by DK
During World War I, Allport performed military duties, before winning a scholarship to Harvard University to study philosophy and economics. After graduating in 1919, he taught for a year in Turkey, then went back to Harvard, where he gained his doctorate in psychology in 1922. He also studied with the Gestalt School in Germany, and at Cambridge University in England.
In 1924, Allport again returned to Harvard to teach the first course in personality studies in the US. Apart from four years at Darmouth College, he remained at Harvard until his death from lung cancer, aged 70, in 1967.
Key works
1937 Personality: A Psychological Interpretation
1954 The Nature of Prejudice
1955 Becoming
1961 Pattern and Growth in Personality
See also: Galen • William James • Sigmund Freud • Carl Rogers • Abraham Maslow • Martin Seligman • Paul Salkovskis • Raymond Cattell • Hans J. Eysenck • William Stern
IN CONTEXT
APPROACH
Intelligence theory
BEFORE
1900s Alfred Binet claims intelligence can be measured, and introduces the term “intelligence quotient” (IQ).
1904 Charles Spearman identifies “g” as an underlying property of intelligence.
1931 In The Measurement of Intelligence, Edward Thorndike says that there are three or four main types of intelligence.
AFTER
1950 J.P. Guilford claims that there are around 150 different types of intellectual ability.
1989 US psychologist John B. Carroll proposes a three-stratum psychometric model of intelligence, consisting of narrow abilities, broad abilities, and Charles Spearman’s “g” factor.
Raymond Cattell, considered to be one of the dozen most eminent psychologists of the 20th century, contributed hugely to the study of human intelligence, motivation, and personality. His interest in intelligence was sparked early in his career when he was a student of Charles Spearman, the British psychologist who defined “g”—a single-factor, general intelligence that serves as the foundation for all learning.
In 1941, Cattell developed this concept further, defining two different types of intelligence that made up “g:” fluid and crystallized intelligence. Fluid intelligence is a series of thinking or reasoning abilities that can be applied to any issue or “content.” Sometimes described as the intelligence we use when we don’t already know how to do something, it comes into play automatically in processes such as problem-solving and pattern recognition, and it is thought to be closely related to working memory capacity.
Cattell suggests fluid intelligence is genetically inherited, which may account for individual differences. It builds to a peak in young adulthood, then steadily declines, perhaps because of age-related changes in the brain. Brain injury can affect fluid intelligence, which suggests it is largely physiological.
Crystallized intelligence
As we use fluid intelligence for solving problems, we begin to develop stores of knowledge and working hypotheses about the world around us. This store of knowledge is our crystallized intelligence, described by Cattell as “the set of judgmental skills” gained from investing fluid intelligence in cultural activities. Vast differences in learning experiences occur because of factors such as social class, age, nationality, and historical era.
Crystallized intelligence includes skills such as verbal comprehension and numerical facility, because these abilities rely on knowledge already gained—such as the rules of grammar or addition, subtraction, and other mathematical concepts. This form of intelligence increases gradually over a lifetime and stays relatively stable until we are around 65 years old, when it begins to decline.
Cattell sees fluid and crystallized intelligence as fairly independent of each other, but reasons that having a higher fluid intelligence might lead to the broader and faster development of crystallized intelligence, depending on factors relating to personality and interests. Noting that standard IQ tests tend to assess a combination of fluid and crystallized intelligence, Cattell developed tests to assess fluid intelligence in isolation. His culture-fair intelligence test, which uses nonverbal, multiple-choice questions based on shapes and patterns, requires no prior learning from the participants and can be used to test children and adults from any culture.
The culture-fair intelligence test was first presented by Cattell in 1940. It measures fluid intelligence through pattern-related problems that require reasoning ability but no prior learning or knowledge to solve.
RAYMOND CATTELL
Born in Staffordshire, England, Raymond Bernard Cattell achieved a first-class degree in chemistry in 1924 before turning to psychology and receiving his doctorate in 1929. After teaching in London and Exeter universities, he ran the Leicester Child Guidance Clinic for five years before moving to the US in 1937. He lived and taught there until 1973, holding posts at Clark and Harvard universities, and the University of Illinois. Cattell married three times and moved to Honolulu as a professor at the University of Hawaii, spending the rest of his life there. In 1997, the American Psychological Association honored him with a Lifetime Achievement Award. However, his idea that nations should safeguard high, inherited intelligence through eugenics made this a controversial award, and led to critical attacks. Cattell defended himself and refused the award, but died of heart failure the following year.
