Cognitive Affective Personality Theory of Walter Mischel

16,474 views

Published on

Cognitive Affective Personality Theory of Walter Mischel

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
13 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
16,474
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
5
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
250
Comments
0
Likes
13
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Cognitive Affective Personality Theory of Walter Mischel

  1. 1. COGNITIVE- AFFECTIVE PERSONALITY THEORY Prepared by Kristel Rose B. Magluyan (MP-CP)
  2. 2. REPORT OUTLINE  Biographical Sketch of Walter Mischel  Theory and Concepts  Critique
  3. 3. WHO IS WALTER MISCHEL?
  4. 4. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF WALTER MISCHEL  He was born on February 22, 1930 in Vienna  Walter is the second son in the family and was raised by upper-middle-class parents  The Mischel Family transferred to the United States, and settled in Brooklyn due to the invasion of Nazis in Austria in 1938
  5. 5. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF WALTER MISCHEL  He graduated as valedictorian in high school  Mischel also acquired a scholarship in New York University  He developed strong passion in art (painting and sculpture), and he divided his time among art, psychology and his life in Greenwich Village  He was strongly inclined to humanistic perspective, which was influenced by existential thinkers and great poets
  6. 6. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF WALTER MISCHEL  He graduated MA-Clinical Psychology at the City College of New York  He went to Ohio State University were he completed his doctorate degree at the age of 26  During his stay in Ohio State University, he was influenced by Julian Rotter and George Kelly  He taught at the University of Colorado for 3 years  He became connected with the Harvard University  During his stay in Harvard, his interest in personality theory and assessment was fortified by his discussions with Allport, Murray and others
  7. 7. BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF WALTER MISCHEL  While he was in Harvard, he met and married Harriet Nerlove  They had three daughters and got involved with several projects before they divorced  Mischel also served Stanford University in 1962 and became colleagues with Albert Bandura  He went back to New York after spending 20 years at the Stanford University, and started teaching in Columbia University  At the present time, he remains as an active researcher for Columbia University
  8. 8. ACADEMIC APPOINTMENTS  Niven Professor of Humane Letters, Columbia University, 1994-present  Professor of Psychology, Columbia University 1983-present; Chair, Department of  Psychology, Columbia University, 1988- 1991; Chair, Department of Psychology,  Stanford University, 1977-1978, 1982-1983; Professor of Psychology, Stanford  University, 1966-1983; Associate Professor of Psychology, Stanford University,  1962-1966; Assistant Professor and Lecturer, Harvard University, Department of  Social Relations, 1958-1962; Assistant Professor, University of Colorado, 1956- 1958
  9. 9. ACTIVITIES AND HONORS  John P. McGovern Award Lecture in Behavioral Sciences (2013), American  Academy of Arts and Sciences  Ludwig Wittgenstein Prize (2012), Austrian Research Foundation  Grawemeyer Award in Psychology (2011)  Doctor Philosophiae Honoris Causa, Hebrew University of Jerusalem (2010)  Scientific Honoree, Foundation for the Advancement of Behavioral and Brain  Sciences (2009)  President, Association for Psychological Science (2008-9)  National Academy of Sciences (elected 2004)  Fellow, American Academy of Arts and Sciences (elected 1991)  MERIT Award, National Institute of Mental Health, 1989-2009 (awarded twice, sequentially)
