AN INVESTIGATION ON THE INFLUENCE OF TEMPERAMENT ON L2 ACHIEVEMENT IN TURKISH INTERMEDIATE LEVEL OF EFL SPEAKERS
Since the dawn of psychology, there have been researches which were conducted to understand man’s behavior and reason behind these actions and reactions and how it affects language acquisition, including L2 acquisition, amongst others. This study examined the awareness of temperament types among Turkish L2 speakers, and went on to analyze if and how the various temperaments affect language learning, acquisition and skills in intermediate level Turkish English language learners. Also, the study proposed suitable teaching techniques for the examined temperaments as it relates to learning. Since understanding an individual’s temperament can go a long way in determining how they best respond to several teaching approaches and help make learning and teaching more effective, this study sets out to investigate the influence of temperament on acquisition of linguistic knowledge, specifically, the influence, if any, of different temperaments in Turkish intermediate proficiency level in acquiring a second language, in other words, the study examines how participants’ temperament types in an L2 environment determine whether they outperform other temperament types or not, why this is so, and how teaching can be tailored to best reflect individual temperaments in a teaching-learning environment to maximize the reception and absorption of knowledge.
The primary data consisted of human subjects, consisting of fifty males and females to make a total of hundred, who took a personality test to determine the category they belong to in their temperament, and in addition went through tests based on different skills: vocabulary, grammar, comprehension, and reading, while also being tested in an oral interview for the speaking aspect of L2. The subjects for data collection were purposively selected and the collated data was analyzed using SPSS (version 20.0) while utilizing ANOVA and Spearman’s Correlation Analysis.
The findings showed that there is a limited knowledge of what the four temperaments are by the respondents. However some have an idea what their temperaments might be. This means majority are aware of the differences in human behavior and some actually took their time to study what temperaments may be and how it affects human behavior. There was the high awareness of sanguine-phlegmatic tendencies by the respondents. In addition, the role that temperament played in reading is important, which means that the temperament one has goes a long way to either positively or negatively influence the ability to read in English. However, when it came to writing, speaking and listening, the influence of temperament may not be important as they were not significantly correlated to any temperament type. Furthermore, in order to meet the needs of all students in the classroom, teaching methods should be mixed, as with this, no one is left out and all can learn best whatever way they can.
The study concluded that the findings have serious implication for both the students of EFL and the language teacher, and that temperament shows some kind of role in the performance of the second language learning in Turkish learners. And also that the teacher should encourage the most reticent students by increasing opportunities for communication and try to make sure that the most outspoken do not drown the latter or hinder them from learning
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1: Classification of human qualities over the time 12
Table 2.1: Traits of the four temperaments 46
Table 4.1: Respondents’ personal information about the four dominant temperaments 62
Table 4.2: Distribution of respondents by temperament types 63
Table 4.3: Correlation analysis showing the relationship between respondents’ temperaments and L2 performance 64
Table 4.4: Relationship between temperament variation and L2 performance 65
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure A: The person in relation to his environment
Figure B: DISC Model: Perception of surroundings
Figure C: Perception of oneself
Figure D: The DISC model integrated
There have been several researches and a lot of arguments when it comes to personality and temperament, there have also been different definitions and explanations. This topic is very important because the issue has been there since the creation of man. The awareness of man brought about the recognition of how people behave and why one is different from the other, it is all in a bid to understand mankind better.
How people acquire languages has also been an interesting topic discussed over time, especially the acquisition of a second language, third language or even more. The acquisition of the mother tongue is seen to be the easiest, although the term ‘mother tongue’ in itself can be misleading since a child learns or acquires the language which he or she is most exposed to at the early stages of language development. The most interesting apart of language acquisition however is the learning of several languages and competence in such learned languages, and as discussed in several researches, bilinguals tend to think outside the box than monolinguals due to more language resources at their disposal.
Furthermore, when it comes to classroom interaction, there have also been discussions on teaching methods that will be most suitable to cater for individual differences in the classroom. The truth is many language teachers including teachers of other subjects don’t take into consideration that people tend to assimilate and grasp concepts and ideas in different ways ‘ some learn more through visual means, some through audio, others through repetition, others through stimuli, and the likes. This is because the mental and physical make-up of every individual is different, even though each individual can be lumped into personality categories.
These topics and issues mentioned will be discussed and temperament will be researched in Turkish Students in acquiring English Language. The receptive and productive skills of English language will be checked. By the end of this research, it should be clearer if temperament really affect the skills and acquisition of English language by Turkish students.
1.1 Background of the Study
The study was conducted to investigate the temperament of English-speaking Turks who are students in relation to their understanding and usage of English Language. In other words, how temperament assists or impedes the acquisition of a second language ‘ which in this case is English ‘ was examined. Since temperaments are different and vary from person to person, there is an interest to check if and how it affects the acquisition of a second language. There is a bid to check the language skills of people in relation to their temperament and human behavior.
The word ‘temperament’ is a Latin word which means ‘to mix’. It can be traced from the ancient times of Socrates, Plato, Hipporates, and Galen, to David Keirsey and the likes, that is, modern times. But there will be a focus on Galen who categorized temperaments into four types: Sanguine, Melancholy, Choleric and Phlegmatic. There is also emphasis on DISC personality testing which goes a long way in this study even though the labels have been slightly changed.
There are different theories dealing with temperament or personality, and some of these are examined one after the other. The Four-important Temperament theory (even though this has been argued back and forth) is a theory that points to the fact that there are four important personality types which are the Sanguine (playful attitude), Choleric (strong-willed), Melancholy (deep thinker) and Phlegmatic (laid-back). These four temperaments may have its origins in the ancient Egypt or Mesopotamia. Under this theory also, they posit that there can be the mixture of two or more of these temperaments in just one individual, but [usually] with just one temperament being the dominant.
Hippocrates, a Greek Physician (who lived between C.460 to C.370 BC), included these temperaments into his medical theories as part of the ancient medical Concept of Humorism that states that there are four bodily fluids which affect human behavior and characteristics. The Greek physician had the belief that some certain human moods, behavior is as a result of excess or lack of body fluids termed humors. They are the blood, yellow bile, black bile and phlegm. Other researchers have brought about the rejection of these four temperaments, in relation to body fluids, especially in modern medicine and science, but there is still the scientific acceptance, although varying, of the four categories of temperaments, or at least something very similar to that is being continuously used ‘ with the changing of terminologies in most cases or in some other cases the addition of more categories.
After him Galen (AD 129-C.200) conducted a research to investigate the reasons behind the different behaviour of human beings. He therefore classified them as hot/cold and dry/wet which he got from the four elements. There could be what is called a balance in the different qualities leading to nine temperaments. There are four less balanced ideal types in which one of the four qualities dominates the others. In the last type he categorized the four types, one pair: these qualities dominated the complementary pair: these four are the ones Galen named sanguine, choleric, melancholy and phlegmatic which are related to body humors.
