1. Introduction

In the current society, there are several behavior problems related to students at school and at home in many countries of the world. These behavior problems manifest in the form of violent activities, promotion of sex clips in class, fighting, bullying and destruction of property (Kinai, 2004). Poverty and inequitable educational opportunities also predispose school youths to violence (Ohsako, 2007). Recent studies from Africa have also shown that physical fighting among school going adolescents is prevalent. For example; Rudatsikira, Sisiya, Kasembe and Muulu (2007) reported that 50.6% of adolescents had engaged in a physical fighting within the past 12 months prior to survey in Namibia and Southern Africa.

In Kisii County of Kenya, students behavioral problems have led to destruction of property, interference of learning programs, psychological and academic achievement have been reported from several schools since 2011 (CDE’s Office Kisii County, 2014). Educational programs require that students live in an environment where they are peaceful and are instructed with the right knowledge, skills values and attitudes (Abiero, 2009). However, in the past student behavior problems have been seen to increase and have become a challenges to almost all stakeholders in education (Kangare,2008),the student behavior problems have resulted into death, destruction of property, deformities, truancy among students, and interference with the learning and teaching in schools (Ruto, 2009).

Behaviour problems have been explained from various dimensions. For example, Akse, Hale, Engels, Raaijmakers and Meeus (2006) found that there were no differences in the hierarchical superiority between personality and problem behavior. Craig, Destroy, and Kevia, (2005) study concluded that, personality analysis provides a three facet organizational framework for understanding psychological significance of deviance makers (behavior problems). Thomas, Jawahar, and Jenifer (2010) study results supports both theories of planned behavior model and a partially mediated model in which prudence, but not adjustment is significantly related to model components; attitudes, norms, control and behavior but not intention to cheat. Aunola, Tolvanen, Viljaranta, & Nurmi (2013) showed that psychological control applied by mothers and fathers in daily interactions with their children leads to an increase in negative emotions in the child. Asads, Jewavia, Feheem, and Kaleem (2012) agree that there was a strong correlation between impulsive and compulsive buying behaviors and it was also observed that both impulsive buying and compulsive buying are positively related with all the big five personality traits.

2. Theoretical Framework

The study was informed by the Eysenck’s theory of criminal of personality developed in 1964. Eysenck argued that great variation between people’s personalities could be reduced to two dimensions, related to underlying functioning of the individuals’ nervous system; He continued and said that a person’s level of extraversion, Neuroticism can be measured by designing simple questionnaires. People with high extraversion scores are sociable, active, and lively and sensation seeking, such individuals are unlikely to engage into behavior problems. Extraversion is determined by the overall level of arousal in a person’s central nervous system. High E-scores have a low level of arousal and therefore need more stimulation from their environment (Steinberg and Morris, 2001). People with high neuroticism score are anxious, depressed and react strongly to any aversive stimuli; neuroticism is determined by overall level of liability in a person’s central nervous system, this indicates that such individuals are more proven to situations that can result to behavior problems (Eysenck, 1964). Eysenck’s is pointing in some useful directions where it comes to control and prevention of criminal and behavioral problems, the theory suggests that the underlying tendencies that eventually manifests themselves as criminal and behavior problems are selected in childhood and it may be possible to modifying the socialization experiences of high – risk individuals so that they do not develop into the offenders.

3. Literature Review

Gary, Haworth, and Plomin (2013) indicated that adolescent behavior problems were moderately associated with normal personality. Ronnie McGhee, Ehrler, Buckhalt and Philips (2012) reported that high extraversion and openness to experience and low conscientiousness were correlated with high risk taking. Davison and Janca (2012) study reported that the rates of personality disorder are high in all serious offenders, the role played by personality disorder may greater in some offences than others. Amandeep (2011) revealed that significant differences were found on personality characteristics, locus of control and hostility between alcoholics and non –alcoholics. Abanti, Musoke and Maiga (2014) results indicated that grandiose narcissists show psychophysiological response patterns similar to primary psychopaths, whereas, vulnerable narcissists have moderate dis-inhibitory physiological makers and resemble more traditional views of the closet’ narcissists who appears subdued but nonetheless entitled and exploitative. Fancisco (2012) showed that there’s a correlation between academic goals and academic results. Cruckshank (2006) indicated negative correlations between certain personality characteristics and negative body and self-image, positive correlations between certain personality characteristics and problematic eating behaviours.

A lot of studies have been done on students’ behavioral problems touching bullying, aggressiveness and delinquency, strikes, anti-social behavioral (Elliot and Cornell, 2009, Rukundo, 2009, Kangare, 2008) all which are extrinsic variables of student behavioral problems. Most reviewed in Kenya have focused on extrinsic management and causes of students behavior problems. However, few studies have focused on the students’ personality variables leading to indulgence into behavior problems among Kenyan students. Hence, the present study filled in this gap in literature.

