Monday, August 20, 2012

My portion of PSY/405 team Learning Personality Theories paper (Week 5)


Cognitive Social Learning Theory Strengths and Weaknesses
            Rotter and Mischel have advanced learning theories in the areas of thinking, values, and goal-direction for humans instead of laboratory animals. Even though this is true, the validity of the cognitive social learning theory depends on the ratings it receives from the six criteria of a useful theory. Cognitive social learning theory has generated an excellent abundance of quality research. The locus of control concept developed by Rotter has been one of the most researched topics in psychology. Both Rotter and Mischel’s theories are considered internally consistent. Rotter wisely defines his terms, making sure each term has one meaning and Mischel’s theory is considered consistent because he developed his theory from empirical research. Rotter’s theory is considered a helpful guide to therapists but Mischel’s theory suggests people behave differently in different situations, which is believed only moderately useful. The cognitive social learning theory is considered simple because it does not explain all human personality. One weakness of Rotter and Mischel’s theories is difficulty verifying or falsifying research. Rotter’s basic prediction formula and general prediction formula cannot be accurately tested (Feist & Feist, 2009).
Social Cognitive Theory Strengths and Weaknesses
Albert Bandura’s social cognitive theory is balanced between innovative speculation and accurate observation (Feist & Feist, 2009). Bandura’s use of these two important components of theory building increase the chances of his hypothesis producing concrete results, and it increases the chances of producing supplementary hypotheses. The way social cognitive theory is constructed has generated thousands of research studies rating Bandura’s theory high on its ability to produce research. In the area of falsifiability social cognitive theory rates high. According to Theories of Personality, Bandura states self-efficacy theory suggests “people’s beliefs in their personal efficacy influence what courses of action they choose to pursue, how much effort they will invest in activities, how long they will persevere in the face of obstacles and failure experiences, and their resiliency following setbacks” (p. 505). His statement opens up the door for possible research leading to falsification of the theory. Social cognitive theory organizes knowledge well. The triadic reciprocal causation model proposes a reasonable description for the learning of many observable behaviors. The guidelines are specific making the theory easy to use, and the theory is internally consistent. Furthermore, the social cognitive theory is simple and straightforward making it parsimonious. 

My portion of PSY/405 team Dispositional Personality Theories paper (week 4)


Allport’s psychology of the individual is based exclusively on individual uniqueness, not leaving a lot of substance regarding the theories explanation of interpersonal relationships. Although, Allport did describe the importance of warm relationships with others in order to have a psychologically healthy personality. If an individual is psychologically healthy they can respect and love others without judgment, which allows for a mature relationship with one’s self and with others. He also modestly emphasized on the importance of social influence on personality. Allport believed culture does influence aspects such as language, religion, values, morals, and fashion, but the use of these cultural forces are contingent on one’s unique personality and motivation. In 1954, Allport started conducting research on how to reduce prejudice. One of his students, Thomas Pettigrew, along with Linda Tropp, conducted a study that established Allport’s proposal that if two groups, a majority group and a minority group, interacted under ideal conditions, there would be a smaller amount prejudice. The results depended on the interaction and the relationships that developed between the individuals in the two groups (Feist & Feist, 2009).

PSY/405 Comparison of Two Theories (Week 4)


Comparison of Personality Theories

            Humanistic/existentialist psychology is a branch of psychology known as humanism, which incorporates existential views, a focus on one’s self by finding one’s place, and building connections with others. Abraham Maslow’s holistic-dynamic personality theory is included in this division of psychology. Hans Jurgen Eysenck  factor theory is encompassed in the major theoretical area of study of personality psychology known as trait theory. His model discusses three main dimension of personality and Maslow’s theory describes how personality is motivated by a hierarchy of needs.

Who is Maslow?

