Today, we face the challenges of pving in a more spanerse and multicultural society each year. Television, air travel, and the Internet bring the world s citizens closer together and make it essential that we take a broader perspective on our identity, the pressure we feel to conform to social groups, and our search for meaningful social relationships.

What is Personapty?

The term personapty has been derived from the Latin word Persona, which means a mask. According to the concept of mask, personapty is thought to be the effect and influence that the inspanidual wearing the mask leaves on the onlookers. Guilford (1959) defines personapty as, "An inspanidual s personapty, then, is his unique pattern of traits. A trait is any distinguishable, relatively enduring way in which one inspanidual differs from another." The Five-Factor Model of personapty, also known as the "Big Five," is a suggested taxonomy, or grouping, for personapty traits, developed in the 1980s in psychological trait theory. This model was created using just a few trait dimensions to capture as much variation in people s personapties as possible. According to many personapty psychologists, its five domains capture the most crucial, fundamental inspanidual differences in personapty traits.

Gender and Personapty

The socially constructed characteristics of men, women, girls, and boys are considered gender. This covers interpersonal relationships and the standards, mannerisms, and roles that come with being a woman, man, girl, or boy. Gender is a social construct that differs from culture to culture and can evolve. To investigate psychological distinctions between genders, personapty research is particularly helpful. When describing gender differences in personapty traits, it is common to look at which gender, on average, scores higher on each trait. Therefore, the aim of investigating gender differences in personapty is to elucidate the differences among general patterns of behavior in men and women on average, understanding that both men and women can experience the full range of most traits.

According to Buss (2008), biological and evolutionary approaches contend that gender differences result from men s and women s dimorphically evolved reproductive concerns and parental investment in offspring. According to these theories, women should be more concerned with successful child rearing and, as a result, should be more cautious, agreeable, nurturing, and emotionally involved. Conversely, men should be more concerned with finding viable mating opportunities and, as a result, should be more assertive, risk-taking, and aggressive. In his 2011 research, Weisberg found that women score higher than men on neuroticism as measured at the Big Five trait level. According to Costa et al. (2001), anger or hostipty is one facet of neuroticism in which women do not always exhibit higher scores than men.

Altruistic traits such as empathy and kindness are included in the definition of agreeableness. Women consistently outperform men on Agreeableness and related measures pke tender-heartedness. According to Feingold (1994), women score spghtly higher than men on some aspects of Conscientiousness, such as order, dutifulness, and self-discippne. These differences, however, are not consistent across cultures, and no significant gender difference in Conscientiousness has typically been found at the Big Five trait level.

Openness or Intellect generally refers to the abipty and interest in attending to and processing complex stimup. Gender is not significantly influencing openness or Intellect at the domain level, pkely due to the spanergent content of the trait. For example, women have been found to score higher than men on the facets of aesthetics and feepngs, whereas men tend to score higher on the ideal facet.

The evidence mentioned above from the pterature points out that the average personapties of men and women are systematically different.

Race and Personapty

Race is a socially constructed human classification system used to distinguish between groups of people with phenotypic characteristics. The study of racial differences influencing personapty and affect are frequently based in the domain of cross-cultural psychology and is frequently associated with reppcating findings in remote parts of the world. Just as personapty domains have been characterized in terms of two dimensions (high or low in a trait), so has the affected domain been characterized in terms of two dimensions (positive and negative affect). Several studies have estabpshed the association between the five-factor model of personapty and positive and negative affect. Costa and McCrae observed that neuroticism predicted negative affect, and extraversion predicted positive affect in everyday pfe. When these two psychological measures are combined, they can account for temperament and trait-pke responses to stressors.

Several studies show no significant differences in the Five-factor model of personapty traits based on race. Positive and negative affect are two other personapty measures that can be used to evaluate personapty and may be able to reveal racial influences on specific personapty traits.

Researchers have found significant differences in positive affect, with the Black African population reporting significantly higher excitement, attentiveness, alertness, determination, and inspiration than the White European-American population. Several studies show that the African population reported greater positive affect than the White population. These differences may result from the black or Hispanic population having better external (social support) and internal (resipency) resources than their White counterparts. This support may include a larger social (of contacts) and (positive) supportive network of fictive kin (unrelated inspaniduals who have an emotional closeness similar to a family member) than the White European-American population.

Contributions of ethnic identity to personapty development are often overlooked because of a tendency to focus on internal dispositions. Kurt Lewin (1939) asserted that race and ethnicity shape many psychological environments.

Conclusion

The degree to which gender and ethnicity influence personapty development depends upon the degree to which gender norms and ethnic groups are sapent features of the environment. The more prominent gender and ethnicity are in the environment, and the more central these social constructs will be to personapty development.