Gray's biopsychological theory of personality: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
SLS559 (talk | contribs)
55 edits
Added more information for comparison of Eysenck's and Gray's theory as they are related to each other.
Mb4500 (talk | contribs)
38 edits
Added to history section about the relationship between gray's theories and their development. Added to the compare and contrast section about comparing and contrasting eysenck and gray's theories. Removed the future research implications section because it was full of opinions with no resources to support the given statements of that section.
Line 1: Line 1:
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.<ref>Matthews, Gerald & Gilliland, Kirby. (1999). The personality theories of H. J. Eysenck and J. A. Gray: A comparative review. Personality and Individual Differences. 26. 583-626. 10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00158-5.</ref>
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.<ref>Matthews, Gerald & Gilliland, Kirby. (1999). The personality theories of H. J. Eysenck and J. A. Gray: A comparative review. Personality and Individual Differences. 26. 583-626. 10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00158-5.</ref>


Gray hypothesized the existence of two brain-based systems for controlling a person's interactions with their environment: the [[#Behavioral_inhibition_system|behavioural inhibition system]] (BIS) and the [[#Behavioral_activation_system|behavioural activation system]] (BAS).<ref>Gray, J.A. (1981). A critique of Eysenck's theory of personality, In H.J. Eysenck (Ed.) ''A model for personality'' (pp 246–276)</ref><ref>Gray, J.A. (1982). ''The neuropsychology of anxiety: An enquiry into the functions of the septo-hippocampal system.''</ref><ref>M.P. Feldman, A.M. Broadhurst (Eds.), Theoretical and experimental bases of behaviour modification, Wiley, London (1976), pp. 3–41</ref> BIS is related to sensitivity to [[punishment]] and avoidance motivation. BAS is associated with sensitivity to [[reward system|reward]] and approach motivation. Psychological scales have been designed to measure these hypothesized systems and study individual differences in personality.<ref name="Carver" /> [[Neuroticism]], a widely studied personality dimension related to emotional functioning, is positively correlated with BIS scales and negatively correlated with BAS scales.<ref name="Boksema">{{cite journal | last1 = Boksema | first1 = M.A.S | last2 = Topsa | first2 = M. | last3 = Westera | first3 = A.E. | last4 = Meijmana | first4 = T.F. | last5 = Lorist | first5 = M.M. | year = 2006 | title = Error-related ERP components and individual differences in punishment and reward sensitivity | journal = Brain Research | volume = 1101 | issue = 1| pages = 92–101 | doi = 10.1016/j.brainres.2006.05.004 | pmid = 16784728 | hdl = 1874/19738 | s2cid = 17629273 | hdl-access = free }}</ref>
Gray hypothesized the existence of two brain-based systems for controlling a person's interactions with their environment: the [[#Behavioral_inhibition_system|behavioural inhibition system]] (BIS) and the [[#Behavioral_activation_system|behavioural activation system]] (BAS).<ref>Gray, J.A. (1981). A critique of Eysenck's theory of personality, In H.J. Eysenck (Ed.) ''A model for personality'' (pp 246–276)</ref><ref>Gray, J.A. (1982). ''The neuropsychology of anxiety: An enquiry into the functions of the septo-hippocampal system.''</ref><ref>M.P. Feldman, A.M. Broadhurst (Eds.), Theoretical and experimental bases of behaviour modification, Wiley, London (1976), pp. 3–41</ref> BIS is related to sensitivity to [[punishment]] and avoidance motivation. BAS is associated with sensitivity to [[reward system|reward]] and approach motivation. There is evidence that the Behavioral Inhibition and Behavioral Activations system are connected to mood control, with positive or negative emotions occurring when rewarded or punished.<ref name=":2">{{Cite journal |last=Smillie |first=Luke D. |last2=Pickering |first2=Alan D. |last3=Jackson |first3=Chris J. |date=2006-11 |title=The New Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory: Implications for Personality Measurement |url=http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1207/s15327957pspr1004_3 |journal=SAGE Journals |language=en |volume=10 |issue=4 |pages=320–335 |doi=10.1207/s15327957pspr1004_3 |issn=1088-8683}}</ref> Psychological scales have been designed to measure these hypothesized systems and study individual differences in personality.<ref name="Carver" /> [[Neuroticism]], a widely studied personality dimension related to emotional functioning, is positively correlated with BIS scales and negatively correlated with BAS scales.<ref name="Boksema">{{cite journal | last1 = Boksema | first1 = M.A.S | last2 = Topsa | first2 = M. | last3 = Westera | first3 = A.E. | last4 = Meijmana | first4 = T.F. | last5 = Lorist | first5 = M.M. | year = 2006 | title = Error-related ERP components and individual differences in punishment and reward sensitivity | journal = Brain Research | volume = 1101 | issue = 1| pages = 92–101 | doi = 10.1016/j.brainres.2006.05.004 | pmid = 16784728 | hdl = 1874/19738 | s2cid = 17629273 | hdl-access = free }}</ref>