            Abraham Maslow was born in Manhattan, New York on April 1, 1908. As a child, Maslow was shy, inferior, and depressed due to his absentee father and his mother’s cruelty. When he was young, he found two kittens and brought them home. His mother saw them and smashed the kitten’s heads against the wall until they died, as Maslow watched. This is only one of the reasons Maslow hated his mother until the day she died. After graduating from high school he attended the City College of New York. During this time, his parent divorced and Maslow and his father’s relationship grew closer. His father wanted him to become a lawyer, but during one of his law classes, Maslow walked out and never looked back. He did well in courses that sparked his interests, philosophy and psychology.

After receiving his Bachelor of Arts degree in philosophy from the University of Wisconsin, Maslow continued on and obtained his PhD in psychology in 1934. He became E. L. Thorndike’s research assistant in researching human dominance and sexuality, which lasted about a year and a half. From there he started teaching at Brooklyn College and attending Friday night seminars at Alfred Alders home. In 1951, Maslow became the chairman of the psychology department at Brandeis University in Massachusetts. He became unhappy with Brandeis University in the 1960’s because students started to rebel against his methods of teaching, wanting less on intellectual and scientific approaches and more experimental participation. Due to this lack of happiness, Maslow pursued a job with Saga Administrative Corporation, where he was able to work freely. On June 8, 1970, Maslow suffered a severe heart attacked and died (Feist & Feist, 2009).

Maslow’s Strengths and Weaknesses

            Maslow’s holistic-dynamic personality theory has shown both strength and weakness regarding the criterion of a useful theory. The theories  ability to generate research ranks above average because the interest in self-actualization still remains a popular subject among researchers. His theories organization is also an asset because it is easy to follow. If a person has not had anything to eat, they are not going to be motivated by other things, they are going to be focused on finding something to fill their stomachs. Maslow’s theory also ranks high on the criterion to guide practitioners. His hierarchy of needs can be useful for parents, teachers, and counselors. If a counselor’s client feels unsafe, the counselor has to find a way to ensure their client’s environment is secure in order for them to fulfill the next need in the hierarchy. Maslow’s holistic-dynamic personality theory is considered moderately simple because while the hierarchy of needs is a simple concept to understand, the whole theory is not. One weakness of this theory is its low rating on falsifiability. Researchers have not been able to validate or falsify Maslow’s methods of identifying a self-actualizing individual.

How Does Maslow’s Theory Explain Individual Relationships?

            Maslow’s hierarchy of needs describes how every individual is motivated by a variety of needs, through accomplishing lower needs an individual can move up and obtain higher needs. Physiological needs are the most basic needs that include food, water, and oxygen. If a person is hungry they are not going to worry about anything else but satisfying that need for food. The need for safety is Maslow’s second factor of motivation. Safety needs describe security, stability, dependability, and freedom. This motivation cannot be completely satisfied because there are always unfortunate events that one cannot predict such as hurricanes, drive by shootings, and fires. Although once one has personally felt secure they can move on to the next motivation, which is love and belongingness. This is the need for friendship, the need for a partner to love and to give love, the need for a family, etc. Those individuals who have their needs of love satisfied, do not get alarmed when they are denied love (Feist & Feist, 2009).

After the need for love is fulfilled, one is motivated to satisfy their need for esteem. This is the need for self-respect, confidence, and the understanding that others hold them in high regard. Once an individual has met their esteem needs, they are motivated to pursue what Maslow’s believes is the highest level one can meet, self-actualization. Self-actualization needs describe the motivation to become self-fulfilled, realizing one’s true potential, and having a desire to be creative. Although one cannot just satisfy this motivation, they first have to conquer the lower needs and then they have to fulfill the B-values. The B-values include 15 different qualities that illustrate what a self-actualizing individual should exemplify (Feist & Feist, 2009).

How Does Maslow’s Theory Explain Interpersonal Relationships?

            Maslow believed that individuals are shaped by biological and societal factors and they cannot be separated. Relationships with other individuals are important in order to obtain self-actualization. In Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, after an individual feels their security needs are met the can move on to obtaining love and belongingness, the need for friendship, a mate, and/or children. Individuals whose need for love was satisfied at a young age, do not show signs of devastation when rejected by others. Individuals who have never been loved or felt like they belonged are incapable of giving their love to others. Maslow also described how individuals who have only had a small amount of love tend to have a more intense need for love. Children are straightforward when they need love, adults on the other hand do not openly show they need love (Feist & Feist, 2009).

