what are its theory and how does it affect personality formation?
122452
The physical environment describes the stuff the Universe is made from and how it behaves, excluding life and human activity.
656656
Read this\nhttp://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/PTO-20030616-000002.html
130077
i have started beleiving more in myself.\n\ni have paranoid personality disorder. its very hard to overcome.\n\nbut i beleive in myself...that i can improve my personality.\n\nit will  be very hard.....but i think with time and lot of will power...i  will be able to improve my personality.
339005
Reward leads to the repetition of a behaviour.\nJohn Watson:\n"give me a dozen healthy infants, well -formed, and my own specified world to bring them up in and I'll guarantee to take anyone at random and train them to become any type of specialist I might select - doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant-chief, and, yes, even beggar man and thief , regardless of his talents, penchants, tendencies, abilities, vocations, and race of his ancestors"
172195
smile, be a good listener, don't get into peoples personal space, have empathy, don't spread gossip, be genuine, do not put on airs. a few  examples that will help.\ntake your worst personality trait and replace it with a good personality trait.
555893
Try reading a bit on both Dependent Personality Disorder and Borderline Personality Disorder; along with Anxiety Disorders as these (the varied anxiety disorders) address irrational beliefs/fears.    Your question, based upon what you wrote afterwards, sounds less about "creating fear" and more about "filling a void...a hole in our soul" so to speak.  We need to learn to tackle our fears in ways that are not destructive to ourselves or others, facing them, journaling about them, talking to someone we trust and feel very safe with.  A direct answer to the question you posed, in my opinion, would be, "Yes.  We can obsess over our fears of impending doom or losing someone, etc.  That obsession can then immobilize us with overwhelming fear and anxiety."  Hope that helps.
296062
I guess it depends upon how sociable the person is and how strong minded and for how long. For an account you could read an Evil cradling by Brian Keenan.\n\nI have a little personal experience of this and was not pschologically stabel and lost a lot of sense of self
445
Genetics my question asker play the major role in determining your personality, however some people do believe that when you are concieved plays a part, because your mother has to deal with different enviromental factors with the changing of the seasons.\nAlso, the moon phases are believed to have an effect on the amniotic fluid you are swimming around in.\nAll of this leads to hints why people born under certain astrological signs act the way they do.
601272
Throughout history, predominantly, philosophy and religion have speculated the most into the phenomenon of love. In the last century, the science of psychology has written a great deal on the subject. Recently, however, the sciences of evolutionary psychology, evolutionary biology, anthropology, neuroscience, and biology have begun to take centre stage in discussion as to the nature and function of love.\n\nBiological models of sex tend to see it as a mammalian drive, just like hunger or thirst. Psychology sees love as more of a social and cultural phenomenon. Psychologist Robert Sternberg explains that love has three different components. Intimacy is a form where two people can share secrets and various details of their personal life. Intimacy is usually shown in friendships and romantic love affairs. Commitment on the other hand is the expectation that the relationship is going to last forever. This factor of love is shown in empty love (ex. when two people stay together for the sake of their children). The last and most common form of love is simply sex, or passion. Passionate love is shown in infatuation love, as well as romantic love. There are probably elements of truth in both views — certainly love is influenced by hormones (such as oxytocin) and pheromones, and how people think and behave in love is influenced by one’s conceptions of love. Hence, from time immemorial, science, from naturalistic poetry to MRI neurochemistry, has debated the nature of love.
421847
These theories can be used to make a connection between teenagers, advertising, and the fast food industry through the analysis of marketing techniques\n\n:> peace
447582
I think personality and how you carry yourself matters most and most of all how you treat others, I've seen many good looking people, who lack personality and seem very standoffish as well as arrogant and nobody wants to have anything to do with them, I've learned people love people who are approachable and easy to talk to, who have a positive attitude, and believe me looks become secondary, many people are into looks, but eventually as you know that wears off, over time. \nI'd teach my children not to judge a book by its cover.
204464
Hypnosis works the best on people who have more ability to dissociate, that is, become detached from their surroundings. Both involve altered states of consciousness and have nothing to do with intelligence. Everyone has the ability to dissociate, but some people have more of the ability, perhaps because they have had more cause to become detached during their lives. Looking at it from a psychological angle, I would say your hypnotisability would have the most to do with your life experiences and consequently the way you react emotionally to different situations. No two people ever have the same experiences and view things in the same way, regardless of IQ.\n\nEdit: To put it more simply, daydreamers (who could be seen as having a "weaker" grip on reality) would likely be easier to hypnotise than more practical people.\n\nOr another way to classify the two groups (more hypnotisable versus less hypnotisable), thin boundary personalities versus thick boundary personalities, the terms being used in relation to dreams and susceptibility to nightmares:\n\n"What differentiates the the two boundary types is a separation between mental process, thoughts and functions. Those with thin boundary type tend to often merge thought with feeling, have a difficulty with focusing on one thing at a time, daydream or fantasize, experience forms of synaethesia, have more fluid sense of self and tend to "merge" more with those who are close to them. Those with thick boundaried personalities have much more separation between what is real and what is imaginary. They tend to have a distinct focus on one thing at a time, differentiate between thoughts and feelings, real and fantasy, self and others, lack strong memories from childhood, well organized and has a strong sense of self."\n\nAgain, nothing to do with intellect, more to do with psychological makeup and emotions.
