced,
and this might be the response that was previously used with
great frequency (e.g., a response that was used at some earlier
developmental stage).

Displacement When a dominant response is blocked, the next strongest is likely
to occur. The response will then generalize to another stimulus
(i.e., stimulus generalization).

Rationalization When a true explanation of an event causes anxiety, the individual
is motivated to construct an alternative explanation that will
reduce anxiety.

Projection This defense depends on the principle of generalization: Each
individual expects others to react in a certain manner. Although
not a unitary phenomenon, various biologically based reactions
that occur tend to reinforce this defense. Acting in a friendly
manner is likely to elicit friendly behavior; conversely, a hostile
manner elicits a hostile reaction.

Reaction Formation “A person who is motivated to do something he had learned to
disapprove or fear may respond with thoughts, statements, or
behavior of the opposite kind” (p. 184).

Adapted from Dollard, J., & Miller, N. E. (1950). Personality and psychotherapy: An analysis in terms of learning, thinking, and culture.
New York: McGraw Hill.

Mowrer’s Two-Factor Theory
Orval Hobart Mowrer modified the theory of classical conditioning, proposing a two-factor theory
to explain avoidance learning. He believed that if an individual avoids a feared stimulus, extinc-
tion will not take place. In other words, if someone is traumatized and develops a phobia of rats,
as in Little Albert’s case, not exposing him to the rat in the future will not eliminate the pho-
bic response. The two-factor theory of avoidance learning says, essentially, that the first factor
involved in learning an avoidance response is the organism’s fear that has been conditioned to the
fear-related event. The organism that runs from danger is not escaping from the source of danger,
but rather from the cues—that is, the conditioned stimuli—associated with danger. For example,
Mowrer would argue that running from someone who is coming at you in a threatening way with
a knife is responding to the cues, in this case a jagged implement, an angry face, and aggressive
movements. The second factor in this theory holds that escaping from the fear-related stimulus or
stimuli (e.g., the cues noted in the example) is reinforcing because it results in harm avoidance and
fear reduction. In this way, avoidance behavior is reinforced and becomes learned.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 151 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.3 Theoretical Models Applied to Personality

Mowrer was interested in the study of conditioned anxiety and reinforcement. He believed that
two principles of reinforcement were required: (1) Responses mediated by the central nervous
system involving voluntary muscles become weaker when drive is reduced (e.g., you are more
likely to stop searching through the refrigerator when not hungry); and (2) responses mediated by
the autonomic nervous system or smooth muscles, such as limbic system arousal related to fear
are learned by sheer temporal association (classical conditioning; e.g., whenever you see a white
lab coat, your blood pressure rises; Hilgard & Bower, 1975). Mowrer’s ideas were used more in the
1950s, but they were met with some criticism and revision as early as the 1960s (Feather, 1963),
and as a result, few researchers cite Mowrer’s work, aside from its historical significance (e.g.,
Levis, 1990).

Wolpe’s Behavioral Applications
Joseph Wolpe was a psychiatrist whose view of behavior was similar to that of Watson, believing
that behavior is elicited by the environment and not simply emitted and shaped by environmen-
tal consequences, as Skinner proposed. A very important concept in Wolpe’s system is anxiety,
which he does not distinguish from fear. He defines anxiety as the automatic response patterns
that occur in reaction to unpleasant stimuli. In his experiments, Wolpe placed cats in a cage and
shocked them after they were exposed to a “hooting sound” of two to three seconds, duration.
As classical conditioning theory would predict, the cats soon responded to the hooting with signs
of extreme anxiety, crouching, trembling, and breathing heavily. When they were prevented from
escaping, they were terrified, often cowering, urinating, and defecating.

In the behavior of these cats, Wolpe detected what he called a “neurotic” pattern (defined as a set
of behaviors reflecting intense anxiety). These “neurotic” cats began to respond with increasing
anxiety to a variety of other noises. In behaviorist terminology, they had generalized their anxiety
responses to other similar stimuli. Importantly, Wolpe also noted that when a response is pre-
vented by a competing response, stimuli associated with the competing response can also inhibit
the behavior. In other words, if you can find a stimulus that will make the cat emit a response that
prevents it from responding with anxiety, that stimulus (and others associated with it) might be
used to prevent the anxiety response. This observation would be central to establishing the frame-
work of a therapeutic intervention.

Wolpe developed the therapeutic technique known as systematic desensitization (also called
graduated exposure therapy), which is frequently used today. It is a behavioral technique used
primarily to treat phobias and other anxiety-based disorders (e.g., obsessive-compulsive disorder).
There are three important steps in systematic desensitization:

1. The first step involves establishing a fear hierarchy for the conditioned stimulus. This
means creating a specific list of feared stimuli and ranking them from least to most
feared. For example, if dealing with a fear of spiders, the low end of the fear hierarchy
might involve touching rubber spiders or pictures of spiders. Next might be contact with
a dead spider. The highest end of the fear hierarchy might involve a live spider at a close
distance or even touching a live spider.

2. During the second step of systemic desensitization, the participant engages in a progres-
sive relaxation technique, such as deep, meditative breathing.

3. The final step involves exposing the patient to each level of the fear hierarchy, beginning
with the lowest end of the fear hierarchy. The patient must return to the relaxed state
prior to the removal of the stimulus.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 152 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.3 Theoretical Models Applied to Personality

Another therapeutic technique proposed by Wolpe (1958) is that of assertive responding. It
involves training the patient to express both aggressive and affectionate feelings. The aggressive-
ness, or assertiveness, is incompatible with anxiety. As a result, the patient who has learned to
respond assertively is less likely to be anxious. Another illustration, as applied to Salter’s work,
would be training someone to demonstrate excitatory behavior, which would be incompatible
with inhibitory behavior. In effect, this is a form of reciprocal inhibition (or counterconditioning) in
that assertive responding prevents free-floating anxiety.

Wolpe (1958) also used aversive techniques in therapy. Aversion therapy typically involves pair-
ing a negative stimulus, such as an electric shock, with an undesirable response. The treatment of
an alcoholic, for example, might include giving the client a nausea-producing drug followed by an
alcoholic beverage (recall the example of the drug Antabuse used in the treatment of problematic
drinking). Similarly, counterconditioning has been used with pedophiles where electric shock is
paired with sexual stimuli. Ethical issues aside, these methods have had limited usefulness for
this population.

Wolpe (1969) did not believe that his
system treated only superficial manifes-
tations of personality. He thought that
behavior therapy changes personality, if
what is meant by personality is the sum
of an individual’s habits. He also believed
that the model of reciprocal inhibition
could explain cures, even when the cure
is brought about by drugs (Wolpe, 1960).
Many behaviorists would agree with his
claim that changing habits is the critical
step in altering one’s “personality.”

Thomas Stampfl (1966), who speculated
that neuroses were the result of learn-
ing to avoid anxiety, developed another
interesting therapeutic technique that
he termed flooding (also called implo-
sive therapy). In implosive therapy, the
patient is literally flooded with stimuli
associated with anxiety. This is based on the expectation that the patient will eventually become
fatigued and that the anxiety response will eventually cease—at which point a different response
will have been counterconditioned to what were previously anxiety-provoking stimuli.

In a move that has taken full advantage of improving technology, more recent behavioral approaches
to exposure therapy have adopted virtual reality as a means of exposing patients to feared stimuli
without leaving the office. A recent empirical review of the literature suggests virtual reality expo-
sure therapy is equally efficacious with respect to more traditional approaches and the benefits
appear to generalize outside of therapy and have some durability (Opriş et al., 2012).

AntionioGuillem/iStock/Thinkstock

In flooding therapy, a patient is fully exposed to the most
intense manifestation of his or her phobia. For example,
a patient with a phobia of fish might be taken to an
aquarium such as this.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 153 5/21/15 12:40 PM

CHAPTER 5

5.4 Component Subsystems of Behavioral Theory

Applied Behavior Analysis
Applied behavior analysis (ABA) is a form of behavior modification that relies on the basic learn-
ing principles outlined in this chapter. Researchers and clinicians identify the behavior that is being
targeted for change, as well as its antecedents (the behaviors and events that precede it) and its
consequences. The idea is to not only study, but to change human behavior for the better in a
wide range of contexts, including business, health and safety, athletics, and, perhaps most widely,
in clinical settings to treat severe mental disorders.

One area that has seen the reasonably successful application of behavioral principles for over
40 years is in treating individuals with autism spectrum disorders (more broadly referred to as
intellectual and behavioral disabilities). Those with autism spectrum disorders often have impaired
cognitive functioning, but the hallmark feature is impairments in socialization and communica-
tion. Behavioral techniques have been employed to help children and adults with low cognitive
functioning to develop communication skills and other adaptive behavior (for a review, see Nei-
dert, Dozier, Iwata, & Hafen, 2010).

An early forerunner to modern-day applied behavior analysis was an approach developed by Ivar
Lovaas, which involves an intensive (i.e., 30 or more hours per week) behavioral intervention to help
young children who have been non-communicative to express themselves (e.g., Lovaas, 1987; Smith,
Lovaas, & Lovaas, 2002). Although there have been some mixed findings regarding the efficacy of
such early behavioral interventions (e.g., the approach appears less effective at addressing deficits
such as problematic emotional responses; Beadle-Brown, Murphy, & Wing, 2006), they continue
to represent one of the most widely used and efficacious forms of early intervention with autism
spectrum disordered individuals (Soorya, Carpenter, & Romanczyk, 2011). Moreover, ABA has been
shown to be effective at decreasing self-injurious behavior (e.g., Chowdhury & Benson, 2011).

In addition to their difficulties communicating, these children with autism spectrum disorders
have personalities that can be described as passive in social interaction, lacking in personal space,
having unique perspectives on the world, failing to understand nuanced communication, and pref-
erence for isolation, to name a few. Some researchers believe that autism represents a unique
personality structure in and of itself and are therefore less likely to use traditional personality con-
cepts to characterize these individuals (Wakabayashi, Baron-Cohen, & Wheelwright, 2006). In con-
trast, other researchers adopt a more traditional perspective and use typical traits to characterize
those with autism. For example, it appears that when compared to normally developing children,
those with autism spectrum disorders score lower on traits such as extraversion, conscientious-
ness, and openness to new experience (creativity; Fortenberry, Grist, & McCord, 2011).

5.4 Component Subsystems of Behavioral Theory

Many of the developments in the evolution of the behavioral model are based on research that looks at how various processes influence the development of personality. Although a few behavioral researchers tried to develop a comprehensive model of personality,
most did not. Still, their research has resulted in the discovery of many processes that might be
considered components of personality. Understanding these processes can be very useful for
understanding how learning occurs and how it contributes to the development of personality (see
Table 5.3).

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 154 5/21/15 12:40 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.4 Component Subsystems of Behavioral Theory

Table 5.3: Subcomponent systems and their clinical phenomena and personality

Construct Clinical application Application to personality

Learned helplessness Depression Depressive personality
development

Self-control Impulse disorders Antisocial personality
development

Anxiety Agoraphobia Avoidant personality
development

Seligman’s Concept of Learned Helplessness
Martin Seligman (1975) developed the concept of learned helplessness, which is when an
individual (or animal) learns that they are unable to control, change, or escape from their
environment. In a series of fascinating experiments, Seligman studied the reactions of dogs

that were given an electric shock and
then allowed to jump over a barrier
to escape—which all dogs learned to
do very quickly. When he changed the
experimental conditions and shocked
the dogs without giving them an
escape route, they seemed to become
helpless; instead of trying various
maneuvers to escape, the dogs stood
or crouched and trembled, seemingly
overwhelmed and frozen with anxiety.
Even more important for Seligman was
the fact that when the barrier was sub-
sequently removed so that the dogs
could escape, they did not. This was
a perplexing observation. Seligman
labeled this state learned helpless-
ness, suggesting that this animal model
could be applied to humans to explain
how individuals with depression seem
to view the world in negative terms and
essentially give up.

Many people come to believe that there are no responses they can make that will make matters
better. Seligman explains that people characterized by learned helplessness seem to have been
conditioned in much the same way as the dogs in his study; they no longer believe there is a possi-
bility of escape. He suggests that learned helplessness might be learned in severely dysfunctional
families where chaos rules and expectancies of having any impact are kept to a minimum. The
significance of Seligman’s early work is that it provides a learning model that explains how cer-
tain experiences can lead to profound changes in personality, such as we see in those who suffer

iStockphoto/Thinkstock

Learned helplessness is the belief that there are no
responses that can make a situation better. This belief
can be learned through long-term exposure to difficult
environments in which efforts do not translate into
favorable change or escape from the setting.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 155 5/21/15 12:40 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.4 Component Subsystems of Behavioral Theory

from trauma and depression. Interestingly, the bulk of the current research published on learned
helplessness focuses on the neurobiological mechanisms of this type of maladaptive learning in
animals and its implications for depression (e.g., Li et al., 2011); a detailed discussion of neurobio-
logical mechanisms can be found in Chapter 4.

Goldfried and Merbaum: Changing Behavior Through Self-Control
Self-control is an important feature of personality functioning. In many individuals with disordered
or dysfunctional personalities, self-control often is impaired (e.g., problems with impulse control
are one of four criteria used in defining personality disorders; this is also true for the DSM-5).
Goldfried and Merbaum (1973) describe self-control as “a process through which an individual
becomes the principal agent in guiding, directing, and regulating those features of his own behav-
ior that might eventually lead to desired positive consequences” (p. 11).

They suggest that it is important to be aware of the fact that environmental influences also play a
central role in developing behaviors that represent self-control. Self-control influences many areas
of personality functioning, including adjustment to the community, family, and work. Indeed,
when self-control is more broadly termed as self-regulation, it can be shown to play a central role
in a number of problematic behaviors, such as inattention and procrastination. For example, in
a lab-based study, researchers found that chronic procrastinators delayed preparing (practicing)
for a task only when it was defined as a cognitive task, and not when it was labeled a fun activity
(Ferrari & Tice, 2000). This research paradigm, which considers procrastination as a form of poor
self-regulation, uses behavioral concepts such as task avoidance to define procrastination.

