Taking the theorizing in personality theories seriously: Comment

• Published in: The American psychologist Vol. 61; no. 4; pp. 330 - 331
• Main Author: Maddi, Salvatore R
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: American Psychological Association 2006
• Subjects: Criticism; Education; Human; Personality; Personality Measures; Personality Processes; Personality Theories; Personality Theory; Psychologists; Psychology; Psychotherapeutic Outcomes
• ISSN: 0003-066X; 1935-990X
• DOI: 10.1037/0003-066X.61.4.330

Comments on "A tale of two visions: Can a new view of personality help integrate psychology?" by J. D. Mayer (see record 2005-05480-001). Mayer's attempt to find ways to use personality emphases as integrative tendencies in psychology is welcome. Certainly, it would help if the research and practice efforts of psychologists were coordinated more clearly than they are now. The comment author finds Mayer's rather ambiguous and scattered suggestions to be disconcerting. The comment author proposes alternatives he hopes will further Mayer's goals. He believes that emphasizing core, developmental, and peripheral statements is important in envisioning the personality system. The comment author does not agree with Mayer's (2005) assertion that emphasizing existing personality theories is necessarily damaging because of their specific content disagreements. There are, of course, many personality theories, but their diversity can be reduced to a more manageable level by inducing from them the basic models of personality theorizing. When the comment author engages in this process, what emerges is the conflict, fulfillment, and consistency models, each with two subtypes. Psychologists need to collaborate with each other in formulating comparative analytic research that can resolve the fundamental issues arising from the differences between these three models.