272959
One of my students is doing his research project on this issue, and though I have not read the paper yet, as he is not finished, I have talked with him and consulted his early sources.  He has found some interesting preliminary results.  \n\nIt seems that Sigmeund Freud, a Viennese doctor in the late 18th century studied dreams of his psychiatric patients, and through this research, he decided dreams could be interpreted as our subconscious minds' desires.  The implications for the Victorians of that era were great because overall Freud's theory of man's essential nature was that he is a selfish being whose basic motivations for life are about fulfilling those selfish needs and desires.  \n\nYet, much research has been done since that era.  A Dr. Karl(?) Jung, another later psychiatrist, has revamped Freud's original research, and even as late as the late 1980's, new research has connected dreams to chemical reactions in the brain occurring in the neurons along which all the electical impulses of the brain run, like electric circuitry, and this research says they are just random electrical discharges that have no meaning, like shadows of memories carried by the impulses, bits and pieces of images generated by earlier thoughts.  Yet, for me, this still leaves open the question.  Even if dreams are shadows of thoughts, one must ask if shadows of bits and pieces of memory would be purposeful for we humans.  I mean, why would our minds generate the shadow?  I think that is just as powerful a question as:  Why do our brains produce the chemical reactions carrying images of memories anyway?\n\nI think it is easy to see that there is much work to do yet in discovering the real essence of dreams before one can decide if there are more than random meanings to be taken from them.  And, that is basically what I am hearing from this student about his struggle with the research process so far.\n\nHope this is helpful.\n\nCC Ryder
38226
Not to sound like Dr. Phil, but the first step is recognizing  that you haven't always made the best choices in life. How people are motivated is very complicated and personal, but we are all amazing influenced by preconditioned responses almost as personality traits. Attempts to conform these behaviors is usually successful, but there is always a minority that has trouble adjusting. Meaning, your choices may have a lot to do  with your personality traits rather than concious decisions.\n\nCoping with this is usually very difficult and requires some supportive counselling. Mostly, it means finding a type of lifestyle to makes makeing positive decisions easy and minimizes the self degredation of negative decisions. \n\nHow you change to start making more positive decisions probably means developing a lot more self-esteem and that usually requires significant changes in lifestyle, job, partner, etc. It's resistance to these changes that often causes the problems as well. \n\nYou've made a good first step. Go further towards understanding yourself and there's nothing you couldn't do.
414890
Individual versus Group Behavior\n\n\n"The passions released are of such an impetuosity that they can be restrained by nothing...Everything is just as though he really were transported into a special world, entirely different from the old one where he ordinarily lives, and into an environment filled with exceptionally intense forces that take hold of him and metamorphose him" \n\nEmile Durkheim on Group Consciousness (1965)\n\nThe discussions we have been having in class about the brain and the self as well as the idea that we are constantly changing led me to think about group versus individual behavior. Although some people may feel otherwise, I think we are all influenced – in different degrees – by others. All of us, at one time or another, have known what it is like to be part of a group. However, there often seems to be a negative feeling towards the group, with more focus being put on negative group behavior. This paper is an exploration on group and individual behavior and thought. Are certain people more group oriented? Are others more individual minded? Which one is the "real" self?\n\nAccording to an article I read, the biological explanation behind why we behave differently when we are in a group as opposed to being on our own is that the limbic system in the brain, which is involved with emotional activity, dominates the person's actions and thinking, and therefore suppresses the neo-cortex, or the logical thinking part of the brain when a person joins a crowd. Therefore, the person acts irrationally because he or she is under "emotional pressure (1)." The author of the article uses the stock market as an analogy, stating that the reason why markets crash – in various societies, rich or poor – after a sudden boom, is that people tend to follow crowds (1). This analogy leads me to ask whether non-Western societies are therefore irrational, since they are regarded as collectivists. And also, if stock brokers in various societies act in the same irrational manner, does that not prove that individuals in different societies behave the same? These two ideas seem contradictory to me and also, they raise many questions regarding the idea that joining a group means loss of rationality.\n\nWhen I studied psychology, it was always made clear that western and non-western psychology were different because of the western emphasis on individuality and the collectivist nature of non-western societies. Statements like these make clear and definite comparisons between western and non-western societies: "Western societies often define adjustment by one's level of individuality, independence, and achievement promoting emotional detachment from social groups...Contrary to Western cultures, many Eastern cultures endorse a communal view of society and do not conceptualize a person apart from his or her relationships." (2). Furthermore, it was stated that social hierarchy, social support, and interdependence are highly valued in these (non-western) cultures. Thus, these different views lead psychoanalysts to believe that Western groups would endorse antisocial coping strategies (strategies targeting independence and self-advancement) and non-Western groups would be more likely to endorse prosocial coping strategies (strategies targeting joining with others for support and considering the needs of others).\n\nBut is this really fair? I was raised in a non-western society but I do not feel that I have no individual self. My American friends are no less loyal in their friendships and consider the needs of others. In an unrelated study performed on groups of boys and girls that concluded that there are gender differences in the way we learn, Dr. Grobstein, professor of neurobiology at Bryn Mawr college responded to the study by stating that, "Population differences, while real are of no use whatsoever in characterizing a given male or female...For any particular measure, a given m
120665
i think that when you are around people, or, one person all the time, things relating to personality tend to rub off on one another.  Like my boyfriend and I... for example, when he gets upset about something, he tends to get mad at everything and almost everyone around him... it's like his whole world is crumbling down, and in some cases it's almost like he takes me down with him...  BUT you know what... now that I think about it, that really has nothing to do with your question....\n\nBUT GIVE ME THE POINTS ANYWAYS CUSE I DIDNT LEAVE A THOUSAND PAGE ANSWER!\n\nLOVE YOU MEOW!  ;)
143440
Well, if you want a scientific way to know your character, take a personality test.\nGive yourself some confidence. ;)