==History==
==History==


The biopsychological theory of personality is similar to another one of Gray's theories, [[reinforcement sensitivity theory]]. The Biopsychological Theory of Personality was created after Gray disagreed with [[Hans Eysenck]]'s arousal theory that dealt with biological personality traits.<ref>Gray, Jeffrey A.; Neil McNaughton (1982). "The neuropsychology of anxiety: An inquiry into the functions of the septo-hippocampal system.". Oxford University Press.</ref> 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 and higher in Neuroticism, according to Eysenck’s theory.<ref name=":1">{{Cite book |last=Ashton |first=Michael Craig |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/987583452 |title=Individual Differences and Personality |date=2017 |isbn=978-0-12-809845-5 |edition=3rd |oclc=987583452}}</ref> Eysenck looked at the ascending [[reticular activating system]] (ARAS) for answering questions about personality. The ARAS is part of the brain structure and has been proposed to deal with cortical arousal, hence the term arousal theory. Eysenck compared levels of arousal to a scale of introversion versus extraversion. The comparison of these two scales was then used to describe individual personalities and their corresponding behavioral patterns.<ref name="Larsen">Larsen, R. J. & Buss, D. M. (2008). Personality Psychology.New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.</ref> Gray disagreed with Eysenck's theory because Gray believed that things such as personality traits could not be explained by just classical conditioning.<ref name="Corr">{{cite journal | last1 = Corr | first1 = Philip J | year = 2001 | title = Testing problems in J. A. Gray's personality theory: a commentary on | journal = Personality and Individual Differences | volume = 30 | issue = 2| pages = 333–352 | doi = 10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00028-3 }}</ref> Instead, Gray developed his theory which is based more heavily on physiological responses than Eysenck's theory.
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. <ref name=":2" /> The Biopsychological Theory of Personality was created in 1970 after Gray disagreed with [[Hans Eysenck]]'s arousal theory that dealt with biological personality traits.<ref>Gray, Jeffrey A.; Neil McNaughton (1982). "The neuropsychology of anxiety: An inquiry into the functions of the septo-hippocampal system.". Oxford University Press.</ref> 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 and higher in Neuroticism, according to Eysenck’s theory.<ref name=":1">{{Cite book |last=Ashton |first=Michael Craig |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/987583452 |title=Individual Differences and Personality |date=2017 |isbn=978-0-12-809845-5 |edition=3rd |oclc=987583452}}</ref> Eysenck looked at the ascending [[reticular activating system]] (ARAS) for answering questions about personality. The ARAS is part of the brain structure and has been proposed to deal with cortical arousal, hence the term arousal theory. Eysenck compared levels of arousal to a scale of introversion versus extraversion. The comparison of these two scales was then used to describe individual personalities and their corresponding behavioral patterns.<ref name="Larsen">Larsen, R. J. & Buss, D. M. (2008). Personality Psychology.New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.</ref> Gray disagreed with Eysenck's theory because Gray believed that things such as personality traits could not be explained by just classical conditioning.<ref name="Corr">{{cite journal | last1 = Corr | first1 = Philip J | year = 2001 | title = Testing problems in J. A. Gray's personality theory: a commentary on | journal = Personality and Individual Differences | volume = 30 | issue = 2| pages = 333–352 | doi = 10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00028-3 }}</ref> Instead, Gray developed his theory which is based more heavily on physiological responses than Eysenck's theory.


