403

MEET TANK Often, in the lobby of a business or other establishment, a receptionist is the first employee you encounter. The receptionist shapes a visitor’s first impression, and thus should be friendly, eager to help, and reliable. A neat physical appearance and pleasant voice are also big pluses.

Newell Simon Hall, the computer science building at Pittsburgh’s Carnegie Mellon University, has an excellent receptionist. His name is Marion LeFleur, but everyone calls him “Tank,” a fitting title given his square jaw and overall tough-guy appearance. But don’t be intimidated by the Rambo look. “Tank is a nice guy,” says Tank’s boss, Dr. Reid Simmons. “He just does his job and has a really good heart.” Approach Tank’s booth, and he will take note of your presence immediately. “Hello there. What can I do for you?” he asks ever so politely (Greenfieldboyce, 2005, December 26). Looking for the room number of a university employee? Tank will find it in seconds. Need directions to a different building on campus? Tank is all over it. He can also provide updates on the local time and weather. Ask the right questions, and Tank might even share some details of his personal life, such as the fact that he once dated the scoreboard at the Pittsburgh Steelers stadium (Lee, Kiesler, & Forlizzi, 2010; Simmons et al., 2011). He may even tell you about his career disaster with NASA, or his botched mission with the CIA (Carnegie Mellon University, 2013).

Perhaps you feel like you’re beginning to know Tank, getting a basic sense of the type of person he is. But wait. Tank isn’t a person; he is a robot—a “roboceptionist,” to be precise—and robots are not capable of exhibiting the complex behaviors you would expect from a human being. At least not yet.

Note: Quotations attributed to Dr. Reid Simmons are personal communications.

404

Looking at Tank, it’s quite obvious he is not a person. His blue, chiseled face lives in a 15-inch flat-panel LCD screen, and his body looks somewhat like a massive red coffee thermos. He has sensors to detect your presence, but he cannot see your facial expressions, read your body language, or even hear your voice. In fact, the only way to communicate with Tank is by typing on his keyboard, and he can only understand simple questions such as “Where is the ladies’ room?”

Tank is a product of Carnegie Mellon’s Social Robots Project, a collaboration between the university’s Robotics Institute and School of Drama. The goal is to “create a robot that can provide useful services, but that also exhibits personality and character” (Gockley et al., 2005, p. 2199). How is this accomplished? Every one of Tank’s behaviors, from the movements of his eyes to the subtle tilts of his head, is preprogrammed by Dr. Simmons’ team of computer whizzes. His backstory and script were written by members of the university’s drama department. It’s all “smoke and mirrors,” according to Dr. Simmons. Creating the illusion of a “personality” turns out to be quite a challenge. This would be no surprise to psychologists studying personality.

One of the major challenges of creating social robots is programming behaviors that gel coherently. If you want to craft a robot with a convincing personality, you’d better make sure that everything it does and says fits the part. One out-of-character remark and people will be reminded that they are merely talking to a collection of electrical circuits.

LO 1 Define personality.

So far we have used the term “personality” rather loosely. The reality is that robots do not actually have personalities. They take on roles or personas whose characteristics may bear resemblance to personalities, but all of their behaviors are programmed by people. Well then, what is personality? Generally speaking, personality refers to the unique, core set of characteristics that influence the way one thinks, acts, and feels—characteristics many psychologists would agree are relatively consistent and enduring throughout the life span.

We should point out that personality is not the equivalent of character. When people discuss character, they often are referring to qualities of morality or culture-specific ideas about what makes a person “good” or “bad.” A person who is untrustworthy or makes “poor” choices might be described as having a weak character, while someone who stands up for what she believes might be said to have a strong character. You may hear that the guy with the blue mohawk or the woman with the multiple body piercings is a “real character”—often in a judgmental way. Psychologists try not to make such judgments; our goal is to describe behaviors and characteristics objectively.

405

TEMPERAMENT Some aspects of adult personality appear to derive from temperament, the distinct patterns of emotional reactions and behaviors observed early in life. Because various temperaments are evident in infants, they appear to have a genetic basis (Plomin, DeFries, Knopik, & Neiderhiser, 2013). But even though temperament remains somewhat stable across the life span (Kagan & Snidman, 1991; Sigelman & Rider, 2009), it can be molded by the environment (Caspi, Roberts, & Shiner, 2005). You can think of temperament as one dimension of the broader construct of personality (Goldsmith et al., 1987).

LO 2 Distinguish how the perspectives of psychology explain personality development.

PERSPECTIVES ON PERSONALITY Psychologists explain the development of personality in a variety of ways, often in accordance with certain theoretical perspectives (Table 10.1). None of the perspectives can completely account for the development and expression of personality, but they do help describe, explain, and predict behavior. Most have strong ties to their founders, all of whom were influenced by the historical period in which they lived. Sigmund Freud’s emphasis on sexuality, for example, was partly a reaction to the Victorian cultural climate into which he was born.

406

In the next section, we will examine these theories of personality in greater depth, but first let’s take a quick detour somewhere fun. How would you describe your sense of humor?

Question 1

Question 2

1. psychoanalytic

2. trait

3. social-cognitive

4. behavioral

Question 3