  10. 10.  Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award, American Psychological Association (APA), 1982  Distinguished Scientist Award, Society of Experimental Social Psychologists (awarded in 2000)  2005 Jack Block Award for Distinguished Contributions to Personality Psychology (Society for Personality and Social Psychology)  Distinguished Scientist Award, APA, Division of Clinical Psychology, 1978  President, Association for Research in Personality, 2002 – 2003 (elected)  Fellow of the Society of Experimental Psychologists (elected 1999)  Editor, Psychological Review, 2000-2004  Distinguished Alumnus Award, Ohio State University, 2010  Doctor of Science, Honoris Causa, Ohio State University, June 1997  Niven Professor of Humane Letters, Columbia University, 1994-present  William James Fellow, American Psychological Society, 1990  President, Division of Personality and Social Psychology (8), APA, 1985  Publication Board, American Psychological Association, 1989-1995  Scientific Advisory Board, Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Berlin, 1983-1994  Social Sciences Commission, Humanities Section, Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, West Germany, 1981-1990  Fellow, Society of Experimental Social Psychologists (elected 1977)  Advisory Board, Research Center for Arts and Culture, Teachers College, 2000- present
  11. 11.  Social Science Research Council, Committee on the Arts, 2000-2001  Trustee, Association for Advancement of Psychology, 1982-1986  Chairman, Personality and Cognition Research Review Committee, National Institute of Mental Health, 1976-1980  Clinical and Personality Sciences Fellowship Review Committee, National Institute of Mental Health, 1970-1973  Committee on Scientific Awards, American Psychological Association, 1975-1977  Advisory Council, Princeton University, Department of Psychology, 1978-1983  President, Division of Clinical Psychology, Section III (Development of Clinical Psychology as an Experimental Behavioral Science), APA, 1971  Fellow, Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, 1976-1977  Katz-Newcomb Lecture, University of Michigan, 1990  Columbia University Lecture, 1989  Morton Professorship Visiting Lecturer, Ohio University, April 1976  Shepard Lecture, University of Michigan, April 1976  Psychology Advisor, Random House and Alfred Knopf, 1974-1980  Series Editor for Century Series in Psychology, Prentice-Hall, 1976-1993:  Distinguished Contributions Series, Guilford Press, 2001-currentEditorial Board/Consulting Editor: Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience (SCAN), 2005-present; Psychological Review, 1989- 1999; Journal of Cognitive  Therapy and Research, 1977-1979; Journal of Personality Research, 1973-1977;  Child Development, 1971-1977.
  12. 12.  Associate Editor: Computers in Human Behavior, 1995-1997; Journal of Personality  and Social Psychology, 1996-1997; Psychological Assessment: An International  Journal, 1984-1994; Psychological Inquiry, 1983-1999; Journal of Experimental  Psychology, 1982-1986; Behavioral Assessment, 1979-1981; Journal of  Personality and Social Psychology, 1969-1971.  Consultant for Selection and Assessment, Peace Corps, Washington, D.C., 1961- 1962  Consultant, United States Veterans' Administration Hospitals, 1957-1985  National Science Foundation Distinguished Visiting Scientist, Univ of Hawaii, Nov  1973  Distinguished Visiting Scientist, Kansas State University, May 1971  Fellow, American Psychological Association, 1973-present  Advisory Board, Stanford Center for the Humanities, 1981-1983
  13. 13. THEORY AND CONCEPTS
  14. 14. CONSISTENCY PARADOX  Mischel‟s term for the observation that clinical intuition and the perceptions of laypeople suggest that behavior is consistent, whereas research finds that it is not.
  15. 15. CONSISTENCY PARADOX  Mischel claimed that though some basic traits persist over time, there is little evidence that they generalize from one situation to another.  For Mischel, any attempt to classify individuals as friendly, extraverted, conscientious, and so forth may be one way of defining personality, but it is a sterile taxonomy that fails to explain behavior.
  16. 16. SITUATIONISM
  17. 17. SITUATIONISM  It is an approach that claims that people are greatly influenced by external situational factors than by internal traits or motivation  The term was popularized in 1968  Mischel argued that circumstances are way powerful than dispositional traits when it comes to predicting the behaviour of a person  It is obviously the opposite of what the personality view defines  The personality view claims that behaviour depends on a person‟s long term personality traits and these are manifested in whatever circumstance a person is immersed into.
  18. 18. COGNITIVE-AFFECTIVE PERSONALITY THEORY
  19. 19. COGNITIVE-AFFECTIVE PERSONALITY THEORY  Mischel‟s theory that views people as active, goal- directed individuals capable of exerting influence on both their situation and themselves  For him, the field of psychology was searching for consistency in the wrong places  SITUATION = NOISE OR ERROR X Mischel asserted that through including the situation as it is perceived by the person and by analyzing behavior in its situational context, the consistencies that characterize the individual would be found