Barlow: The Nature of Anxiety
One of the most prolific contemporary workers in psychology is David H. Barlow (2002), whose
models of treatment are based directly on the behavioral model. However, his description of anxi-
ety and its various subdivisions, such as panic and phobias, is more inclusive than that of the
behaviorists. Not only does it include much of what is current in neuroscience, but it also ascribes
an important role to emotions, a topic that behavioral psychologists have largely ignored.

Anxiety is perhaps the most common clinical symptom in a wide range of personality disorders,
hence its central role in any comprehensive personality theory. Barlow (2002) has done much to
broaden our understanding of this central issue. Using learning theory, he presents evidence that
there is a relationship between the development of agoraphobia (fear of venturing into a strange
place or into crowded areas) and the development of what is termed an avoidant personality
style. For example, an individual might be afraid of going into a grocery store because a panic
attack occurred on the last visit to the store. That person might then begin to develop more gener-
alized anxiety related to being out of their zone of comfort at home. The panic can then generalize
and become agoraphobia, which Barlow describes as “basically a complication of anxiety about a
fear of panic” (2002, p. 357). Barlow’s work explains how reinforcement patterns can be critical in
creating states of anxiety and in fostering the development of certain personality types and disor-
ders. For example, a highly anxious individual, whose avoidance of new situations is reinforced by
a lessening of anxiety, may develop a strongly entrenched avoidant personality style. Accordingly,
most of the therapeutic approaches Barlow developed are behavioral methods.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 156 5/21/15 12:40 PM

CHAPTER 5

5.5 Assessment Strategies and Behavioral Tools

After establishing the theoretical groundwork (e.g., Gray, 1985), recent research has provided
insights into the neurobiology of the basic learning mechanisms (e.g., activation and inhibition
systems) that underlie anxiety and other disorders (e.g., Buss et al., 2003; Putman, Hermans,
& van Honk, 2004; Sutton & Davidson, 1997). For example, consistent with Barlow’s hypothe-
sis, recent research in a large study of college undergraduates has shown a strong connection
between behavioral inhibition, experiential avoidance, and anxiety sensitivity (Pickett, Lodis,
Parkhill, & Orcutt, 2012). Importantly for personality, there appear to be measurable individual
differences in the acquisition/inhibition systems that can be traced to neurobiological factors
(e.g., Zinbarg & Mohlman, 1998). (Chapter 4 provides a more comprehensive coverage of neuro-
biological mechanisms.)

5.5 Assessment Strategies and Behavioral Tools

As indicated by the theories reviewed in this chapter, the primary focus of any assessment will be on behavior and factors in the environment that might influence that behavior. One commonality in many of the behavioral assessment strategies is the populations to which
they are applied, which tend to reflect lower cognitive abilities. For example, infants and children
are often the target of behavioral assessments, in large part because behaviors are more likely to
reflect the primary presenting problem, and also because access to other constructs (e.g., affec-
tive and cognitive experiences) is limited by their level of functioning. Similarly, individuals having
experienced brain injuries or pervasive developmental disorders are also assessed largely with
behavioral measures.

One relevant concept to all forms of behavior assessment is behavioral reactivity, which means
that behaviors can sometimes change (at least for a short period of time) as a function of being
observed. Within the context of research, this could mean that the participant alters his or her
behavior to conform to the expectations of the researcher, known as demand effects. This can also
occur in clinical contexts.

Assessing With Applied Behavior Analysis
Much like psychoanalysis, applied behavior analysis is both a technique for therapeutic change
and a method of assessment in which behavioral sequences are analyzed. This procedure ana-
lyzes and assesses important variables such as operants, reinforcers, punishment, extinction, and
schedules of reinforcement. Using these tools, researchers are able to analyze and understand
how certain behavioral patterns are shaped, reinforced, and maintained, as well as how they can
be extinguished when change is desired.

Behavior analysis is a proven and powerful technology that has many uses. A common first step in
therapy is to observe sequences of behavior and to analyze associated reinforcement and punish-
ment. For example, if a child has a temper tantrum when asked to logoff the computer, the tan-
trum might last longer if the parent continues to pay attention to the child, even if the attention is
negative. The attention might actually be reinforcing the temper tantrum. Knowing that this is the
case is an important tool in behavioral therapy.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 157 5/21/15 12:40 PM

CHAPTER 5 5.5 Assessment Strategies and Behavioral Tools

Behavioral Assessments of Children and Adolescents
Diagnosticians have long relied on behavioral assessments in a variety of clinical contexts to facili-
tate case conceptualization and treatment of children and adolescents (e.g., for a recent review, see
Hersen, 2006; McLeod, Jensen-Doss, & Ollendick, 2013). For example, scales such as the Neonatal
Behavioural Assessment Scale and the Assessment of the Preterm Infant’s Behavior are commonly
used to assess for any unusual behavioral or developmental manifestations (Lester & Tronick, 2001).

Clinicians use these assessments in applied settings, but it is also the case that any advances in
our understanding of children’s temperaments (personalities) is driven by the effectiveness of the
tools available to assess temperament. Researchers have argued and demonstrated that behav-
ioral assessments should stand at the forefront of any such assessments (Goldsmith & Gagne,
2012). There are a number of reasons for this argument, most notably, when dealing with children
it is much more difficult to access cognitive and behavioral information, and behaviors are more
easily objectified and can be directly observed.

Behavioral Assessments of Adults
The last 20 years have seen the implementation of many behavioral assessment approaches in
adults (e.g., Kenny, Alvarez, Donahue, & Winick, 2008), though with the bulk of these assess-
ment procedures being applied to individuals with some compromise in functioning, such as those
with adult autism-spectrum disorders (e.g., Parsons, Reid, Bentley, Inman, & Lattimore, 2012).
Although less common, behavioral assessments in normally functioning adults are also employed,
and recent research has attempted to integrate these methods in the personality literature (e.g.
Kelly & Agnew, 2012). Researchers have also attempted to use behavioral assessment strategies to
assess personality disorders, both to facilitate case conceptualization and treatment (i.e., behav-
ior change; Nelson-Gray et al., 2009). Interestingly, even informal and relatively brief behavioral
assessments of normally functioning adults can lead to some consensus with respect to predicting
the traits of extraversion and conscientiousness (Vartanian et al., 2012), thereby suggesting that at
least some traits are universally recognized and defined.

Behavioral assessment and therapy can and has been applied in many settings. It can be used in
naturalistic settings, such as in childcare facilities or in the classroom, as well as in clinical, forensic,
industrial/organizational settings (e.g., performance evaluations), and healthcare settings. In addi-
tion, health psychologists have adopted these techniques to help address problems of obesity,
smoking, heart disease, and other negative health behaviors that plague Western society.

Although other forms of assessment are typically cautious in their use of tests in other cultures,
behavioral approaches simply interpret any cultural differences as reflecting different learning
environments. Different cultures expose their members to different social and environmental
influences, which will then have powerful effects in shaping behavior. Cultures reinforce cer-
tain behaviors and values, and they punish others. The behavioristic model analyzes differences
among cultures in the same way as differences between the behaviors of two individuals might
be analyzed—that is, in terms of the nature of the reinforcement and punishment that follows
the behaviors. For example, as noted at the beginning of Chapter 3, grandiosity, attention seek-
ing, and other characteristics of narcissism are prevalent in American culture today. A behavioral
analysis would identify the elements of our culture that reinforce these behaviors that may not be
present in other cultures today or in American culture of the past. However, learning theory does
not concern itself with cultural variations and issues to the same extent that some of the other
approaches presented in this text do. Instead, behaviorists have sought to identify the universality
of human responses, rather than emphasizing cultural differences.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 158 5/21/15 12:40 PM

CHAPTER 5 Summary

Summary

The development of behaviorism heralded a major departure from the psychodynamic mod-els of personality. By rejecting most of the basic concepts of psychoanalysis, such as the unconscious, ego, and id, behaviorists attempted to develop an empirical foundation for
the study of behavior. Unlike other models presented in this text, behaviorism espouses no grand
theories and focuses instead on mere behavior.

One of the pioneering figures in behaviorism was Thorndike, who formulated the law of effect
and the law of exercise. The field was also strongly influenced by Pavlov’s discovery of the condi-
tioned reflex. Watson popularized behaviorism, most notably by demonstrating with Little Albert
the explanatory power of conditioning. He also brought behavioral principles to the public by
applying them to child psychology and parenting. Watson emphasized the prediction and control
of behavior, and this dramatically altered psychology’s theoretical landscape. Radical behavior-
ism, introduced by Skinner, held firmly to the notion that psychology should not concern itself
with mentalistic constructs because they are too subjective. Skinner described how schedules of
reinforcement can be used to shape complex behavior using the principles of operant condition-
ing. Dollard and Miller translated aspects of psychodynamic theory into learning theory in their
analysis of the role of drives, cues, responses, and reinforcement. Wolpe studied conditioning in
animals but then applied his findings to humans to understand how anxiety is caused and how it
can be extinguished, using systematic desensitization to treat disorders such as phobias. Research
also suggests that we may be more likely to acquire and maintain some phobias (e.g., spiders
and snakes) relative to others. Seligman investigated learned helplessness with animals and then
applied the model to explain depression in humans.

Principles of learning that are the foundation of the behavioral model can be used to understand
how personality is shaped and formed by examining behavioral sequences and reinforcement pat-
terns. These tools of behavioral analysis have found widespread use in a variety of disciplines and
settings, including clinical psychology, education, and business.

As noted in this chapter, numerous theoreticians have attempted to extend basic learning prin-
ciples to an understanding of personality with varied success. Although the behavioral perspec-
tive offers some very important insights to understanding personality, and perhaps even more to
the methods of studying any psychological phenomena, one longstanding and cogent criticism
is whether learning theory can be broadly applied to the complexities of human functioning.
Because much of the work is based on animal models, and is generally less able to account for a
multitude of competing drives and motivations, not all of which are known to the individual (or
at least not to the same degree), one natural criticism is that the complexities of human func-
tioning are overly simplified by the learning perspective. Indeed, some of the most successful
behavioral applications are for relatively less complex phenomena. As was noted in this chapter,
when applying behavioral principles to behavior change, the best fit appears to be with disor-
ders that are largely behaviorally defined (e.g., simple phobias, where the primary symptom is
avoidance behavior); where a single, definable stimulus (environmental cue) can be identified
as the trigger of the problematic behavior (e.g., a spider for someone with arachnophobia); and
when the population being targeted for treatment and behavior change exhibits lower cognitive
functioning (e.g., as with the application of behavioral principles to those with cognitive dis-
abilities). Of course, the trade-off for the simplified approach is that there is likely to be greater
experimental control, and this can be very useful to advancing our scientific understanding of
any phenomenon, including personality.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 159 5/21/15 12:40 PM

CHAPTER 5

Key Terms

Key Terms

anxiety Automatic response patterns that
occur in reaction to unpleasant stimuli.

applied behavioral analysis (ABA) A form of
behavior modification that identifies the behav-
ior that is being targeted for change, as well as
its antecedents and its consequences.

assertive responding A behavioral technique
that trains the patient to employ direct behav-
iors to express internal experiences.

aversion therapy A behavioral technique that
pairs a negative stimulus with an undesirable
response.

behavioral reactivity A change in behavior
as a function of being observed.

classical conditioning Learning by temporal
association, focusing on reflexive actions.

conditioned response A learned response
to a stimulus.

conditioned stimulus A previously neutral
stimulus that elicits the response to an uncon-
ditioned stimulus through repeated association.

continuous schedule When every instance of a
behavior is reinforced or punished.

cue A stimulus that directs attention to certain
aspects of the environment.

discrimination When the conditioned
response is only produced for a very specific
conditioned stimulus.

drive A strong stimulus that motivates action.

extinction When the conditioned stimulus no
longer elicits the conditioned response.

fear hierarchy A ranked list of feared stimuli.

fixed schedule A schedule that is stable and
does not change from trial to trial.

flooding A behavioral technique where the
patient is exposed to stimuli associated with
intense fear or anxiety (also called implosive
therapy).

generalization When the conditioned response
is elicited by a similar conditioned stimulus.

higher order conditioning When a con-
ditioned stimulus is paired with a neutral
stimulus until the neutral stimulus becomes a
conditioned stimulus by producing the con-
ditioned response; also known as secondary
conditioning.

inductive reasoning Reasoning that begins
with data and then induces laws from the data.

interval The period of time between responses
(or, in a related sense, it can be used as an
adjective to describe the type of schedule that
is determined by the time between schedules).

law of effect Behaviors are controlled by their
consequences, such that behaviors that are
reinforced are likely to reoccur, whereas those
that are punished are less likely to reoccur.

law of exercise The more often a response
has been connected with a stimulus, the more
likely it is to be repeated (repetition strengthen
learning).

learned drive See secondary drive.

learned helplessness When an individual or
animal learns that they are unable to control,
change, or escape from their environment.

negative punishment Withdrawing something
from the environment that decreases the prob-
ability of a behavior occurring.

negative reinforcement Withdrawing some-
thing from the environment that results in an
increase in a behavior.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 160 5/21/15 12:40 PM

CHAPTER 5 Key Terms

neutral stimulus A stimulus that does not pro-
duce a specific response.

non-assertive An inhibitory personality that
navigates life with extreme caution with
respect to emotional expression and actions.

one-time conditioning Learning that occurs
after only one trial of conditioning.

operant conditioning Learning as a result of
consequences that are typically not occurring
at the same point in time as the behavior and
involving nonreflexive actions.

operants Behavioral responses that are emit-
ted by an organism rather than elicited by
specific stimuli.

phobia An intense fear that results in a degree
of dysfunction.

positive punishment Adding something to the
environment that decreases the probability of a
behavior occurring.

positive reinforcement Adding something to
the environment that results in an increase in a
behavior.

preparedness The suggestion that all species
are genetically prepared to make certain asso-
ciations, especially those that have maximized
survival.

primary drive Unlearned drives, such as hun-
ger, thirst, sex, fatigue, and pain.

punishment Anything that reduces the prob-
ability of a certain response occurring.

ratio schedule Determined by the number of
responses.

reinforcement Anything that increases the
behavior with which it is associated.

respondents Behavioral responses that occur
as reactions to a specific stimulus.

response See unconditioned reflex.

secondary drive Learned drive that develops
by way of reinforcement in complex social
systems.

shaping A form of conditioning that breaks
complex behaviors into simpler behaviors and
reinforces each successive, sequential step.