Table 1.1: Classification of human qualities over time
Element Qualities Humor Type Traits
Air Warm/moist Blood Sanguine Cheerful/warm
Fire Warm/dry Yellow bile Choleric Quick to anger
Earth Cold/dry Black bile Melancholy Melancholic
Water Cold/moist Phlegm Phlegmatic Placid/Sluggish
The Four-Temperament Theory is quite popular because the world as we all know is infinitely complex and people tend to look for simple ways to understand themselves and others. Beyond that though, this theory actually has universal traits that people can attribute to themselves to various degrees. This theory makes a large attempt to objectively assign defined categories of universally applicable descriptive words that apply to colossal numbers of people. Yet, when people apply groups to themselves and others, they think they have specific information. Truly they may have a little colossal approximation that could be partly real in an extremely finished sense. This is devoted to in critique works such as the Barnum Effect, named after the circus showman P. T. Barnum.
Avicenna (980-1037) who was a Persian doctor expanded Galen’s theory by adding emotional aspects, mental capacity, moral attitude, self-awareness, movements and dreams to it. While Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) another great and important philosopher, in his book talked about his own understanding of temperament which he still referred to as Galen did in the same terms. The twist in his own research as opposed to Galen’s, is that, he posits that each temperament is basically independent and there can be no combination.
Between the late 19th to mid 20th century, theorists like Eric Adicks (1866-1928) a German Philosopher whose work is a reflection on Kant, asserts that people can be differentiated by their dominant world view. He also proposed four types of personalities: the Innovative [who are changers and pioneers], the Traditional [who are conservatives], the Doctrinaires [who seek what will be of value to human], and the Skepticals [who call everything into question]. William James (1842-1910) also has a similar opinion with Eric Adick’s. He, however, goes further by making a distinction between rationalists and empiricists, these set of personalities can be observed in the way they handle facts. He expatiates by stating that while rationalists are tender-minded, empiricists are tough-minded.
Another theorist, Eduard Spranger (1882-1962) saw personality as what each person values the most, which also determines the world view of each individual. He classified these values into six different types (Social, Economic, Theoretical, Aesthetic, Political and religious). These values, in relation to whichever chosen by an individual, will determine the personality that individual embraces.
While the above theorist juxtaposed values and personality or temperament, Ernst Krestschmer (1888-1964) classified temperament as ‘psychological disorders’ that develop in an individual, he goes on further to posit that Psychosis is an extension of temperament. He therefore in relation to his assertion divides individuals into two broad categories: Cycloids [those who admire social activities], and Schizoids [those who are outright suspicious of and avoid social activities]. He went further to divide Cycloids into Melancholic (depressive) and Hypomanic (excitable), while also dividing Schizoids into Hyperestic (over-sensitive) and Anesthetic (insensitive).
Carl Jung (1875-1961) in relation to temperament believes in the distinction between extroversion and introversion. According to him, extroverts are inclined towards the object, while introverts are inward away from the object. The differences bring about different individual and this was just a starting point for him. He makes two broad categories in relation to cognitive processes of mental functions which are perceptive (how we get to be aware of things) and judging (how we decide about things). The first is also associated with sensing and intuition while the second has to do with thinking and feeling. He posits that there is an introverted and extroverted side to each individual which brings about eight mental functions that people use to cope with life, although one is most relied on in such a way that defines the personality of the person.
Furthermore, according to Eric Fromm (1900-1980), temperament has to do with emotional disposition which is innate, while character has to do one’s ethics and morals which leads to character development. He used the same term of temperament as both Galen and Avicenna and agreed with Kant on the features associated with each. In addition to all of that, he goes further to describe six dominant characters in the modern society which he states as Receptive, Exploitative, Hoarding, Marketing, Necrophilous, and Pathological. He concludes by identifying the positive one as productive.
David Keirsey (1921-2014) is one of the direct contributors to the development of personality dimensions. He says human personality can be classified into four types, this due partly to inspiration he had from most of the scholars already mentioned above. The four temperaments which according to him exist in human beings are Artisans, Guardians, Rationales, and Idealists.
DISC is a theory from William Moulton Marston, a Psychologist; it is a theory that focuses on traits. People who are grouped into ‘D’ are outgoing and task-oriented, they show dominant and direct behaviors, people who are grouped into ‘I’ are outgoing, people-oriented, and they show inspiring and interactive traits. For people grouped into ‘S’, they are reserved, people-oriented, and supportive with steady behavior. Lastly, people who are put in ‘C’ category are reserved, task-oriented, and cautious. However, every person shows all or some of these behaviors depending on the situation.
Having talked briefly about these temperament theories, as stated earlier, this study focuses on Galen’s theory on temperament. Of course, the theory in itself is not totally complete as temperament is quite a complex area of research, but nonetheless, most researchers still refer to his terms and features, even if with tweaks and adjustments, and hold his theory in high regard.
Similarly, there is a need to understand the reason behind the variation in the performance of L2 learners (that is, why some perform very well and some poorly) even though they are exposed to the same teaching technique. Even though a lot has been said about individual differences, what should be investigated is the way we perceive and understand the world and also the way we react to the world ‘ temperament.
Since the way a second language is acquired is quite different from how the native or mother tongue is acquired, a lot of the individual comes into play, especially as most learners are exposed to a second language at a later growth stage. Turks are hardly exposed to English language unless they intentionally expose themselves to it, this triggered the academic curiosity to know how their temperament affects their language acquisition in relation to skills in English.
Turkish is mainly spoken in Turkey and its surroundings; it has like 70 million native speakers worldwide. It borrows from Persian, French and Arabic, even though there was a major change in the language in 1928, the Arabic alphabet was changed to Latin which is mostly used in English, about this time, Turkish alphabet equivalents replaced the Arabic and Persian ones. In Turkish, the endings are added to the root one by one to a word to get the required meaning it is known to be an agglutinative language. Unlike English alphabets, Turkish has 29 letters, it does not have Q, W, and X, but it includes diacritic such as C. There are eight vowels and 21 consonants.
Turkish students do not really have a problem with the writing system of English. However, they have a problem in oral phonology of English; this is as a result of Turkish vowel harmony which English vowel lacks. The most common difficulties can be seen in the inclusion of an extra vowel in words like sport (>siport) or the omission in words like support (> sport) and also mistake in minimal pairs such as law/low, man/men or kip/keep. Also just like others who are not native English speakers, Turkish student have problem with words like then, think, clothes and so on. There is also a challenge when producing words beginning with /w/ and /v/, examples are words like vine as wine and vice versa.