Who is Eysenck?

            The only child to Ruth and Eduard Eysenck, Hans Jurgen Eysenck was born on March 4, 1916 in Berlin. Eysenck mother and father were both in show business and after his parents divorced he went to live with his grandmother. His parents and his grandmother were very lenient when it came to rules and discipline. He was a very intelligent child and in school he would often embarrass his teachers. After being told he would have to join the Nazi secret police he left Germany and moved to England. He married Margret Davies, a Canadian with a mathematics degree, in 1938. In 1940, Eysenck received his PhD in psychology from the University of London. He began working at Mill Hill Emergency Hospital, assisting in the treatment of psychologically ill patients. It was this experience that led to the ideas he published in his first book, Dimensions of Personality (Feist & Feist, 2009).

            When the war ended, he became the psychology department director at Maudsley Hospital. He wanted to set up a clinical psychology profession in Britain, so he traveled to the United States and Canada to examine their clinical psychology programs. He divorced his wife Margret and married his travel companion, Sybil Rostal, a quantitative psychologist. After instituting a clinical psychology department at the University of London, Eysenck became a psychology professor in 1955. Throughout his life, Eysenck published 75 books and 800 journals. He retired from his senior psychiatrist position at Maudsley and Bethlehem royal hospitals and served as a professor emeritus until his death on September 4, 1997 at the University of London (Feist & Feist, 2009).

Eysenck’s Strengths and Weaknesses

            Eysenck’s personality theory is essential in the taxonomies that form personality into significant classifications. His theory ranks high on its ability to generate research. Research has been conducted using this theory in many areas related to both biological and social antecedents of behavior; conditioning, memory, perception, sexuality,  and criminality are just a few areas that have been studied. In the area of falsifiability Eysenck’s theory ranks moderate to high because his research results have not been duplicated by external researchers. His theory also ranks high on its ability to organize knowledge because extracted factors produce a depiction of personality in the terms of traits, which ultimately offers a structure for organizing observations of human personality. The theories simplicity is also considered an asset, the reduction of variables is the purpose of factor analysis. One of the two weaknesses related to Eysenck’s theory is the theories ability to guide practitioners. A complete and organized taxonomy is provided with this theory but this is not useful to parents, teachers, and counselors, it is only useful to researchers. Because factor analysis is an exact mathematical procedure and factor theories are strongly empirical this theory ranks indistinctly internally consistent (Feist & Feist, 2009).

How Does Eysenck’s Theory Explain Individual Relationships?

            Eysenck’s factor theory is built off of psychometric and biological components, which generated three factors, extraversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism. These three factors all have biological causes, at least 75% of these personality dimensions are linked to heredity. Through the study of twins, identical and fraternal, Eysenck found evidence that biology is a strong element in personality. There was a higher similarity with the identical twins then there was with the fraternal twins, which proposes genetics play a large part in the differences of human personality.  People tend to preserve their stance overtime on the different dimensions of personality and researchers have found people in various areas of the world share nearly identical factors, which are both individual pieces of evidence that heredity influences the personality dimensions (Feist & Feist, 2009).

How Does Eysenck’s Theory Explain Interpersonal Relationships?