Skinner box An experimental apparatus used
for investigating learning in animals.

spontaneous recovery When an extinct con-
ditioned response returns without any further
conditioning.

systematic desensitization A behavioral tech-
nique used to treat phobias and anxiety-based
disorders.

unconditioned reflex A natural response to a
stimulus.

variable schedule A schedule that changes
from trial to trial.

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 161 5/21/15 12:40 PM

Lec81110_05_c05_133-162.indd 162 5/21/15 12:40 PM

Mario Tama/Getty Images News/Getty Images

Learning Objectives

After reading this chapter, you should be
able to:

• Explain how Tolman’s concept of latent learn-
ing sparked a need for theoretical accounts
that went beyond basic classical and operant
conditioning models.

• Describe the beginning of the cognitive revo-
lution and the importance of George Miller’s
memory studies.

• Explain how the computer has been used as
a metaphor for the way the mind processes
information.

• Describe how the cognitive counterrevolution
was different from the behavioral revolution
before it.

• List and define some of the foundational
concepts of cognitive approaches.

• Characterize George Kelly’s personal construct
theory and his view of humans as scientists.

Cognitive and Cognitive-Behavioral
Approaches to Personality 6

Chapter Outline

Introduction

6.1 Metacognition: Thinking About Your
Thinking

6.2 Major Historical Figures and Theories
• Edward Tolman and Latent Learning
• Chomsky and the Role of Language in

Cognition
• George Miller: The Cognitive Revolution
• Von Neumann and McCulloch: A Conceptual

Leap From Computers to the Mind

• Describe the contributions of the social learning theorists Julian Rotter, Albert Bandura, and Walter Mischel and
their contributions to such concepts as reward value, behavioral expectancies, self-efficacy, self-regulation, self-verification,
and motivated reasoning.

• Describe the process of modeling in both human and animal models.

• Compare and contrast the cognitive theories of Albert Ellis, Aaron Beck, and Marsha Linehan.

• Name and briefly describe some of the more commonly employed assessment tools used in the cognitive perspective.

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 163 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6

Introduction
“There are no facts, only interpretations.” F. Nietzche

It’s December 14, 2012, at approximately 9:30 a.m. It’s an otherwise normal day
at Sandy Hook Elementary School in the small town of Newtown, Connecticut.
Then, 20-year-old Adam Lanza arrives on the scene carrying an arsenal of high-
capacity weapons, and he proceeds to gun down 20 helpless children and 6 adults
and terrorize many more. Authorities would later discover that Lanza had also
shot and killed his mother prior to coming to the school. Unfortunately, the mas-
sacre was not an isolated incident in American history, but it was the second dead-
liest school shooting in American history. Some claim that this incident points to
the disturbed nature of some individuals. Others point to the need for stricter gun
control to limit access to high-capacity weapons. Still others suggest that violence
in the media or video games were to blame. What was your take on these events?

If the goal were to predict your behavioral response to this event, could we do
so simply by understanding the environment in which you were brought up in
and currently live, or would we also need to understand how you cognitively pro-
cessed the event? Is it even possible to study and comprehend all of the factors
that influence your interpretation and response? Given the considerable interpre-
tive variability of the above example, let us consider something far less complex:
a physical stimulus.

The simple, visual example shown in Figure 6.1 illustrates variability in how peo-
ple interpret the world. Perceptually, you might detect a chalice, where the white

Introduction

6.3 Areas of Specialization Within
Cognitive Psychology and Their
Relation to Personality
• Information Processing
• Pattern Recognition
• Schema

6.4 Cognitive and Social-Cognitive
Approaches to Personality
• George Kelly and Personal Construct

Theory

• Julian Rotter’s Model of Behavioral

Expectancy and Reward Value
• Bandura’s Social Learning Theory
• Walter Mischel’s Self-Regulatory

Theory

6.5* Cognitive-Behavioral Approaches
to Personality
• Ellis’s Rational-Emotive Therapy
• Beck’s Cognitive Theory and Therapy
• Linehan’s Cognitive-Behavioral Model

6.6 Assessment Strategies and Tools
From the Cognitive Perspective
• Kelly’s Repertory Grid
• Beck Depression Inventory (BDI)
• Other Depression Inventories
• Anxiety Inventories
• Implicit Association Test
• Possible Selves and Self-Schemas
• Cultural Influences and Differences

Summary

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 164 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6Introduction

image is the figure and the dark portions are the (back)ground. However, you
might instead detect two faces looking at each other, where the dark image is now
the figure and white is the (back)ground. Research indicates that your previous
experiences and how you formed conceptual categories can influence what you
see by, for example, priming you for certain perceptual categories (e.g., Ashby &
Maddox, 2005). More importantly, perceptions are also influenced by your beliefs,
biases, and both conscious and nonconscious goals (e.g., Tamir, Ford, & Ryan,
2013). Even very simple behaviors like pointing and grasping at objects, which
require us to “code” information in our environments, can be influenced by our
intentions (i.e., our planned actions; e.g., Wykowska, Schubo, & Hommel, 2009),
suggesting that even basic and seemingly automated behaviors are not passive.
This suggests that decidedly internal events are important to understanding how
we interact with our environments, which brings us to a crucial question: To what
extent does your ability to think and experience emotions define your character?

The cognitive movement emerged following the heyday of the behavioral move-
ment. Like the behavioral perspective, the cognitive perspective also emphasized
scientific rigor and tight experimental methodologies. However, the constructs of
interest were now internal processes, with the primary impetus for this perspec-
tive being the constructs that had been overlooked by behaviorists (i.e., working
on the assumption that there is more to human personality and functioning than
mere behavior). Thus, the unique and subjective perspective of the individual is
here emphasized, and it is acknowledged that there may be an infinite number of
possible perspectives on any one event.

In this chapter we will discuss the nature of cognition and its influence on person-
ality. We will see how a cognitive revolution in psychology created a new frame-
work for looking at human behavior and personality. The cognitive perspective
has proven very useful for theorists, researchers, and clinicians and has led to dif-
ferent models that have been applied to personality theory and clinical treatment.

Figure 6.1: Figure-ground perception

Do you perceive faces or a vase? What you perceive in
this image is influenced by previous experience, beliefs,
biases, and both conscious and nonconscious goals.

Source: Science Source/Photo Researchers

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 165 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6

6.1 Metacognition: Thinking About Your Thinking

6.1 Metacognition: Thinking About Your Thinking

Cognitive theories focus on how our thought processes impact our personalities. There is an important concept related to this called metacognition. This term literally means thinking about our thinking, and while the term is not used widely by the primary theorists in this
model, thinking about our thinking is exactly what they are asking us to do. Unless we can take a
step back and analyze our thinking processes from almost a third person perspective, we cannot
change faulty cognition. As you will read in the following pages, analyzing and challenging our
faulty thinking systems is at the heart of cognitive theories.

We all view the world through the filter of our personal and cultural experiences. This is human
nature. What speaks to us as true is often determined by our cultural experience or our personal
frame of reference. People who practice metacognition constantly assess how their experiences
and perspectives are affecting how they process information. Metacognition means that they
understand themselves and know the dynamics at play within their own psyche. Most people
simply assume that if they think that something is right (or wrong), it is just that.

Akin to the idea of metacognition is the concept of critical thinking. You have probably heard the
term before, but definitions vary. Stephen Brookfield’s (1987) approach aligns with the underlying
concepts of cognitive psychology and metacognition. He contends that critical thinking is a process.
Although his definition includes emotional as well as rational components, and clearly acknowl-
edges the importance of culture and context, it contains the following common characteristics:

1. Identifying and challenging assumptions.
2. Challenging the importance of context.
3. Trying to imagine and explore alternatives.
4. Reflective skepticism. (pp. 7–9)

Brookfield (1987) defines reflective skepticism as the act of constantly questioning the status quo.
Just because something has been believed for years does not necessarily mean that it is true. Just
because someone of perceived importance (like professors, for example) says something is right,
that does not prove that it is right. As was discussed in the introduction, reality is subjective, and
what we “think” we know is not always objectively accurate.

Can you see the parallels with the cognitive model? We should make it a habit to challenge
assumptions (including our own) and to understand the cultural implications that underlie our
interactions with others. For example, Ellis says that while it would be nice to be loved by all
around us, it is not a catastrophe if we are not. We create the catastrophe by failing to question
our assumptions; in this case, the assumption that we should be loved by everyone. Understand-
ing the cultural contexts helps us to also recognize that often, someone not liking us is not even
about us—it is about them.

It is helpful to examine thinking through the construct of cognitive development theory, because
thinking about our thinking requires higher level thinking skills and logic. Many cognitive theorists
believe that concrete logic is not possible until at least age six or seven and that only in the highest
levels of cognitive development can critical thinking take place. Jean Piaget, a noted psychologist
and developmental theorist, postulates the following stages of development:

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 166 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6

6.2 Major Historical Figures and Theories

1. Sensorimotor Stage: Birth to age 2 (approximately). Children begin with no thinking
structures (called schema) and develop them through exploration of their senses and
experimentation on the environment. Significant cognitive development occurs, but
children in the sensorimotor stage are incapable of logical thought.

2. Pre-operational Stage: Ages 2 to 7 (approximately). Children rapidly develop language
skills and more sophisticated cognitive structures but are still pre-logical. They are not
capable of conservation (the ability to understand that substance does not change
although it changes shape or form). They are also incapable of de-centering (the ability
to see things from another’s perspective). Conservation and de-centering are prerequi-
site to logical thinking.

3. Concrete Operational Stage: Ages 7 to adolescence. Children begin to grasp conservation
and de-centering. They begin to question: How does Santa really get to all those houses
in one night? They can now reason logically but only on a concrete level, not hypotheti-
cally or abstractly. They solve problems logically but haphazardly.

4. Formal Operations Stage: Adolescence and above. The person is now capable of sophisti-
cated logical thought. He or she can think in the abstract, can think hypothetically and can
solve problems using the logic of combinations (Dworetzky & Davis, 1989).

Piaget’s stages ended with Formal Operations, but Riegel (1973) has postulated a fifth stage called
Dialectical Reasoning. This is a stage beyond logic where metacognition and critical thinking can
take place. It is the ability to perceive the frequent paradoxes in life (to see the dialectic) and to
question and analyze the assumptions that underlie the logic. Dialectical thinkers “readily recog-
nize, accept, and even enjoy conflict and contradictions in values and possible courses of action
because sorting out these conflicts forces them to grow intellectually” (Dworetzky & Davis, 1989,
p. 360).

6.2 Major Historical Figures and Theories

Cognitive science, which emerged in the 1950s, was a revolutionary development in the field of psychology. In 1977, Mahoney used the term cognitive revolution in describing this shift in the field of psychology—a shift that was partly driven by dramatic advances in computer
science. The cognitive revolution reflected the notion that consciousness is the ultimate product
of evolution. Consciousness is what allows us to reflect upon ourselves and to wonder about the
nature, the origin, and the purpose of our existence. This capacity for reflective thinking is con-
sidered the “essence of the self” (Corr, 2006, p. 563)—small wonder that Descartes should have
accepted as proof of his existence the fact that he could think, summarized in his immortal phrase,
“I think, therefore I am.”

The goal of cognitive approaches to psychology is to understand how we think—that is, the goal is
to explain topics such as how we process information, how we remember, how we perceive, how
we solve problems, and how we process language. This was a radical departure from behaviorism,
which emphasized empiricism and insisted that psychology should concern itself with the observ-
able, objective aspects of human behavior. Recall that it was behaviorism’s avoidance of specula-
tion about the mind and mental processes that had fueled its break from what was then main-
stream psychology. Now a new cognitive science was again suggesting that psychology should
be concerned with some of the old challenges of psychology that behaviorism had set aside. The
cognitive sciences were concerned with what occurs in the mind. And this presented a strong chal-
lenge to the supremacy of behaviorism.

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 167 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6 6.2 Major Historical Figures and Theories

Edward Tolman and Latent Learning
Ironically, the roots of the cognitive perspective can be traced to learning theory, where a num-
ber of findings began to emerge from behavioral research that undermined some of the domi-
nant beliefs within that tradition. One of the first was Edward Tolman’s (1949, 1955) work that
introduced the concept of latent learning. Latent learning is a special form of learning that is not
immediately evident or behaviorally observable. Moreover, latent learning occurs in the absence
of any reinforcement of either the behavior or any associative learning (which means any learn-
ing process in which a new response becomes associated with a particular stimulus due to their
occurring at the same time).

In a classic demonstration of latent learning in animals, Tolman (Tolman & Honzick, 1930) assigned
hungry rats to one of three experimental conditions that varied with respect to the delivery of
food (a reinforcer). In one condition, the rats were given food only when they reached the end of
a maze, and this resulted in improved maze running with each attempt. In the second condition,
the rats were not reinforced with food after running the maze, and consistent with traditional
learning principles, they failed to demonstrate learning of the maze. A third condition also initially
received no food for maze running, and predictably they too failed to learn the maze—at least as
indicated by their behavior. However, after a series of unreinforced trials, the rats were then rein-
forced for their maze running. This resulted in a dramatic improvement (learning), and the rate of
learning indicated that they were in fact learning the maze in the earlier trials, despite the lack of
reinforcement. The acquisition of maze running was so proficient that they even outperformed
the rats in the first condition who had been reinforced throughout the task. Tolman concluded
that rats in all three conditions were learning the maze and were forming internal cognitive maps
(i.e., mental representations) of the maze. However, they simply failed to demonstrate the behav-
ior until such a time as they were reinforced, which is why those in the third condition could do as
well and even outperform the rats in the first. In this respect, Tolman reasoned that the rats’
behavior did not reflect their internal mental processes, they did not demonstrate learning until a
later time, and they appeared to learn even in the absence of a reinforcer (reflecting the features
of latent learning). Tolman’s findings were soon replicated both in animals (e.g., Karn & Porter,
1946) and in humans (e.g., Postman & Tuma, 1954; Stevenson, 1954).