In written English because there is a difference in the structure in Turkish structure which is Subject-Object-Verb patterns, there is interference of this in English structure. These and more are the main challenges Turkish students face in the acquisition of English Language.
Temperament may have a lot to do with L2 acquisition because new language requires practice and some temperament are more prone to practice more than others. There is a need for this study to check how this happens and why in the Turkish environment especially due to the aforementioned difficulties or challenges associated with a second language learning, in this case, English.
1.2 Statement of Research Problem
Studies have indeed worked on language acquisition in relation to temperaments and classroom teaching techniques, but how temperament assists or impedes the learning of English language as a second language by Turks of an intermediate level has not been adequately investigated, as there is little or no literature on this. As noted all along, temperaments play a big role in second language or L2 acquisition; this is what this research addresses, as well as recommending appropriate and suitable teaching techniques for each of the temperaments to enable optimal acquisition of the second language ‘ English.
1.3 Purpose of the Study
The aim of this study is to look into if and how the various temperaments affect language learning, acquisition and skills in Turkish English language learners. Also, the study proposes suitable teaching techniques for the examined temperaments as it relates to learning.
1.4 Objectives of the Study
i) To investigate the awareness of temperament types among Turkish L2 speakers;
ii) To analyse the influence of temperament on the level of performance in L2 acquisition by Turkish EFL Speakers; and
iii) To suggest, based on findings, teaching methods that can be used to improve the deficiency of each temperament in L2 acquisition?
1.5 Research questions
The following research questions that are important to this study are given below. These will help to have a clearer understanding of the main focus of this research.
1. Can people determine the temperament they belong to?
2. What role does temperament plays in the L2 acquisition?
3. What teaching methods can be used to improve the deficiency of temperament in L2 acquisition?
1.6 Research Hypotheses
1) People to a large extent will be able to determine the temperament they belong to.
2) Temperament plays a major role in Second language acquisition ‘ English ‘ in Turkish speakers.
3) Teaching methods will vary due to the different temperaments and their requirements and the strengths and weaknesses of these teaching techniques.
1.7 Significance of Study
The understanding of a temperament gives space for other types to be understood ‘ their advantages and disadvantages. This study therefore enhances the understanding of ESL and language teaching as pertaining to temperaments and how it affects language acquisition [in Turks]. Also, teaching techniques will again be revised as to how they can be attuned to produce greater results in learners according to their temperament type.
Due to time limitation, hundred people from a particular geographical area were selected ‘ the area was selected due to a large number of English learners who reside or work there. But that should not in any way, take away from the merits of the study. Also, as noted earlier that research in the field of temperaments is forgotten, but with the abundance of ancient and modern models of research models, these research work sticks with the model of Galen while drawing on the DISC theory both of which of course may have their deficiencies.
1.9 Theoretical Framework
Galen’s model on temperaments will be mostly emphasized, while David Keirey who shares similar ideas with him will be looked into. Galen’s work, no matter the modern and other models, is important because there is mostly recourse to his works by other theorists and some even refer to the terms he used with little modification or use them as a base for their own terms.
DISC theory by Moulton Marston will be dealt with in details, its strengths, weaknesses and limitations. They are related to Galen’s identification of temperaments even though the labeling is different, the features are quite similar.
1.10 Outline of the Thesis
The different researchers label their understanding of temperament differently with real differences reflected across studies, but it has been noted that there is a substantial agreement in the contents of constructs across a number of studies of temperament (Rothbart & Bathes, 1998). These labels will be examined but there will be a focus on Galen whose label was referred to and who serves as a source of inspiration to some researchers.
In chapter one, there is the background of the study which highlights the different theories of temperament, the statement of research problem, the purpose and objectives of the study, the limitations of the study, the research questions to be answered.
In chapter two, there is the literature review which deals with past literature and recent ones, historical background alongside detailed information about temperament and personality theories is collated from several scholars and related to the present research.
In chapter three, is the methodology which elaborates on the research data, research design, research procedure and instrumentation.
Chapter four deals with the data analysis, all the data gathered is processed here including the major findings according to the data analyzed.
Chapter five, the conclusion of the research, addresses the summary of the research work and includes recommendations for further studies.
An important question which is a major concern in Goldsmith et al. (1987) is seen in the title of the article: ‘What is temperament?’ This question has been debated over a long period of time, and the renowned researchers who participated in the 1987 article continued this argument by trying to give different definitions. At the end of the 1987 article, the commentator Robert McCall gave a definition of temperament that tries to mix the four approaches:
‘Temperament consists of relatively consistent, basic dispositions inherent in the person that underlie and modulate the expression of activity, reactivity, emotionality, and sociability. Major elements of temperament are present early in life, and those elements are likely to be strongly influenced by biological factors. As development proceeds, the expression of temperament increasingly becomes more influenced by experience and context. (p. 524)’
This meaning articulates countless number of the public assumptions concerning temperament that have accompanied scrutiny for the past twenty-five years. Though, new findings and ways have presented new perspectives on these countless accompanying assumptions. First, not all temperament traits are stable nor main in existence, perhaps because new temperamental arrangements that manipulation or inhibit the extra reactive aspects of temperament appear merely afterward in infancy; as these manipulation arrangements come on-line, they could change the expression and stability of the extra reactive traits (Rothbart, 2011).
Temperament traits come to be extra consistent as regards period, displaying comprehensive stability by at least the preschool years (Roberts & DelVecchio, 2000). Further, due to maturational procedures transpiring amid infancy and afterward childhood, stability frequently could be heterotypic rather than homotypic. For example, discernible exploratory deeds in infancy predicts novelty pursuing in adolescence, perhaps representing two developmentally specific expressions of a public procedure (Laucht, Becker, & Schmidt, 2006; discern Schwartz et al., 2011, for a comparable example including behavioral inhibition).
Second, most temperament researchers would agree that the particular traits included in the definition do constitute individual differences in temperament (see, e.g., the definition offered by Zentner & Bates, 2008). However, the 1987 list leaves out dimensions of attention and self-regulation, which have turned out to be important individual differences that emerge in basic form in infancy, derived in part from developing biological systems, and modulate the development of more reactive emotional systems (Rothbart, 2011). In short, temperament researchers understand nowadays that affective and cognitive processing are exceedingly consolidated arrangements (Derryberry & Tucker, 2006; Forgas, 2008) and that, consequently, a little aspects of temperament ‘ such as attention and official control ‘ involve individual contrasts in areas conventionally believed to be extra cognitive in nature.