            When Eysenck estimated that 75% of the change in extraversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism are linked with heredity, he also stated about 25% of the variance of these personality factors can be associated with environmental factors. In the Eysenck’s first dimension, extraversion, people who are more extraverted are social, impulsive, and optimistic, characteristics built on their association with others. People who are introverted tend to be unsociable, shy, thoughtful, and reserved. In the neuroticism dimension, Eysenck discussed how a person’s internal and social state depends on where they score on the extraversion/ introversion scale and where they score on the neuroticism/stable pole. In the psychoticism dimension, Eysenck discussed scores high on the psychoticism side of the pole include antisocial traits, such as being hostile, aggressive, and nonconforming. If an individual were to score low on psychoticism, they would be an extremely socialized, empathetic, and caring person. The three dimensions combined, along with genetic factors, biological transitions, and experimental studies can predict an assortment of social behaviors. In the area of learning, extraverted children do better with active discovery learning and introverted children do better with passive reception learning. Eysenck also discussed how children who are troublemakers score high in either extraversion or psychoticism. If a troublemaker child scores high in extraversion, parents and teachers often regard their behavior as delightful scoundrels and forgive their mistakes. But children who are troublemakers that score high in psychoticism  are often considered more disorderly, malicious, and unlovable (Feist & Feist, 2009).

Conclusion

            Both Maslow and Eysenck provided an insightful view into the theory of personality. Maslow believed a person could never reach self-actualization if they did not meet their physiological needs, their need for security, their need for love and belonging, and their esteem needs. Eysenck believed the explanation of personality is modeled in three dimensions extraversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism. Each of these theorists brought many great aspects to the theory of personality psychology and their ideas are still being researched today (Feist & Feist, 2009).

References

Feist, J & Feist, G. (2009). Theories of Personality (7th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.

My portion of PSY/405 team Humanistic and Existential Personality Theories paper (week 3)


Person-Centered Theory and Personality Development and Interpersonal Relationships

Roger’s postulated there were two subsets of self, the self-concept and the ideal self.  The individual begins to form a concept of self during infancy through perceiving various experiences.  The ideal self, differs from the concept of self in that it is what the individual wishes to be.  Individual personalities are deemed healthy when there is little divergence between their self-concept and their ideal self.  Roger’s own interpersonal relationships may have struggled during childhood, but he “grew to become a leading proponent of the notion that the interpersonal relationship between two individuals is a powerful ingredient that cultivates psychological growth within both persons” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 312).  To become a person, Roger’s theory requires contact between persons, whether it is positive or negative.



Existential Theory and Personality Development and Interpersonal Relationships

Existential theorist’s explanation of individual personalities is focused on two areas, the search for meaning in one’s life and every individual is responsible for who they are and who they become.  People ask themselves important questions, consciously and unconsciously, when they are searching for meaning within their lives, questions like “Who am I?” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p.347).  Existential theorists believe people cannot blame others for who they are and what they become.  One makes the choice of who they are and who they want to be, no one else is to blame or can hold influence because ultimately every individual is alone.  Existentialists referred to the relationship one has with their selves as Eigenwelt.  This term gives reference to the awareness individuals have of being human and the meaning they find through the relationships they build with the world of people and things that surround them.  Rollo May believed the relationships one builds with the other people can have a freeing or an enslaving result.  Unhealthy relationships can inhibit personal growth and make it challenging for individuals to partake in healthy encounters with others.  If one cannot relate to others, life becomes meaningless and a sense of alienation from others and one’s self occurs (Fesit & Feist, 2009).

My portion of the PSY/405 team Psychodynamic Personality Theories paper (Week 2)


Who Is Adler?

            Alfred Alder was born on February 17, 1870 in the village of Rudolfsheim. Between nearly dying of pneumonia at the age of five and death of his younger brother, Alder became inspired to become a physician. During his childhood years, Alder took a large interest in his social relationships, his peers and siblings were essential in his development during childhood. In 1895, Alder obtained his medical degree and after serving in the Hungarian army he returned to Vienna for his postgraduate studies. After starting his own eye specialist practice, he decided it was not for him and starting focusing on psychiatry and general medicine. In 1902, Alder became a part of a group known as the Wednesday Psychological Society, which in 1908 became known as the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society. The group was led by Sigmund Freud and the discussions were related to psychology and neuropathology. Alder published Study of Organ Inferiority and Its Psychical Compensation in 1907, which discussed the foundations for human motivation being linked to physical deficiencies. In 1911, Alder was the president of the Vienna Psychoanalytic Society and expressed his views regarding psychoanalysis. Alder believed psychoanalysis is more broad then Freud’s view of infantile sexuality, contending that the drive for superiority was a more uncomplicated motive. This caused a collision between Freud and Alder which ultimately caused the resignation of his presidency and the creation of his own group known as the Society of Individual Psychology. During World War I Alder made significant changes to his theory, suggesting the foundations for human motivation are social interest and compassion. Alder advanced his theories through lecture, instituting child guidance clinics, and training teachers. In 1932, he became a resident of the United States and taught Medical Psychology at Long Island College of Medicine. In Scotland on May 28, 1937, while on a speaking tour, Alfred Alder died of a Heart Attack (Feist & Feist, 2009).