Tolman’s work sparked an inter-
est in understanding the role of
human thought in the process of
learning, but his was not the only
research to challenge one of the
most basic assumptions of learning
theory, and cognitive psychologists
now looked at topics like percep-
tion, attention, thinking, memory,
and language (Neisser, 1967).

Beyond the Text: Classic Writings

In this breakthrough paper, Tolman introduces the idea of
cognitive maps in animal and human models. Read it at
http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Tolman/Maps/maps.htm

Reference: Tolman, E. C. (1948). Cognitive maps in rats and
men. The Psychological Review, 55(4), 189–208.

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 168 5/21/15 12:39 PM

http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Tolman/Maps/maps.htm

CHAPTER 6 6.2 Major Historical Figures and Theories

Chomsky and the Role of Language in Cognition
A second, and somewhat independent, line of research that further sparked the cognitive move-
ment was that of linguist Noam Chomsky (1972, 2000) who noted that humans appear to have
a preparedness (a readiness) to learn and develop speech. Thus, much in the way that fish have
a preparedness for swimming, monkeys for climbing, and birds for flying, humans have a readi-
ness to acquire and use language. Chomsky believed that language and mental processes develop
hand-in-hand, and that language can be used to access mental constructs. Chomsky firmly
believed that the prevailing behavioral model, with its exclusive use of learning theory, was unable
to explain the complexities of
language. Instead, he believed
that understanding thought pro-
cesses, which occur between the
stimulus and the response, is
necessary if one is to understand
language—a point with which
Skinner strongly disagreed (Skin-
ner, 1957; Chomsky, 1959).

Philosopher and cognitive psy-
chologist Jerry Fodor expanded
these ideas by suggesting that
beliefs and desires, which are
decidedly mental events, are
explained through what he
called the language of thought.
Fodor suggests that mental rep-
resentations are more than mere
explanatory tools; rather, they
reflect what has been codified in
the brain (e.g., Fodor & Pylyshyn,
1988). In Fodor’s model, con-
ceptual thinking is essentially an
internally represented language,
but it is not equivalent to lan-
guage. Rather, it exists in a for-
mat that reflects how the mind represents concepts using symbols, which are organized as mental
sentences that follow the grammatical principles of language. Much of Fodor’s theory was based
on the idea of computer intelligence, in which symbols are manipulated by a computer following
basic algorithms to reflect psychological processes (e.g., Newell & Simon, 1976).

Beyond the Text: Classic Writings

Can cognition be shown to exist separate from behavior?

In a thought experiment (known as the Knowledge Argu-
ment) originally proposed by Frank Jackson (1982; see also
Jackson, 1986), the premise is that Mary is a brilliant neuro-
physiologist who studies vision, but must investigate the
world from a black and white room, with her only access
to the outside world being a black and white TV. She learns
everything there is to know about color, but she never expe-
riences color directly. The question posed is whether she
will learn anything once released from the room. Essen-
tially, Jackson uses this to illustrate that physicalism, which
is the thesis that everything is physical, and that everything
is necessitated by the physical, is false. For a summary of
the philosophical argument and counterviews, see http://
plato.stanford.edu/entries/qualia-knowledge/.

Reference: Nida-Rümelin, M. (2010). Qualia: The knowl-
edge argument. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
E. N. Zalta (Ed.). Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu
/archives/sum2010/entries/qualia-knowledge/.

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 169 5/21/15 12:39 PM

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qualia-knowledge/

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/qualia-knowledge/

http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2010/entries/qualia-knowledge/

http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2010/entries/qualia-knowledge/

CHAPTER 6 6.2 Major Historical Figures and Theories

George Miller: The Cognitive Revolution
Miller’s work focused largely on human memory. In a thought-provoking and widely cited article,
Miller (1956) suggested that immediate memory is limited to seven items, plus or minus two
items. That is, most people are able to keep in mind (be immediately conscious of or think about)
approximately seven distinct items. However, he soon discovered that these seven items did not
have to be single units such as seven letters, but could be groupings of letters or other items,
which he labeled chunks. Because information could be grouped in different ways by different
individuals, and because this chunking predicted how people perceived the physical world, it
began to establish the supremacy of thought over the outside world (and observable behavior).

In Miller’s work, there is an emerging
cognitive perspective that concerns
itself with how mental processes may
be structured and information pro-
cessed. What occurs in the human
mind no longer needed to be studied
using highly subjective speculation, but
could now be brought into the realm of
the scientific method.

Miller had a significant impact on the
field when he looked to computer pro-
grams as a form of simulated thought
processes. He believed that the com-
puter made an excellent metaphor for
how the brain processes information.
He thought that the computer could
provide cognitive psychology with an
enormously powerful tool for simu-
lating mental processes. After all, the
computer suggests an easy analogy
for human cognitive processes. In this

analogy, the computer’s hardware is equivalent to the brain, and its software to the mind and
its mental processes. Carrying the analogy further, input corresponds to stimuli, and output to
responses.

Von Neumann and McCulloch: A Conceptual Leap From Computers
to the Mind
The development of computer science was crucial in the cognitive revolution. Mathematicians
such as John von Neumann and Claude Shannon reasoned that symbols such as numbers could be
substituted for letters and that mathematical computations could be used to express relationships
among these symbols. This notion was developed into programs in which information is repre-
sented by a 0 or a 1 (binary representation) and where that information can be manipulated and
analyzed using rules of logic and algebraic equations (Corr, 2006; Newell & Simon, 1972). Simon
and a young graduate student, Allen Newell, took up the challenge of developing a computer that
could reason.

iStockphoto/Thinkstock Hemera/Thinkstock

Since the 1950s, theoreticians and researchers have
considered the computer as a metaphor for the inner
working of the mind. Thus, computer chips would be akin
to neurons in both their complexity as individual units and
their interconnectedness.

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 170 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6 6.3 Areas of Specialization in Cognitive Psychology and Their Relation to Personality

As researchers began to model the association between computers and thought, the term and
subdiscipline of artificial intelligence (AI) emerged, which further positioned cognitive psychology
as the natural successor to behaviorism (e.g., Casti, 1987; Sharples, Hogg, Hutchinson, Torrance, &
Young, 1989). This line of investigation has examined some of the more rudimentary cognitive pro-
cesses, such as basic perception (or “bottom-up” processing; e.g., Achler, 2012), as well as meta-
analytic (“top-down”) views of intelligence (e.g., Hutter, 2012). Researchers have also attempted
to replicate with computers such human experiences as emotions and social skills, which involve
the challenge of predicting and reacting to the emotions and motivations of others (e.g., Minsky,
2006). Currently, the Human Brain Project (Chapter 4) hopes to provide solutions to the many
mysteries of consciousness and brain disorders.

6.3 Areas of Specialization in Cognitive Psychology
and Their Relation to Personality

Cognitive psychologists believe that not all inferences or hypotheses need be based only on direct observation. The scientific method, they insist, can make inferences about unseen events and states, and this parallels practices in other disciplines of science. For example,
when physicists speculate about particles like quarks and neutrinos, or when evolutionary theo-
rists describe long-extinct life forms on the basis of fossil records, they are discussing concepts to
which there is no direct access. For their part, cognitive psychologists make inferences about the
inner workings of the mind (Hunt, 2007).

Within cognitive psychology, several areas of focused research have developed over the years,
such as information processing, pattern recognition, and schema. Each of these areas will be
explored here.

Information Processing
Emerging from the use of the computer as a potential model for how the mind works was an ever-
expanding field termed information processing. In everyday usage, the term information may be
thought of as an ordered sequence of symbols that has a meaning that can be transmitted and
understood. Data, on the other hand, consist of unorganized symbols that are without meaning
in their current form. Think of the difference between a random list of names and phone numbers
(raw data) and these names ordered alphabetically (information). Information processing is what
happens when data are manipulated and transformed into information. Information has a rela-
tional connection that distinguishes it from raw data and makes it useful (Ackoff, 1989).

Computers and the brain share some complex information-processing operations. In comput-
ing science, these are mathematical operations often in the form of algorithms. In humans, our
information-processing processes are often not as certain as are algorithms. Instead, they tend
to be more “rule of thumb” and are referred to as heuristics. These include processes for which
we have a high degree of awareness, as well as those for which we have limited awareness. As an
illustration, consider the availability heuristic, which is the tendency to assume that some events
occur with greater frequency than they do in reality because those events are readily available to
us. For example, because every airline crash receives so much media attention, it fosters the idea
(and perhaps subsequently the fear) for some that air travel is unsafe, though it is statistically far
safer than traveling by car.

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 171 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 66.3 Areas of Specialization in Cognitive Psychology and Their Relation to Personality

Researchers have established that although there are some common heuristics and biases that are
expressed by everyone (e.g., the availability heuristic, the representative heuristic, etc.; see Kahne-
man & Tversky, 1973; Tversky & Kahneman, 1974; for a more recent review, see Kahneman &
Tversky, 2000), individual differences can also dictate a preference for some heuristics and biases.
For example, mood states appear to influence heuristics, such that positive mood states increase
reliance on heuristics, resulting in an increased tendency to make false racial identifications of
members of stereotyped groups (Park & Banaji, 2000). Moreover, researchers have shown that
personality differences, such as sociability, can influence heuristics (such as the representative-
ness heuristic), but only under specific conditions, such as when sociability is relevant (e.g., judg-
ment problems dealing with rejection and abandonment; Moore, Smith, & Gonzales, 1997). These
and other findings suggest that there is a complex interaction between the use of heuristics, the
situational context, and longstanding personality differences; with each of these factors contribut-
ing to the prediction of outcomes (e.g., Marszal-Wiśniewska & Zajusz, 2010).

Information processing is cognitive psychology’s attempt to describe what actually occurs in
the mind. When researchers and theorists investigate human information processing, they are
exploring the internal workings of the mind. But since we cannot observe information processing
directly, the models cognitive psychology presents are derived by inference. For example, when
you see a threatening dog, neural receptors in your eyes immediately send information to the
part of your brain responsible for pattern recognition. And when a scary dog template is found in
your limbic system, there is an immediate fight-flight (and recall from Chapter 4 that freeze has
also been added to this automatic response) decision implicit in the signals that are sent to your
muscles. In this information-processing model, information signifies various serially ordered men-
tal representations that result in some mental or physical change or action (J. R. Anderson, 1990).

Of course, the above-noted example is a more universal response, as most individuals would
respond in the same way to a threatening dog; the influence of personality is illustrated when
more idiosyncratic responses emerge. For example, your response to a particular type of human
face that you find attractive, but that is not considered classically “handsome” or “beautiful,”
reflects your particular taste.

Pattern Recognition
One cognitive model suggests that infor-
mation processing involves recognizing
patterns. This model maintains that we
identify stimuli by matching them to a
model, pattern, or prototype that cor-
responds to the stimuli. For example,
Anderson (1990) hypothesizes that
the brain stores patterns, called tem-
plates, and that the perceptual system
compares these stored templates with
incoming information to find a corre-
spondence. Recall Ekman’s research on
emotions, where he found that certain
facial expressions seem to reflect feelings
that are universally recognized. Ander-
son’s template hypothesis explains this
by suggesting that our neural networks

iStock/Thinkstock

If a house is filled with pictures in which everyone in
the family looks happy, can that lead to a more positive
recollection and outlook on your family life? In this
respect, mental representations can overshadow reality.

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 172 5/22/15 3:21 PM

CHAPTER 66.3 Areas of Specialization in Cognitive Psychology and Their Relation to Personality

store various patterns of facial configurations, each of which has a specific emotion attached to it.
An angry face will match our stored representations of other angry faces. And other representa-
tions will tell us whether to smile, run for our lives, stay and fight, or ignore.

In the cognitive perspective, representation involves the use of symbols to depict or signify
objects, events, or occurrences. Cognitive psychologists describe how external events are encoded
(transformed) and represented in the mind; they investigate how these are recorded in our neural
networks so that they can be recalled as language, visual images, feelings, symbols, and thoughts
(Hunt, 2007).

Research suggests that personality patterns can likewise influence this specific cognitive process.
For example, borderline personality disorder (BPD) is characterized by profound difficulties with
emotion regulation, the consequence of which is affective instability. Because such difficulties are
most pronounced in social contexts, it has been hypothesized and supported in the literature that
individuals with BPD have impaired facial emotion recognition (typically with a negativity or anger
bias), which then undermines the interpersonal interaction (Domes, Schulze, & Herpertz, 2009).

Despite establishing the problems that individuals with BPD have with facial emotion recogni-
tion, what is unclear is whether these deficits affect all basic emotions, are valence-specific, or
if individual emotions are implicated. Using a sample of 33 inpatients with BPD and 32 matched
healthy controls, patients with BPD were less accurate than control participants in emotion recog-
nition, and this was especially true for negative emotions (there was little to no impairment with
favorable faces; Unoka, Fogd, Füzy, & Csukly, 2011). Individuals with BPD also had difficulties with
basic attributions, such that they over-attributed disgust/surprise to facial expressions, but under-
attributed fear to the facial expressions relative to controls.

Schema
Memory is in large part about the self. That is, much of our memory is autobiographical; it con-
sists of our constantly evolving narrative about ourselves (Singer, 1995). In one study, Bartlett told
non-Western folktales to Westerners and found that the subjects inadvertently filled in the blanks
according to their cultural expectations, omitting details that did not make sense to the Western
mind. Bartlett termed this organized mass of experience-based memory schemata or schema.

