Gray's biopsychological theory of personality
The biopsychological theory of personality is a model of the general biological processes relevant for human psychology, behavior, and personality. The model, proposed by research psychologist Jeffrey Alan Gray in 1970, is well-supported by subsequent research and has general acceptance among professionals.[1]
Gray hypothesized the existence of two brain-based systems for controlling a person's interactions with their environment: the
History
The biopsychological theory of personality is similar to another one of Gray's theories, reinforcement sensitivity theory. The original version of Gray’s reinforcement sensitivity theory of personality was developed in 1976 and Gray revised it independently in 1982. Then in 2000 further and more thorough revisions were made alongside McNaughton. The purpose of the revision was to adapt the theory according to new inputs of scientific findings since the 1980s. Reinforcement sensitivity theory arose from the biopsychological theory of personality.[5] The Biopsychological Theory of Personality was created in 1970 after Gray disagreed with Hans Eysenck's arousal theory that dealt with biological personality traits.[8] According to Eysenck, differences in extraversion are a result of differences in sensitivity of the ascending reticular activating system.[9] People with less sensitive systems are not easily aroused and seek additional stimulation, resulting in an extraverted personality.[10] People with more sensitive systems are overstimulated and try to avoid additional stimulation, resulting in an introverted personality.[11]
The development of the biopsychological theory of personality occurred during Gray's time at Oxford where he was a fellow and lecturer. [12]
Gray's main critique of Eysenck’s theory was that introverts are not more sensitive to conditioning, but are more responsive to non reward and punishment. The evidence Gray collected for his hypothesis on the biological basis of personality comes from blink tests done on humans and studies done on animals injected with sodium amobarbital.[13] Using animal subjects allows researchers to test whether different areas of the brain are responsible for different learning mechanisms. Specifically, Gray's theory concentrated on understanding how reward or punishment related to anxiety and impulsivity measures. His research and further studies have found that reward and punishment are under the control of separate systems and as a result people can have different sensitivities to such rewarding or punishing stimuli.[14]
Behavioral inhibition system
The behavioral inhibition system (BIS), as proposed by Gray, is a
The physiological mechanism behind the BIS is believed to be the septohippocampal system and its monoaminergic afferents from the brainstem.[6] Using a voxel-based morphometry analysis, the volume of the regions mentioned was assessed to view individual differences. Findings may suggest a correlation between the volume and anxiety-related personality traits. Results were found in the orbitofrontal cortex, the precuneus, the amygdala, and the prefrontal cortex.[17]
Behavioral activation system
The behavioral activation system (BAS), in contrast to the BIS, is based on a model of appetitive motivation - in this case, an individual's natural disposition to pursue and achieve goals. The BAS is aroused when it receives cues corresponding to rewards and controls actions that are not related to punishment, rather actions regulating approachment type behaviors. This system has an association with hope.
Comparative Analysis of BIS and BAS
Together, the two systems work in an inverse relationship. In other words, when a specific situation occurs, an organism can approach the situation with one of the two systems. The systems will not be stimulated at the same time and which system is dominant depends on the situation in terms of punishment versus reward.[23] This phenomenon of the differentiation between the two systems is thought to occur because of the distinct areas in the brain that becomes activated in response to different stimuli. This difference was noted years ago through electrical stimulation of the brain.[24]
The behavioral activation system and behavioral inhibition system differ in their physiological pathways in the brain. The inhibition system has been shown to be linked to the septo-hippocampal system which appears to have a close correlation to a serotonergic pathway, with similarities in their innervations and stress responses. On the other hand, the activation, or reward system, is thought to be associated more with a mesolimbic dopaminergic system as opposed to the serotonergic system.[23]
