BRAIN. Broad Research in Artificial Intelligence and Neuroscience ISSN: 2068-0473 | e-ISSN: 2067-3957 Covered in: PubMed.gov; IndexCopernicus; The Linguist List; Google Academic; Ulrichs; getCITED; Genamics JournalSeek; J-Gate; SHERPA/RoMEO; Dayang Journal System; Public Knowledge Project; BIUM; NewJour; ArticleReach Direct; Link+; CSB; CiteSeerX; Socolar; KVK; WorldCat; CrossRef; Ideas RePeC; Econpapers; Socionet. 2019, Volume 10, Issue 4, pages: 28-39 | doi:10.18662/brain/03 A Comparative Study of Emotional Dimensions of Personality in Stimulants and Opioids Users Sanaz HOSSEINPOUR¹ 1 Department of psychology, Islamic Azad University, Science and research branch, Faculty of humanities and social sciences, Tehran, Iran. Abstract: Background and Objective: Drug addiction and substance abuse have become a psychological social problem that seriously threatens the various countries and societies. The purpose of this study was to compare the emotional dimensions of personality in stimulants and opioids users. Method: The research sample consisted of two groups of stimulants and opioids users consisted of 150 people (each group was 75 people) were selected by targeted and convenience sampling method and responded to the psychological emotional personality scale. Results: The results showed that there was a significant difference in the dimensions of novelty seeking, harm avoidance, persistence, cooperation, self-directedness self-transcendence in stimulants and opioid users, and in all of the above scales, the mean scores obtained in stimulants was higher than the opioids. Conclusion: These results indicate that addicted people show deficiencies in emotional cognitive regulation, which can be effective in preventing and treating addiction. Keywords: Emotional dimensions; Personality; Addiction; Stimulants; Opioids. How to cite: Hosseinpour, S. (2019). A Comparative Study of Emotional Dimensions of Personality in Stimulants and Opioids Users. BRAIN. Broad Research in Artificial Intelligence and Neuroscience, 10(4), 28-39. doi:10.18662/brain/03 BRAIN. Broad Research in December, 2019 Artificial Intelligence and Neuroscience Volume 10, Issue 4 29 Introduction Today, the problem of drug abuse is one of the four global and major social crises in the country, which has close relation with the economic and cultural aspects. Although, social factors in drug addiction are emphasized a lot, but abuse can be attributed to biological, psychological, and personality processes. Personality refers to all the traits and features including thought, feelings, self-perception, views, thoughts, and many habits that represent one's behavior and actually refer to a particular aspect of the whole human personality Addicts' personality traits are not just due to opioids, but addicts have had a number of psychological and personality disorders prior to addiction that have become more destructive after the addiction. So the problem of addicts is not just opioids, but in essence, the relationship between personality and addiction is discussed, and in fact, some people's personality structure is more conducive for accepting addiction than others. Many researches shows that emotional instability is the axis of the dysfunction in personality disorder and one of the signs of specifying it (Robbins, Keng, Ekblad & Brantley, 2012; Bornovalova et al., 2008). People with this disorder show greater frequency and severity in the emotions surveyed by self-assessment questionnaires (Linehan et al., 2007; Jacob et al., 2008). Various studies emphasize irritability (Links and Heslegrave, 2000), anger (Jacob et al., 2008) and shame (Gratz, Rosenthal, Tull, Lejuez & Gunderson, 2010), stress and anxiety (Stiglmeyr et al., 2005), fear (Arntz Klokman & Sieswerda, 2005), and total negative emotions (Walters, 2006). Based on the evidence from effective brain systems that are divided into six distinct groups, it has been assumed that a great deal of personality variation can be attributed to the strengths and weaknesses found in these six systems. This hypothesis provides more evidence for the physiological bases of personality if proven (Panksepp, 2004). Also, Davis, Panksepp and Normansell (2004) provide a tool called Affective Neuroscience Personality Scales (ANPS). The tool is used to measure six core emotions that according to them is “core” elements defendable from emotional experience of “happiness, curiosity, emphasize, phobia, discomfort and anger”. Stimulants such as amphetamine, dextroamphetamine, and methylphenidate are a group of synthetic or plant-derived substances that increase alertness, arousal, and vigilance by stimulating the central nervous system. Stimulants by affecting