Dispositional and Learning Personality Theories

Dispositional and learning personality theories have similarities and differences.  This paper will examine each theory, comparing and contrasting them, in reference to personality, behavior, characteristics, and interpersonal relationships.  An individual’s personality affects behavior in every situation he or she is involved in.  Each theory has personality characteristics attributed to them, which will be examined.  This paper will also examine the interpersonal relational aspects that are associated with dispositional and learning theories   Dispositional and learning theirs are both alike and different in many aspects. 

The Role of Personality in Affecting Situational Behavior

Personality is one of the most commonly researched areas of psychology.  Behavior is affected by an individual’s personality.  Dispositional personality theories argue that each individual has a set of dispositions that make up his or her personality and therefore affect his or her behavior.  “A trait can be thought of as a relatively stable characteristic that causes individuals to behave in certain ways” (Cherry, 2013, para. 1).  Traits and characteristics are manifested in an individual’s behavior, sometimes defining him or her by the traits and characteristics that he or she possesses. 

Dispositional personality theories are composed of Allport’s psychology of the individual and Eysench, McCrae,  and Costa’s trait and factor theories.   According to Feist and Feist (2009) “In the personality theory of McCrae and Costa, behavior is predicted by an understanding of three central or core components and three peripheral ones” (p. 424).  The three central components in Eysenck’s trait and factor theory are known basic tendencies, characteristic adaptations, and self-concept.  Basic tendencies are the raw components of personality that biological, environmental, or changed by psychological interventions.  Basic tendencies often define a person and his or her direction in life.  Situational behavior results from the underlying basic tendencies of an individual. Basic tendencies are composed of the five personal traits, sexual orientation, cognitive abilities, acquisition of language, and cognitive abilities.  “The essence of basic tendencies is their basis in biology and their stability over time and situation” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 424).   

Characteristic adaptations are personality components modified by environmental factors.  An individual’s personality adapts to the environment, making behavior reliant on the environmental factors present from situation to situation.  “Characteristic adaptations can be influenced by external influences, such as acquired skills, habits, attitudes, and relationships that result from the interaction of individuals with their environment” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 425).  Considering that situations change an individual’s skills, attitudes, relationships, and habits, it is evident that behavior is influenced from situation to situation.  Self-concepts is a characteristic adaptation and is defined as an individual’s view of him or herself.  Self-concept also influences situational behavior, because how a person feels about him or herself shows in his or behavior.  People see themselves differently, depending on the situation he or she is in.  No matter how self-confident a person is, he or she can always find him or herself in a situation that makes him or her uncomfortable or fearful, which influences his or her behavior from situation to situation. 

Peripheral components of the five-factor personality theory also influence situational behavior.  These components are object biography, biological bases, and external influences.  Biological bases suggest that behavior is a result of biological factors such as brain structure, genes, and hormones.  As cited by Feist and Feist (2009) “the second peripheral component is objective biography, defined as everything the person does, thinks, or feels across the whole lifespan” (p. 426).  McCrae and Costa argue that behavior is a result of the interaction between the third peripheral component, external influences, and characteristic adaptations.  This concept assumes that situational behavior influences personality. 

Dispositional personality theories focus on an individual’s traits and characteristics, while learning theories focus on observable behavior.  Observable behavior does not only consist of actions viewed by others but also thoughts and feelings that can be observed by the individual feeling them.  Learning theories are composed of Skinner’s behavior analysis, Rotter and Mischel’s cognitive social learning theory, Bandura’s social cognitive theory, and Kelly’s psychology of personal constructs (Feist & Feist, 2009).  “As an environmentalist, Skinner held that psychology must not explain behavior on the basis of the physiological or constitutional components of the organism but rather on the basis of environmental stimuli” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 442).  Skinner believed in genetic factors, but he considered them to be less important behavior these factors are present at birth and unchangeable, meaning they cannot control behavior.  Skinner believed that past experiences have the greatest influence on behavior.  This theory suggests that an individual’s behavior from situation to situation is a result of the person’s history.  Bandura suggests that “people regulate their conduct through both external and internal factors” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 479).  This implies internal and external factors influence behavior from one situation to the next, depending on the present factors.  However, not all learning comes from experience.  Bandura suggested that most learning occurs by watching the behavior of other individuals and acting on them accordingly. 