Adler’s Strengths and Weaknesses

            Various concepts illustrated in Alder’s theory do not allow for easy verification or falsification. His theory is very broad, making it difficult for research to support or fail to support its major principles. Early memories are determined by ones present style of life, is a tenet found difficult to verify or falsify. His theory is also not considered internally consistent because many of the terms used in his theory are not accurately operationally defined; creative power is one example of this. However, the strength of the theory is its ability to guide action. The theory provides solutions to practical problems for teachers, parents, and psychotherapists. By collecting information on birth order, dreams, early memories, childhood troubles, and physical deficits, psychotherapists can use the information to understand a person’s life style and increase their freedom of choice (Feist & Feist, 2009).

PSY/405 Introduction to Personality Paper(Week 1)


Introduction to Personality

            Personality psychology is the study of personality and the individual differences between human beings. The construction of logical interpretations of individuals and their major psychological processes are the objectives personality psychologists strive for. It is difficult to define personality; it encompasses so many different aspects. The term theory is often misused and confused with other words such as philosophy, speculation, hypothesis, and taxonomy. It is necessary to understand the definition of theory and how a theory becomes useful. There are multiple factors that can affect a person’s personality. Genetics, parenting, and friends are just a few.  Theories allow us to find answers to what make me?

Definition of Personality

The word personality comes from the Latin persona, which is a reference to a theatrical mask worn by Roman actors in Greek drama to project a role or false appearance. Although many psychologists agree to the words origination, they have a difference of opinion on the words meaning. There is no single definition psychologists agree on; nevertheless Feist & Feist (2009) provided this classification, “personality is a pattern of relatively permanent traits and unique characteristics that give both consistency and individuality to a person’s behavior” (p. 4). Traits influence the individual differences in behavior, the stability of behavior over time, and the reliability of the behavior through the majority of situations. Characteristics are the exclusive qualities of an individual that include attributes such as temperament, physique, and intelligence (Feist & Feist, (2009).

Examination of Theoretical Approaches

One of the most misunderstood and misused words in the English language, is the word “theory”. Feist & Feist (2009) stated, “A scientific theory is a set of related assumptions that allows scientists to use logical deductive reasoning to formulate testable hypotheses” (p.4). There are five key points in this definition that can help explain thoroughly what a theory is.  The first point being, “a theory is a set of assumptions” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p.4). This indicates that for a theory to show adequacy there needs to be a set of assumptions. The reason for this is an individual assumption cannot incorporate multiple observations and a good scientific theory does include various observations. The second point in this definition is, “a theory is a set of related assumptions” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p.5). This part of the definition is important for a scientific theory to be useful since multiple assumptions that relate can produce significant hypotheses and hold internal stability. Assumptions, is the third significant word in this definition. A theory is just a set of assumptions, none of the components within a theory are validated until research is conducted, during which researchers continue to build upon and restructure the initial theory. The fourth crucial point in this definition is logical deductive reasoning. Researchers used logical deductive reasoning to generate hypotheses from a general theory. If researchers cannot deduce a hypothesis from the components of a theory, the theory becomes idle. The final fundamental term in this definition is testable. A hypothesis is considered useless if it cannot be tested. It however does not have to be tested immediately, the possibility it can be tested in the future with the right means is necessary though (Feist & Feist, 2009).