the brain's reward center create pleasurable effects such as euphoria. These effects are in the consumer that led to A Comparative Study of Emotional Dimensions of Personality in Stimulants … Sanaz HOSSEINPOUR 30 dependence. These substances cause energy and happiness in the consumer. The members of this group do not have high physical addiction but their consumption is associated with psychological addiction and many physical effects. (Mennin & Farach, 2007). In contrast, opioids are substances derived directly from poppy sap or artificially produced from this substance and are the most common illicit substances used in Iran. Opium is a poppy-dried sap that is the source of a variety of addictive substances, including burned, sap, morphine, codeine, diphenoxylate and heroin. The physical effects of these substances include the feeling of heat and red face, pupil narrowing, dizziness and lethargy (Sharp et al., 2014). Behavioral disorders, feelings of joy and pleasure followed by depression and bad temper. Mental retardation, restlessness, disorder in memory and concentration, disorder in judging are the psychological effects of drug use. According to the World Health Organization, methamphetamine use is the most abused drug in the world after cannabis. Currently, there are approximately 26 million regular users of amphetamine versus 16 million heroin users and 14 million cocaine users worldwide (Tomko, Trull, Wood & Sher, 2014). In the studies of Allen, Moeller, Rhoades and Cherek (1998) and Fisher et al. (2006), it has been reported that regarding drug abuse disorders, personality features such as impulsive, impulsivity, emotion seeking and restriction and prone to social deviations can expose the person to these disorders. In addition, heroin and alcohol abusers had higher levels of vulnerability associated with internalizing relative to the control group. On the other hand, Conway et al., suggested that restriction factor (one of other features of personality) can well distinguish opioids and cocaine users (low restriction) from marijuana and alcohol users (high restriction). In this regard, according to the findings of Ketabi, Maher and Borjali, (2008), the level of novelty seeking and harm avoidance of addicts is higher than non-addicts, while self-directedness and cooperation in opioids users is lower than normal people. Also, Sarvela and McClendon (1998) in a study on addicts in Manchester found that four factors of access to opioids, risky occupation, and pressure from friends and colleagues had a significant relationship with addiction, and in another study he specified that emotion seeking individuals have readiness to high addiction. Robert et al (2007) in a study on opioids users in Germany showed that opium users had 14.9% anxiety, 11.6% depression, 10.5% schizoid personality, 10.1% psychological weakness and 10.1% antisocial personality. The highest rate was related to heroin addicts. According to research, it seems that stimulant and opioids users have different personality, psychological characteristics that play a BRAIN. Broad Research in December, 2019 Artificial Intelligence and Neuroscience Volume 10, Issue 4 31 decisive role in their tendency for stimulants and opioids. Therefore, the present study seeks to answer the question whether there is a difference between the emotional dimensions of personality in stimulants and opioids users. Research method This study is a causal-comparative study in which the personality emotional were compared in two groups of stimulants and opioids users. The statistical population of this study includes addicts (men and women) who are addicted to stimulants and opioids that referred to quit camps or addiction counseling and psychological centers in Tehran in 2006. The sample consisted of 150 addicts who were selected using targeted and convenience sampling method. It should be noted that 75 stimulants and opioids users were selected as the sample group. Entry criteria of sample group based on the DSM-5 include: 1- Tolerance symptoms 2- Quit symptoms 3- Permanent desire to reduce or control the substance or unsuccessful efforts in this field 4- Long time to be spent from needed activities to obtain or release material from effects of the material. 5. Important social, occupational, and recreational activities to be excluded due to drug use. 6- Continued drug use, despite awareness of its physical and psychological problems. 