Gray had a lot of support for his theories and experimented with animals to test his hypotheses.<ref name="Gable">{{cite journal | last1 = Gable | first1 = L.S. | last2 = Reis | first2 = T.J. | last3 = Elliot | first3 = J.A. | year = 2000 | title = Behavioral activation and inhibition in everyday life | url =http://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/a45a/1a1cf4a77123fc44df913c1960bc99c1c235.pdf | journal = Journal of Personality and Social Psychology | volume = 78 | issue = 6| pages = 1135–1149 | doi=10.1037/0022-3514.78.6.1135 | pmid=10870914| s2cid = 14891811 }}</ref> 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.<ref name="Larsen" />
Gray had a lot of support for his theories and experimented with animals to test his hypotheses.<ref name="Gable">{{cite journal | last1 = Gable | first1 = L.S. | last2 = Reis | first2 = T.J. | last3 = Elliot | first3 = J.A. | year = 2000 | title = Behavioral activation and inhibition in everyday life | url =http://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/a45a/1a1cf4a77123fc44df913c1960bc99c1c235.pdf | journal = Journal of Personality and Social Psychology | volume = 78 | issue = 6| pages = 1135–1149 | doi=10.1037/0022-3514.78.6.1135 | pmid=10870914| s2cid = 14891811 }}</ref> 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.<ref name="Larsen" />
Line 20: Line 20:


== Compare and contrast ==
== Compare and contrast ==
After Eysenck’s biology based “top-down” theory of personality, Gray proposed an alternative, “bottom-up” explanation called the Biophychological theory of Personality.<ref name=":03">{{Cite journal |last=Smillie |first=Luke D. |last2=Pickering |first2=Alan D. |last3=Jackson |first3=Chris J. |date=2006-11 |title=The New Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory: Implications for Personality Measurement |url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15327957pspr1004_3?casa_token=ShSkyhF9qHIAAAAA:Fg1z8zlYwcjGPElZYLyFG3C2pwBCEp-BYGynIfqfgGxo6z-cVCpZZuh23xkSqAy3OtnG6P1uy0X_22Y& |journal=Personality and Social Psychology Review |volume=10 |issue=4 |pages=320–335 |doi=10.1207/s15327957pspr1004_3 |issn=1088-8683}}</ref> 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. <ref name=":13">{{Cite book |last=Ashton |first=Michael Craig |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/987583452 |title=Individual Differences and Personality |date=2017 |isbn=978-0-12-809845-5 |edition=3rd |oclc=987583452}}</ref>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 and higher in Neuroticism, according to Eysenck’s theory. <ref name=":13" /> 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. <ref>{{Cite web |title=APA PsycNet |url=https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1995-00067-001?doi=1 |access-date=2022-05-03 |website=psycnet.apa.org |language=en}}</ref>

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.<ref name="Gray">Gray, J. A. (1987). The psychology of fear and stress. New York: Cambridge University Press.</ref> 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.<ref name="Neblyistyn">Nebylitsyn, V. D. & Gray, J. A. (1972). Biological bases of individual behavior. New York: Academic Press, Inc.</ref>
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.<ref name="Gray">Gray, J. A. (1987). The psychology of fear and stress. New York: Cambridge University Press.</ref> 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.<ref name="Neblyistyn">Nebylitsyn, V. D. & Gray, J. A. (1972). Biological bases of individual behavior. New York: Academic Press, Inc.</ref>