The two systems proposed by Gray differ in their motivations and physiological responses. Gray also proposed that individuals can vary widely in their responsiveness of the behavioral inhibition system and the behavioral activation system. It has been found that someone who is sensitive to their BIS will be more receptive to the negative cues as compared to someone who is sensitive to their BAS and therefore responds more to cues in the environment that relate to that system, specifically positive or rewarding cues. Researchers besides Gray have shown interest in this theory and have created questionnaires that measure BIS and BAS sensitivity. Carver and White have been the primary researchers responsible for the questionnaire. Carver and White created a scale that has been shown to validly measure levels of individual scores of BIS and BAS. This measure focuses on the differences in incentive motivations and aversive motivations. As previously mentioned these motivations correlate to impulsivity and anxiety respectively.[14]
Compare and Contrast of Biological Theories of Personality
It is important to analyze the difference between Eysenck's and Gray's theories of personality as Gray’s theory itself arose from a critique of Eysenck's theory. [13] After Eysenck’s biology based “top-down” theory of personality, Gray proposed an alternative, “bottom-up” explanation called the Biopsychological Theory of Personality.[5] Contrary to his previous theory called the reinforcement sensitivity theory, the biopsychological theory of personality is a theory of personality that puts an emphasis on the differences among individuals in different areas of the brain that are responsible for the facets of personality. [25] Gray’s Theory differed from Eysenck's as Eysenck’s theory involved three dimensions: Extraversion, Neuroticism, and Psychoticism. Each dimension was related to how sensitive a person is to stimuli. For example, people who were rated as having stronger reactions to stimuli should be lower in Extraversion as the strong sensation is uncomfortable to them, according to Eysenck’s theory. [25] Gray's theory relies more heavily on physiological explanation versus arousability which was used to explain Eysenck's theory. Gray's theory involves the Behavioral Activation System and Behavioral Inhibition System and how these systems affect personality.[26] While different in some regard, it has also been proposed with some evidence that there is a correlation between Gray’s BIS and Eysenck's Neuroticism. Gray’s BAS also has evidence of correlation to Eysenck’s Extraversion.[25]
Applications
Since the development of the BAS and BIS, tests have been created to see how individuals rate in each area. The questionnaire is called the Behavioral Inhibition System and Behavioral Activation System Questionnaire.[27]
People can be tested based on their activation of either systems by using an EEG.These tests will conclude whether a person has a more active BIS or BAS. The two systems are independent of each other.[15]
These tests can determine different things about a person's personality. They can determine if a person has more positive or negative moods.[15] Using psychological test scales designed to correlate with the attributes of these hypothesized systems, neuroticism has been found to be positively correlated with the BIS scale, and negatively correlated with the BAS scale.[7]
According to Richard Depue's BAS dysregulation theory of
The BAS/BIS Questionnaire can also be used in the cases of
References
- .
- ^ Gray, J.A. (1981). A critique of Eysenck's theory of personality, In H.J. Eysenck (Ed.) A model for personality (pp 246–276)
- ^ Gray, J.A. (1982). The neuropsychology of anxiety: An enquiry into the functions of the septo-hippocampal system.
- ^ M.P. Feldman, A.M. Broadhurst (Eds.), Theoretical and experimental bases of behaviour modification, Wiley, London (1976), pp. 3–41
- ^ S2CID 23768053.
- ^ S2CID 6452203.
- ^ S2CID 17629273.
- ^ Gray, Jeffrey A.; Neil McNaughton (1982). "The neuropsychology of anxiety: An inquiry into the functions of the septo-hippocampal system.". Oxford University Press.
- ^ "Eysenck - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics". www.sciencedirect.com. Retrieved 2023-02-27.
- ^ "Eysenck - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics". www.sciencedirect.com. Retrieved 2023-02-27.
- ^ "Eysenck - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics". www.sciencedirect.com. Retrieved 2023-02-27.
- ^ Rawlins, Nick (2004-05-13). "Obituary: Jeffrey Gray". the Guardian. Retrieved 2022-05-05.
- ^ PMID 5470377.
- ^ a b c d Larsen, R. J. & Buss, D. M. (2008). Personality Psychology.New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
- ^ S2CID 14891811.
- PMID 24058520.
- PMID 22592859.
- .
- PMID 15964149.
- ^ S2CID 19861932.
- PMID 23840558.
- PMID 37998668.
- ^ a b Gray, J. A. (1987). The psychology of fear and stress. New York: Cambridge University Press.
- ^ Nebylitsyn, V. D. & Gray, J. A. (1972). Biological bases of individual behavior. New York: Academic Press, Inc.
- ^ OCLC 987583452.
- S2CID 6452203.
- ^ .
- ^ PMID 20161456.
- PMID 18271911.