Personality Characteristics Attributed to Dispositional and Learning Personality Theories

“In general, personality theories are of two types—those who see personality as a dynamic entity motivated by drives, perceptions, needs, goals, and expectancies and those who view personality as a function of relatively stable traits or personal dispositions” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 529).  Dispositional personality theories and learning personality theories have personality characteristics attributed to them.  Allport focused on the characteristics of a healthy personality.  Allport believed that “psychologically mature people are characterized by proactive behavior; that is, they not only react to external stimuli, but they are capable of consciously acting on their environment in new and innovative ways and causing their environment to react to them” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 378).  Psychologically healthy people must be unselfish, relate warmly with others, a realist, have security and acceptance within him or herself, human insight, and a clear view of his or her purpose in life.  Eysenck’s factor theory suggests “that psychometric sophistication alone is not sufficient to measure the structure of human personality and that personality dimensions arrived at through factor analytic methods are sterile and meaningless unless they have been shown to possess a biological existence” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 408).  Eysenck took a biological standpoint, believing that learned characteristics are eliminated.  McCrae and Costa’s five factor model “became a theory, one that can both predict and explain behavior” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 418).  Eysenck, McCrae, and Costa had similar idea’s with their factor models, but Eysenck believed there were only three factors while McCrae and Costa believed that there were five main factors to be identified. 

Learning personality theories suggest that individual personalities are shaped through learning of different sorts.  Skinner’s behavioral analysis suggested that personality characteristics were passed on to offspring.  “Individuals who were most strongly disposed toward fear or anger were those who escaped from or triumphed over danger and thus were able to pass on those characteristics to their offspring” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 461). Like Skinner, Bandura believed that people can learn through personal experience, but Bandura focus more on vicarious learning.  Other dispositional and learning personality theories suggest that people have little control over his or her situation.  Feist and Feist (2009) suggests that “through a triadic reciprocal causation model that includes behavioral, environment, and personal factors, people have the capacity to regulate their lives” (p. 478).  Rotter’s social learning theory agrees with Skinner, Bandura, Mischel, and Kelly that personality is developed through learning.  Richel does not suggest that people have core or central traits, but believes that can always be changed and formed as long as the individual is able to learn.  Like Allport, Eysenck, McCrae, and Costa Mischel believed that “cognitive-affective personality theory holds that behavior stems from relatively stable personal dispositions and cognitive-affective processes interacting with a particular situation” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 529).  Unlike other dispositional and learning theories, Kelly’s personal constructs theory suggests that personality is constructed by the individual’s interpretations and meaning placed on the situation. 

Interpersonal Relational Associated with Dispositional and Learning Theories

Dispositional personality theories assign people to different categories, depending on the individual’s personality traits.  Interpersonal relationships are influenced by an individual’s emotions and feelings.  Everyone has different feelings and views of the world around them and other cultures.  Interpersonal relationships are influenced by the disposition of an individual.  For example, a person who has a disposition to be calm and relaxed is more likely to have interpersonal relationships with individuals of the same disposition.  Interpersonal relationships are also influenced by past experiences.  People are likely to avoid situations that present the same qualities of negative past experiences.  Meaning, past experiences can hinder interpersonal relations, depending on the disposition of the other person, or the situation accompanying the other person. 

Learning personality theories suggest that personality is influenced by conditioning and vicarious learning.  No matter how people have acquired the behaviors he or she has learned, interpersonal relationships will be influenced.  For instance, a man could be roommates with a close friend and watch his friend be disrespected and cheated on by his significant other, the man may choose to have a certain interpretation of male-female relationships.  It could be years later when this man gets into a relationship of his own, but vicariously learned personality traits will stick with him, and influence his own interpersonal relationships.  Most likely, he would have a bend toward being untrusting or the need for dominance.  Rotter developed a test known as interpersonal trust scale in order to test the general expectancy of trust within an individual.  According to Feist and Feist (2009), “high trusters are not gullible or naive, and rather than being harmed by their trustful attitude, they seem to possess many of the characteristics that other people regard as positive and desirable” (p. 525).  The level of trust an individual has affects the interpersonal relations he or she is involved with.  Kelly believed that “people belong to the same cultural group, not merely because they behave alike, nor because they expect the same things of others, but especially because they construe their experience in the same way” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 560). 