Schema have since become fundamental to cognitive psychology. The term is used extensively in
Jean Piaget’s (1926) developmental theory. Schema refer to mental structures that are organized
patterns of thought (see also earlier discussion of templates). In terms of personality theory, we
can have self-schema (concept we have about ourselves; discussed in Chapter 9) and person-
schema (notions we have about other people). Notions of self- and person-schema were later
adopted by cognitive personality theorists who used them to explain and treat depression and
personality disorders. Schema became the cornerstone of cognitive models designed to explain
how thoughts and beliefs (schemata) influence personality and are involved in the development
of mental disorders such as depression.

Research indicates that personality impacts person-schemas (e.g., Srivastava, 2010; Wood, Harms,
& Vazire, 2010), and this not only influences how we cognitively perceive ourselves, but also how
we perceive others (Kammrath, 2011). For example, individuals high in trait narcissism (which is,
in fact, an indicator of low self-esteem) are more likely to perceive others as uninteresting (Beck,
Freeman, & Davis, 2004). Individuals characterized as highly agreeable are likely to perceive oth-
ers as more agreeable, while those scoring low on agreeableness are more likely to see others
as hostile (Dodge & Crick, 1990; Graziano, Bruce, Sheese, & Tobin, 2007). The assumption is that

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 173 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6

the schemas that are easily accessible because they are applied to one’s own behavior are the
same schemas that are readily available to characterize the behavior of others (Higgins, 1996).
Moreover, with these schemas being activated, it primes individuals to be attentive to situational/
environmental cues that are relevant to the activated schemas (e.g., Mischel & Shoda, 2008). As
an example, if an individual manifests the trait of dominance, they are likely to notice when others
are making a grab for power in an interpersonal interaction, or when power is given up.

6.4 Cognitive and Social-Cognitive Approaches to Personality

As we noted earlier, the development of systems of psychotherapy, psychopathology, and personality theory often occurred simultaneously. These theories emerged from two prin-cipal sources. Some theories grew out of clinical practice; most of these are based on new
treatment models that led to advances in personality theory. A second source of personality theo-
ries is more academic: It consists of theories that grew out of research, rather than clinical prac-
tice. Theories from both of these sources, academic research and clinical science, often show a
great deal of cross-fertilization—that is, they build on each other’s ideas.

In the next section we review the founding theorists in the cognitive perspective, including the work
of George Kelly, Julian Rotter, Albert Bandura, and Walter Mischel. We will also present the work
of Albert Ellis and Aaron Beck, who in a parallel fashion founded cognitive therapy. Each presents a
somewhat different perspective on how cognition organizes the way we think, act, and feel.

George Kelly and Personal Construct Theory
Perhaps as a function of his upbringing on a farm in Kansas, George Kelly adopted the perspective
that everyone, even those with less formal education, acts as scientists do. Specifically, they try
to explain the present and predict the future, and like scientists, Kelly (1955) argued that every-
one develops and modifies theories to accomplish the goals of explanation and prediction. Kelly
referred to these theories as personal constructs. Kelly believed that people’s lives represented
their “experiments,” and the utility of their personal constructs (theories) was determined by how
well they accomplished the goals of explaining the present and predicting the future. As a simple
illustration, if your life experiences (experiments) have resulted in the belief that people will take
advantage of you if you give them the opportunity, this represents a personal construct. This
might also lead to other constructs such as don’t trust anyone, or don’t let anyone get too close to
hurt you. Presumably, these personal constructs have been used to explain what has happened to
you, they provide a framework for interpreting the world around you, and they allow you to antici-
pate what might happen next (predict the future). New information, by way of new experiences,
may strengthen these constructs or it may weaken them (as might be the case if you happen upon
some relationships that are especially warm and supportive).

In his landmark book, The Psychology of Personal Constructs, Kelly (1955) put forth a fundamental
principle and 11 corollaries. The fundamental principle essentially states that how a person per-
ceives the world is affected by how he or she expects (anticipates) things will occur. In other
words, our expectations are the basis for our psychological reality; it’s not just what’s out there in
the world, but rather what we think is out there and what we expect to be out there. The 11 corol-
laries that can be derived from the fundamental postulate are identified and briefly described in
Table 6.1 (see Kelly, 1955).

6.4 Cognitive and Social-Cognitive Approaches to Personality

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 174 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6 6.4 Cognitive and Social-Cognitive Approaches to Personality

Table 6.1: Kelly’s personal construct corollaries

Construction
corollary

People anticipate events by construing similarities to past events. That is, we expect
things to happen as they did before (based on past experience).

Experience
corollary

Personal construct systems will vary as a function of construing new events. This
means that as we experience the world, how we perceive that world necessarily
changes and adapts to maximize predictability.

Dichotomy
corollary

Construct systems are composed of dichotomous constructs, and there are a finite
number of said constructs. Constructs have two poles that define each other (e.g.,
nice-mean, threatening-safe, outgoing-inwardly focused, etc.) and there is a limited
number of ways we can interpret the world (i.e., constructs are not infinite in their
number).

Organization
corollary

A construct system orders its specific constructs in a hierarchy. More simply stated,
some constructs are more important and central than others.

Range corollary Any construct has a limited range of events to which it can be applied. As an
illustration, a construct such as “good-bad” would likely have a very wide range of use.

Modulation
corollary

Variability in the construct system is a direct function of the permeability
(changeability) of the constructs, and some constructs are more changeable than
others. Kelly was specifically referring to changes in the construct’s range of use,
rather than the actual content of the construct.

Choice corollary Individuals are free to choose any constructs for their construct system, but once
chosen, those constructs limit how the individual perceives and interprets the world.

Individuality
corollary

Because we all differ in our experiences, our constructs and construct systems will
necessarily be unique to us.

Commonality
corollary

Whenever two people interpret experiences in the same way, their construct
systems should be similar.

Fragmentation
corollary

Due to the considerable variability within each person’s construct system, it is
possible and, in fact, quite likely that different constructs within one system are
incompatible with each other.

Sociality
corollary

A person can better get along with someone else by adopting that person’s construct
system, even if the constructs are quite different.

Kelly hypothesized that individuals will experience anxiety when their construct system fails to
explain or predict events. He argues that the natural response for the individual is to modify their
construct system until events can be explained, and at that point, anxiety should be reduced.
Kelly also defined a number of other emotional responses in terms of personal constructs. For
example, Kelly suggested that guilt is experienced when one is engaging in behavior or experienc-
ing thoughts that are incongruent with one’s superordinate (core or central) constructs.

Perhaps one of the more interesting concepts introduced by Kelly was that of cognitive com-
plexity. Kelly argued that individuals are healthiest when they have numerous superordinate con-
structs that can be used to interpret the world around them. In contrast, he considered those
with very few superordinate constructs as highly vulnerable; the rationale being that if events
ever undermined those few (or one) superordinate constructs, the individual would have no other
theories to adopt, and this would significantly undermine personality functioning. In fact, Kelly
characterized psychological disorders as any time an individual uses a personal construct that has
been repeatedly invalidated by life’s experiments. Presumably this would be more likely to occur

Based on Kelly, G. (1955). The psychology of personal constructs. New York: Norton.

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 175 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6 6.4 Cognitive and Social-Cognitive Approaches to Personality

for those having fewer superordinate constructs to turn to, even in the face of a failure to predict
and explain. In a study examining cognitive complexity and traits, researchers demonstrated that
cognitive complexity (flexibility) is, predictably, most related to the trait of openness to new expe-
rience (Tetlock, Peterson, & Berry, 1993).

Julian Rotter’s Model of Behavioral Expectancy and Reward Value
Julian Rotter was one of the earlier contributors to the cognitive movement as he elaborated on
the basic behavioral paradigm, and he was among the first to introduce social learning theory. Like
behaviorists, Rotter still focused on predicting behavioral outcomes. However, his theory empha-
sized two decidedly cognitive events as the most important predictors of behavior. In the book
Social Learning and Clinical Psychology (1954), Rotter suggests that behavior could be predicted
by knowing behavioral expectancy and reward value.

He defined behavioral expectancy as the individual’s expectation that the contingencies—the
outcomes—for behavior are in place. That is, rather than focusing on whether or not one is rein-
forced or punished for a behavior, Rotter shifted the focus to whether the individual expects to be
reinforced or punished (i.e., the subjective assessment). The second factor, reward (or reinforce-
ment) value, emphasizes the fact that we all subjectively value rewards in different ways, and this
variability is critical to predicting behavior. Thus, if you highly value earning an “A” in personality
psychology and expect to receive the “A” if you study, then Rotter’s theory predicts that you will
study. However, if you either don’t value a high grade or don’t believe that your efforts will be
rewarded, then the theory predicts that you will be less likely to study.

It is also important to note that Rotter didn’t actually use the term behavior, but instead empha-
sized behavior potential. Behavior potential was defined as the probability of engaging in a spe-
cific behavior in a given situation. Obviously, in a given situation, there are many behaviors that
one can engage in, and for each of these, there is a behavior potential. Rotter hypothesized that
people will manifest the behavior with the highest potential. Based on these concepts, Rotter
developed a simple formula to predict behavior. Specifically, he stated that Behavior Potential (BP)
is a function of both Expectancy (E) and Reinforcement Value (RV).

BP 5 f(E & RV)

Of course, because the factors of expectancy and reinforcement value are derived in part from the
situation, in addition to the individual’s subjective appraisal of each factor, social learning theory
is thus an interaction model, considering both the individual and the situation. Several researchers
would expand on this model, but this was an important first step.

One additional significant con-
tribution from Rotter was his
differentiation of internal versus
external locus of control. Rotter
(1966) stated that those with an
internal locus of control believe
that they have control over most
aspects of their life (e.g., ability
and effort), whereas those with
an external locus of control are
influenced by factors outside

one’s personal control (e.g., chance/luck, task difficulty). The internal-external locus of control
distinction will be discussed extensively in Chapter 8.

Beyond the Text: Classic Writings

In an award-winning 1990 address, Rotter reviews the his-
tory of the concept of locus of control.

Reference: Rotter, J. B. (1990). Internal versus external con-
trol of reinforcement: A case history of a variable. American
Psychologist, 45(4), 489–493.

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 176 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6 6.4 Cognitive and Social-Cognitive Approaches to Personality

Bandura’s Social Learning Theory
One of the more influential theorists who integrated theoretical contributions from the cognitive
perspective to the field of personality is Albert Bandura. Bandura (1986; see also Bandura, Ross,
& Ross, 1961) developed a hybrid social-cognitive theory that combines aspects of the behavioral
and cognitive approaches. The cognitive influence is seen in Bandura’s emphasis on emotions
in determining behavior, as well as in the importance he places on our ability to symbolize and
anticipate the consequences of our actions; both of these represent decidedly cognitive events.
The behaviorist influence is also apparent in his discussion of the consequences of our actions.

Modeling

Drawing on the work of Miller and Dollard (1941), Bandura hypothesized that individuals learn in
a variety of ways, and of those, modeling is fundamentally important. Modeling is learning that
occurs as a function of observing behaviors performed by others. Through imitation, we learn all
sorts of important behaviors. For example, Bandura explains that we learn new behaviors when we
see them performed by someone else;
we learn to inhibit deviant behaviors
when we see others punished for similar
behaviors (or perhaps we learn to engage
in deviant behaviors when we see others
rewarded for them). We also learn what
classes of behaviors and beliefs are likely
to be rewarded in our culture.

Note how Bandura’s explanations for
the effects of imitation are drawn from
behaviorist notions of reinforcement. It
is the consequences—and more impor-
tantly, the anticipated consequences—
of a model’s behavior that determines
whether or not the model will be cop-
ied. But note, too, that concepts such as
anticipation describe a fundamentally
cognitive activity: To anticipate is to sym-
bolize and to think. And symbols are a central aspect of Bandura’s theory. In fact, Bandura’s theory
also asserts that a model need not be a real-life person performing some act, but is perhaps even
more likely to be symbolic in our advanced technological societies. Symbolic models include written
or verbal instructions, abstract graphical representations, film and book characters, and any other
set of stimuli that can be represented and emulated (note the overlap here with our earlier discus-
sion of representations).

Bandura proposed that the modeling process involves several steps. The first two steps implicate
memory functioning, whereas the latter two steps involve planned behaviors.

• Attention: In order for learning to occur, the individual or animal must first notice and
attend to the defining features of the behavior that is to be modeled.

• Retention: In order for the behavior to be reproduced, the defining features of modeled
behavior have to be encoded, retained, and recalled.

Monkey Business Images/Thinkstock

How much do we learn from watching others get in
trouble (or be rewarded)?

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 177 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6 6.4 Cognitive and Social-Cognitive Approaches to Personality

• Reproduction: To reproduce a behavior, responses must be organized to match the model.
The process of organizing typically improves with practice and can move from an intentional
act, to one requiring minimal attention (i.e., a more automated behavioral sequence).

• Motivation: Incentive(s) or motive(s) are typically needed to reproduce the behavior.

Some of the strongest experimental data on the effects of modeling that is more readily appli-
cable to our daily life can be seen in the literature examining the impact of exposure to violent
media (primarily television) images (for a review, see Friedrich-Cofer & Huston, 1986). Most note-
worthy, a study by Huesmann and colleagues (1984) found that earlier viewing of aggression on
television predicted later aggression, even after initial levels of aggression and age were statisti-
cally controlled. Moreover, the effects were strongest when the participants (boys) reported that
they could identify with the violent television characters (note the consistency with the earlier
research, cited in this chapter, regarding self-schemas). In addition, research has shown that the
effect of violent media images affects both immediate and long-term aggressive behavior (Bush-
man & Huesmann, 2006). As a result, even the most recent reviews of the literature have con-
cluded that television violence does result in increased aggressive behavior, and the magnitude
of this effect appears to have increased since 1975 (Bushman & Anderson, 2001). Of course, as
technology has changed, so too have the media channels through which we can be exposed to
violent images, and researchers have shifted their focus to such areas as violent video games (van
Schie & Wiegman, 1997).