Key works
1971 Abilities
1987 Intelligence
See also: Alfred Binet • J.P. Guilford • Hans Eysenck • William Stern • David Wechsler
IN CONTEXT
APPROACH
Personality
BEFORE
1926 American psychologist Catharine Cox tests the intelligence and personalities of 300 geniuses and finds the average IQ to be 165+; key characteristics are tremendous persistence and motivation.
1956 J.P. Guilford develops the concept of divergent thinking to discuss creativity.
AFTER
2009 In Genius 101: Creators, Leaders, and Prodigies, American psychologist Dean Keith Simonton argues that geniuses are the result of good genes and good surroundings.
2009 Swedish psychologist Anders Ericsson attributes expert performance to 10,000 hours of practice.
Discussion about genius has been dominated for most of its history by the nature-versus-nurture debate: is a genius born or made? Prior to the early 1900s, ideas about genius were based largely on stories of people who were perceived as geniuses, such as Leonardo da Vinci and Beethoven. As early as Aristotle, creative genius and madness were seen as linked, and both assumed to be largely genetic in nature. In 1904, British psychologist Havelock Ellis’s A Study of British Genius, reported controlled studies of both psychotic patients and creative people to establish a link between the two. Seventy years later the German psychologist Hans Eysenck reviewed the early evidence and concluded that it is not psychosis (full blown insanity) that is related to genius, but psychoticism, which he defined as an underlying disposition to develop psychotic symptoms.
"There is a common genetic basis for great potential in creativity and for psychological deviation."
Hans J. Eysenck
Temperament and biology
Many psychologists have defined and measured personality traits, but Eysenck’s interests focused on human temperament rather than the detailed characteristics that make up a whole person. He was a biologist, and like others before him, notably the ancient Greek physicians Hippocrates and Galen, he believed that physiological factors account for temperament. Hippocrates had suggested that personality type arises from an excess or deficit of a p
articular type of bodily fluids, known as humors. Galen expanded upon this idea to suggest there are four types of temperament: sanguine, choleric, phlegmatic, and melancholic. He claimed that sanguine people have an excess of blood, and are cheerful and optimistic. Those with a choleric temperament, stemming from an abundance of bile, are quick and hot-tempered. Phlegmatic individuals, with too much phlegm, are slow, lazy, and dull. Melancholics, who suffer from black bile, are sad, pessimistic, and depressed.
Galen’s biological approach appealed to Eysenck, who considered temperament to be physiological and genetically determined. He proposed a measure of two dimensions, or overarching “superfactors” of personality, that encompass all the detailed traits: Neuroticism and Extraversion—Introversion, which he then mapped against Galen’s four temperaments.
Eysenck’s scales
“Neuroticism” was Eysenck’s name for a personality dimension that ranges from emotionally calm and stable at one extreme, to nervous and easily upset at the other. He claimed that neurotics (at the less stable end of the spectrum) have a low activation threshold in terms of triggering the sympathetic nervous system, which is the part of the brain that activates the “fight or flight” response. People with this more responsive system are hyperactive in this regard, so they respond to even minor threats as though they are seriously dangerous, experiencing an increase in blood pressure and heart rate, sweating, and so on. They are also more likely to suffer from the various neurotic disorders. However, Eysenck was not suggesting that people who scored at the nervous end of this dimension are necessarily neurotic in practice, merely that they would be more likely to develop a variety of nervous disorders. Eysenck’s second dimension of temperament was “Extraversion—Introversion.” He used these terms very much as we use them to describe people around us: extraverts are outgoing and talkative, while introverts are shy and quiet. Eysenck claimed that variations in brain activity explain the difference: introverts are chronically over-aroused and jittery, while extraverts are chronically under-aroused and bored; so the brain must either wake itself up through seeking further excitement with other people (extraverts) or calm itself down through seeking peace and solitude (introverts).
Eysenck’s model of personality provides an overarching paradigm for defining temperament. Each of the superfactors (Extraversion and Neuroticism) is made up of lower-order habits, such as “ lively.” The two superfactors divide habits into four types that reflect Galen’s four temperaments.
Psychoticism
Eysenck tested his ideas on large groups of people, but realized there were some sections of society that he was missing; so he took his studies into mental institutions. Through this work, he identified a third dimension of temperament, which he labeled “psychoticism,” a term that has largely replaced the word “insanity” in general use. In personality theory, this was quite a departure: most personality theorists were attempting to define and measure the normal (sane) personality. However, Eysenck said that, as with the neuroticism dimension, psychoticism ranges along a scale; his tests looked for the occurrence of personality traits commonly found among psychotics.