Useful Theories

There are six factors involved in making a theory useful. The ability to produce and direct more research is considered the most vital element of a useful theory.  Two different types of research are constructed from useful theories, descriptive research and hypothesis testing. Descriptive research assists in the expansion of the current theory by involving measurements, labeling, and categorization of the components engaged in theory constructing. A theory is more complete if there is a larger quantity of descriptive research. Hypothesis testing is the second type of research produced by a useful theory. Multiple hypotheses are composed from useful theories, which can lead to the reconstruction and sizing of the theory after the hypotheses are tested (Feist & Feist, 2009).

The second factor involved in making a theory useful is falsifiable, which is not considered to be the same as false. In order for a theory to be falsifiable it has to be fairly accurate to suggest research that supports or does not support its major principles. A theory is not considered to be useful or falsifiable if it is ambiguous, meaning both positive and negative results support the theory. Falsifiability describes how if negative research results contradict a theory, theorist will have to reject or adjust the theory. Unobservable data theories are very challenging to verify or falsify, “A theory that can explain everything explains nothing” (Feist & Feist, 2009, p. 9).

The organization of data is the third factor set forth to determine the usefulness of a theory. Compatible research data needs to be organized effectively in order for the findings to be meaningful and not become detached. If the research data were to become disconnected because of a lack of organization, researchers would not be able to gain further knowledge (Feist & Feist, 2009).

The ability to guide a practitioner help individuals with everyday issues is the fourth element involved in making a theory useful. Every individual is face with multiple questions daily, useful theories give a practitioner structure and assist in the answering of those questions. If practitioners did not have useful theories to guide them, they would have to resort to trial and error (Feist & Feist, 2009).

The fifth component involved in making a theory useful is internal consistency. Internal consistency refers to consistency of a theory in itself. For a theory to be useful it needs to show consistency with terms and concepts. One word cannot have two different meanings nor can two terms refer to an idea. It is also important that the ideas and terms are operationally defined. The law of parsimony is the final element involved in making a theory useful. The law of parsimony is when two theories equally meet all the other elements involved in making a theory useful, the most straightforward and simple theory is preferred and is ultimately more useful (Feist & Feist, 2009).

Factors of Personality Development

            After reading chapter one, I found that there are multiple factors that affect an individuals personality. Our genes are the most important, in my opinion, because they provide us with those key personality traits and characteristics that can evolve from our social influences. An individual maybe genetically able to pitch a baseball fast and accurately, but without ever trying or practicing they would never know of their ability to do so.  Parenting styles are also important to the development of an individual’s personality. If a person was raised in an authoritarian house hold, they were raised with strict rules. In this type of parenting, parents do not express much warmth, they give no justification for punishment, and the children are not allow to have opinions or choices. This strict parenting style can result in one thinking love and obedience goes hand in hand. It also can cause one to become really shy and disconnect from others and have very low self-esteem (Cherry, 2012). Every element we are faced with on a daily basis can affect who we are as individuals; it is what makes each and every one of us special and our personalities unique.

Conclusion

            Our personalities set us apart from everyone else in the world. Individuals can have similar personalities but there are so many different types of traits and characteristics, no two individuals possess the same personality. A theory is a set of related assumption that uses logical deductive reasoning to generate hypotheses that are testable. There are six key elements that assist in making a theory useful, the generation of research, falsifiability, the organization of data, action guidance, internal consistency, and the law of parsimony. In personality theories, an explanation has to be made for some type of behavior in order for the theory to be useful (Feist & Feist, 2009). There are many different factors that influence our behavior and personality because of our genetics and social influences, parenting styles is just one example.

References

Cherry, K. (2012). What is authoritarian parenting?. Retrieved June 18, 2012, from            http://psychology.about.com/od/childcare/f/authoritarian-parenting.html
Feist, J., & Feist, G. (2009). Theories of personality (7th ed.). New York: McGraw Hill.