Conclusion

Dispositional and learning theories have diverse perceptions of personality and how it is formed.  Dispositional theories suggest that personality is present at birth and is modified by experiences while learning personality theories suggest that personality is formed through learning, whether it is conditioned or vicarious learning.  Interpersonal relationships are influenced by both dispositional and learning personality theories.  Dispositional personality theories suggest that as the environment influences an individual’s personality, personality also influences the individual’s environment.  The disposition of a person affects the interpersonal relationships that he or she has.  Learning personality theories suggest that learned behavior, both positive and negative, affect interpersonal relationships. 

References

Feist, J., & Feist, G. J. (2009). Theories of personality (7th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw Hill.

Cherry, K. (2013). Trait theory of personality. Retrieved from http://psychology.about.com/od/theoriesofpersonality/a/trait-theory.htm

Overview of Individual Psychological and Analytical Psychology Personality Theories

Personality is complex, and described by many theorists over the years.  Alfred Adler developed the individual psychological theory to describe his take on personality.  Carl Gustav Jung described his opinions on personality through his analytical psychology theory.  Both Adler and Jung have shown courage to come out with these theories, exposing each theories strengths and limitations.  This paper will compare and contrast the two theories in relationship to each ones basic and underlying assumptions.  Each of the two theories has their own take on determinism and free will.  Opinions are also expressed on awareness of self, or whether the conscious or unconscious motivate human behavior.  Theorists, Adler and Jung, have developed personality theories both alike and different. 

Assumptions

Adler believed the driving force for human behavior is the desire for success or superiority, while Jung took a different approach.  “Jung believed that each person is motivated, not only by repressed experiences, but also by certain emotionally toned experiences inherited from our ancestors” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 98).  Alfred Adler’s individual psychological theory takes a positive approach to human nature.  This theory suggests that the driving force for human behavior is the desire for superiority or success.  Adler believed the manner that is used to strive for success or superiority is not based on reality, but his or her own subjective perception, by his or her personal fictions, or assumption of what the future holds.  “Personality is unified and self-consistent” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 74).  Adler’s beliefs that every individual is indivisible and unique lead him to believe that every individual has consistent behavior.  The individual psychological theory assumes that every individual is interested and driven by the best interest for society.  Adler developed the concept of style of life, which “includes a person’s goal, self-concept, feelings for others, and attitude toward the world” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 78).  Creative power assumes that every person is responsible for who he or she is as well as his or her behavior.  An individual’s creative power, “places them in control of their own lives, is responsible for their final goal, determines their method of striving for that goal, and contributes to the development of social interest” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 79). 

Carl Gustav Jung used concepts from Freud’s psychoanalytical theory, Adler’s individual psychological theory, and his own endeavors to create his own theory known as analytical psychology.  Jung’s theory was inspired by his work with Freud, schizophrenics, and the psychoanalytical community.  He developed a deep interest for the human mind, especially the unconscious, which he dedicated his life to.  Jung did not think he needed to be confined to natural science.  “He saw as empirical evidence the world of dream, myth, and folklore as the promising road to its deeper understanding and meaning” (“Analytical psychology,” 2013).  The Jungian theory gives way to both the personal and collective conscious. The collective unconscious, which is inherited from the human species, shapes behaviors, dreams, and attitudes, while the personal unconscious comprises an individual’s experiences and complexes.  While Adler believed that every individual is unique and indivisible, Jung believed “the contents of the collective unconscious are more or less the same for people in all cultures” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 104).  Jung suggests that the goal for analytical psychology is self-realization, also known as individuation, which is the process one takes to become a whole person or individual.  “Analytical psychology is essentially a psychology of opposites, and self-realization is the process of integrating the opposite poles into a single homogeneous individual” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 123). 

