Compare and contrast the aims and methods of trait theory with those of personal construct theory.
Clinical, psychometric and experimental traditions are the three separable yet related strands of personality theories dating back to over a century ago (Butt, 2012). The two theories that this assignment will focus on are Kelly’s (1955) personal construct theory (PCT) and Eysenck and Rachman’s (1965) trait theory (TT). TT is an experimental approach which focuses on how people’s behavior is connected to traits which are rooted in an individual’s biology. PCT on the other hand is a phenomenological approach which focuses on how individuals view the same thing differently based on experience (Butt, 2012). This assignment will begin by briefly defining each approach and then go onto discuss their strengths and weaknesses while comparing and contrasting the two. It then will conclude by summarising these points.
Eysenck and Rachman (1965, cited in Butt, 2012) developed TT and it is concerned with ‘placing the individual with respect to a number of trait dimensions that are thought to underpin behaviour” (Butt, 2006, cited in Butt, 2012, p.7). According to Butt (2012) Eysenck’s version of TT is perhaps the most thorough and daring in its application, and is mainly concerned with clinical application of theory. Trait theorists are primarily concerned with how traits can be measured and then assigning them to patterns of behaviour, attempting to discover why people behave in different ways in the same situations. TT is interested in identifying norms based on a continuum and then illustrating how people differ in relation to them. Cattell (cited in Butt, 2012) used sixteen fundamental personality traits to portray people’s behaviour, yet Eysenck believed that he only needed two: extroversion and neuroticism, which he believed were definitions of behaviour in ‘biologically based temperament’ (Butt, 2012, p.46). According to Eysenck (cited in Butt, 2012) the link...