Third, the field understanding of the combined workings of biological factors and experience in progress has come to be extra complex. The meaning is that temperamental contrasts are powerfully affected by biology at the onset, but come to be extra affected by environmental experiences as time goes on. This dichotomy between biological and environmental influences is not tenable. Before a child’s origin, the intrauterine nature would have already affected the expression of every single child’s gene physically (Huizink, 2012). Both genetic and environmental factors impact temperament from infancy onward and new genetic influences on temperamental traits arise afterward in progress (Saudino & Wang, 2012). Thus, temperament ought to no longer be believed as biologically derived at origin and afterward shaped by experience; rather, it ought to be believed as the consequence of biological and environmental factors working jointly across development. Seized jointly, the newest work on temperament suggests an alternative definition: Temperament traits are main growing frank dispositions in the areas of attention, affectivity, attention, and self-regulation, and these dispositions are the product of convoluted contact amid genetic, biological, and environmental factors across time. As McCall noted in his commentary on the four temperament ways:
‘Definitions are not valid or invalid, confirmable or refutable. Instead, they are more or less useful. (p. 524)’
It is vital that people not be dogmatic in adherence to a solitary meaning of temperament. As new findings amass, supplementary frank dispositions could be recognized, and an altered meaning could be clarified to be extra useful.
2.1 The DISC model: Theory and background: The traditional theories
For a long time, there have been attempts to understand human beings and human behavior: What we do and why. Disparate areas, from the antique Greeks and Romans to the American Indians, have had disparate methods of comprehending and delineating what they noted in others and in themselves. A little of the methods of delineating human behavior, that were industrialized in antique areas, are still in use today; a little even have the rank of frank knowledge. E.g. reference is frequently made to Hippocrates (400 BC) and his description of the four temperaments, or to Galen (200 AD), who in a comparable manner delineated four body fluids.
In the eighteenth century, Galen’s works were elucidated by the German theorist Immanuel Kant, and in 1903, Wundt undertook a rigorous revision of the Kant-Galen-Hippocrates theory of four kinds of temperament. With Freud, Jung, Adler and others, the present psychological way was established. While Freud delineated the id, ego and super-ego; Jung articulated the frank archetypes; and Adler stressed that early-developed motives were established on communal need. Later on came the behaviorists, who upheld that human actions were a consequence of whether our replies were unpleasant, pleasant or neutral. But, in spite of the past progress ‘ the theories and hypothetical disparities or conflicts ‘ there is yet a forceful research attention in human behaviour, meanwhile, the demand for easy and competent way of understanding and conversing actions is larger than ever before.
The fundamental DISC model is as follow: the Confidential Profile Arrangement is an influential instrument that is both facile to comprehend and additionally an easy method of understanding convoluted human behaviour. It is valid both for psychologists and for others who are interested in discovering things concerning themselves and others; the Personal Profile System is based on the DISC model with two axes and four dimensions. The model divides behaviour into four different dimensions: Dominance, influence, Stability and Conscientiousness/Competence (DISC).
It is important to notice that the book deals with Marston’s model and not with the tool. Marston produced a system for understanding and describing human behaviour. He never developed a tool for measuring human behaviour. With time, the model has been further examined and revised in the light of the latest knowledge and research. The Confidential Profile Arrangement is exceptional, in that it is a self-evaluating and self-interpreting instrument, industrialized on the basis of the DISC model.
The DISC model was early delineated in 1928, in Marston’s book: ‘Emotions of Normal People’, literally, the label itself indicates the object of Marston’s focus. In contradistinction to countless of his contemporaries, such as Freud and Jung, Marston was not interested in pathology or mental illness, but rather in the normal man’s feelings and actions in interplay with his environment. Although from a modern standpoint, the book is composed in an antiquated intellectual speech, the ideal it describes is nevertheless vibrant, vital and just as profound as it was after Marston crafted it.
The DISC model is established on two ideas: that we discern our surrounding as favorable or unfavorable, and; that a person perceives himself to be more or less influential than his surroundings. Most people, naturally, are convinced that, after they have fully understood this model, the Confidential Profile Arrangement is considerably easier to elucidate and yields far larger benefit.
2.2 The DISC model in detail
A vital word in the DISC model is the word ‘perception’. The manner we discern and deal with precise situations, events, and nature, is far more vital than these situations, events and nature in itself. Severely articulated, we can hardly converse of an event in itself ‘ the event equals our understanding of it. There are countless examples of this: one reacts to events in a book or film and laughs or cries as if it were real; a person alone at a residence is sure that the sound by a tree-branch tapping against the window pane is a burglar; another person panics because he or she has misunderstood the situation and trusts that the undertaking of the repair he perceives, ought to be finished in two weeks rather than in two months. Our particular responses in relation to situations, people and events depend on our understanding of them. Marston understood this, and with rigorous psychological scrutiny, it has been confirmed that our feelings and actions are established on our thoughts concerning the globe and the situations we encounter in our lives.
2.3 Definition of Surroundings
We understand that the DISC model is established on a person’s understanding of his nature and of himself in relation to the surroundings. But what is meant by surroundings? In this case, the word ‘surroundings’ covers everything beyond the person. It includes everything from people, deeds and conditions to demands of the situation, the locale and the weather.
Figure A (below): shows the person, their surroundings and actions in relation to the surroundings.
EXPECTATIONS ACTIONS SITUATIONS
??? PEOPLE ??? ERA
WHAT WE BELIEVE IN
FEELINGS ??? GENETIC TRAITS
PSYCHOLOGICAL MOTIVES/DRIVES ??? CORE OF THE PERSONALITY
The DISC model was industrialized at a period after the larger portion of psychological scrutiny was causing uproar with its ideology of mental purposes as being physically determined. Marston wanted to check what was transpiring mentally, emotionally and physically across human contact in the surroundings. He measured factors such as perspiration level and skin reactions; he questioned people concerning their responses and behavior; and he interviewed trained observers. As his work progressed, Marston started to discern precise outlines that implied that everyone has one out of four methods of replacing and reacting in relation to their surroundings. These four methods correspond to what we nowadays understand as D, I, S, and C, behavior.
There are supplementary factors that can impact behavior, such as: benefits, sophistication, upbringing, spiritual beliefs, etc. (meaning of favorable and unfavorable nature). According to the DISC model, a person perceives his nature as being favorable or unfavorable ‘ those who discern their nature as unfavorable notice trials, hindrances and probable pitfalls in the tasks they set themselves; while those who discern their nature as favorable notice the pleasure, human warmth and the probable accomplishment in the tasks they set for themselves
Neither of the two perceptions is more correct or appropriate than the other; they are plainly different. Most people’s understanding of their nature is straightforward and automatic. The difference between the two perceptions can be extremely thin, but it exists, as the proceeding examples show: Two people go to a diner and realize there is a queue of people vying for a table. The first thinks: ‘This place has to be extremely popular’, while the other thinks: ‘This place has to be truly badly run if they cannot manage this many people with this long queue waiting’. Furthermore, a workgroup receives the task of assessing a training programme with a thought to its usefulness. One person says: ‘It should be functional to discern a little aftermath on how far can be learned by the programme.’ Another says: ‘We have to take care to ensure that we discover something from this programme.’ To buttress the above examples, in their arranging for a sales encounter, one person looks onward to hearing whether or not the client likes the product, whereas the other looks onward to responding to the customer’s straightforward questions. Across a cluster of encounter, some people are happy that a decision has been grasped and that everyone supports it; others are troubled concerning whether or not the right decision has been made.
