Chapter 14 Eysenck’s Biologically Based Factor Theory 423studies in education comparing the effectiveness of discovery learning and traditional
reception learning have often produced either conflicting differences or no differences.
Eysenck believed that these studies did not consider that extraverted children prefer
and do better with the more active discovery learning, whereas introverted children
prefer and do better with the more passive reception learning. In other words, an
interaction exists between personality dimensions and learning styles. However, when
investigators ignore these personality factors, they may find no differences in the
comparative effectiveness of discovery versus reception learning styles.
Eysenck (1995) also hypothesized that psychoticism (P) is related to genius and
creativity. Again, the relationship is not simple. Many children have creative ability,
are nonconforming, and have unorthodox ideas; but they grow up to be noncreative
people. Eysenck found evidence that these people lack the persistence of high P scorers.
Children with the same creative potential who are also high in psychoticism (P) are
able to resist the criticisms of parents and teachers and to emerge as creative adults.
Similarly, Eysenck and S. B. G. Eysenck (1975) reported that both high P scorers
and high E scorers are likely to be troublemakers as children. However, parents and
teachers tend to regard the extraverted children as charming rogues and to forgive
their misdemeanors, whereas they see high P scorers as more spiteful, disruptive, and
unlovable. Thus, the high E scoring troublemakers tend to grow into productive adults,
while the high P scoring troublemakers tend to continue to have learning problems,
to get into crime, and to have difficulty making friends (S. Eysenck, 1997). Again,
Eysenck believed strongly that psychologists can be led astray if they do not consider
the various combinations of personality dimensions in conducting their research.
Personality and Disease
Can personality factors predict mortality from cancer and cardiovascular disease
(CVD)? Beginning during the early 1960s, Eysenck devoted much attention to this
question. He and David Kissen (Kissen & Eysenck, 1962) found that people who
scored low on neuroticism (N) on the Maudsley Personality Inventory tended to
suppress their emotion and were much more likely than high N scorers to receive
a later diagnosis of lung cancer.
Later, Eysenck teamed with Yugoslav physician and psychologist Ronald
Grossarth-Maticek (Eysenck & Grossarth-Maticek, 1991; Grossarth-Matick &
Eysenck, 1989; Grossarth-Maticek, Eysenck, & Vetter, 1988) to investigate not
only the relationship between personality and disease, but also the effectiveness of
behavior therapy on prolonging the life of cancer and CVD patients. Grossarth-
Maticek had used a short questionnaire and a long personal interview to place
people into one of four groups or types. Type I included people with a hopeless/
helpless nonemotional reaction to stress; Type II people typically reacted to frustra-
tion with anger, aggression, and emotional arousal; Type III people were ambiva-
lent, shifting from the typical reaction of Type I people to the typical reaction of
Type IIs and then back again; Type IV individuals regarded their own autonomy
as an important condition to their personal well-being and happiness. In the origi-
nal study in Yugoslavia, Type I people were much more likely than others to die
of cancer, and Type II people were much more likely to die of heart disease. Type
III and Type IV individuals had very low death rates from either cancer or CVD.