Line 38: Line 40:
The BAS/BIS Questionnaire can also be used in the cases of [[criminal profiling]].<ref name="Novovic" /> Previous research as reported by researchers MacAndrew and Steele in 1991 compared two groups on opposite spectrum levels of fear and the response of a variety of questions. The two groups in the study varied on levels of BIS, either high or low, and were selected by the researchers. One group was composed of women who had experienced [[anxiety attacks]] and together made up the high BIS group. The low BIS group was composed of convicted prostitutes who had been found to take part in illegal behavior. Main findings showed that the responses to the questionnaires were distinctly different between the high BIS group and the low BIS group, with the convicted women scoring lower. Results from this study demonstrate that questionnaires can be used as a valid measurement to show differences in the behavioral inhibition systems of different types of people.<ref name="Larsen" />
The BAS/BIS Questionnaire can also be used in the cases of [[criminal profiling]].<ref name="Novovic" /> Previous research as reported by researchers MacAndrew and Steele in 1991 compared two groups on opposite spectrum levels of fear and the response of a variety of questions. The two groups in the study varied on levels of BIS, either high or low, and were selected by the researchers. One group was composed of women who had experienced [[anxiety attacks]] and together made up the high BIS group. The low BIS group was composed of convicted prostitutes who had been found to take part in illegal behavior. Main findings showed that the responses to the questionnaires were distinctly different between the high BIS group and the low BIS group, with the convicted women scoring lower. Results from this study demonstrate that questionnaires can be used as a valid measurement to show differences in the behavioral inhibition systems of different types of people.<ref name="Larsen" />
Gray also introduced his SPSRQ questionnaire to measure sensitivity to reward (SR) and sensitivity to punishment (SP) in anxiety (2012). It is a specifically designed questionnaire linking to Gray's theory referencing the SR to the BAS and the SP to the BIS.<ref name=":0" />
Gray also introduced his SPSRQ questionnaire to measure sensitivity to reward (SR) and sensitivity to punishment (SP) in anxiety (2012). It is a specifically designed questionnaire linking to Gray's theory referencing the SR to the BAS and the SP to the BIS.<ref name=":0" />

==Future research or implications==

As mentioned previously, psychological disorders have been analyzed in terms of the behavioral inhibition and activation systems. Understanding the differences between the systems may relate to an understanding of different types of disorders that involve anxiety and impulsivity. To date, there are many types of anxiety disorders that deal with avoidance theories and future research could show that the behavioral activation system plays a large role in such disorders and may have future implications for treatment of patients.


== References ==
== References ==

Revision as of 21:23, 3 May 2022

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 behavioural inhibition system (BIS) and the behavioural activation system (BAS).[2][3][4] BIS is related to sensitivity to punishment and avoidance motivation. BAS is associated with sensitivity to reward and approach motivation. There is evidence that the Behavioral Inhibition and Behavioral Activations system are connected to mood control, with positive or negative emotions occurring when rewarded or punished.[5] Psychological scales have been designed to measure these hypothesized systems and study individual differences in personality.[6] Neuroticism, a widely studied personality dimension related to emotional functioning, is positively correlated with BIS scales and negatively correlated with BAS scales.[7]

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] 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 and higher in Neuroticism, according to Eysenck’s theory.[9] Eysenck looked at the ascending reticular activating system (ARAS) for answering questions about personality. The ARAS is part of the brain structure and has been proposed to deal with cortical arousal, hence the term arousal theory. Eysenck compared levels of arousal to a scale of introversion versus extraversion. The comparison of these two scales was then used to describe individual personalities and their corresponding behavioral patterns.[10] Gray disagreed with Eysenck's theory because Gray believed that things such as personality traits could not be explained by just classical conditioning.[11] Instead, Gray developed his theory which is based more heavily on physiological responses than Eysenck's theory.