The above instances are all disparate interpretations of the same situation. Every single point of thought makes the finished picture more methodical and assorted, adding to the situation a richness that would not have existed if everyone observed it in similar methods. The figure below illustrates the understanding of nature as either unfavorable or favorable.
Figure B: DISC model: Perception of surroundings
The surroundings The surroundings
unfavorable & hostile favorable & friendly
2.4 Definition of Oneself
The subsequent portion of the DISC model is the theory that every single person discerns themselves as being more influential than our nature or less influential than our surroundings. This indicates how far the impact and manipulation of the individual perceives himself as possessing above the situations, people or events in his surroundings. Those who discern themselves as being more influential than their nature trust that they can accomplish their aim through will-power or by convincing others. While those who discern themselves as being less influential than their nature trust that they can accomplish their aims by utilizing upheld collaboration alongside others, or by sticking to instituted procedures for safeguarding quality.
Again, as in the previous illustration, neither of the two perceptions is more correct or appropriate than the other; they are just different. Here also the difference can be very fine, but it exists, as the following examples show. The DISC model ‘ how one perceives the surroundings: unfavorable and hostile, or favorable and friendly): One person staying in a packed diner thinks, ‘I might truly straighten out this place’, the other thinks, ‘I have to find out how many are in front of me on the waiting list’. Furthermore, in the evaluation of a new training programme, one person is convinced that he or she can convince the others to attend the programme he or she likes best, while the other trusts the evaluation of the finished cluster and wishes to continue with the program he or she most thinks best. In addition, at a sales encounter, while one person is convinced that he or she can vanquish all probable obstacles to the sale, another believes that his or her product meets all of the customer’s demands on standards and quality. In relation to the above, it is evident that across a cluster encounter, one person contributes by being able to raise the others’ enthusiasm, as the other contributes by upholding and backing up the group.
The next figure illustrates understanding of oneself as more or less influential as the surroundings.
Figure C: The DISC model: Perception of oneself
Oneself more powerful
Oneself less powerful
The integrated model
By combining perception of the surroundings and oneself in relation to the surroundings we get a model with four dimensions/factors, each of which is distinct from the others. The integrated model appears thus:
Oneself more powerful
The surroundings The surroundings
unfavorable & hostile favorable & friendly
Oneself less powerful
Figure D (above): The DISC model ‘ Integrated
The integrated model as illustrated in figure D above, gives four distinct combinations of perceptions, each with its derived behavioral tendency:
Surroundings Oneself Behavioral tendency
Unfavorable More powerful Dominating behavior (D)
Favorable More powerful Influencing behavior (I)
Favorable Less powerful Stabilizing behavior (S)
Unfavorable Less powerful Competence- seeking behavior (C)
People with a forceful D-tendency dominate, because they discern trials for them to vanquish and discern themselves as more influential than the challenges. They will endeavor to change, vanquish or manipulate things. People with an I-tendency endeavor to exercise impact above others out of a feeling of being influential in favorable nature, and desire others to adhere to their perception. They endeavor to exercise impact, because they are convinced that they can. People with the S-tendency are not propelled to desire extreme change, because they desire to uphold their favorable nature and because they discern themselves as less influential than their surroundings. They are convinced that the finished product is good enough and must stay as it is. People with a C-tendency discern themselves as being less influential in disapproving surroundings. They however use prudent scrutiny as a basis for working towards the attainment of elevated standards, or they pursue continuing laws to accomplish their goals.
2.5 The DISC dynamics
We understand that deeds can be modified, adapted and is situation-specific. The DISC model is in keeping alongside this knowledge. Because the model is established on understanding, it makes good sense to observe the interplay of modified understanding managing to modified deeds, and vice versa. The vibrant interplay amid the understanding of oneself and of one’s nature explains why the individual’s deeds can vary from one situation to another. The contrasts evince a behavioral flexibility that is established on the individual’s perception. Anybody who fills out a Confidential Profile at disparate points in period has to notice how the Confidential Profile displays variations in perception. Used in this method, the Confidential Profile Arrangement becomes an influential instrument for crafting an understanding of oneself in disparate situations, and reflects the individual’s attitude to changing circumstances.
Nevertheless deeds can change from one situation to another; countless behavioral features stay public to a sequence of situations. As by now delineated, deeds are additionally established on frank character traits. These traits change slightly with time and form the basis of who a person is and what he or she does. We can consequently anticipate that we change ourselves and are flexible to encounter the situation’s demands, but we cannot anticipate being completely different.
The Confidential Profile Arrangement reflects both the behavioral consistency and adaptation of the person filling it out.
2.6 The Story behind DISC: It is older than you think
The four human kinds were early delineated in Greek mythology. According to the legend, the Greek deity Zeus granted four deities the consent to help mankind get more of the gods’ endowments: Apollo was to endow mankind with spirit; Dionysos was to endow mankind with joy; Epimetheus was to endow mankind with a sense of duty; and Prometheus was to endow mankind with analytical ability. The Babylonian sovereigns Heraclitus and Empedocles, who administrated c. 450 BC, recognized the four elements: fire, water, earth and air, and they associated these four agents with the four ‘primary colors’: red, blue, yellow and green. They additionally said that these colors and agents were related to four frank emotional conditions, but unfortunately no record of what these last were has survived.
At this same period, around 450 BC, the Greek doctors Hippocrates and Galen wrote of the four basic temperaments: choleric, sanguine, phlegmatic and melancholic. They asserted that people’s temperament was ambitious by the kind of bodily fluid that prevailed inside their inner organs. Yellow gall indicated a choleric temperament ‘ described by being pivotal, facilely angered and self-assured; Blood indicated a sanguine temperament ‘ a honest heart, facilely advanced, optimistic, and outward-going; The phlegmatic temperament, with its inner structures manipulated by plasma, was described by slowness of deed, patience and calm; and, Black gall indicated a melancholy temperament – weighty, troubled and gentle.
The four temperaments were considered as being reciprocally select ‘ an individual allocated to one of them was automatically excluded from the supplementary three. The four temperaments stayed accepted up to and across the middle Ages.