4. Methodology

A Correlation Survey Design was used in the study. Target population consisted of 11479 form three secondary school students drawn from Kisii County, Kenya. Sample size was 378 students drawn from girls, mixed and boys’ schools where boys to be used in the study was 60% which is (270), and girls 40 % (155). This was because both boys and girls were found to be involved in behavior problems. The students were in the age bracket of between 13-18 years of age and were selected using stratified random sampling technique. This study employed Eysenck personality inventory and Indulgence in Behaviour Questioannires to collect data. Both Questionnaires consisted of items in likert scale to which students were expected to check as Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Strongly Disagree, and Disagree (Kasomo, 2007). A reliability coefficient of 0.895 was reported. Permission to conduct the study was obtained from the Kenyan ministry of Education. Thereafter, the researcher visited the sub-counties and schools to inform them of the intended research, and also to create rapport and solicit their co-operation. The study allowed all the participants to remain anonymous by not indicating their names on the research tools and that their identity was treated as a salient feature of the study. The researcher was sensitive to respect human dignity as he expressed unconditional positive regards to all respondents’ feelings and opinions during this study. Data was collected using the questionnaires. The null hypothesis was tested using ANOVA and post Hoc tests.

5. Results

A one-way between-groups analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to explore the impact of personality subtype on students’ indulgence in behaviour problems, as measured by students’ behaviour problems questionnaire. Table 1 shows group description for indulgence in behaviour scores got by each group.

Table 1. Group descriptions

The findings presented in table 1 shows that extroverted students had higher mean (N = 119, mean = 67.7, standard deviation = 1.62 and standard error = .15) in indulgence to behaviour problems than the other two groups. Neurotic students seemed to indulge in behaviour problems the least (N = 114, mean = 57.7, standard deviation = 1.09 and standard error = .10). Table 2 shows the SSPS one-way between-groups analysis of variance (ANOVA) output.

Table 2. ANOVA output

The analysis shown in Table 2 revealed that there was a statistically significant difference (at the p<.05 level) in students’ indulgence in behaviour problems scores for the three personality subtypes [F (2, 344) = 1181.25, p<.05]. Consequently, given the fact that significance difference was established, it was necessary to further find out which group was significantly different from which other group. This was done by use of a Post-Hoc test.

Having received a statistically significant difference, a look at the results of the post-hoc comparison using the Turkey HSD test was viable. The statistical significance of the differences between each pair of groups is provided in the table of multiple comparisons, which gives the results of the Post-Hoc tests (Table 3).

Table 3. Post Hoc Tests

The findings presented in Table 3, shows that the indulgence to behaviour problems mean score for extroverted students (M=67.7, SD=1.62) was significantly different from the mean score of introverted students (M=61.7, SD=.53) and neurotic (M=57.7, SD=1.1). The mean indulgence in behaviour problem for introvert and neurotic students also differed significantly from each other. Thus, the findings indicate that extroverted students tended to indulge more in behaviour problems more often than the other personality traits. It means that they are more aroused to engage in crime like activities. The implication of this finding is that teacher counselors should teach Self-Regulation skills to extroverted students. Self-regulation should also be about paying attention to how they’re behaving throughout the day in the classroom.

6. Discussion and Conclusions

The study revealed that students who exhibited extroverted personality were involved in behavior problems, while the introverted and neurotic personality was less involved in behavior problem. This finding agrees with of Ronnie (2012) who indicated that the high extraversion and openness to experience and low conscientiousness were correlated to high risk taking. Similarly, Crag et al (2005) found out that our personality analysis provides a three facet organizational framework for understanding psychological significance of deviance makers. Similarly, Thomas (2010) also agreed that significantly related to model components; attitudes, norms, control and behavior but not intention to cheat. In addition, Asads et al (2012) in Pakistan indicated that there was a strong correlation between impulsive and compulsive buying behaviors and it was also observed that both impulsive buying and compulsive buying were positively related with all the big five personality traits. Gary et al (2013) agreed that adolescent behavior problems were moderately associated with normal personality. Amandeep Sing (2011) in India also indicated that significant differences were found on personality characteristics, locus of control and hostility between alcoholics and non-alcoholics. In agreement, Fuller (2012) in Pennsylvania also showed that there was some support for the relationship between certain personality factors (conscientiousness and agreeableness) and offending. That is, Agreeableness was the only factor shown to be significantly able to differentiate between non-offenders and co-offenders. While On the other hand, Wiebke (2007) also found that Neuroticism score did not correlate with sensation seeking as Shakerian (2014) study proved that neuroticism and extraversion personality trait have a meaningful contribution toward the pre-marital affair with the opposite sex. However, on the contrary, Akse et al (2006) study found that that there were no differences in the hierarchical superiority between personality and problem behavior.

In conclusion, most of the students with introverted personality subtypes, are focused, not easily destructed from the class activities and do pursue their set goals. This therefore, shows that such students were likely not to engage into behavior problems at school. However, the extroverted students were reported, warm, out-going talkative and more so, most them do have mood swings. Because of their outgoing tendency, it was possible for them to join any group of students that were deviant causing them to be highly vulnerable to behavior problems. The study recommends that the teacher counselors should teach Self-Regulation skills to extroverted students. Self-regulation should also be about paying attention to how they’re behaving throughout the day in the classroom. It’s well worth teaching a lesson on the differences between extroverts and introverts so that both personality types will be mindful of what their peers are going through. In addition, teachers should let extroverted students Talk out Conflict. This would lower their indulgence in behavior problems because Extroverts think by talking, so when they’re engaged in a conflict with another student, be sure to give them ample time to talk it out, whether directly with the other student.