Gray had a lot of support for his theories and experimented with animals to test his hypotheses.[12] 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.[10]

Behavioral inhibition system

The behavioral inhibition system (BIS), as proposed by Gray, is a neuropsychological system that predicts an individual's response to anxiety-relevant cues in a given environment. This system is activated in times of punishment, boring things, or negative events.[12] By responding to cues such as negative stimuli or events that involve punishment or frustration, this system ultimately results in avoidance of such negative and unpleasant events.[10] According to Gray's Theory, the BIS is related to sensitivity to punishment as well as avoidance motivation. It has also been proposed that the BIS is the causal basis of anxiety.[13] High activity of the BIS means a heightened sensitivity to nonreward, punishment, and novel experience. This higher level of sensitivity to these cues results in a natural avoidance of such environments in order to prevent negative experiences such as fear, anxiety, frustration, and sadness. People who are highly sensitive to punishment perceive punishments as more aversive and are more likely to be distracted by punishments.[14]

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.[15]

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 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.[12] According to Gray's theory, the BAS is sensitive to conditioned appealing stimuli, and is associated with impulsivity.[11] It is also thought to be related to sensitivity to reward as well as approach motivation. The BAS is sensitive to nonpunishment and reward. Individuals with a highly active BAS show higher levels of positive emotions such as elation, happiness, and hope in response to environmental cues consistent with nonpunishment and reward, along with goal-achievement. In terms of personality, these individuals are also more likely to engage in goal-directed efforts and experience these positive emotions when exposed to impending reward. The physiological mechanism for BAS is not known as well as BIS, but is believed to be related to catecholaminergic and dopaminergic pathways in the brain. Dopamine is a neurotransmitter commonly linked with positive emotions, which could explain the susceptibility to elation and happiness upon achieving goals which has been observed. People with a highly active BAS have been shown to learn better by reward than by punishment, inverse to BIS as mentioned above.[6] BAS is considered to include trait impulsivity that is also related to psychopathological disorders such as ADHD, substance use disorder, and alcohol use disorder.[16] The higher the BAS score, or the higher the impulsive, the more it is likely to be related to psycho-pathological or dis-inhibitory disorders.[17] Certain aspects of the dopaminergic reward system activate when reward cues and reinforcers are presented, including biological rewards such as food and sex.[18] These brain areas, which were highlighted during multiple fMRI studies, are the same areas associated with BAS.

Compare and contrast

After Eysenck’s biology based “top-down” theory of personality, Gray proposed an alternative, “bottom-up” explanation called the Biophychological theory of Personality.[19] 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. [20]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 and higher in Neuroticism, according to Eysenck’s theory. [20] 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. [21]

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.[22] 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.[23]

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.[22]

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.[10] Another area of study has been comparing Gray's theory to Eysneck’s theory mentioned earlier. 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.[9]

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.[24]

People can be tested based on their activation of either systems by using an EEG.[citation needed] These tests will conclude whether a person has a more active BIS or BAS. The two systems are independent of each other.[12]

These tests can determine different things about a person's personality. They can determine if a person has more positive or negative moods.[12] 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 bipolar disorders,[25] now doctors and other professionals can determine if a person with bipolar disorder is on the brink of a manic or depressive episode based on how they rate on a scale of BAS and BIS sensitivity. Essentially, this dysregulation theory proposes that people with BAS dysregulation have an extraordinarily sensitive behavioral activation system and their BAS is hyper-responsive to behavioral approach system cues.[25] If a person with bipolar disorder self-reports high sensitivity to BAS, it means that a manic episode could occur faster. Also, if a person with bipolar disorder reports high sensitivity to BIS it could indicate a depressive phase.[26] A better understanding of BAS dysregulation theory can inform psychosocial intervention (e.g. cognitive behavioral therapy, psychoeducation, interpersonal and social rhythm therapy, etc.).[25]

