11.3 Personality: Meaning, Types & Determinants
Key Takeaways
- Personality derives from the Latin persona, the mask worn by an actor; Allport defined it as the dynamic organisation within the individual of the psychophysical systems that determine characteristic behaviour and thought.
- Sheldon's somatotypes are endomorph, mesomorph and ectomorph; Jung's typology divides introvert from extrovert; the Big Five model uses openness, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness and neuroticism.
- The Indian typology is by Guna - Sattvic, Rajasic and Tamasic - set out in Bhagavad Gita chapters 14, 17 and 18 across faith, food, action, intellect, resolve and happiness.
- Determinants of personality are biological, psychological and psychosocial - heredity, physique, family, culture, education, peer group and situation.
- The Pancha Kosha model gives yoga a layered account of personality that neither trait nor type theories provide, running from the physical sheath to the sheath of bliss.
11.3 Personality: Meaning, Types & Determinants
Items 4.6 and 4.7 open the personality block of Unit 4. This section handles the definitional and structural material; Section 11.4 handles development and the role of yogic practice.
What personality means
Etymology
Personality comes from the Latin persona — the mask worn by an actor in classical theatre. The etymology carries a warning the tradition would endorse: what is called personality is the presented aspect, not the person.
Definition
The most widely used definition is Gordon Allport's:
"The dynamic organisation within the individual of those psychophysical systems that determine his characteristic behaviour and thought."
Four words do the work. Dynamic — it changes. Organisation — it is structured, not a heap of traits. Psychophysical — it is neither purely mental nor purely bodily. Characteristic — it is what is typical of this person, which is what makes prediction possible.
Characteristics of personality
It is unique to the individual; relatively stable while remaining modifiable; integrated rather than compartmentalised; dynamic, developing across the lifespan; goal-directed, and expressed in adjustment to the environment.
Related terms that must be distinguished
| Term | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Temperament | The biologically based, largely inherited emotional style — present from infancy |
| Character | The evaluative, moral dimension of personality |
| Trait | A relatively enduring disposition to behave consistently across situations |
| Type | A category of persons sharing a cluster of traits |
| Self-concept | A person's own perception of themselves |
Types of personality
Sheldon's somatotypes (constitutional)
| Somatotype | Physique | Associated temperament |
|---|---|---|
| Endomorph | Soft, round, higher body fat | Viscerotonia — sociable, relaxed, food-loving, comfort-seeking |
| Mesomorph | Muscular, robust, hard | Somatotonia — assertive, energetic, risk-taking, competitive |
| Ectomorph | Thin, linear, fragile | Cerebrotonia — restrained, introverted, sensitive, self-conscious |
The physique-temperament correlations are weak and the theory is not accepted today, but it is examinable and it maps loosely onto the Kapha, Pitta and Vata constitutional types of Ayurveda — a comparison worth making.
Jung's typology
Introvert — energy directed inward, reflective, reserved, preferring depth. Extrovert — energy directed outward, sociable, action-oriented, preferring breadth. Most people are ambiverts. Jung added four functions — thinking, feeling, sensation, intuition — from which the sixteen-type MBTI derives.
Trait theories
| Theorist | Model |
|---|---|
| Allport | Cardinal (dominating the whole life), Central (5–10 characteristic traits), Secondary (situational preferences) |
| Cattell | 16 source traits, measured by the 16PF |
| Eysenck | Three dimensions — Extraversion, Neuroticism, Psychoticism |
| Big Five (OCEAN) | Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Neuroticism — the current consensus model |
The Indian typology: classification by Guna
The Bhagavad Gita classifies personality by dominant Guna, and does so across a striking range of domains — chapters 14, 17 and 18 classify faith, food, sacrifice, austerity, charity, knowledge, action, agent, intellect, resolve and happiness, each into three:
| Domain | Sattvic | Rajasic | Tamasic |
|---|---|---|---|
| Faith (17.2–4) | Worship of the divine | Worship of power and wealth | Worship of the dark and departed |
| Food (17.8–10) | Fresh, juicy, nourishing | Bitter, sour, salty, very hot | Stale, putrid, leftover |
| Charity (17.20–22) | Given as duty, to a worthy person, without expectation | Given for return or reluctantly | Given at the wrong place and time, to an unworthy person, with contempt |
| Knowledge (18.20–22) | Sees the one imperishable in all beings | Sees only manifold separateness | Clings to one part as if it were the whole |
| Action (18.23–25) | Done as duty, without attachment or aversion | Done with desire for fruit and much effort | Done from delusion, without regard to consequence or capacity |
| Agent (18.26–28) | Free from ego and attachment, steady, unaffected by success or failure | Passionate, greedy, elated and depressed by outcome | Undisciplined, vulgar, obstinate, procrastinating |
| Intellect (18.30–32) | Knows what is to be done and what avoided, bondage and liberation | Confuses Dharma and Adharma | Takes Adharma for Dharma, seeing everything reversed |
| Resolve (18.33–35) | Unwavering, holding mind, Prana and senses in Yoga | Holds to Dharma, Artha and Kama for their fruits | Does not release sleep, fear, grief, despondency and conceit |
| Happiness (18.37–39) | Poison at first, nectar at the end | Nectar at first, poison at the end | Delusive from beginning to end, born of sleep and indolence |
The happiness verses (18.37–39) are the most quotable in the whole classification, and they are a genuinely useful teaching tool: Sattvic happiness is what you must work through discomfort to reach, Rajasic happiness is immediately pleasant and ends badly, Tamasic happiness never was pleasure at all.