  20. 20. COGNITIVE-AFFECTIVE PERSONALITY THEORY  If A, then X; but if B, then Y  For example, if Mark is provoked by his wife, then he will react with aggression. However, when the “if” changes, so does the “then.” If Mark is provoked by his boss, then he will react with submission.  Mark‟s behavior is not inconsistent and may well reflect a stable lifetime pattern of reacting.  The frequently observed variability in behavior is simply an essential part of a unifying stability of personality.
  21. 21. COGNITIVE-AFFECTIVE PERSONALITY THEORY  Mischel claimed that the „consistency‟ of personality is due to similarity of the perceived features of the situation – that is people identify situation – behavior relationships that become behavior signatures of people‟s personalities.  These signatures are idiographic (individual)  In this, personality could even be considered as the interaction or intersection of cognitive characteristics and environment.
  22. 22. MISCHEL‟S THEORETICAL POSITION IN PREDICTING BEHAVIOR  “If personality is a stable system that processes the information about the situations, external or internal, then it follows that as individuals encounter different situations, their behaviors should vary across the situations”
  23. 23. SITUATION VARIABLES  Mischel believes that the relative influence of situation variables and personal qualities can be determined by observing the uniformity or diversity of people‟s responses in a given situation.  5 Variables that contribute to the condition of a certain situation  Competencies- the intellectual capabilities and social skills  Cognitive strategies- different perceptions of events that happen (example:what we think is frightening for us ourselves may be challenging for a different person.)  Expectancies- the results that are expected after performing certain behaviors  Subjective Values- the respective value of the possible outcomes of behaviours  Self-regulatory systems- the rules and standards that people adjust to control their behaviours
  24. 24. EXPERIMENT OF MISCHEL AND ERVIN STAUB(1965)  They made an experiment to show that the interaction between the situation and various personal qualities is an important determinant of behavior.
  25. 25. Now let‟s look at the results Subject: 8th- grade boys They were asked to rate their expectancies for success on verbal reasoning and general information task They worked on a series of problems Some were told that they succeeded on the problems, some were told that they failed; and a third group received no information at all The boys were then asked to choose between an immediate, less valuable, noncontingent reward and a delayed, more valuable, contingent reward.
  26. 26. Obtained Success Chose more valuable contingent rewards Obtained Failure Chose less valuable noncontingent rewards No Information Made choices based on earlier expectancy for success
  27. 27. THE MARSHMALLOW EXPERIMENT  Subject – 4 year old children  A plate with one marshmallow on top was placed in front of the children  Each of the children were given the instruction that they could eat the marshmallow, but if they would wait longer they would be given one more marshmallow  NOW LET’S WATCH THE VIDEO 
  28. 28. PERSPECTIVE EVALUATION
  29. 29. QUICK ANALOGY  Humans have an ongoing dialogue between self and situation
  30. 30. ADVANTAGES  Emphasizes interpresonal influences  Understands that humans have different selves in different situations  Often studies personality across time
  31. 31. LIMITS  Difficult to define situations and to study the many complexities of interactions  Extreme positions can fail to take into account the complexity of the relationship between personality, behavior and the situation  May overlook biological influences
  32. 32. REFERRENCES  Feist, G. J., & Feist, J. (2008). Theories of Personality 7th Edition. The McGraw−Hill Companies, Inc. USA  Freidman, H. S., & Schustack, M.W. (1999). Personality: Classic Theories and Modern Research. Allyn & Bacon. USA  http://waltermischellara.wikispaces.com/Biog raphy  http://www.columbia.edu/cu/psychology/ind iv_pages/mischel/Walter_Mischel_files/wm_vit a_1-7-13.pdf
  33. 33. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING! 

×