The BAS/BIS Questionnaire can also be used in the cases of criminal profiling.[24] Previous research as reported by researchers MacAndrew and Steele in 1991 compared two groups on opposite spectrum levels of fear and the response of a variety of questions. The two groups in the study varied on levels of BIS, either high or low, and were selected by the researchers. One group was composed of women who had experienced anxiety attacks and together made up the high BIS group. The low BIS group was composed of convicted prostitutes who had been found to take part in illegal behavior. Main findings showed that the responses to the questionnaires were distinctly different between the high BIS group and the low BIS group, with the convicted women scoring lower. Results from this study demonstrate that questionnaires can be used as a valid measurement to show differences in the behavioral inhibition systems of different types of people.[10] Gray also introduced his SPSRQ questionnaire to measure sensitivity to reward (SR) and sensitivity to punishment (SP) in anxiety (2012). It is a specifically designed questionnaire linking to Gray's theory referencing the SR to the BAS and the SP to the BIS.[17]

References

  1. ^ Matthews, Gerald & Gilliland, Kirby. (1999). The personality theories of H. J. Eysenck and J. A. Gray: A comparative review. Personality and Individual Differences. 26. 583-626. 10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00158-5.
  2. ^ Gray, J.A. (1981). A critique of Eysenck's theory of personality, In H.J. Eysenck (Ed.) A model for personality (pp 246–276)
  3. ^ Gray, J.A. (1982). The neuropsychology of anxiety: An enquiry into the functions of the septo-hippocampal system.
  4. ^ M.P. Feldman, A.M. Broadhurst (Eds.), Theoretical and experimental bases of behaviour modification, Wiley, London (1976), pp. 3–41
  5. ^ a b Smillie, Luke D.; Pickering, Alan D.; Jackson, Chris J. (2006-11). "The New Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory: Implications for Personality Measurement". SAGE Journals. 10 (4): 320–335. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr1004_3. ISSN 1088-8683. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  6. ^ a b c Carver, C.S.; White, T.L. (1994). "Behavioral Inhibition, Behavioral Activation, and Affective Responses to Impending Reward and Punishment: The BIS/BAS Scales". Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 67 (2): 319–333. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.67.2.319.
  7. ^ a b Boksema, M.A.S; Topsa, M.; Westera, A.E.; Meijmana, T.F.; Lorist, M.M. (2006). "Error-related ERP components and individual differences in punishment and reward sensitivity". Brain Research. 1101 (1): 92–101. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2006.05.004. hdl:1874/19738. PMID 16784728. S2CID 17629273.
  8. ^ Gray, Jeffrey A.; Neil McNaughton (1982). "The neuropsychology of anxiety: An inquiry into the functions of the septo-hippocampal system.". Oxford University Press.
  9. ^ a b Ashton, Michael Craig (2017). Individual Differences and Personality (3rd ed.). ISBN 978-0-12-809845-5. OCLC 987583452.
  10. ^ a b c d e Larsen, R. J. & Buss, D. M. (2008). Personality Psychology.New York: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.
  11. ^ a b Corr, Philip J (2001). "Testing problems in J. A. Gray's personality theory: a commentary on". Personality and Individual Differences. 30 (2): 333–352. doi:10.1016/S0191-8869(00)00028-3.
  12. ^ a b c d e Gable, L.S.; Reis, T.J.; Elliot, J.A. (2000). "Behavioral activation and inhibition in everyday life" (PDF). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 78 (6): 1135–1149. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.78.6.1135. PMID 10870914. S2CID 14891811.
