Advertisement

The Future of Personality Theory: a Processual Approach

  • Svetlana N. KostrominaEmail author
  • Natalia V. Grishina
Regular Article

Abstract

The perpetual discussion of approaches and principles in the study of personality has been one of the notable trends of development of psychological science over many decades. The structural approach, based on the delineation of a person’s traits and characteristics, made an important contribution to various branches of psychology, but now the scientific community has recognized the limitations of a structural understanding of personality. Its inadequacy becomes particularly obvious in today’s conditions, when fundamental changes pose a challenge to man’s ability to respond flexibly to changing conditions of everyday existence, as well as to larger-scale changes. At the beginning of the twenty-first century, it is obvious that there is a need for new ways to understand and describe the personality: Scholars are calling for study of the dynamic personality, of the personality as an open system. At the foundational level, modern personality psychology should incorporate classical ideas about its structure; secondly, it should consider personality in the context of the individual’s lifetime; and – at the highest level – it should describe personality as the subject of Being. We submit our own description of personality psychology’s problem field.

Keywords

Personality psychology Problem field of personality psychology Processual approach Structural approach Existential approach Situational and contextual level Everyday life psychology 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank Jaan Valsiner for his invitation to write this paper and Susan Welsh for her help with the translation.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict Interest

The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by the author.

References

  1. 18th European Conference on Personality (2016) Romania. Retrieved from http://www.eapp.org/meetings/conferences/ecp18/
  2. 2nd World Conference on Personality (2016) Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Retrieved from http://www.perpsy.org/meetings/conferences/conference2016/
  3. Allport, G. W. (1937). Personality: A psychological interpretation. New York: Holt.Google Scholar
  4. Asmolov, A. G. (2015). Psychology of modernity: The challenges of uncertainty, complexity and diversity. Psychological Studies, 8(40) Retrieved from http://psystudy.ru/index.php/eng/2015v8n40e/1121-asmolov40e.html.
  5. Geukes, K., van Zalk, M.H.W., & Back, M.D. (2017). Understanding personality development: An integrative state process model. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 42(1), 43–51.  https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025416677847.
  6. Giordano, P. J. (2015). Being or becoming: Toward an open-system, process-centric model of personality. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 49(4), 757–771.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Giordano, P. J. (2017). Individual personality is best understood as process, not structure: A Confucian-inspired perspective. Culture and Psychology, 23(4), 502–518.  https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067X17692118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gosling, S. (2016). No excuses, it’s time to study real people in the real world (p.115). Abstract book of the 18th European Conference on Personality, 19–23 July 2016, Romania. Retrieved from http://www.eapp.org/meetings/conferences/ecp18/
  9. Grishina, N. V., Kostromina, S. N., & Mironenko, I. A. (2018). Struktura problemnogo polia sovremennoi psikhologii lichnosti [the structure of the problem field in modern personality psychology]. Psikhologicheskii zhurmal, 39(1), 26–35.Google Scholar
  10. Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and Time (Sein und Zeit, 1927), Translated from the German by J. Macquarrie and E. Robinson. London: SCM Press.Google Scholar
  11. Leontiev, D. A. (2011). Novye orientiry ponimaniia lichnosti v psikhologii: Ot neobkhodimogo k vozmozhnomu [new points of orientation in the understanding of personality in psychology: From the necessary to the possible]. Voprosy Psikhologii (1):3–27.Google Scholar
  12. Maslow, A. (1968). Toward a psychology of being. New York: Van Nostrand.Google Scholar
  13. May, R. (1994). The discovery of being. Writings of being. New York: WW Norton & Co.Google Scholar
  14. McAdams, D. P. (2001). The person: An integrated introduction to personality psychology (3rd ed.). Fort Worth: Harcourt College Publishers.Google Scholar
  15. Mischel, W. (1968). Personality and assessment. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  16. Roberts, B. W. (2009). Back to the future: Personality and assessment and personality development. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 137–145.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. Ross, L., & Nisbett, R. (1991). The person and the situation. Perspectives of social psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  18. Rubinstein, S. L. (2003). Bytie i soznanie. Chelovek i mir [being and consciousness. Man and the world]. St. Petersburg: Piter.Google Scholar
  19. Sherman, R. A., & Jones A. B. (2016). What do we mean by personality? Reconsidering old issues in light of modern theory and new data (p. 125). Abstract book of 2nd World Conference on Personality, 31 march–4 April 2016, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Retrieved from http://www.perpsy.org/meetings/conferences/conference2016/
  20. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of inter group relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago: Nelson-Hall.Google Scholar
  21. Uher, J. (2015a). Conceiving "personality": Psychologists' challenges and basic fundamentals of the transdisciplinary philosophy-of-science paradigm for research on individuals. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 49, 398–458.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Uher, J. (2015b). Developing "personality" taxonomies: Metatheoretical and methodological rationales underlying selection approaches, methods of data generation and reduction principles. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 49, 531–589.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Vygotsky, L. S. (1982). Sobr. sochinenii [Collected works], in 6 vols, vol. 1. Moscow: Pedagogika.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Personality PsychologySt. Petersburg State UniversitySaint-PetersburgRussia

Personalised recommendations