Crucially, Guna classification is not fixed. A person is not "a Tamasic type"; a person has a currently dominant Guna, and the Gunas are in constant mutual displacement (BG 14.10). This is the decisive difference from Western type theory and the reason the Indian scheme is intrinsically developmental.
The Kosha model as a layered account of personality
Neither trait nor type theories describe personality as layered. The Pancha Kosha model does:
| Kosha | Aspect of personality |
|---|---|
| Annamaya | Physical constitution, appearance, health, energy |
| Pranamaya | Vitality, breath quality, drive, stamina |
| Manomaya | Emotional life, habits, desires, reactivity |
| Vijnanamaya | Intellect, values, discrimination, worldview |
| Anandamaya | Capacity for joy, meaning, the sense of connection |
Its practical advantage is that it explains why superficial change does not last. Alter behaviour at the Manomaya level while the Vijnanamaya values are unchanged, and the behaviour reverts. Real personality change requires work at the level where the pattern is actually held.
Determinants of personality
Biological
Heredity and genetics — twin studies attribute a substantial share of trait variance to genetic factors. Physique and appearance, which shape how a person is treated and therefore how they come to see themselves. Endocrine function — thyroid, adrenal and gonadal hormones affect mood, drive and reactivity. Nervous system characteristics — baseline arousal, reactivity and temperament. Ayurvedic Prakriti, the constitutional Vata-Pitta-Kapha type, is the tradition's own version of this category.
Psychological
Intelligence and aptitude; motivation and level of aspiration; emotional maturity; self-concept and self-esteem; and characteristic coping and defence patterns.
Psychosocial — the category item 4.7 names explicitly
| Determinant | Influence |
|---|---|
| Family | The first and most formative environment: attachment, parenting style, sibling position, economic security |
| Culture | Norms, values, language, expressed emotion, the individualist-collectivist orientation |
| School | Teachers, curriculum, achievement experience, the climate of the classroom |
| Peer group | Powerfully formative in adolescence; identity, belonging, conformity |
| Socio-economic status | Access to resources, exposure to chronic stress, aspiration and expectation |
| Mass media and digital environment | Models, comparison, attention patterns, self-image |
| Religion and community | Meaning frameworks, moral norms, belonging |
| Situation | Personality is expressed differently across contexts — the interactionist position |
The yogic addition
The tradition adds one determinant the psychological literature does not contain: Samskaras — impressions from past experience, and in the classical view from prior births — aggregating into Vasanas, standing tendencies. This is why yoga treats personality as workable at a deeper level than habit change: the practice aims at the impressions rather than only at the behaviours they produce.
Summary of Exam-Key Points
- Persona = mask. Allport: "the dynamic organisation within the individual of those psychophysical systems that determine his characteristic behaviour and thought."
- Sheldon: endomorph/viscerotonia, mesomorph/somatotonia, ectomorph/cerebrotonia.
- Big Five (OCEAN): Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, Neuroticism.
- Gita's Guna typology covers faith, food, charity, knowledge, action, agent, intellect, resolve and happiness.
- Happiness (18.37–39): Sattvic = poison first, nectar at the end; Rajasic = nectar first, poison at the end; Tamasic = delusive throughout.
- Guna dominance is not fixed — the decisive difference from Western type theory.
- Determinants: biological, psychological, psychosocial + the yogic addition of Samskara and Vasana.
How does Allport define personality?
According to Bhagavad Gita 18.37-39, how is Sattvic happiness described?
What is the decisive difference between the Gita's Guna typology and Western type theories such as Sheldon's?
Which advantage does the Pancha Kosha model offer over trait and type theories in accounting for personality?
Which determinant of personality does the yogic tradition add that the psychological literature does not contain?