The next known and documented contribution to the theory of four types came in the middle of the 19th century. The German theorist Immanuel Kant recognized four comprehensive kinds of traits that were related to the four temperaments. About a hundred years afterward, the psychologist Wilhelm Wundt upheld that people owned two qualities in fluctuating degrees: speed/slowness and strength/weakness. He reorganized the four temperaments in relation to these two fluctuating qualities and allocated them in a matrix. He thereby distanced himself from the public exclusivity expressed in the preceding theories.
Quickly afterward, Carl Jung industrialized his renowned theory. He upheld that from the pursuing four pairs of factors, people have in every single case one of two frank attitudes: introvert/extrovert; sensual/intuitive; intellectual/emotional; judgmental/cognitional. Both attitudes are present in the personality, says Jung. One of them is dominant and cognizant, while the other is supplementary, subordinate, and unconscious. Jung did not remark on the four temperaments. Wundt’s works materialized countless years before Jung’s, but as both men lived in fairly close geographical proximity, it seems reasonable to accept that Jung was cognizant of the four-type theory, but choose not to remark about it in his works ‘ not even to refute it to the supremacy of his own theory.
For the early period, the four kinds were recognized as vibrant and situation-specific. But in 1928, William M. Marston published his revolutionary book: ‘The Emotions of Normal People’. Dr John Geier states in his introduction to the updated edition of Marston’s work: ‘It was understood that an individual can display countless traits.’ Marston was clearly ahead of his time, as thirty to forty years afterwards, most psychologists started to understand that a human being can change as regards his surroundings. It should be noted that both Marston’s thoughts on traits and Jung’s thoughts on kinds garnered slight credit from their contemporaries, because during that period, the globe of psychology was generally interested in theories, and mostly in characteristics that were physically observable or displayed by people in public, and not in characteristics that differentiated people from one another.
For a long period of time there was no more progress on the four-type theory till the middle of the 1950s, when the Russian psychologist Pavlov, with his renowned examinations on dogs, endeavored to clarify that precise behavioral traits are related with precise procedures in the central nervous system. He upheld that there were four kinds of central nervous arrangement, and related it to the four temperaments. The examinations have been discredited on the fields that they were worked out in the laboratory conditions rather than in ‘real life’. Despite the fact that they were examinations, Pavlov did recognize the neurological background that underlines the observable characteristics.
In 1977, Max L”scher gave a new ‘angle ‘on the four-type theory. In his book: ‘The Four Colour Person’, he postulates that a person’s choice of colour embodies characteristics of that color. For instance, people who favor red are characterized by impact-making, accomplishment, manipulation, and competition; those who favor yellow are characterized by joyfulness, sincerity, speed, and hope; those who favor blue are characterized by concord, protection, loyalty, and patience; and, those who favor green are characterized by stability, confrontation to change, acquisitiveness, and precision.
In modern times, especially since the last ten years, a lot of tools and measuring instruments have made their emergence into the scientific world. A number of them are established on the aforementioned renowned ‘ and acknowledged ‘ theories, and are faithful to these. Supplementary instruments continue from theories of a more ‘modern cut’, these normally weigh a popularized combination of the most facilely comprehensible agents of countless frank theories. It therefore appears that even the Baltic ‘test market’ consists of tens of disparate systems. Merely insufficient of these can clarify an adequate validity and reliability in request to the Estonian, Latvian or Lithuanian population. One of these is Inscape’s Confidential Profile, as of 1997 more than 15,000 examples have been utilized in the Baltics.
2.7 Correlation between the DISC model and other theories concerning human behavior-types
‘ William M. Marston: ‘Emotions of Normal People’ (1928), D ‘ Dominance, I ‘ [Social] Influence, S ‘ Stability, and C ‘ Conscientiousness/Competence.
‘ Greek Mythology: Apollo (spirit), Dionysus (joy), Epithemeteus (sense of duty), and Prometheus (analysis).
‘ Hippocrates: The 4 temperaments (450 BC), Choleric (yellow bile), Sanguine (blood), Phlegmatic (plasma), and Melancholic (black bile).
‘ Wilson Learning Systems: Managing Interpersonal Relationships Driver Expressive Amiable.
‘ Analytical Robert Blake & Jane Mouton: The Managerial Grid ‘ 9.1 1.9 4.9 9.4.
‘ Paul Hersey & Kenneth Blanchard: Situational Leadership ‘ S1 S3 S3 S1.
‘ Max L”scher: The 4-colour person ‘ Red, Yellow, Blue, and Green.
‘ Eric Berne: Transaction Analysis ‘ critical parents and the rebel child; solicitous parents and the natural child; solicitous parents and the well-adjusted child; critical parents and the professor child.
‘ The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator cannot be compared with the DISC model, as the two theories were developed with a different focus and thus describe two different things. For further information see the article on DISC/MBTI (July, 1995).
2.8 Elaboration of D-I-S-C- behavior
D ‘ Dominance: The ‘Dominating’ person loves challenges. Some consider him as being inconsiderate, and he is extremely competitive. He has respect for those who can accomplish even in the face of extremely poor odds, and he contributes his best efforts especially if he has power and responsibility. He sets himself elevated targets and wants his power to be consented and considered seriously. If he has no trials confronting him, he is liable to ‘rock the boat’. The ‘Dominating’ person frequently works extremely long and diligently. In fact, trials hold out the best in these persons. In their intercourse with others, the ‘D’s is normally instant, direct and straightforward. They say what they mean and mean what they say. They can be brusque, even sarcastic, but they do not bear a grudge. They flare up facilely and they come facilely into discussion with their colleagues. They know it that others look up to them, they like seizing leadership and being in the limelight. If they are not the centre of attention, they can go on the offensive. They facilely damage others’ feelings while lacking cognizance of it, they are egoistic and chiefly like being acclaimed.
The ‘Dominating’ person is normally an individualist who has his own methods and is self-sufficient. They can be tyrannical and ignore others in order to accomplish their goal. They do not concern themselves with laws and promises, and can be excessively critical and judgmental if people or things do not live up to their expectations. After they have said what they desire, they frequently ignore what they have said. They normally desire to go in an association with a thought to accomplishing a particular result, rather than seizing a portion in communal activities. The ‘D’ is interested in the infrequent and dangerous. They are inquisitive and normally have countless disparate hobbies, and are prepared to try their hands at anything. They have a lot of new ideas. Because of their countless hobbies, they favor tasks that are continually changing, but facilely lose attention in a task if it provides no more trials, and therefore are happy to have others finish the work for them.