  13. ^ Gray J.A., The psychophysiological basis of introversion-extraversion (1970) Behaviour Research and Therapy, 8 (3), pp. 249-266.
  14. ^ Braem S, Duthoo W, Notebaert W (2013). "Punishment Sensitivity Predicts the Impact of Punishment on Cognitive Control". PLOS ONE. 8 (9): e74106. Bibcode:2013PLoSO...874106B. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0074106. PMC 3772886. PMID 24058520.
  15. ^ Fuentes, Paola; Barrós-Loscertales, Alfonso; Bustamante, Juan Carlos; Rosell, Patricia; Costumero, Víctor; Ávila, César (September 2012). "Individual differences in the Behavioral Inhibition System are associated with orbitofrontal cortex and precuneus gray matter volume". Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience. 12 (3): 491–498. doi:10.3758/s13415-012-0099-5. ISSN 1530-7026. PMID 22592859.
  16. ^ Franken, Ingmar H.A.; Muris, Peter; Georgieva, Irina (March 2006). "Gray's model of personality and addiction". Addictive Behaviors. 31 (3): 399–403. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2005.05.022. PMID 15964149.
  17. ^ a b Hahn, Tim; Dresler, Thomas; Ehlis, Ann-Christine; Pyka, Martin; Dieler, Alica C.; Saathoff, Claudia; Jakob, Peter M.; Lesch, Klaus-Peter; Fallgatter, Andreas J. (January 2012). "Randomness of resting-state brain oscillations encodes Gray's personality trait". NeuroImage. 59 (2): 1842–1845. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.08.042. PMID 21889990. S2CID 19861932.
  18. ^ Costumero, Victor; Barrós-Loscertales, Alfonso; Bustamante, Juan Carlos; Ventura-Campos, Noelia; Fuentes, Paola; Rosell-Negre, Patricia; Ávila, César (2013-06-28). Rao, Hengyi (ed.). "Reward Sensitivity Is Associated with Brain Activity during Erotic Stimulus Processing". PLOS ONE. 8 (6): e66940. Bibcode:2013PLoSO...866940C. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0066940. ISSN 1932-6203. PMC 3695981. PMID 23840558.
  19. ^ Smillie, Luke D.; Pickering, Alan D.; Jackson, Chris J. (2006-11). "The New Reinforcement Sensitivity Theory: Implications for Personality Measurement". Personality and Social Psychology Review. 10 (4): 320–335. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr1004_3. ISSN 1088-8683. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  20. ^ a b Ashton, Michael Craig (2017). Individual Differences and Personality (3rd ed.). ISBN 978-0-12-809845-5. OCLC 987583452.
  21. ^ "APA PsycNet". psycnet.apa.org. Retrieved 2022-05-03.
  22. ^ a b Gray, J. A. (1987). The psychology of fear and stress. New York: Cambridge University Press.
  23. ^ Nebylitsyn, V. D. & Gray, J. A. (1972). Biological bases of individual behavior. New York: Academic Press, Inc.
  24. ^ a b Novović, Z.; Mišić-Pavkov, G.; Smederevac, S.; Drakić, D.; Lukić, T. (2013). "The role of schizoid personality, peritraumatic dissociation and behavioral activation system in . a case of parricide". Aggression and Violent Behavior. 18 (1): 113–117. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2012.11.004.
  25. ^ a b c Nusslock, R.; Abramson, L. (2009). "Psychosocial Interventions for Bipolar Disorder: Perspective from the Behavioral Approach System (BAS) Dysregulation Theory". Journal of Clinical Psychology. 16 (4): 449–469. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2850.2009.01184.x. PMC 2790718. PMID 20161456.
  26. ^ Alloy, L. B.; Abramson, L. Y.; Walshaw, P. D.; Cogswell, A.; Grandin, L. D.; Hughes, M. E.; Hogan, M. E. (2008). "Behavioral Approach System and Behavioral Inhibition System sensitivities and bipolar spectrum disorders: prospective prediction of bipolar mood episodes". Bipolar Disorders. 10 (2): 310–322. doi:10.1111/j.1399-5618.2007.00547.x. PMID 18271911.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Gray%27s_biopsychological_theory_of_personality&oldid=1086045670"