Analysing personality and behaviour is complex and exists on multi-level and it is multi-caused (Argyris, 1957). Personality can be defined as specific characteristics of individuals which may be open or hidden and which may determine either commonality or differences in behaviour in an organization (Brooks, 1999). In addition, Robbins, Millett, Cacioppe & Waters-Marsh (2001) define personality as the consistent psychological patterns within an individual that effect the way they interact with others and the situations they encounter. Robbins, Millett, Cacioppe & Waters-Marsh (2001) also discuss the different personality determinants, they state that some aspects o

In conclusion, it is obvious that analyzing personality can be a tough task as it is deeply diversified. This essay has discussed personality with the help of the locus of control test and continued with explaining the different learning styles and some motivation theories relevant to my university life here in Griffith.

A person’s personality can also be related to their learning styles. Brooks (1999) argues that the issue of learning has become an increasingly important one, both for the individual in his or her own right and also in terms of their rule of individual learning in the organisation. Moorhead and Griffin (1989) define learning as a relatively permanent change in behaviour or potential behaviour that results from direct or indirect experience. There are a few theories of learning and as stated by Robbins, Millett, Cacioppe & Waters-Marsh (1994), they are classical conditioning which refers to a type of conditioning where an individual responds to some stimulus that would not invariably produce such a response. Another theory is the operant conditioning which is a type of conditioning in which desired voluntary or learnt behaviour leads to a reward or prevents a punishment. Finally comes the theory of social learning, which states that people can learn through observation and direct experience.

Furthermore, they divide the determinants into three categories which are, firstly, Heredity, which refers to those factors such as facial attractiveness, gender, temperament, muscle composition and reflexes, energy level, biological rhythms etc. that are predetermined at birth, secondly, Environment which refers to the culture in which one is raised, early conditioning, norms among family, friends and social groups, and other influences that one experiences, that exerts pressure on the personality formation, and thirdly, Situation, which states that a person’s personality does change in different situations they face. Different demands in different situations call forth different aspects of personality.

There are a few tests available which help in finding one’s personality characteristics. The test I am going to discuss is the locus of control test. Locus of control is defined as the degree to which people believe they are masters of their own fate (Robbins, Millett, Cacioppe & Waters-Marsh, 2001). The outcome of this test divides people into two categories, internal and external locus of control, though a mixture of both can be found in some people. After performing the test (see appendix for test), my result was a score of six which according to this test defines me a person with an internal locus of control and as stated by Judge, Erez, Bono & Thoresen (2003), beliefs about the causes of events in one’s life-locus is internal when individuals see events as being contingent on their own behavior. In other words, people with internal locus of control believe that they control what happens to them.

Some topics in this essay:
Cacioppe Waters-Marsh, Moorehead Griffin, Moorhead Griffin, , Bono Thoresen, locus control, furnham 1994, Robbins Millett, Millett Cacioppe, millett cacioppe waters-marsh, robbins millett cacioppe, cacioppe waters-marsh, moorehead griffin, raise promotion, internal locus, internal locus control, millett cacioppe, robbins millett, griffin 1989, university life, Bernardin Bowans, locus control test, cacioppe waters-marsh 2001,