Eysenck found that a number of personality traits relate to each other to produce psychoticism; those who score highly on this scale are usually aggressive, egocentric, impersonal, impulsive, antisocial, unempathic, creative, and tough-minded. A high score on the scale does not mean a person is psychotic, and it is not inevitable that they will become so; they simply share characteristics with psychotic patients. In controlled studies, such as those by Norwegian psychologist Dan Olweus and his colleagues in 1980, the aggressive element of psychoticism has been related biologically to increased testosterone levels.
Professor Frankenstein creates a monster in Mary Shelley’s novel, and exhibits classic psychotic symptoms: recklessness, disregard for conventions, and tough-mindedness.
"Introverts are characterized by higher levels of activity than extraverts and so are chronically more cortically aroused than extraverts."
Hans J. Eysenck
Studying genius
A clear psychological definition of creativity has proved slippery, but there is broad agreement that it involves originality and novelty, and is based on aspects of both intellectual ability and personality. In his paper, Creativity and Personality: Suggestions for a Theory, Eysenck aimed to throw some light on the nature of creativity and its relationship to intelligence, personality, and genius.
Genius is held to be the highest form of creativity, and it rests upon very high intelligence: an IQ score of at least 165 is considered to be a prerequisite. However, a high IQ is not enough on its own. Another relevant component of intelligence is the mental search process which we use to find solutions, by bringing together different ideas from memory to form new answers to problems. This mental scanning is guided by ideas of relevance: what past ideas and experiences do I have that are relevant to this problem? Each of us performs this differently, and it is an ability that is independent of our IQ. The ability runs along a scale, ranging from an expansive, over-inclusive idea of what is relevant (seeing too many things as potential possibilities), to an overly narrow one (seeing few possibilities); at the center sits a more conventional sense of what might apply to any problem at hand.
Over-inclusive thinking can be measured by word-association tests, which analyze two features: the number of responses to any given word, and the originality of responses. For example, when presented with the word “foot,” those with a narrow range of responses are most likely to respond with the word “shoe;” a slightly wider range of inclusive thinking might contain the words “hand” or “toe,” while an over-inclusive person might generate words such as “soldier” or “sore.” This kind of test makes it possible to measure people’s creativity.
It is the element of over-inclusive thinking that Eysenck demonstrated to be a common feature of both psychoticism and creativity. When over-inclusive thinking and high IQ are present together, creative genius will result, because the combination generates creative and original ideas. This is the cognitive characteristic that lies at the base of creativity. When over-inclusive thinking and psychotic symptoms are present together, psychosis, in varying degrees, may result.
Creative geniuses, such as the artist Vincent van Gogh, exhibit traits from Eysenck’s psychoticism dimension, particularly over-inclusive thinking, independence, and nonconformity.
Creativity and personality
Eysenck believed that creativity is a personality trait that provides the potential for creative achievement, but the realization of that potential lies in the character trait of psychoticism (in the absence of psychosis). The drive to translate the trait of creativity into achievement, for example by creating works of art, comes from aspects of the psychotic temperament, in particular the over-inclusive thinking style. Eysenck was not suggesting a causal link between genius and insanity; while the two things have something in common—over-inclusive thinking—this combines with other features of genius or insanity to lead to very different results.
Research into creativity faces a number of difficult challenges: with some researchers claiming that creativity can only be judged on what it produces. Eysenck felt unable to propose a fully developed theory of creativity, only a suggestion for one. As he said, “I am linking several fuzzy theories.” His work ranged over many areas, though he is best known for his exploration into personality and intelligence. His PEN (Psychoticism, Extraversion, Neuroticism) model was hugely influential, and acted as the basis for much o
f the later research into personality traits.
"Psychoticism in the absence of psychosis… is the vital element in translating the trait of creativity (originality) from potential to actual achievement."
Hans J. Eysenck
HANS J. EYSENCK
Hans Jurgen Eysenck was born in Berlin, Germany, to artistic parents; his mother was a well-known film actress, and his Catholic father, Eduard, was a stage performer. His parents separated soon after his birth, and he was raised by his maternal grandmother. In 1934 he discovered that he could only study at Berlin University if he joined the Nazi party, so he traveled to England to study psychology at University College London.
He married in 1938 and after narrowly escaping internment as a German citizen during World War II, he completed a PhD, and took up work as a psychologist at an emergency hospital. He later founded and then headed the Institute of Psychiatry at the University of London. Eysenck married again in 1950, and became a British citizen in 1955. He was diagnosed with a brain tumor in 1996 and died in a London hospice in 1997.
Key works
1967 The Biological Basis of Personality
1976 Psychoticism as a Dimension of Personality
1983 The Roots of Creativity