The study of personality investigates an existential question that humans have been asking since ancient times: “Why am I the way I am?”. However, the science of psychology developed an interest in personality surprisingly late, not until the late 1930’s. Nevertheless, individual differences have been interpreted by all cultures (and belief systems) throughout history, with two common themes still found in today’s theories: external influences on personality, and the internal bodily localizations of personality traits.
This thesis aims to integrate these two themes, with the help of Cross-cultural Affective Neuroscience (CAN). Chapter One presents a review that covers new ground by discussing these themes from the perspective of the most historically prominent belief systems (Part A), and points to its projections in modern science (Part B). By the start of the 20th century, a number of theorists started to work to synthesize these external and internal themes. The 21st century started with the scientific realization that the emotional brain functions as a bridge between the external influences and the internal bodily localizations. Despite these advances, only Panksepp attempted to theorize the relationship of the emotional brain to personality.
Part B summarizes how the Affective Neuroscience Personality Scale (ANPS) was constructed, based on Panksepp’s approach, to measure six basic affective systems: SEEK, PLAY, CARE, FEAR, SADNESS, and ANGER. The ANPS has proved to be a valid and reliable tool, standardized in at least 15 countries. However, the ANPS literature has not addressed certain points, such as (1) the role of culture, (2) the cross-cultural investigation of gender effects, and (3) the cross-cultural analysis of the relation of the ANPS to the Big Five Scales (B5S). Part C offers a solution to these missing points, through the development of CAN, presented in a summary of five published papers. The main premise of CAN is that culture influences subcortical affective systems, via mothering styles, family models, and parental attachments.
Chapters Two to Six present the emprical aspects of this thesis. These studies demonstrate that (i) cultures have varying influence on the subcortical affective systems, (ii) gender has both universal and culturally specific effects on ANPS, and (iii) cortical cognitive personality factors measured by the B5S are rooted in certain subcortical affective systems measured by the ANPS. The first CAN study (Chapter Two) compares the norms of the original American ANPS with the norms attained by the Turkish ANPS study. The second CAN study (Chaper Three) compares the ANPS findings among Japan, Türkiye, and Germany. It also observes how ANPS and Big Five factors load on interdependent- independent self construals. The third CAN paper (Chapter Four) reviews all the ANPS literature, including the first two CAN papers. It suggests future directions for CAN research, including gender/culture comparisons. The fourth CAN paper (Chapter Five) observes the gender effect on ANPS in 15 countries. Lastly, the fifth paper (Chapter Six) includes a meta-analysis of ANPS-Big Five correlations, over 21 papers from 12 countries.
Chapter Seven discusses the main findings deduced from these five CAN papers: universal similarities and cultural differences, and the influence of connectedness and separateness on ANPS findings across cultures. These findings confirm the main premise of CAN that culture influences the affective neuroscience personality profiles. The discussion demonstrates that CAN is a valid, integrative research field to observe personality through the lens of culture, gender and the emotional brain. It also presents the limitations of this new-born field, and suggestions for further research: the development of a Global Affective Mapping, that illustrates the cultural affective personality profiles within universal affective networks.