Importantly, not all of the published studies have concluded that violent video game exposure
necessarily results in more aggression or violent outcomes (e.g., Williams & Skoric, 2005); in fact,
there is considerable division in the empirical literature on what we really know about this phe-
nomenon (Kutner & Olson, 2008). As noted in the opening of the chapter, considerable debate
erupted over the causal antecedents of the Newtown shooting, with the violence portrayed in
the media being one of the alleged contributing factors. The uncertainty over the role of media
violence was perhaps highlighted most clearly when the Supreme Court of the United States ruled
that video games have First Amendment protection and that minors’ use of violent video games
could not be regulated by the government (Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association, 2011).
The Supreme Court’s decision was based at least in part on the high court’s conclusion that the
scientific evidence was “unpersuasive,” as it was lacking in scientific scrutiny, and this paralleled
recent similar conclusions by government reviews in both Australia and Sweden (Swedish Media
Council, 2011). However, a recent publication does provide an effective summary on the points
of agreement in the empirical literature, and they are: (1) Video game violence is an important
area for ongoing research; (2) violence is determined by multiple factors, (3) results tend to be
stronger when the outcome measures are aggression and measured in the lab, and minimal when
the outcome behavior is violence and measured outside the lab; and (4) in order to fully under-
stand whether, and to what extent, media violence impacts aggressive behavior, there is a need
to consider evidence from multiple sources, including survey research, experimental studies, and
longitudinal/prospective research (Ferguson, 2013).

Self-Efficacy

Another important construct developed by Bandura (1997) is the construct of self-efficacy (or
mastery/competency), defined simply as the belief that you have the ability to succeed—or, more
literally, the opinion you have of your personal effectiveness in a given situation. For example,
those with high levels of self-efficacy are more likely to stop smoking because they believe that
they can. In a sense, self-efficacy is something of a self-fulfilling prophecy: People with high self-
efficacy expect to be successful, they tend to engage in activities where they are successful, and,

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 178 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6 6.4 Cognitive and Social-Cognitive Approaches to Personality

as a result, their activities bolster their notions of self-efficacy. High self-efficacy provides a sharp
contrast to the concept of learned helplessness (as discussed in Chapter 5). Individuals character-
ized by learned helplessness believe that they have no control over outcomes; hence, they have
very low notions of self-efficacy. It should also be noted that self-efficacy beliefs can be domain
specific. That is, one might have highly elevated self-efficacy beliefs with respect to their work, but
very low self-efficacy beliefs with respect to relationships. Not surprisingly, some research sug-
gests that domain-specific, self-efficacy beliefs, such as those in the social domain, are related to
specific personality traits, such as agreeableness (Caprara, Alessandri, & Eisenberg, 2012).

The context specificity of self-efficacy beliefs is not only important to predicting behavioral out-
comes in different contexts, but it also highlights the fact that we can cognitively create and dif-
ferentiate contexts simply by how we perceive them. Social cognitive theory is focused on our
expectations about the future, and Bandura believed that our self-efficacy perceptions are central
to our expectations. Although there are many ways in which self-efficacy beliefs can influence
our behavior, one of the most profound is in its relation to effort and persistence, which in turn
also influences performance (e.g., Sitzmann & Ely, 2011). That is, if we believe we are competent
enough to succeed, this predicts sustained effortful behavior, whereas if we doubt our abilities,
then we are less likely to try (e.g., Bandura, 1997).

Reciprocal Determinism

Bandura’s (1986) theory suggests that in order to predict behavior it is important to understand
the person (i.e., their internal cognitive processes), his or her behavior, and the environmental
context or setting in which the behavior occurs. Bandura also suggested that each of these three
factors is both caused by and causes the others—hence, the concept of reciprocal determinism
(or reciprocal causality). In this respect, by accounting for both internal processes of the individual
and environmental context, social cognitive theory demonstrated a considerable advance over
the psychodynamic and behavioral perspectives that predated the cognitive movement.

XiXinXing/Thinkstock Eyecandy Images/Thinkstock

How do our beliefs about domain-specific self-efficacy affect our success in certain domains?

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 179 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6 6.4 Cognitive and Social-Cognitive Approaches to Personality

Walter Mischel’s Self-Regulatory Theory
Walter Mischel’s training within a cognitive framework was established early on, as he studied
under both George Kelly and Julian Rotter. Mischel made a number of important contributions
to the field of personality psychology, and among them were his ideas on self-regulation. Self-
regulation is the process of identifying a goal or set of goals and, in pursuing these goals, using
both internal (e.g., thoughts and affect) and external (e.g., responses of anything or anyone in the
environment) feedback to maximize goal attainment. In an early classic experiment with implica-
tions for self-regulation, Mischel tested school children in the late 1960s who were asked to regu-
late their impulses for an immediate desired reward (e.g., a single marshmallow) in order to gain
a greater reward (e.g., two marshmallows) at a later point in time. Although this research can be
considered within the framework of delayed gratification or even the trait of impulsiveness, it can
likewise be conceived of as an early experiment in the ability to self-regulate to a specific goal. In
this current example, the goal might be to maximize the number of marshmallows they could eat
(although for some children, the goal may have been to minimize the time they would have to wait
for the marshmallows!). The children who were most effective at self-regulation (also referred to
as self-control) were also found to be more successful later in life, resulting in higher scores on
standardized tests, higher educational attainment, lower incidence of drug use, and more stable
marriages (Mischel, Shoda, & Rodriguez, 1989).

Mischel and colleagues also demonstrated that some intervention strategies (e.g., blocking the
desired stimulus from sight or imagining the reward to be something less desirable) could be used
to help the children self-regulate more effectively, thereby indicating that these were: (1) mutable
processes and (2) a direct function of the individual and the situation. That is, some individuals
could regulate their behavior more easily than others, and some could modify their behavior more
easily than others. More recently, Mischel and colleagues demonstrated that individuals who can
more effectively self-regulate may be better at taking a broader (“big picture”) perspective on
matters and finding meaning in their experiences (Kross, Ayduk, & Mischel, 2005). Thus, Mischel
saw humans as actively involved in the construction of their own psychological world, rather than
being passive and instinct-driven in responding to their environments (Mischel, 1976).

Like Bandura and other social learning theorists, Mischel emphasized goal setting, and self-
regulation to one’s goals, as central to predicting human behavior. Within the context of goal
setting, a number of factors are implicated, including perceived competencies (as per Ban-
dura), subjective appraisals of reward value and expected reinforcement (as per Rotter), and
even basic cognitive abilities, such as encoding strategies. The goal-driven behavior is likewise
affected by feedback or corrective information. For example, if a student is not progressing to
a desired or expected level toward a goal, such as doing better in a history class, the student’s
behavior can be adjusted. This can be done in one of two ways. The student could increase
effort or efficiency by studying more, going to speak with the professor regularly, or taking
more notes in class. Adjustments can also be made via the student’s goals. For example, the
student can maintain the same effort and efficiency but lower expectations for the outcome
(i.e., accept a lesser grade as a measure of success).

Building on the self-regulatory framework here described, researchers have studied how a desire
for a particular outcome can impact the cognitive processes and goal pursuit. For example, Kunda
(1990) suggests that when we make inferences and reason regarding our environment, this does
not occur in a vacuum. Instead, we reason within the context of specific desired outcomes (such
as getting a higher grade), and as a result we may be motivated to perceive events in specific ways,
referred to as motivated reasoning.

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 180 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6 6.4 Cognitive and Social-Cognitive Approaches to Personality

In a comprehensive review of the literature, Kunda (1990) highlighted the concept of motivated
reasoning as showing that (e.g., Kruglanski & Freund, 1983; Kunda, 1987; Pyszczynski & Green-
berg, 1987; Sorrentino & Higgins, 1986) people utilize cognitive processes and mental representa-
tions to reach desired conclusions and that their motivation plays a critical role in determining the
specific cognitive processes they employ (Kunda, 1990). Thus, in essence, we are biased in how
we utilize cognitive processes when navigating toward desired outcomes (Kunda, 1990). As an
illustration, consider how you might evaluate an interaction with an acquaintance whom you want
to date. As you use cognitive processes to evaluate your social interactions with this person, you
are motivated to notice and favorably interpret some cues (e.g., smiles, eye contact, responding
to your text), as well as being motivated to possibly ignore or minimize other cues (e.g., lack of eye
contact with you or failure to return your text).

At an even more basic level, recent research has shown that our internal motivations can impact
our visual perception—that is, our motivations can affect what we see and how we see it. Con-
sider the research by Balcetis and Dunning (2006) in which they examined visual perception and
how it is influenced by motivated states. The researchers informed participants that they would
be assigned to one of two experimental conditions based on randomly generated information on
a computer. For example, in study 1, participants were engaged in what was ostensibly a taste-
testing task, and they would either have to consume and evaluate a glass of freshly squeezed orange
juice (desirable) or a chunky, gelatinous substance referred to as an “organic veggie smoothie”
(undesirable); both beverages were placed in front of participants and they were encouraged to
smell them. They were then instructed to look at the computer screen and told that they would
see either a “13,” which was assigned to the OJ, or the letter “B,” which was assigned to the veggie
smoothie, and that whatever symbol they saw would determine the beverage they would drink.

An ambiguous figure (see Figure 6.2) was then presented for 400 ms and then the computer
“crashed.” Participants were then asked by the experimenter if they happened to notice anything
on the screen prior to the “crash.” Participants overwhelmingly (i.e., 82%) reported seeing the
symbol that was randomly assigned to the desirable outcome (i.e., 13, rather than B). Similar
findings were reported in four additional experiments, leading the researchers to conclude that
motivation clearly affects visual information processing.

Figure 6.2: The ambiguous “B–13” figure

Research suggests that whether you see a “B” or a “13” depends
on if a desirable outcome is associated with seeing one of the
two figures.

Source: From Balcetis, E., & Dunning, D. (2006). See what you want to see: Motivational influences on
visual perception. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91(4), 612–625. doi:10.1037/0022-
3514.91.4.612. Copyright . 2006 by the American Psychological Association.

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 181 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6

6.5 Cognitive-Behavioral Approaches to Personality

Researchers have also linked personality to other aspects of reasoning. For example, trait extra-
version is associated with the increased incidence of reasoning errors on valid syllogisms, despite
expressing greater confidence in their erroneous decisions (Papageorgiou et al., 2012). However,
other research suggests that this same trait can result in more effective reasoning, provided the
reasoning task is related to the trait of extraversion (Fumero, Santamaría, & Johnson-Laird, 2011).
Finally, research has also been able to link several personality traits, such as extraversion and neu-
roticism, to moral reasoning (Athota, O’Connor, & Jackson, 2010).

Person-by-Situation Debate

Although this will be elaborated in greater detail in Chapter 8, which focuses on personality traits,
it is here noted that Mischel was squarely at the center of one of the biggest controversies in psy-
chology. Researchers such as Mischel critiqued personality researchers (specifically those studying
traits) for over-emphasizing the person when trying to predict behavior. Mischel believed situ-
ational factors to be at least as important in determining behavior as trait factors.

To support his point, Mischel had collected considerable data on the behavior of schoolchildren in
different situations and concluded that there was minimal cross-situational consistency, thereby
speaking to the explanatory power of situations rather than traits. In 1968, Mischel published
his classic book Personality and Assessment, which critiqued traits on two major grounds. First,
Mischel argued that traits only accounted for approximately 9% of human behavior (i.e., aver-
age correlations of approximately .30), with these figures being derived in part on his studies of
schoolchildren in different contexts. His second critique suggested that traits were mere labels,
and therefore limited in their utility. Although the field of personality did respond to these chal-
lenges, Mischel was instrumental in moving the field to a more interaction-based approach to
understanding and predicting behavior.

6.5 Cognitive-Behavioral Approaches to Personality

There is considerable overlap in current cognitive and cognitive-behavioral models of per-sonality (see Figure 6.3). Still, one way to differentiate between the two approaches is to look at the way they were influenced by various other disciplines. Whereas cognitive theory
was highly influenced by computer models, as well as by linguistics and anthropology, cognitive-
behavioral models emerged out of the behavioral tradition. As a result, cognitive-behavioral theo-
rists have a somewhat different orientation, which is evident in their use of behavioral concepts
and therapies. It is interesting to note that there are elements of a cognitive approach in the much
earlier work of some psychoanalytic theorists, such as Karen Horney, Otto Rank, and Alfred Adler,
all of whom influenced Aaron Beck, whose work is discussed in this section (Sperry, 1999). Some
of the theoretical work that underlies personality theory, which emerged from the cognitive-
behavioral tradition within clinical psychology, is here reviewed.

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 182 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6 6.5 Cognitive-Behavioral Approaches to Personality

Ellis’s Rational-Emotive Therapy
Albert Ellis is generally recognized as having launched the cognitive revolution in psychother-
apy. His Rational-Emotive Therapy (RET) [(later changed to Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy
(REBT)] was one of the earliest applications of the cognitive model to psychotherapy. It emerged
in the mid-1950s (Ellis & Harper, 1961) and was at the forefront of the cognitive revolution. Ellis
claims that REBT “had an implicit theory of personality” (Ellis, 1974, p. 309). A later text, published
shortly after his death in 2007, at age 90, presented a more formal theory of personality (Ellis,
Abrams, & Abrams, 2009).

Ellis’s basic tenet is that irrational thinking (a decidedly cognitive event) is the central cause of
human suffering. His theory is partly derived from the work of Alfred Adler (1923), who believed
that humans constantly evaluate and give meaning to events in their lives. Ellis acknowledges the
influence of Karen Horney (1950), who talked about the “tyranny of shoulds” (as in “I should have
done that,” “I should act like this,” etc.). He also was influenced by the work of Julian Rotter (1954),
who emphasized the cognitive aspects of learning and personality theory (Arnkoff & Glass, 1992).
More specifically, Ellis believed that it is not the actions of others, the defeats we experience, the
problems of the external world, or other events that cause suffering, but the way we think about
or interpret these events.

The fundamental component of personality disorders, explained Ellis, is “irrationality.” Irra-
tional beliefs are what lead to emotional, cognitive, and behavioral disturbances (Ellis et al.,
2009). Ellis (1974) developed the ABC theory to explain how beliefs (either rational or irratio-
nal) lead to emotional and behavioral outcomes. In this theory, A 5 Activating Experience;

Figure 6.3: The influence of different disciplines on the cognitive and
cognitive-behavioral models

Anthropology

Cognitive-

Behavioral

Linguistics

Computer
Science

Cognitive

Behavioral

This figure illustrates the somewhat distinct
fields influencing the emergence of the
cognitive and cognitive-behavioral models.

