The Relationship Between Essentialist And Contextualist...

Personality tends to refer to a unique, systemic amalgamation of characteristics and traits that define an individual (Mayer, 2007). However, contesting views on the specifics of this definition inform varied perspectives on the malleability or permanence of personality throughout life; while Mayer (2007) has further described personality as a ‘developing system’, others, such as Pervin, Cervone, John (2005), state that it must prescribe ‘consistent patterns’ in cognition and behaviour. The resultant debate between essentialist and contextualist standpoints on personality continuity will hence be explored in this essay. It will be argued through discussion of cognitive and ethological theory that personality formation is largely established by infancy, although the advent of social roles can also have a gradual impact in the first few decades. Viewpoints on more abrupt, situational, or post-interventional changes are more disparate in validity, ranging from claims of volitional influence to anomalous, yet undeniable observations of personality change following brain trauma. Developments in genetic research and cognitive psychology in recent years support the notion that personality is ingrained in individuals, and therefore unchanging. While it had been hypothesised since the 1960s that individuals could be genetically predisposed to psychiatric disorders (Heston, 1966), this field of study has expanded to explore the predisposition of personality traits, where it is now