7. Ability to read and write to answer a research questionnaire. Tool It is the Affective Neuroscience Personality Scale (ANPS). The test questions are classified into 14 blocks used by the following components: search, phobia, care, anger, happiness, sadness and discomfort (only 12 items) that are generally followed by a filling question. Items in each block (numbers 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12) have inverse numbers. To guide the reader, there are 7 items from the "Search" component on the form (numbers 1, 9, 17, 25, 33, 41 and 49) and 7 items on the back of the form that contain numbers (57, 65, 73 81, 89, 97, 105). Rating changes from "normal" to "reverse" seven times. The translation and adaptation steps of this questionnaire with the permission of its creators (Davis et al., 2014) in Iran have been performed by Amini et al. (2017) and its re-translation has been revised by the creators and finalized after modification. In Amini's study (2017), 10 experts' view was used to improve the validity of this questionnaire and its validity was found to be appropriate. The reliability of the questionnaire was 0.84 using Cronbach's alpha. A Comparative Study of Emotional Dimensions of Personality in Stimulants … Sanaz HOSSEINPOUR 32 Findings Table 1 presents the descriptive indices of the two groups as well as the emotional dimensions of the personality. Table 4.1 Descriptive Indicators of Personality Emotional Dimensions Discomfort Happiness Anger Care Phobia Search User group Components opioid Stimulant 150 150 150 150 150 150 75 75 Number 17.456 16.875 17.458 17.300 17.083 16.875 16.450 68.716 Mean 4.7682 4.7253 4.7684 4.7111 4.795 4.7253 2.4004 11.8301 SD 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 44.00 Minimum 27.00 27.00 27.00 27.00 27.00 27.00 20.00 99.00 Maximum Then, Kolmogorov - Smirnov test was performed to investigate normal distribution of variables before multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). Since the significance level obtained in the K-S test for most of the variables of the study is more than 0.05, separately, it can be concluded that the distribution of the studied variables in the statistical sample has a normal distribution. Table 2. Kolmogorov-Smirnov test Significant level Kolmogorov- Smirnov Group Variable 0.200 0.077 Opioid Search 0.200 0.076 Stimulant 0.025 0.107 Opioid Phobia 0.200 0.087 Stimulant 0.199 0.088 Opioid Care 0.075 0.094 Stimulant 0.191 0.087 Opioid Anger 0.087 0.088 Stimulant 0.201 0.103 Opioid Happiness 0.200 0.94 Stimulant 0.121 0.98 Opioid Discomfort 0.109 0.102 Stimulant Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was used to analyze the data on the differences between the two groups of opioids users and stimulants users. Box test results for investigating the default of all variance- covariance matrices showed a significant level of (p> 0.05). Therefore, the BRAIN. Broad Research in December, 2019 Artificial Intelligence and Neuroscience Volume 10, Issue 4 33 homogeneity of variance – covariance matrix was well observed (F = 1.125, P> 0.05). Table 3. Box test results to examine the default of all variance-covariance matrices in components of personality dimensions Significance F BOX S M 0.345 1.125 6.892 To determine the significant effect of group on the components of personality emotional dimensions, the Wilks' Lambda test was used and the results are reported in Table 4. Table 4. Results of the Wilks' Lambda test in multivariate analysis of variance Eta squared Significant level df Degree of freedom of error F Value Test 0.153 0.001 3 156 0.364 0.847 Wilks' Lambda The results of Wilks' Lambda test showed that there was a significant difference between two groups in at least one of the components of personality dimensions. Levon's test was also used to examine the equality of variance in the components of emotional dimensions of personality in the study groups. Table 5. Levon's test results for investigating the default of equality of variance in personality dimensions of personality. Significant level Df2 Df1 F Variables 0.120 158 1 2.438 Search 0.106 158 1 2.640 Phobia 0.799 158 1 0.650 Care 0.112 158 1 2.450 Anger 0.567 158 1 0.760 Happiness 0.456 158 1 2.431 Discomfort The table above shows that the variance of the components of the personality emotional dimensions does not differ significantly in the two A Comparative Study of Emotional Dimensions of Personality in Stimulants … Sanaz HOSSEINPOUR 34 groups of opioids and stimulants users, which indicates the reliability of the results. Table 5. Results of multivariate analysis of variance Eta squared Significance F MS DF SS Variable Group 0.128 0.001 23.100 783.225 1 783.225 Search Opioid group 0.044 0.001 7.235 308.025 1 308.025 Phobia 0.074 0.001 12.649 345.156 1 345.156 Care 0.055 0.001 13.345 435.345 1 231.435 Anger 0.123 0.001 21.435 345.234 1 432.654 Happiness 0.023 0.001 12.436 234.456 1 432.987 Discomfort 0.121 0.001 13.367 5357.175 