fei75766_ch14_435-462.indd 451  02/06/20 01:10 PM
Chapter 14    Eysenck’s Biologically Based Factor Theory451
P,E,andNareinthemiddle ofafive-step progression from DNA tosocial behavior, 
withbiological intermediaries andexperimental evidence anchoring thethree major 
personality dimensions. Inother words, personality hasgenetic determinants that
indirectly shape biological intermediaries, andthese biological intermediaries help
mold P,E,andN.Inturn, P,E,andNcontribute toawidevariety oflaboratory 
learnings aswellassocial behaviors. 
Personality as a Predictor
Eysenck’s complex model ofpersonality shown inFigure 14.6suggests thatthepsy-
chometric traits ofP,E,andNcancombine withoneanother andwithgenetic deter -
minants, biological intermediates, andexperimental studies topredict avariety of
social behaviors, including those thatcontribute todisease.
Personality and Behavior
DoEysenck’s three general personality dimensions predict behavior? According to
Eysenck’s model shown inFigure 14.6, psychoticism, extraversion, andneuroticism 
should predict results ofexperimental studies aswellassocial behaviors. Recall that
Eysenck’s theory assumes thatextraversion isaproduct oflowcortical arousability. 
Therefore, introverts, compared withextraverts, should bemore sensitive toavariety 
ofstimuli andlearning conditions. Eysenck (1997a) argued thataneffective theory of
personality should predict bothproximal anddistal consequences (seeFigure 14.6), 
andheandhissonMichael (H.J.Eysenck &M.W.Eysenck, 1985) cited studies that
demonstrated extraverts’ greater demand forchange andnovelty inbothlaboratory 
studies andstudies ofsocial behavior.
Eysenck (1997a) further argued thatmany psychology studies havereached 
erroneous conclusions because theyhaveignored personality factors. Forexample, 
studies ineducation comparing theeffectiveness ofdiscovery learning andtraditional 
reception learning haveoften produced either conflicting differences ornodiffer -
ences. Eysenck believed thatthese studies didnotconsider thatextraverted children 
prefer anddobetter withthemore active discovery learning, whereas introverted chil-
drenprefer anddobetter withthemore passive reception learning. Inother words, 
aninteraction exists between personality dimensions andlearning styles. However, 
when investigators ignore these personality factors, theymayfindnodifferences in
thecomparative effectiveness ofdiscovery versus reception learning styles.
Eysenck (1995) alsohypothesized thatpsychoticism (P)isrelated togenius 
andcreativity. Again, therelationship isnotsimple. Many children havecreative abil-
ity,arenonconforming, andhaveunorthodox ideas; buttheygrow uptobenoncre -
ativepeople. Eysenck found evidence thatthese people lackthepersistence ofhighP
scorers. Children withthesame creative potential whoarealsohighinpsychoticism 
(P)areabletoresist thecriticisms ofparents andteachers andtoemerge ascreative 
adults.
Similarly, Eysenck andS.B.G.Eysenck (1975) reported thatbothhighP
scorers andhighEscorers arelikely tobetroublemakers aschildren. However, par-
entsandteachers tendtoregard theextraverted children ascharming rogues andtoFinal PDF to printer