Deterministic versus free will

Determinism and free will are incompatible with one another.  Determinism is the idea that everything that has happened was the only thing that could have happened.  Also, everything that did not happen could not have happened regardless of the circumstances.  Determinism suggests that choices are not real and only an illusion to the “choice-maker.”  Free will is the concept that people are free to make choices “unconstrained by certain factors” (“Free will,” 2013).  Adler and Jung both lean farther toward the free will side of the determinism versus free will spectrum.  Both men believe that there are constraints to free will.  For Adler, these constraints are known as subjective perceptions, or fictions.  Feist and Feist (2009) give an example of one of Adler’s fictions, which is that people believe that they have free will (p. 73).  Because people believe they have free will, they act on it, thus making them responsible for the choices that they make.  Free will is a concept that cannot be proven, but it is the subjective perception of many people, yet it continues to guide many people’s lives. 

Jung’s constraints on free will include his believe of self-realization.  “True free will must involve self-realization, which is a maturing of the self that allows the dissolution of one's counter-productive obsessive, internal pre-occupations and assumptions, including unrecognized peer-pressure and the like,—all of which reduce our actual choices, thus reduce our freedom” (“Free will,” 2013).  Unless a person has developed self-realization, he or she is unable to have true free will.  Adler and Jung’s theories have similar ideas in this respect.

Awareness of Self

Adler and Jung have different views concerning the conscious and unconscious, and how they relate to the motives of behavior.  Adler did not depict a sharp contrast between the two states of mind, conscious and unconscious.  Adler did not believe that experiences and memories were repressed to the unconscious, never to be found again.  He believed that a thought can go in and out of consciousness when needed.  "Upon deeper inspection there appears (to be) no contrast between the conscious and the unconscious, that both cooperate for a higher purpose, that our thoughts and feelings become conscious as soon as we are faced with a difficulty, and unconscious as soon as our personality requires it” (Stein, n.d.).  The Adlerian individual psychological theory suggests that the motives of human behavior lye in the consciousness and that people are self-aware.

Unlike Adler, Jung believed that human behavior is directly connected to the connection between the self and the ego.  The self is the total psyche, which is composed of the conscious and unconscious; the ego is consciousness.  “Jungian psychology focuses on establishing and fostering the relationship between conscious and unconscious processes” (Frager & Fadiman, 2005, p. 56).  Individuation, also known as self-realization, is one of Jung’s concepts that describe a person who has learned to face and accept his or her unconscious.  Once a person has faced and accepted his or her unconscious, he or she “must allow the unconscious self to become the core of personality” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 123).  A person who is self-realized is self-aware of his or her motives and behaviors. 

Conclusion

Theorists, Adler and Jung, have developed personality theories both alike and different.  Each theorist has his own way of perceiving personality.  The individual psychological theory has basic assumptions much different from the assumptions of analytical psychology. For instance, Adler does not see a significant difference between the conscious and unconscious, which Jung believes that a large part of our personality is influenced by the unconscious.  One thing that both Adler and Jung do agree on is free will.    Adler thought that people are self-aware and completely responsible for his or her own actions.  Jung believed that it takes a large amount of effort to become self-aware, or self-realized, the time when a person is authentically him or herself and understands his or her motives and behaviors. 

References[N1] 

Analytical psychology. (2013). In Wikipedia. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Analytical_psychology

Feist, J., & Feist, G. J. (2009). Theories of personality (7th ed.) [University of Phoenix Custom Edition eBook]. New York, NY: McGraw Hill. Retrieved from University of Phoenix, PSY405 website.

Free Will. (2013). In Wikipedia. Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_will

Stein, H. T. (n.d.). Classical Adlerian Quotes: Consciousness & Unconsciousness. Retrieved from http://pws.cablespeed.com/~htstein/dev-hts.gif

Frager, R., & Fadiman, J. (2005). Personality and Personal Growth (6th ed.). New York, NY: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Written Assignment Grading Form