158 5357.175 Search Stimulant group 0.012 0.001 12.567 42.572 158 6726.375 Phobia 0.098 0.001 11.987 27.288 158 4311.538 Care 0.076 0.001 12.102 34.344 158 3467.341 Anger 0.066 0.001 21.231 32.453 158 5687.345 Happiness 0.145 0.001 14.243 54.543 158 4325.543 Discomfort According to Table 5, there is a significant difference between the two groups of opioids users and stimulants users in the dimension of search (P <0.01, F1, 158 = 23/100). That is, the search score for the stimulant group was significantly lower than the opioid group. The group variable explains 12.8% of the variance of search in the search. There is a significant difference between the two groups of opioid and stimulant users in phobia component (F1, 158 = 7.223) and P <0.001). The phobia score of the stimulant group is significantly higher than the opioid group. The group variable explains 4.4% of the variance in phobia. There is a significant difference between the two groups of opioid and stimulant users in care component (F1, 158 =12.649) and P <0.001). The care score of the stimulant group is significantly lower than the opioid group. The group variable explains 7.4% of the variance in care. There is a significant difference between the two groups of opioid and stimulant users in anger component (F1, 1 = 13.345) and P <0.001). The anger score of the stimulant group is significantly lower than the opioid group. The group variable explains 5.5% of the variance in anger. There is a significant difference between the two groups of opioid and stimulant users in happiness component (F1, 1 = 21.435) and P <0.001). The happiness score of the stimulant group is significantly lower than the opioid group. The group variable explains 12% of the variance in anger. BRAIN. Broad Research in December, 2019 Artificial Intelligence and Neuroscience Volume 10, Issue 4 35 There is a significant difference between the two groups of opioid and stimulant users in discomfort component (F1, 158 = 14.243) and P <0.001). The sadness score of the stimulant group is significantly higher than the opioid group. The group variable explains 14% of the variance in discomfort. Discussion and conclusion This study was conducted to investigate and compare the emotional dimensions of personality in opioids and stimulants users. The results showed that there is a significant difference between the emotional dimensions of personality in opioids and stimulants users. That is, there was a significant difference between the two groups of addicts in terms of search, phobia, happiness, discomfort, anger. These results are consistent with the findings of the researches of Habibeh and Teklavi (2016), Tahereh, Khani, Shahram, and Gholamreza, (2011), Gross and Feldman Barrett (2011), Stevens et al., (2004). The results of the study indicated that the dimension of search in stimulants users is higher than opioids users; it means that following and searching is mainly more in stimulants users. This result may be due to the morale and personality of people who are inclined to use stimulants, so the search dimension itself can lead to more demand of stimulants by searchers than traditional drug users. The research dimension can be related to people's emotion seeking, emotion seeking people are ready for high addiction. The findings did not show a significant difference between the fear dimensions among stimulants users compared to opioids users. The above results show that both groups of users have no phobia to use opioids. Contrary to the results obtained, other results indicated that heroin addicts had a high level of novelty seeking and non-phobia in comparison to opioids and control groups. In addition, the findings show that the anger dimension is higher in opioids users than in stimulants. The findings also show that the dimension of sadness and discomfort in stimulants users is higher than opioids users. Various studies have shown that the most important factor that was significantly associated with the development and persistence of mental disorders was lack of motivation, interest and cooperation to change the conditions. In addition, opioids users had non-motivation and sadness caused by it. Other results indicate that happiness dimension is higher in stimulants users than opioids users. Since this study and previous research show that most of the stimulant users are young people and mostly young people under 40, it can be guessed that due to youth and more energy, they A Comparative Study of Emotional Dimensions of Personality in Stimulants … Sanaz HOSSEINPOUR 36 have more discomfort and anger and happiness than opioids users and they have high-risk behaviors associated with the use of stimulants. