I'm not sure how well these will work, mostly because "personality" is a bit messy in academia; you end up in the weeds of psychology, philosophy, etc. You also end up with a causation issue where it is hard to determine if writing follows personality or if personality follows writing (chicken and the egg conundrum). There is a lot of discussion about how identity (personality) emerges through writing (i.e. we become the person we write ourselves as being). That is some deeply theoretical research though.
One way you might work it is to try to connect process theory from the perspective of Harris with popular personality theories (the color schome, or the alphabet, or I kind of like the ancient humors scheme: phlegmatic, melancholic, choleric, and I forget the fourth. This might be a fun investigation, but what academic (knowledge building) argument could you use it to make?
I'm not sure how well these will work, mostly because "personality" is a bit messy in academia; you end up in the weeds of psychology, philosophy, etc. You also end up with a causation issue where it is hard to determine if writing follows personality or if personality follows writing (chicken and the egg conundrum). There is a lot of discussion about how identity (personality) emerges through writing (i.e. we become the person we write ourselves as being). That is some deeply theoretical research though.
ReplyDeleteOne way you might work it is to try to connect process theory from the perspective of Harris with popular personality theories (the color schome, or the alphabet, or I kind of like the ancient humors scheme: phlegmatic, melancholic, choleric, and I forget the fourth. This might be a fun investigation, but what academic (knowledge building) argument could you use it to make?