Due Monday, Day 7, Week Two

Content and Development	Points Earned 10  /10
Prepare a 1050- to 1,400-word paper that is based on the theories of personality covered in the readings. Choose two and analyze the strengths and limitations of the theories. Compare and contrast them in relationship to: · Basic or underlying assumptions · Deterministic versus free will · Awareness of self (e.g., conscious versus unconscious motives for behavior)	Your paper meets the minimum word count. Your paper is  based on the theories of personality covered in the readings Your paper identifies and analyzes the strengths and limitations of two of the theories    Your paper compares and contrasts these theories in relationship to · Basic or underlying assumptions · Deterministic versus free will · Awareness of self (e.g., conscious versus unconscious motives for behavior) Your paper is comprehensive and links theory to examples, using the vocabulary correctly. Major points are stated clearly and the paper is well organized overall.  The introduction is well done. The conclusion needs to be more developed, reviewing major points.
The content is comprehensive, accurate, and persuasive
The paper links theory to relevant examples and uses the vocabulary of the theory correctly.
Major points are stated clearly; are supported by specific details, examples, or analysis; and are organized logically.
The introduction provides sufficient background on the topic and previews major points.
The conclusion is logical, flows from the body of the paper, and reviews the major points.
Readability and Style	Points Earned 2.5 /2.5
	Comments:
Paragraph transitions are present, logical, and maintain the flow throughout the paper.	Your paper is fairly well written; paragraph transitions are present and the paper has a good flow. Sentences are well constructed
The tone is appropriate to the content and assignment.
Sentences are complete, clear, and concise.
Sentences are well constructed, strong, and varied.
Sentence transitions are present and maintain the flow of thought.

Introduction to Personality

Personality is what makes each individual unique.  Personality is a complex subject and not easily understood.  Many individuals have attempted to attach a simply put definition to the word, without success.  According to The Penguin Dictionary of Psychology (2009), “each author's meaning of the term tends to be coloured by his or her theoretical biases and by the empirical tools used to evaluate and test the theory” (para. 1).  Personality itself is a hard concept to define in psychology. The reason for this is that there are a wide variety of perceptions regarding what personality is and where it originates from, whether it is from within a person, from the world around, or a combination of both.  The word “personality is derived from the Latin persona.  According to Feist and Feist (2009), this word refers to a, “theatrical mask worn by Roman actors in Greek dramas” (p. 3).  The actors were portraying a character and acting out that character’s personality.  In modern day psychology, this definition is unacceptable. 

Feist and Feist (2009) define personality as “a pattern of relatively permanent traits and unique characteristics that give both consistency and individuality to a person’s behavior” (p. 4).  Each person individual traits, which evolve over time, and show differences in each person’s behavior.  Traits give insight into an individual’s consistency in behavior as time passes and stability of behavior throughout circumstances.  Although traits can be associated with a public, every individual has his or her own model of traits. In the same way, each individual is similar to others, yet everyone has his or her own unique personality.  Characteristics are distinguishing qualities of a person, like warm-hearted, outspoken, and driven.

Theoretical Approaches in Studying Personality

There are four main categories of personality theories with several theories under each of those categories.  All personality theories fall under psychodynamic, human/existential, dispositional, and learning theories. 

The psychodynamic theory describes personality as being a combination of conscious and unconscious factors.  Sigmund Freud is one of the best well-known psychologists in history.  He describes personality as being comprised of the id, the ego, and the superego.  According to Feist and Feist (2009), “the id is unconscious, chaotic, out of contact with reality, and in service of the pleasure principle” (p. 63).  It is constantly seeking pleasure and striving to meet basic desires.  The ego is the only dimension of the psyche that is in touch with reality. “It grows out of the id during infancy and becomes a person’s sole source of communication with the external world” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 29).  The superego is part conscious and part unconscious and is the part of the psyche that aims to obey rules that society and parents put into place, moral values, guilt, and conscience.  Freud developed a theory called psychoanalysis, which attempts to unmask unconscious desires and thoughts.  Psychodynamic theories, in general, describe personality as being shaped through childhood experiences. 

Humanistic personality theories suggest that all matter develops from simple to complex.  Actualization and self-actualization are common terms in humanistic theories.  The actualization tendency is what motivated animals and people to fulfillment.  “Self-actualization develops after people evolve a self-system and refers to the tendency to move toward becoming a fully functional person” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 339).  Maslow’s holistic-dynamix theory and Rogers’ person-centered theory are both humanistic personality theories.  “Maslow’s hierarchy of needs concept assumes that lower level needs must be satisfied or at least relatively satisfied before higher level needs become motivators” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 280).  Rollo May developed an existential personality theory, which suggests that what people are, is less important than what they do.  May believed that individuals are liable for who they are and who they ultimately will become, and that they look to answer meaningful questions about life.   They know that death is imminent and make the choice to live life in the moment. 