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), methamphetamine use is the most abused after cannabis in the world. Currently, there are approximately 26 million regular users of amphetamine versus 16 million heroin users and 14 million cocaine users worldwide. Research findings suggest that stimulants users have a stronger dimension of care than opioids users. Characteristics of impulsivity, emotion seeking, restriction, and prone to social deviations can expose person to these disorders. These results are consistent with the findings of the researches of Bridges, Denham and Ganiban (2004), Rawlings, Claridge and Freeman (2002), Gratz and Roemer (2004). The use of stimulants increases the level of dopamine in the body and follows symptoms such as aggression, anxiety, obsession, and irritability, hallucinations in individuals that can impair one's physical, emotional, and mental function. Since this study is a comparative study, uncontrolled variables such as age, education, duration of use may have compromised the results of the study. In this study, the age variable was not controllable, because opium-dependent people were older than stimulant-dependent people. There was also another restriction that duration of use in opioids users was higher due to their high age and lower physical and spiritual destruction, while duration of use in stimulant users (crystal) was much lower due to the lower age and high physical and spiritual destruction. Since most opioid users are not satisfied to just one type of substance, so access to people solely dependent on one type of opioid (in this research, opium) or stimulants is very difficult and this issue causes much limitation. Also, the personality factors specified in this study confirm the problem of changing patterns and trends of drug abuse from traditional to industrial and higher prevalence of stimulants among young people. Over time, change of the pattern of drug abuse, the amount of access to the drugs is due to demographic and geographical differences as well as cultural and economic differences. According to the direct and indirect role of emotional dimensions of personality, it seems that preparing and implementing interventional and preventive programs based on healthy personality, especially in adolescents and young people, can have a significant effect on reducing the tendency for drug abuse. It is suggested that in educational programs in counseling centers, educational centers such as schools, etc., a topic titled Introduction to Personality Types and its Consequences and Emotional Dimensions of Personality to be considered to be investigated the maladaptive consequences of any personality pattern. BRAIN. Broad Research in December, 2019 Artificial Intelligence and Neuroscience Volume 10, Issue 4 37 References Allen, T. J., Moeller, F. G., Rhoades, H. M., & Cherek, D. R. (1998). Impulsivity and history of drug dependence. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 50(2), 137– 145. doi:10.1016/s0376-8716(98)00023-4 Amini, M., Mehraban, A. H., Haghani, H., Mollazade, E., & Zaree, M. (2017) Factor structure and construct validity of children participationassessment scale in activities outside of school–parent version (CPAS-P). OccupationalTherapy in Health Care, 31(1), 44-60. doi:10.1080/07380577.2016.1272733 Arntz, A., Klokman, J., & Sieswerda, S. (2005). An empirical test of the schema mode model of borderline personality disorder. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 36(3), 226-39. doi:10.1016/j.jbtep.2005.05.005 Bornovalova, M. A., Gratz, K. L., Daughters, S. B., Nick, B., Delany-Brumsey, A., Lynch, T. R., Kosson, D., & Lejuez, C. W. (2008). A multimodal assessment of the relationship between emotiondysregulation and borderline personality disorder amonginner-city substance users in residential treatment. Journal of Psychiatric Research 42(9):717-26. doi:10.1016/j.jpsychires.2007.07.014 Bridges, L. J., Denham, S. A., & Ganiban, J. M. (2004). Definitional issues in emotion regulation research. Child development, 75(2), 340-345. Davis, K. L., Panksepp, J., & Normansell, L. (2014). The Affective Neuroscience Personality scales: Normative data and implications. Neuropsychoanalysis, 5(1), 57-69. doi:10.1080/15294145.2003.10773410 Fisher, S. L., Bucholz, K. K., Reich, W., Fox, L., Kuperman, S., Kramer, J., Hesselbrock, V., Dick, D. M., Nurnberger, J.I. Jr, Edenberg, H. J., & Bierut, L.J. (2006). Teenagers are right-parents do not know much: An analysis of adolescent-parent agreement on reports of adolescent substance use, abuse, and dependence. Alcoholism, clinical and experimental research. 