Temperament and Personality Traits 87analytic studies of questionnaire content. However, recent
studies in behavior genetics have used the model, and some of
the data from earlier studies has been translated into the form
of these five factors (Loehlin, 1992).
Two recent models have been derived from biosocial
theories. Based on factor analyses of scales used in psy-
chobiological studies of temperament and personality,
Zuckerman and Kuhlman developed a five-factor model
dubbed the alternative five (Zuckerman, Kuhlman, &
Camac, 1988; Zuckerman, Kuhlman, Thornquist, & Kiers,
1991). This model was translated into a five-factor question-
naire (Zuckerman-Kuhlman Personality Questionnaire, or
ZKPQ) on the basis of item and factor analyses (Zuckerman,
Kuhlman, Joireman, Teta, & Kraft, 1993). The five factors
are sociability, neuroticism-anxiety, impulsive sensation
seeking, aggression-hostility, and activity. This model was
used as the framework for a volume on the psychobiology
of personality (Zuckerman, 1991).
Cloninger (1987) developed a personality model for
both clinical description and classification of personality.
The theory is biologically based and, like Zuckerman’s,
uses the monoamine neurotransmitters as fundamental de-
terminants of personality differences. The factors included
in the most recent version of his questionnaire include nov-
elty seeking, harm avoidance, reward dependence, persis-
tence, cooperativeness, persistence, self-directedness, and
self-transcendence (Cloninger, Przybeck, Svrakic, & Wetzel,
1994). Much of the recent psychobiological research in per-
sonality and psychopathology has used Cloninger’s system
and questionnaires.
Builders of personality trait models often give different
names to what are essentially the same traits. But even if one
goes by the trait labels alone there are obvious similarities in
what are considered the basic personality traits. Extraversion
and neuroticism appear in nearly every system. Of course,
one cannot take their equivalence for granted until empirical
studies are done of their correlational relatedness.
Zuckerman et al. (1993) compared Eysenck’s Big Three,
Costa and McCrae’s Big Five, and Zuckerman and
Kuhlman’s Alternative Five in a factor-analytic study. A four-
factor solution accounted for two thirds of the variance. The
first factor was clearly extraversion, and the second was neu-
roticism with representative scales from all three question-
naires highly loading on their respective factors. The third
factor consisted of Eysenck’s psychoticism and Zuckerman
and Kuhlman’s impulsive sensation seeking at one pole and
the NEO conscientiousness at the other. The fourth factor
was defined by NEO agreeableness at one pole and ZKPQ
aggression-hostility at the other. The analysis did not yield a
fifth factor, possibly because of a lack of representative
markers in the three tests. Activity loaded on the extraversion
factor, and openness loaded on the agreeableness factor.
Zuckerman and Cloninger (1996) compared the scales of
the ZKPQ with those of Cloninger’s Temperament and Char-
acter Inventory (TCI). ZKPQ impulsive sensation seeking
was highly correlated with TCI novelty seeking (r=.68),
ZKPQ neuroticism-anxiety with TCI harm-avoidance
(r=.66), ZKPQ aggression-hostility with TCI cooperative-
ness(r=−.60), and ZKPQ activity with TCI persistence
(r=.46). These scales showed convergent and discriminant
cross validity, but the other scales in both tests had weaker
correlations and correlated equally with several measures on
the other scales. In Cloninger’s model there is no specific
scale for extraversion or sociability.
The personality systems described thus far have been
developed using factor analyses of trait dimensions. Many
personologists have developed typologies on a rational-
theoretical basis. Freud (1914/1957), Erikson (1963), and
Maslow (1954) described personality types based on their
developmental theories, each stressing the adult expressions
of types derived from earlier stages of development. No
valid methods of assessment were developed to operational-
ize these theories, although many clinicians continue to use
them to describe personality differences among patients or
others.
More recently, Millon and Everly (1985) defined eight
types based on the interactions of four primary sources of re-
inforcement and two kinds of instrumental behavior patterns
(active and passive). Some of the resultant types resemble
different poles of the standard dimensions of personality.
Sociable and introversive personality types resemble the two
poles of the extraversion dimension; the inhibited type re-
sembles neuroticism; and the cooperative types sounds like
agreeableness. The model was developed as a way of inte-
grating personality development of psychopathology, partic-
ularly the personality disorders. It has been described as a
biosocial theory but has not as yet been widely used in
psychobiological research.
The examination of the biosocial bases of personality in
this chapter will be organized around four basic personality
factors, derived mostly from factor analytic studies, which
are the same or quite similar across these studies, have some
similarity to traits described in studies of temperament and
animal behavior, and have been used in correlational studies
of traits and psychobiology in humans. The four traits are
extraversion/sociability, neuroticism/anxiety, aggression/
agreeableness, and impulsivity/sensation seeking/psychoti-
cism. Although activity is a widely used trait in studies of
children and animals, it has not been widely used in studies of
humans except for the pathological extreme of hyperactivity