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 183 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6 6.5 Cognitive-Behavioral Approaches to Personality

B 5 Belief System; and C5Consequence (i.e., emotional consequence). Whereas many people
might directly attribute an event or experience to a particular outcome or consequence—that
is, A S C—according to Ellis’s ABC theory, point B, our belief system, determines our emotional
outcome (C) to our experiences (A)—that is, A S B S C. How we think about an experience
determines our emotional reaction to it. For example, if your car is stolen in a big city you’ve never
been to before (A), then the way you think about it (B) will determine your emotional state (C).
You can, for example, believe that cities are dangerous places and that perhaps there are criminals
who have targeted you for a crime. This would obviously lead to a more anxious and paranoid
emotional state. You can believe that car theft happens everywhere, in towns big and small, and
that you simply were unlucky in this instance. Such thinking about the event will likely lead to far
less anxiety, and perhaps none at all.

If we apply the ABCs of REBT to personality development, we can arrive at a basic understanding
of how personality patterns develop. Based on variations in biologically based emotional response
tendencies, individuals are going to be shaped by the conditioning patterns present in their social-
cultural environment. Those who are sensitive to rejection might begin to interpret minor rejec-
tions as too awful to bear and develop a conditioned response pattern of avoiding situations in
which they might be rejected. This behavior pattern will continue to be shaped by the individual’s
beliefs and may become firmly entrenched. As a result, the individual might later be described as
having a shy, withdrawn, avoidant personality.

Beck’s Cognitive Theory and Therapy
Aaron Beck, though psychoanalytically trained, was interested in developing a treatment approach
that would be brief, in contrast with the traditional psychoanalytic approaches that were sometimes
astonishingly lengthy, often lasting many years (Beck, 1967). Like Ellis, Beck became disenchanted
with the analytic model and began to use aspects of cognitive science’s information-processing
model. One construct that proved especially useful in the development of his theory was that of the
schema—the individual’s internal representations (private thoughts, beliefs, and emotions).

Beck was intrigued by evidence suggesting that depressed patients’ views of the world are dis-
torted by negative thinking and misattributions about themselves and the world. Accordingly,
Beck began to use the rules of evidence and logical argument to change the depressed patient’s
cognitive distortions (Beck, Rush, Shaw, & Emery, 1979). He too believed that the way we perceive
and how we interpret situations shape our emotions and behaviors. If the therapist can change
these perceptions and make the patient think more rationally, personality disorders might well
be resolved. The therapeutic approach Beck developed describes specific cognitive distortions
that characterize various neurotic conditions, and it outlines how the general principles of cog-
nitive therapy can be used to treat these conditions, as well as to treat depression (Beck et al.,
1979). Importantly, just as the social learning theorists tried to explain and predict the behavior of
most individuals, practitioners like Ellis and Beck were using similar cognitive frameworks to effect
changes in those with problematic thinking.

A Cognitive Model of Depression

Beck’s interest in the clinical phenomenon of depression culminated in the publication of the book
Cognitive Therapy of Depression (Beck et al., 1979), which many consider a major development in
the treatment of depression, and he later addressed personality disorders, developing his cogni-
tive theory of personality (Beck & Freeman, 1990; Beck, Freeman, & Davis, 2004).

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 184 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6 6.5 Cognitive-Behavioral Approaches to Personality

There is evidence that personality factors play a role in the development of depression (Klein,
Kupfer, & Shea, 1993). The cognitive model of depression suggests that there may be important
links among overlapping cognitive schema (thoughts and beliefs), and as maladaptive thoughts
become well rehearsed and automated, the problems are more likely to manifest in the form of
personality. Moreover, the relationship between personality and depression may be reciprocal.
Thus, just as irrational beliefs (schema) are at the root of personality disorders, so too can certain
personality features, such as high emotionality (neuroticism), make one more vulnerable to the
effects of loss or personal failure, either of which can precipitate depression (see Figure 6.4).
Similarly, a highly confrontational and demanding individual may have trouble maintaining attach-
ments and may have to deal with the emotional consequences of poor relationships.

Figure 6.4: The highly interdependent nature of mood and personality

Neuroticism can result in
one overreacting to aversive
outcomes, which can lead to
a negative mood state. If this
occurs with sufficient frequency,
then more durable aversive
mood states (e.g., depression)
may occur.

Interdependence
of personality

and mood

High
neuroticism

Sad mood
state

Overreact to
most outcomes
(catastrophes)

Durable and
more intense

sad mood
(depression)

Beck et al. (1979) present a compelling information-processing model that identifies predisposing
factors for depression. The theory proposes that negative concepts about the self, the external
world, and the future result from our early experiences. These negative concepts are encoded in
schema that we may be unaware of but can be activated by situations similar to the experiences
that first led to the negative schema. For example, if you had a parent who left the home while
you were young, you might be more likely to detect abandonment cues, such as someone show-
ing decreased interest, and this leads you to interpret even benign information consistent with a
schema based on abandonment. Thus, the theory describes cognitive distortions associated with
depression as primitive rather than mature ways of thinking (see Table 6.2).

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 185 5/22/15 3:21 PM

CHAPTER 6 6.5 Cognitive-Behavioral Approaches to Personality

Table 6.2: Application of the information-processing model to the
thinking of the depressed individual

Arbitrary inference (a response set) the process of drawing a specific conclusion in the absence of
evidence to support that conclusion, or when the evidence is contrary to the conclusion.

Selective abstraction (a stimulus set) focusing on a detail (fragment) taken out of context, ignoring
other, more salient, features of the situation, and conceptualizing the whole experience on the basis
of the fragment.

Overgeneralization (a response set) the pattern of drawing a general rule or conclusion on the basis
of one or more isolated incidents and applying the concept across the board to related and unrelated
situations.

Magnification and minimization (a response set) errors made in evaluating the significance or
magnitude of an event. These errors are seen as being so gross as to constitute a distortion.

Personalization (a response set) the tendency to relate external events to oneself when there is no
basis for drawing such a conclusion.

Absolutistic, dichotomous thinking (a response set) the tendency to place all experiences in one or
two opposite categories; for example, flawless or defective, immaculate or filthy, saint or sinner. In
describing himself, the patient selects the extreme negative categorization.

Source: From Beck, A. T., Rush, A. J., Shaw, B. F., & Emery, G. (1979). Cognitive therapy of depression. New York: Guilford Press, p. 14.
Reprinted by permission of Guilford Publications.

Beck’s success in therapy, even relative to pharmacologic interventions (e.g., Hollon et al., 2005),
and the popularity of his approach led to the expansion of descriptions of clinical syndromes and
a widening of the populations to whom it could be applied—among others, individuals suffering
from anxiety, pain, substance abuse, and eventually even those with personality disorders. The
latter is an especially compelling area because of the prevalence of personality disorders and the
difficulty of effectively treating them. Cognitive therapy not only suggests how disorders might be
treated, but also emphasizes the importance of empirical support for the approach.

Applying Cognitive-Behavior Therapy (CBT) to Personality Theory

Beck described how an information-processing model can use personality schema to character-
ize how those with different personalities organize their belief systems (Beck & Freeman, 1990;
Beck, Freeman, & Davis, 2004). Personality schemas are anchored in the individual’s behaviors,
thoughts, and affect. As with the previously mentioned social learning model, Beck believed that
education, training, modeling, reinforcement contingencies, and cultural influences also influence
personality development. Beck’s theory also takes into consideration how evolutionary history has
influenced how we think, perceive the world, and behave (Beck & Freeman, 1990). Beck assumes
that both animal and human behaviors are programmed in the sense that they are based on
an interaction of genetically determined structures and experiences. Thus, individuals may have
various personality types that are genetically determined: Some people are predisposed to attack
when threatened, others might freeze, and yet others go out of their way to avoid danger. Each of
these patterns may have a certain adaptive survival value (Beck & Emery, 1985).

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 186 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6 6.5 Cognitive-Behavioral Approaches to Personality

Confirmation Bias

Early experiences, especially those of a traumatic nature, also have an important influence on
the development of our schema. Later, these schemata may be reinforced by confirmatory bias,
meaning that information that matches the schema strengthens it and that which fails to match
it is ignored or rejected. For example, those whose cognitive schema is “I am bad” may well view
anger directed at them as confirmation of their badness. But someone whose schema is “I am
good” may view other people’s anger as evidence of that person’s irrationality.

In an interesting series of studies that demonstrate this confirmation bias in people’s self-schemas,
Swann and colleagues demonstrated that depressed individuals seek out feedback that confirms
their unfavorable self-assessments (see Swann, Chang-Schneider, & McClarty, 2007). In addition,
the depressed participants also were the least likely to seek out favorable feedback. These find-
ings are in keeping with a wide range of studies showing that those with positive self-schemas
choose partners who appraised them favorably and validate their self-views, whereas those with
negative self-views tend to choose partner interactions that conform to self-verification (i.e.,
those who view them unfavorably) rather than self-enhancement (see Swann, Stein-Seroussi, &
Giesler, 1992). In fact, with respect to relationships, individuals with negative self-schemas tend
to feel more committed to those who likewise thought negatively of them (De La Ronde & Swann,
1998; for a review, see Swann et al., 2007).

Strategies

Strategies may be likened to personality traits or patterns of behavior, in that they “may be
regarded as forms of programmed behavior that are designed to serve biological goals” (Beck
& Freeman, 1990, p. 25). Strategies are not necessarily conscious, nor are all of them adaptive.
In fact, some can be highly maladaptive, depending on the circumstances in which they are
expressed. For example, Beck notes that strategies such as competitiveness and avoidance of
unpleasant outcomes are often adaptive. However, if you always avoid minor unpleasantness,
such as might be associated with a visit to your doctor or dentist, your strategy may, in the end,
be fatally maladaptive.

Various personality disorders are associated with primitive strategies that characterize how
individuals adapt. For example, those with antisocial personality disorder use a predatory strat-
egy; those with a dependent personality adopt a help-eliciting strategy; and those with a com-
pulsive personality use a ritualistic (i.e., relying on behavioral habits to reduce anxiety) style
(Pretzer & Beck, 1996). As we shall see in Chapter 10, the disorders of personality explicitly
involve perceptions and interpretations of the self and others as relevant to all diagnostic cri-
teria for personality disorders.

Beck’s Use of Schema

Beck’s theory of personality is based on an information-processing model (Pretzer & Beck, 1996).
Individuals process data about themselves based on their beliefs and other elements of their
cognitive organization (memory, perception, and the like). The manner in which information is
interpreted shapes an individual’s response pattern. Therefore, cognitive structures determine
how information affects behavior.

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 187 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6 6.5 Cognitive-Behavioral Approaches to Personality

One of the most important elements of Beck’s theoretical model is his emphasis on schema (inter-
nal representations in the form of thoughts, feelings, and beliefs). Schema may include infor-
mation about relationships, such as attitudes toward self and others, as well as more objective
concrete or abstract categories. They can be narrow or wide in scope, flexible or rigid, overtly
emotionally charged, or less obvious in their emotional content.

Research suggests that self-related schemas are automated (as was the case for the above-noted
self-verification strivings) and often implicit, rather than explicit (see Greenwald et al., 2002). For
example, it appears that cognitive representations of your self-concept can be associated with fac-
tors central to defining your personality, such as traits and self-esteem, and the speed with which
you make those associations can indicate how central they are to your self-concept. Indeed, one of
the more recent directions in the psychological literature is to consider implicit self-esteem (which
is based on automatic, self-evaluative processes) to be as, if not more, important than explicit self-
esteem (e.g., Greenwald & Banaji, 1995; Koole, Dijksterhuis, & van Knippenberg, 2001); tests like
the Implicit Association Test (IAT) are one of the preferred approaches for assessing such implicit
schemas (Greenwald & Farnham, 2000; also see the discussion on the IAT in the assessment sec-
tion of this chapter).

An essential aspect of this theoretical model concerns how impulses are controlled or inhibited.
Impulses may be thought of as “wants” that might be encouraged or inhibited by beliefs. Beliefs
are the “should” and “should nots” that color our schema. At times, they may exert a counterforce
on our impulses and wishes (I wish to punch someone who hurts me, but I do not do so because
of my belief that it is wrong to act in violence). At other times, they may encourage our impulses
(I feel like having an ice cream cone, and I will have one because I believe I deserve one after all
these hours of hard studying).

In a sense, the internal control system represents how individuals communicate with themselves.
Our personality functioning is guided by our schema and by how our internal communication
system operates to evaluate, assimilate, and encode information. When we function well, we can
modify schema to respond flexibly to the demands of our environment, but in cases of personal-
ity dysfunction, maladaptive schemata tend to be inflexible and self-perpetuating. Schemata are
sometimes maintained through a variety of faulty information-processing mechanisms. Cognitive
distortions such as dichotomous thinking (using either-or categories such as “I am good or bad”),
selective abstraction (focusing only on one stimulus and ignoring other contradictory informa-
tion), and catastrophic thinking (expecting, for example, a future event to be unbearable) are but
a few of these (Pretzer, 2004).

An important aspect of Beck’s work has been his efforts to provide an evidence base for cognitive
psychotherapy. Other researchers, like Marsha Linehan, also extended Beck’s work.

Linehan’s Cognitive-Behavioral Model
Many theoretical developments that have contributed to the development of personality theory
have resulted from the need for new therapeutic approaches for severe personality disorders. This
was the case with Marsha Linehan, who developed a cognitive-behavioral model of personality,
referred to as Dialectical Behavior Therapy (DBT), based on her work with individuals suffering
from severe personality disorders. Linehan’s (1993) model of personality is biosocial: It maintains
that both genetic predispositions for emotional problems (biology) and the social environment
are responsible for the creation of personality disorder. Thus, for Linehan, personality exists in a
relational context and is fluid, changing largely as a function of our perspective.

