comparative analysis of a newspaper article by Jacewicz (2017)

comparative analysis of a newspaper article by Jacewicz (2017)

Genetics and environment surrounding an individual are the main factors that influence personality. However, in the past few years, research has been carried out to investigate the link between the discrepancies in adult’s personalities and their physical locations. Chopik and Motyl (2017) conducted a correlational study in 50 states and found a relationship between adult’s personalities and their geographical locations. This paper provides a comparative analysis of a newspaper article by Jacewicz (2017) who makes claims based on Chopik and Motyl study. The paper establishes that Jacewicz has done a good job referencing Chopik and Motyl’s work, but the title of her article provides a different message from the original journal article.

To understand the relationship between personality and geographic location of an individual, Chopik and Motyl (2017) conducted a research in 50 states to 127, 050 adults ranging between the age of 25 to 35 years. From the study sample, 73.5% were female, while 26.5% were male. The study was carried out between September 2002 and March 2012 where the partakers were analyzed using a 7-point Likert scale through an internet site known as authentichappiness.com.

Chopik and Motyl study aimed at detecting and describing the affiliation between two diverse variables of quantifiable value. The variable comprised of the predictor variable that referred to the geographic location of the adults studied and the criterion variable that described their attachment orientation. Other variables that were considered in the study include sex rationale (male or female), age, race (White or Hispanic) and median income.

Chopik and Motyl gathered geographical and demographic information such as age and postal codes of their participants to collect data for their research. Their study established that there was a substantial correlation between feelings of anxiety and avoidance at the state and individual level. However, the main findings from the study were that in the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic regions, individuals are higher in neuroticism that is associated with attachment anxiety. The study also concluded that individuals living in the frontier countries were more prone to attachment avoidance because they are independent and self-reliant.

Chopik and Motyl also investigated how attachment anxiety and avoidance differ geographically. The study established that the most anxious states were in the mid-Atlantic and Northeast region of the United States. Five of the top ten most anxious states were found to be in these two areas. Only one country in the ten least anxious states (Vermont) was found to be in these regions.

To determine if state-level anxiety and avoidance are linked to state-level relational indicators, Chopik and Motyl found out that higher state-level avoidance was related to a minor percentage of married families, a lesser family size, a subordinate fraction of people volunteering, and less hours of volunteering on average. Avoidance was also connected with a greater proportion of people living alone. On the other hand, anxiety was significantly correlated to the proportion of married households and marginally (negatively) associated to the percentage of the population that reported to have never been married. Thus, states with high level of anxiety were found to have a higher percentage of married households compared to states with lower levels of anxiety.

The idea of people’s personalities and attitudes changing in different surroundings is a puzzle that Jacewicz was determined to answer in her article “Where you live affects your personality, study say”. Jacewicz study was based on romantic relationships and how they are influenced by the geographic localities of individuals. Jacewicz borrows from the correlational study of Chopik and Motyl and concludes that, people living in the Northeast and Midwest areas have a higher level of anxiety in terms of long-term romantic relationships than those residing in Westcoast regions. The study also concluded that, people living in mountainous regions had declined interest in cultivating relationships. However, Utah, despite it being a hilly region, was found to be one of the most romantically motivated and least anxious regions from the areas under study.

Jacewicz article also highlights other factors that are mentioned in Chopik and Motyl study which provide additional explanations as to why people’s personalities change based on the environment they live. Migration patterns, social pressures and ecology are factors that affect individual’s personalities without their awareness. According to Jacewicz, personality can change after a relocation because individuals can either have a positive or negative attitude towards their new surroundings. Change in weather conditions can also have an impact on people’s mood and behavior. However, Jacewicz argues that, such factors are hypothesized, and additional research need to be conducted to provide facts and support the correlation study.

From the above summary, it can be argued that, Jacewicz has done a good job summarizing and discussing Chopik and Motyl’s work. Jacewicz understanding of Chopik and Motyl’s work is depicted through her analysis of their findings which is clear and accurate. Her summation of the findings illustrating the high levels of neuroticism that exist in states on the east coast and the low degrees of attachment in the frontier regions, is not ambiguous and she recounts the main results in a brief manner which makes her writing clear and interesting to the reader.

However, spends a lot of time discussing other possible factors that explain the link between individuals’ personalities and geographic location as highlighted in Chopik and Motyl’s article. The major part of the article explains why relationships exist and the reasons why people’s personalities are centralized in certain states. However, these factors are indicated by Chopik and Motyl to be possible factors as to why relationships exist but are not fundamental factors. Jacewicz does acknowledge at the end of her article that further research needs to be done on this subject to go beyond debating educated speculations. However, including these arguments as a major discussion of her article can be confusing to the readers because they might understand the findings as causation for variations in personality among the states.

The title of Jacewicz article is also confusing because it provides a different message from what Chopik and Motyl’s scientific journal alleges. Chopik and Motyl argues that there is a considerable correlation between geographic variation and adult attachment orientation, not just that personality changes based on the geographic location of a person. However, the title of Jacewicz’s article suggests that the geographic location of a person affects their personality.

To conclude, even though the title of Jacewicz article does not go hand in hand with the assumptions of the original article by Chopik and Motyl, its content is rich and provides a summation of the original article. However, Jacewicz should have relied more on the main findings of the original article rather than delving into hypothetical claims made by Chopik and Motyl that require more investigation.