The ‘Dominating’ person has a tendency to become encompassed in countless things simultaneously, as their inherent restlessness makes them always to be pursuing new horizons. They tend to become dissatisfied and impatient with methodical work, even though they can do it if it is vital to accomplish a particular aim ‘ but on the condition that these features are not too repetitive or monotonous. It frequently happens that, in a main period of their occupations, ‘Dominating ‘persons often times change jobs because of impatience or insufficient adaptability.
I ‘ Influence: The ‘Influencing’ person’s style is outgoing, convincing and normally optimistic. As a law, they discern something good in every single situation. They are chiefly interested in people, their setbacks and activities. They are keen to aid others with their tasks and additionally to accord others’ aid alongside their own tasks. In this manner, the ‘I’ tends to lose sight of the business outlook, but others materialize to be extremely accommodating towards him or her. They go in an association because of the concomitant communal activities. ‘Influence-people’ readily make new acquaintances ‘ at first encounter they address others by chummy terms and adopt the honest and direct attitude of life-long friends. They claim to understand an incredible number of people and like to hang around people.
The ‘Influencing’ person is prone to superficiality and can change factions in an argument with no seeming signal that they are cognizant of their inconsistency. They frequently sketch premature conclusions and deed from emotional motives. Also, they make finished decisions established on a shallow scrutiny of the facts, and their belief in an agreement of supplementary people leads them to misjudge others’ abilities. They sense that they can convince and inspire others to action and make them be as they desire them to be. This person works well in settings where it is vital to empathize with others. As they are not character-wise equipped to annihilate ‘pleasant atmospheres’, they can find it tough to make demands or give a goal response.
S ‘ Stability: The ‘Stable’ person is normally approachable, tranquil and relaxed. Such people are kept and controlled, but as they rarely flare up, they can frequently nurse a grievance and bear a grudge. They like to have a close connection to a moderately manipulated cluster of workers or colleagues. Patience and steadiness are the qualities that describe their normal behavior, and as such appear to others as content and relaxed. They are good acquaintances and always prepared to aid those they see as their friends. They fight to uphold the order by challenging change, particularly if it is unexpected or sudden. Also, after they have mastered a precise outline of work, they can pursue it with a seemingly limitless patience.
They are normally quite ‘acquisitive’, and are extremely attached to their work cluster, their club or their family. They are closely attached to their relations and do not tolerate being separated from them for a long time. The ‘Stable’ person acts well as an associate of a cluster and has an outstanding ability for coordinating his efforts with those of others. They are quick to develop good working customs and are good at routine tasks (not vitally at a low level).
C ‘ Conscientiousness/Competence: The ‘Competent’ person is peaceful and adapts to the situation in order to circumvent hostility. They are humble and placid, and they endeavor considerably to do their work as well as possible. They tend to circumvent criticism from their nature by employing an elevated degree of self criticism. They are prudent and can take a long period to make vital decisions, as they always desire to ponder all the obtainable facts. This can be a basis of irritation to their associates who perhaps deal more swiftly. Because they find it tough to make decisions, they frequently pause to discern ‘which direction the wind is blowing’ before embarking on any action. They have a good sense of timing and a fine manipulation of judgment before selecting the right decision at the right time.
The ‘Competent’ person is able to form themselves according to the picture that they think is anticipated of them. They will go to great lengths to stay clear of a fight and hardly ever step on others’ toes. They fight to live an orderly existence and are inclined to pursue prevailing habits, be they norms or guidelines, both in the confidential and company spheres. They like to continue according to a fixed design, and work precisely with attention to detail. They are usually coordinated for probable aftermath and steer clear of being in an unexpected situation.
2.9 Galen Temperament
The Concept of Four-Temperament Theory
The word temperament comes from a Latin word temperamentum, which means proper blending. And the belief behind it was that if the human body fluids were decreased in their intensity by balancing the humors alongside every single supplementary, next curing should transpire (Media Spotlight, 1994).
From this Latin word the theory was born. Although, the Four-Temperament theory is devoted to as a method projected exceptionally by the psychologists so as to comprehend the human characteristics or nature, assisting in enhancing the human condition and additionally gathering people into assorted personality characteristics that seemingly materialize to make up their frank temperaments (Martin & Bobgan, 1992). Therefore, temperament means the characteristic phenomena of an individual’s emotional nature as personality is a sum total of the physical, mental, emotional and communal characteristics of an individual. Temperaments are inborn traits as personality is shaped by nature and nurture.
The Origin and Chronological Analysis of Four-Temperament Theory
The temperament theory is asserted to could have started from the Antique Egypt or Mesopotamia but was afterward industrialized as a health theory by an outstanding Greek physician Hippocrates (460-377 BC) [Martin & Bobgan, 1992]. Although the concerns concerning human personality and temperaments that ended in the origination of the Four- Temperament theory seemingly might be drawn right from the pursuing scholars coordinated chronologically as Empedocles, Hippocrates, Plato, Aristotle and Galen (Media Spotlight, 1994).
From the antique periods, there were myths and occult habits, physicians and philosophers who utilized the four humors of body fluids (blood, yellow bile, black bile and phlegm), four temperaments and additionally the signals of zodiac so as to cure ailments and hence assist in comprehending human differences. Zodiac is the imaginary span in the sky in which the sun, satellite and supplementary planets materialize to lie, and that has been divided into twelve equal portions every single one with a distinct term and signal (Oxford Elevated Learner’s Dictionary, 2010). The four-temperament had links with the twelve signals of zodiac in the heart of astrology (the discovery of the locations of the stars and the movements of the planets in the belief that they impact human affairs) (OALD, 2010). These links heralded the following classifications whereby blood had links with (Gemini, Libra and Aquarius), yellow bile with (Aries, Leo and Sagittarius), black bile with (Taurus, Virgo and Capricorn) and phlegm with (Cancer, Scorpio and Pisces) (Media Spotlight, 1994).
According to an outstanding Greek theorist recognized as Empedocles (495-425 BC), the four primary agents that were utilized to delineate the human temperaments were: fire (that could be honest and dry), air (that might be honest and moist), earth (that might be dry and cold) and also water (that might be moist and cold). Furthermore, across the Empedocles period, each element seemingly was allocated a corresponding deity and goddess because cosmology was mixed jointly with mythology. The deity and goddess allocated to these agents were: Zeus (the fire), Hera (the air), Aidoneus (the earth) and Nestis (the water).
The supplementary outstanding theorist who came after Empedocles was Hippocrates (460-377BC) who developed and seemingly increased the former’s evaluation on human personality and temperaments by employing four corresponding body fluids from time to time termed humors: blood, yellow bile, black bile and phlegm. According to Hippocrates, the human condition depends on the proper balancing of these four humors and there is a connection amid the body fluids and the yearly seasons. For example, phlegm increased across winter and decreased during summer. Hippocrates consequently came up with the pursuing schema providing corresponding names from the agents of Empedocles as here below: blood had links with Spring, yellow bile with Summer, black bile with Autumn, and phlegm with Winter (Media Spotlight, 1994).