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 188 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6 6.6 Assessment Strategies and Tools From the Cognitive Perspective

Linehan’s model is primarily a treatment model; unlike Freud’s model, it is not intended as a grand
theory of personality. However, by developing a treatment model that has shown robust empirical
support, she has demonstrated that DBT methods are also effective as an explanatory framework
for personality (i.e., they can help explain why a patient is having problems, as well as providing a
direct method to change those problems).

One important distinction between DBT and Beck’s CBT is that Linehan emphasizes mindfulness
in order to become aware of automatic thoughts so as to then allow such thoughts to pass. In
contrast, Beck makes patients aware of automatic thoughts, but the goal of CBT is to actively inter-
rupt those thoughts and replace them with more adaptive thoughts. Another important contribu-
tion of this model is that it blends theoretical elements that include biological, relational, cogni-
tive, behavioral, and systemic components. Linehan (1993) believes that attempting to categorize
behavior into the various modes traditionally used by cognitive-behaviorists—motoric, cognitive-
verbal, and physiological—is artificial, such that when both covert and overt behaviors are con-
sidered, all of the categories are implicated. For example, she describes how motor behavior,
expressed by actions of our skeletal muscular system, can be overt and covert. She also explains
how activities such as problem solving, thinking, perceiving, speaking, reading, and writing are
cognitive-verbal behaviors that have parallel motoric and physiological events. At a physiological
level, there are the many activities related to functioning of the nervous system and of glands
and smooth muscles. The results of most of these physiological activities are usually covert (e.g.,
heartbeat) but can also be overt (e.g., blushing and crying). Thus, Linehan sees each of the tradi-
tional behavioral categories as one piece of a larger, unified set of experiences.

6.6 Assessment Strategies and Tools From
the Cognitive Perspective

Cognitive theorists have a strong foundation in empiricism and therefore value objective assessment instruments. Assessment of personality based on a cognitive model relies on the assumption that various personality configurations share identifiable types of schemata
(Beck & Freeman, 1990; Young, 1994). Most assessment tools are self-administered scales that
are then scored by a clinician. A sampling of the instruments commonly employed will be here
reviewed.

Kelly’s Repertory Grid
Kelly’s (1955) theoretical work resulted in the development of the Repertory Grid, a method for
accessing the personal constructs of individuals. Kelly adopted a very straightforward method
for assessing constructs by focusing on how we perceive the important people in our lives. After
generating a list of important individuals (e.g., mother and father figures, siblings, current and
ex-boyfriends/girlfriends, employer—15 in all), the respondent is asked to compare three indi-
viduals at a time and note how two of the three are similar on a construct yet different from the
third individual on that same construct. For example, when comparing your father, ex-boyfriend/
girlfriend, and employer, one might conclude that your father and ex-boyfriend both have a good
sense of humor, while your employer does not (e.g.. “funny – not funny”). The respondent would
then continue to make all possible three-person comparisons, generating new constructs for each.
The resulting list of constructs could then be analyzed (Kelly did so mathematically) to identify
common/recurrent themes, with those representing core or superordinate constructs.

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 189 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6 6.6 Assessment Strategies and Tools From the Cognitive Perspective

Beck Depression Inventory (BDI)
Beck (Beck et al., 1979) developed one of the most widely used instruments to assess depression:
the Beck Depression Inventory, which was revised most recently in 1996 (BDI-II; Beck, Steer, & Brown,

1996). This 21-item inventory was devel-
oped to identify the cognitive features of
depression, emphasizing such concepts
as self-reported withdrawal, sense of
failure, sadness, guilt, self-dislike, indeci-
siveness, and the like. The items include
four-response choices ordered in terms
of severity, and respondents focus on the
most recent two weeks of time in order
to match the DSM-IV criteria for major
depression. The total scale score results
in labels of minimal depression to severe
depression, with norms collected on 500
outpatients and a college student sam-
ple. The BDI-II has strong psychometric
properties, thereby making it a popular
inventory.

Other Depression Inventories
Although the BDI is one of the most commonly used measures, a number of other self-report
depression inventories are used widely in research and clinical practice to assess the cognitive
manifestations of depression.

The Center for Epidemiological Studies in Depression

When assessing the construct of depression in the general population, the Center for Epide-
miological Studies in Depression scale (CES-D; Radloff, 1977) is one of the better normed and
more effective self-report measures when assessing less severe forms of depression. The CES-D
is a 20-item inventory with Likert ratings on how frequently a particular experience has occurred
within the past week. Although it is primarily intended for use in the general population, there are
geriatric norms, and it adopts a clinical cutoff score of 16.

The Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression

The Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression is like the BDI in that it is used to capture depression
scores that fall more within the clinical range. Item endorsements denote symptom severity, with
scores of 20 and higher denoting moderate, severe, or very severe depression (Hedlung & Vieweg,
1979). Other versions of the scale have also been developed.

Anxiety Inventories
The construct of anxiety is also commonly assessed and is a central component of clinical and
personality research. Two of the more commonly used scales are here reviewed.

Aman Khan/iStockphoto/Thinkstock

This person appears depressed behaviorally. The
challenge is capturing that affective state in an objective
manner and quantifying it.

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 190 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6 6.6 Assessment Strategies and Tools From the Cognitive Perspective

The Beck Anxiety Inventory

The Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI; Beck & Steer, 1990) is a 21-item symptom listing that requires
respondents to endorse the extent to which they experience each symptom, ranging from “not at
all” to “severely,” and it is intended for those aged 17–80 years of age. Items reflect two general
factors, one measuring somatic symptoms (e.g., sweating, numbness, tingling, etc.) and one mea-
suring cognitive features of anxiety. Scores range from 0 to 63, though scores above 23 typically
denote severe anxiety.

The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory

The State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI; Spielberger, Gorsuch, & Lushene, 1970) was first published
in 1970 but was then revised in 1983 (Spielberger, Gorssuch, Lushene, Vagg, & Jacobs, 1983). The
inventory assesses state anxiety as well as trait anxiety in adults. Responses are based on a 4-point
Likert scale, and scores range from 20 to 80, with higher scores indicating greater anxiety. The psy-
chometric properties of the STAI have been shown to be adequate (Rule & Traver, 1983).

Implicit Association Test
The Implicit Association Test (IAT; Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998) is computer-based task
that asks respondents to categorize concepts with a particular attribute. For example, one might be
asked to categorize the concepts of “white” and “black” with favorable (e.g., “sunshine,” “happy,”
etc.) and unfavorable (e.g., “war,” “vomit,” etc.) attributes. The typical design requires respondents
to match both concepts to both sets of attributes and records reaction times to assess the extent
to which some associations are more natural (i.e., more easily made and therefore more readily
associated from a cognitive standpoint) relative to others. Because this assessment is thought to
access more automatic associations, it is considered better than self-report measures that can
be more affected by demand characteristics (see Nosek, Greenwald, & Banaji, 2005). Of course,
debate continues on the constructs assessed with the IAT, with some research suggesting that it
assesses knowledge of associations, rather than whether one actually has a particular association.

You can take the Implicit Association Test at the link below to find out more about any implicit
biases you might have: https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/.

Possible Selves and Self-Schemas
The assessment of possible selves is to assess a number of possible (hypothetical) selves that an
individual might have at any time in his or her life. These can include multiple manifestations of an
“ideal self,” future possible selves (which includes the ideal self), as well as current and past pos-
sible selves. Possible selves can also be assessed for their valence (positive or negative).

Two distinct approaches for measuring possible selves have been forwarded in the empirical lit-
erature. An open-ended version is primarily intended for use with child and adolescent samples,
whereas with adult samples, a closed-ended approach is preferred. In the latter, the focus often
involves identifying the number of positive and negative possible selves as well as the affective
ratings associated with these possible selves (Markus & Nurius, 1986).

A second instrument, the Brief Core Schema Scales (BCSS), provides a self-reported assessment
of schemata concerning self and others but specifically targets those experiencing psychosis. The

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 191 5/21/15 12:39 PM

https://implicit.harvard.edu/implicit/

CHAPTER 6Summary

BCSS assesses four dimensions of self and other evaluation: negative-self, positive-self, negative-
other, positive-other. In the initial validation of the instrument, individuals experiencing psychosis
and in cognitive therapy were compared to students. The BCSS appears to have reasonably good
psychometric properties (Fowler et al., 2006).

Cultural Influences and Differences
There is little research at this time that looks at the applicability of the cognitive model to other
cultures. Even though the cognitive model does not pay much attention to cultural differences,
the basic theory takes into consideration environmental factors that influence and shape schema.
For example, that some cultures (including our own) encourage extraverted behavior is seen
as a reflection of cultural demands encoded into its members’ schemas through information-
processing activities.

Since the various cognitive models are based on an information-processing model, most are highly
flexible, and the assumption is that they probably have good generalizability to other cultures. An
interesting question is whether those raised in other cultures learn to process information differ-
ently and how this might affect personality development and expression.

Within the last two decades, researchers have begun to address this question by exploring cultural
differences with respect to certain cognitive mechanisms. For example, it appears that East Asians
(relative to those in western Europe and America) consider dispositions to be more malleable
and more strongly influenced by the situation (Choi, Nisbett, & Norenzayan, 1999), and they also
perceive environmental events as more holistic (interdependent; Ji, Peng, & Nisbett, 2000). For
a recent discussion on cultural differences in perception, see the following cover story on The
Culture-Cognition Connection found in the American Psychological Association’s publication, the
Monitor (from February 2006; see link: http://www.apa.org/monitor/feb06/connection.aspx).

In Chapter 9, we will discuss some additional ways in which the self-concept may vary by
culture, emphasizing how the self in individualistic cultures is distinct from the self in collec-
tivistic cultures.

Summary

Cognitive science represents a revolutionary advance in the field of personality psychology. It emerged from behaviorism, after Tolman introduced the concept of latent learning. How-ever, the cognitive approach went considerably farther, recognizing that it could make infer-
ences about the mind and not just about things that are observable. George Miller, who believed
the behavioral model lacked sufficient complexity, engendered this cognitive revolution. Miller
was interested in memory, a highly relevant topic for psychology and personality, as it undergirds
many basic cognitive processes. Another conceptual leap occurred when the computer was used
as a metaphor for developing a model of how the mind works, which is an area of great interest
to neuroscientists. The computer offered an analogue to how the mind might process information
and form connections.

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 192 5/21/15 12:39 PM

http://www.apa.org/monitor/feb06/connection.aspx

CHAPTER 6

Key Terms

Information-processing models led to the development of valuable constructs, such as schema,
which are the cognitive templates we use to process information. Various blends of cognitive
models have been developed with slightly different emphases reflected in cognitive, social-
cognitive, and cognitive-behavioral approaches. George Kelly was one of the earliest theorists
who considered individuals as scientists and their theories as personal constructs, which are used
to explain the present and predict the future. Researchers such as Julian Rotter, Albert Bandura,
and Walter Mischel introduced ideas relating to learning and the self-concept. Rotter empha-
sized the influence of reward value and expected contingencies, rather than assuming universally
defined rewards value and contingencies. Bandura developed a social cognitive theory emphasiz-
ing the role of modeling, the importance of the ability to symbolize and to anticipate, and the cen-
trality of notions of self-efficacy. Constructs such as self-efficacy are useful in understanding how
our perceptions and self-beliefs affect our behavior. Mischel emphasized the role of self-schema,
how such schema are biased for self-verification, and how personal goals play a role in the self-
regulation process.

Each of these theorists has contributed to our understanding of personality. Personality is not just
a reaction to external events and conditioning: It is strongly affected by our cognitive processing
of our world and our relationships, as well as by the inner representations (schema) that result.
The cognitive perspective also resulted in the development of a large number of self-report inven-
tories used to assess personality, with an emphasis on internal mental representations. These
represent some of the most widely used inventories in the field.

Key Terms

behavioral expectancy The individual’s expec-
tation of reinforcement or punishment.

behavior potential The probability of engaging
in a specific behavior in a given situation.

biosocial The interplay of genetic predisposi-
tions and the social environment.

cognitive map A mental representation of a
spatial environment.

cognitive revolution The shift in the field of
psychology toward cognitive science.

confirmatory bias The tendency to favor infor-
mation that matches and strengthens a schema
and to ignore or reject information that contra-
dicts a schema.

heuristic A type of information-processing
technique that can be common or differenti-
ated among humans.

information processing When data are manip-
ulated and transformed into information.

latent learning Learning that is not immedi-
ately evident or behaviorally observable, and
that occurs absent of reinforcement of the
behavior or any associative learning.

metacognition The act of thinking about one’s
thinking. An awareness of one’s own thinking
processes.

mirror neuron A brain cell that fires when an
animal perceives others performing an action
and facilitates unconscious, automatic mimicry.

modeling Learning that occurs as a function of
observing behaviors performed by others.

motivated reasoning Motivation to perceive
events in specific ways by reasoning within the
context of desired outcomes.

personal construct A theory developed and
modified by an individual used to explain and
predict phenomena.

preparedness Readiness to learn and develop
a particular behavior.

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 193 5/21/15 12:39 PM

CHAPTER 6Key Terms

Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy (REBT) A
type of psychotherapy that focuses on identify-
ing and changing irrational beliefs to resolve
emotional and behavioral disturbances.

reciprocal determinism The belief that a per-
son’s cognitive processes, behavior, and envi-
ronmental context influence each other; also
called reciprocal causality.

representation The use of symbols to depict or
signify objects, events, or occurrences.

reward (or reinforcement) value The idea that
we each subjectively value rewards in different
ways, and this variability is critical to predicting
behavior.

schema An organized pattern of thought.

self-efficacy A person’s belief that they have
the ability to succeed.

self-regulation The process of identifying a
goal and using both internal and external feed-
back to maximize goal attainment.

self-verification The tendency to seek
feedback that maintains or confirms your
self-concept.

social-cognitive theory Theory that combines
aspects of behavioral and cognitive approaches
to explain personality.

Lec81110_06_c06_163-194.indd 194 5/21/15 12:39 PM