30(10):1699-710. doi:10.1111/j.1530-0277.2006.00205.x Habibeh, G., & Teklavi, S. (2016). Comparison of Emotional Maladjustment in Students with Borderline and Normal Symptoms. Second National Conference on Educational Science Knowledge and Technology of Iranian Social Studies and Psychology, Tehran, Sam Iranian Institute of Knowledge and Technology Development Conference. Tahereh, G., Khani, M., Shahram, M. & Gholamreza, S. (2011) Comparison of the effectiveness of cognitive-behavioral group therapy based on coping skills and methadone maintenance therapy in improving emotion regulation and relapse prevention strategies. Articles Collection: Postgraduate and PhD theses in the field of opioids. (vol. 1). Tehran: Information. A Comparative Study of Emotional Dimensions of Personality in Stimulants … Sanaz HOSSEINPOUR 38 Gratz, K. L., & Roemer, L. (2004). Multidimensional assessment of emotion regulation and dysregulation: Development, factor structure, and initial validation of the difficulties in emotion regulation scale. Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, 26(1), 41-54. Gratz, K. L., Rosenthal, M. Z., Tull, M. T., Lejuez, C. W., Gunderson, J. G. (2010). An experimental investigation of emotional reactivity and delayed emotional recovery in borderline personality disorder: The role of shame. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 51(3), 275–285. doi:10.1016/j.comppsych.2009.08.005 Gross, J. J., & Feldman Barrett, L. (2011). Emotion generation and emotion regulation: One or two depends on your point of view. Emotion review, 3(1), 8-16. Jacob, G. A., Cindy, G., Zimmerman, S., Corinna, N. S., Rüsch, N., Rainer, L., & Lieb, K. (2008). Time course of anger and other emotions in women with borderline personality disorder: A preliminary study. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 39(3), 391–402. doi:10.1016/j.jbtep.2007.10.009 Ketabi, S., Maher, F., & Borjali, A. (2008). Personality profile of drug addicts using Cloninger and Eysenck's two personality systems. Quarterly Journal of Research on Addiction, 2 (7), 45-54. Linehan, M. M., Bohus, M., & Lynch, T. R. (2007). Dialectical behavior therapy for pervasive emotion dysregulation: Theoretical and practical underpinnings. In J. Goss (Ed.), Handbook of emotion regulation (pp.581-605). New York, U.S.A.: Guilford Press Links, P. S., & Heslegrave, R. J. (2000). Prospective studies of outcome: Understanding mechanisms of change in patients with borderline personality disorder. Psychiatric Clinics of North America 23(1):137-50. Mennin, D., & Farach, F. (2007). Emotion and Evolving Treatments for Adult Psychopathology. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 14, 329-352. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2850.2007.00094.x Panksepp, J. (2004). Affective neuroscience: The foundations of human and animal emotions. New York, U.S.A.: Oxford University Press. Rawlings, D., Claridge, G., & Freeman, J. L. (2002). Principal components analysis of the schizotypal personality scale (STA) and the borderline personality scale (STB). Personality and Individual Differences, 31(3), 409-419. Robins, C. J., Keng, S. L., Ekblad, A. G., & Brantley, J. G. (2012). Effects of mindfulness-based stress reduction on emotional experience and expression: A randomized controlled trial. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 68(1), 117-131. doi:10.1002/jclp.20857 Sarvela, P. D., & McClendon, E. J. (1998). Indicators of rural youth drug use. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 17(4), 335-47. doi:10.1007/BF01537674 BRAIN. Broad Research in December, 2019 Artificial Intelligence and Neuroscience Volume 10, Issue 4 39 Stiglmayr, C. E., Grathwol, T., Linehan, M. M., Ihorst, G., Fahrenberg, J., & Bohus, M. (2005). Aversive tension in patients with borderline personality disorder: A computer–based controlled field study. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 111, 372–379. Sharp, C., Pane, H., Ha, C., Venta, A., Patel, A.B., Sturek, J. & Fonagy, P. (2014). Theory of mind and emotion regulation difficulties in adolescents with borderline traits. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 50, 563-573. Stevens A, Burkhardt M, Hautzinger M, Schwarz J, & Unckel C. (2004). Borderline personality disorder: impaired visual perception and working memory. Psychiatry Research, 125, 257–267. Tomko, R. L., Trull, T. J., Wood, P. K., & Sher, K. J. (2014). Characteristics of borderline personality disorder in a community sample: comorbidity, treatment utilization, and general functioning. Journal of personality disorders, 28(5), 734-750. Walters, K. N. (2006). Emotional responses to social rejection and failure among persons with borderline personality features. [Dissertation]. University of Alberta.