“Each person has stable, long-lasting dispositions to display certain behaviors, attitudes, and emotions” (Westmont College, 2002, para. 1).  If a person is asked to describe him or herself or another individual, he or she would likely name a list of traits, like caring, giving, and outgoing.  “Each person has a different set of dispositions or at least a set of dispositions of varying strengths, which implies a unique pattern” (Westmont College, 2002, para. 1).  These dispositions explain why people act in specific ways under difference circumstances.  Dispositional theories look at the differences in individuals through types, traits, and factors.  Trait theories describe each individual with a list of the traits he or she possess in different amounts.  Gordon Willard Allport “believed that attempts to describe people in terms of general traits rob them of their unique individuality” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 375).  Hans Eysenck produced the Five-Factor Theory and which describes personality as being a combination of psychometric and biological factors.

Learning theories suggest that an individual’s interaction with his or her environment results in personality.  Skinner’s behavioral analysis theory suggests that behavior is learned through operant and classical conditioning.  Operant conditioning is learned behavior through reinforces, which either increases or decreases the chances of the behavior occurring again.  Bandura’s social cognitive theory suggests that people learn through observing others and consequences of behavior.  Bandura believed that people have control over the quality and nature of their lives, and they regulate behavior through external and internal factors.  “The cognitive social learning theories of both Rotter and Mischel attempt to synthesize the strengths of reinforcement theory with those of cognitive theory” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 545).  Rotter believed that behavior is a result of a combination of the strength of needs and expectations of reinforcements.  George Kelly’s theory of personal constructs suggests “the idea of constructive alternativism, or the notion that our present interpretations are subject to change” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 573).  Kelly’s basic postulate suggests that the anticipation of events directs all psychological processes. 

Personality Development

Several personality theories describe different aspects of personality development, including social, moral, and cognitive development.  Sigmund Freud developed a controversial theory known as the stages of psychosexual development.  This theory suggests that the development of personality directly relates to an individual’s erogenous zones.  For example, the first stage in Freud’s stages of psychosexual development is the oral stage.  During the oral phase “infants obtain life-sustaining nourishment through the oral cavity, but beyond that, they also gain pleasure through the act of sucking” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 39).  Freud believed that if this stage, along with others, were not completed there would be personality problems during adulthood. 

Erik Erikson developed stages of psychosocial development, also known as the post-Freudian theory.  “Erikson suggested that at each stage a specific psychosocial struggle contributes to the formation of personality” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 243).  Erikson used Freud’s theory as a foundation for his eight-stage psychosocial theory.  Erickson looked at the entire lifespan to reveal how personality is developed through social relationships.  Alfred Adler believed that people have a choice regarding who they are.  “The creative power endows humans, within certain limits, with the freedom to be either psychologically healthy or unhealthy and to follow either a useful or useless style of life” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p.79).  He also believed that running from difficulties interferes and stops personality development, which he called withdrawal. 

Jung believed that personality development occurred throughout an individual’s lifespan in a series of stages.  These stages result in self- realization, or individuation.  “In contrast to Freud, he emphasized the second half of life, the period after age 35 or 40, when a person has the opportunity to bring together the various aspects of personality and to attain self-realization” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 120).  This stage also holds the chance of rigid reaction and degeneration.  In order to progress from one stage to another the individual must learn to balance “the poles of the various opposing processes” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 120). 

Conclusion

With so many personality theories, it is hard to describe personality in a simple form.  One thing is for sure, personality is intricate and complex.  It is what makes us individuals, unique from any other person.  Psychodynamic, human/existential, dispositional, and learning theories do a good job of describing just how complex personality is, looking at it from several vantage points.  Personality development occurs in many ways throughout each stage of life.  This includes (psychosexual) development, social relationships or psychosocial development, and self-realization. 

References

Feist, J., & Feist, G. J. (2009). Theories of personality (7th ed.) [University of Phoenix Custom Edition eBook]. New York, NY: McGraw Hill. Retrieved from University of Phoenix, PSY405 website.

Personality. (2009).  In The Penguin Dictionary of Psychology.  Retrieved from
http://www/credoreference.com.ezproxy.apollolibrary.com/entry/penguinpsyc/personality

Westmont College. (2002). Theories of Personality. Retrieved from http://www.westmont.edu/~bsmith/general/lectureoutlines/15personality/dispositional.html