After Hippocrates, came Plato (427-347 BC) who asserted that humors truly had a great contribution to ones behavior. For example, the madness of a person was as a consequence of morbid humors contacting a person’s mortal soul. He afterward finished that ‘the truth is that the intemperance of affection is an illness of the soul due chiefly to the moisture and fluidity which is produced in one of the agents by loose consistency of the bones’ (Media Spotlight, 1994 p. 2). On the other hand, Plato made extremely interesting remarks considering bad behavior that:
‘For no man is voluntarily bad; but the bad became bad by reason of an ill disposition of the body and bad education, things which are hateful to every man and happens to him against his will. For where the acid and briny phlegm and other bitter and bilious humors wander about in the body, and find no exit or escape, but are pent up within and mingle their own vapors with the motions of the soul, and are blended’ and being carried to the three places of the soul’ they create infinite varieties of ill-temper and melancholy, of rashness and cowardice, and also forgetfulness and stupidity’ (Media Spotlight, 1994, p. 2).
Aristotle (384-322 BC) who was a student of Plato, as well embraced the explanations of other great gurus who learned the personality and temperaments of humans. He clashed that the shape of the body to a little extent imitated the hobbies of the soul as well and he associated warm and deep blood with strength, and chilly and slender blood with intelligence.
Though Empedocles utilized four agents of fire, air, earth and water to delineate human personality and temperaments, on the other hand Hippocrates, Plato and even Aristotle looked at the body fluids to categorize a little human behavior. In the later years the theory was then industrialized by Claudius Galen from Pergamum (131-200 AD) who nevertheless understood the humors or body fluids in order to categorize human personalities and temperaments, also looked into the physiological reasons as the main cause of such human behaviors, moods and emotions. The scholar categorized these behaviors as hot and chilly, dry and wet. These were afterward industrialized into four temperaments technically denoted to as sanguine, phlegmatic, choleric and melancholic.
The scholar finished by asserting that if one is a sanguine in that one is affected by blood then one comes to be happy, hearty, outgoing, sturdy/strong, intrepid, optimistic, and interested in physical pleasures. If one is phlegmatic, one is affected by phlegm (thick white material that we wheeze after we have cold) then one comes to be chilly, remote, unemotional, uninvolved, dependable, and a trifle dull. If one is choleric, one produces yellow bile from the liver, hence, one displays traits such as anger, disgust and have fits of temperament (giving in to most bad impulses). If one is delineated as melancholic then one is driven by a worse black bile from liver hence one is always wretched, unhappy and suicidal.
Developments and Application of the Four-Temperament Theory
From the works of the main scholars, it is extremely evident that human personalities and temperaments depend on the body fluids or humors hence the ensuring classifications arose: sanguine, phlegmatic, choleric and melancholic. Though, the character traits of these kinds of temperaments have been debated and given traits contrarily so as to suit different placements and professions. For example, according to Martin and Bobgan (1992) the ensuring traits can be noted on every single group of temperaments such as: Sanguine [cheerful, approachable, talkative, lively, restless, self-centered and undependable], Phlegmatic [calm, dependable, effectual, easy-going, passive, stubborn and lazy], Choleric [optimistic, active, confident, strong-willed, quick to anger, hostile and inconsiderate] and Melancholic [melancholic/sad, sensitive, analytical, perfectionist, unsociable, moody and rigid].
On the other hand, other scholars delineate these temperaments in little supplementary methods such that the sanguine is believed to be fairly extrovert, relish communal meeting, making new friends, tends to be boisterous, quite creative, frequently daydreams, a little alone period is critical for them, very sensitive, compassionate and thoughtful; but with the resulting flaws: chronically late, inclined to be absent, slightly sarcastic, loses attention swiftly after pursuing a new hobby, talkative and introverted, and frequently emotional. The phlegmatic has the following traits: tends to be self-content and kind, extremely consenting and affectionate, extremely receptive and introverted, favor stability to uncertainty and change, extremely consistent, relaxed, calm, relational, inquisitive, observant, are good administrators, can be extremely passive and aggressive. The choleric is a doer, have a lot of drive, power and passion and always endeavor to instill it to others, can law people of supplementary temperaments particularly the phlegmatic, countless great charismatic martial and governmental figures are choleric, and their flaw is that they like to be the head in everything they do and can additionally be manipulative. Lastly, the melancholic have traits such as being a thinker, extremely thoughtful and becomes rather troubled after they cannot be on period of events. They can be exceedingly creative in hobbies such as poetry and fine art, and can be overly occupied with the tragedy and cruelty in the globe, frequently a perfectionist, self-reliant, and independent; but with a flaw that they can become so profoundly encompassed in what they are doing and ignore others.
When including the report on ‘The Subsequent Large Thing’ in Temperament theory, Barens (2006) realized that the theory has an outstanding relationship with the progress of human resource. Being the founder of Inter-strength Associates (ISA), a company training firm industrialized to serve associations that target to maximize individual and firm aftermath, the author applied this theory so as to delineate core benefits, motivations and needs of people and hence explicate these into useful company requests in the firms concerned. Many corporate bodies apply this theory in enhancing association progress, motivation of employee, retention of creativity and change to traverse change. The scholar has applied the theory in companies basing the argument on three core ideas: to be alert, delineate a contribution to the association, and additionally, talent as well. In this vein, Barens (2006) renamed the public nomenclature of the four-temperament theory into the theorists, stabilizers, improvisers and the catalysts. These names have been exceedingly accepted by operatives of assorted company bodies.
The four-temperament theory is an antique system devised for understanding human nature and thereby enhancing the human condition. The theory divides people according to assorted personality characteristics that materialize to make up their basic temperament. Some people endeavor to distinguish between a person’s temperament and his personality by saying that temperament traits are inborn while personality traits are the consequence of nature and nurture. However, the distinction is not always probable or clear. The four temperament groups are Sanguine, Choleric, Melancholy, and Phlegmatic. Every single category or kind is described by a catalog of illustrative terms. Then people are allocated to one or other kinds by matching the person with the descriptions.
The following table presents every single of the four temperaments with a brief catalog of traits generally associated with every single temperament.
Table 2.1: Traits of the four temperaments
Sanguine Choleric Melancholy Phlegmatic
Cheerful Optimistic Melancholy Calm
Friendly Active Sensitive Dependable
Talkative Confident Analytical Efficient
Lively Strong-willed Perfectionist Easy-going
Restless Quick to anger Unsociable Passive
Self-centered Aggressive Moody Stubborn
Undependable Inconsiderate Rigid Lazy