Theory of Behaviorist and Psychodynamic - Term Paper Example

Theories of Personality The Psychodynamic theories of personality focus on the role of the unconscious in shaping personality traits, and classify personality traits on the basis of four sets of opposite traits. The Humanist theories imbue people with self actualizing tendencies that lead them to work towards achieving their inner potential. The dimensions of personality are more complex as explained in the psychodynamic theories and serve to explain the fundamental differences between people. The Humanist theory on the other hand, offers a better explanation for what motivates human being – the need for positive regard. Introduction: Personality theories attempt to explain and account for human behavior. The three major schools of personality theory are the Behaviorist, Psychodynamic and Humanist theories, each of which offers its own explanation and classification of personality. While the psychodynamic theories are more focused upon the effect of the unconscious in shaping the elements of human personality, the Humanist school of thought offers a predominantly positive view of the personality of human beings. Carl Jung’s psychodynamic school of thought offers a more comprehensive classification of personality, as the permutations and combinations of eight different aspects in psychological dimensions. However, Roger’s Humanist theory offers a much more insightful look into the basic motivation that drives human beings. Carl Jung’s psychodynamic approach to personality: Sigmund Frued was the first one to propose the theory of psychoanalysis, which has led to the development of a collective group of theories known as psychodynamic theories, all emphasizing unconscious motives and desires and the importance of childhood experiences as a factor in shaping personality. Freud views conflict as inevitable in human life with humans also being basically destructive. He paid particular attention to the division of mental life of an individual into conscious and unconscious processes (Freud, 1927). Carl Jung built upon this and attributed four levels to the psyche of man (a) conscious level – with psychic images sensed by the ego (b) personal unconscious – comprising repressed or forgotten experiences (c) collective unconscious – or ideas derived from the experiences of our ancestors and (d) archetypes – or archaic images derived from the collective unconscious.(www.unt.edu) On this basis, he defined two opposing trends in personality development – progression, which is a forward flow of psychic energy that is necessary to adapt to the outer world and regression, which is the backward flow of psychic energy that is necessary for adaptation to the inner world. This also produces opposing tendencies in personality, such as extroversion and introversion, which are both present in all individuals, although one tends to dominate the other.(Jung, 1923). The Myers Briggs Personality assessment tool: On the basis of Jung’s theory of personality differences, personality assessment tools such as the Myers-Briggs indicator have been developed, which assesses an individual’s way of working through a series of either/or questions. The answers to these questions produce a personality profile that reveals individual tendencies in four psychological dimensions (a) Extraversion v Introversion (b) Sensing v Intuition (c) Thinking v Feeling and (d) Judging v Perceiving. According to Jung, each individual tends to be more comfortable with one of the choices in each psychological dimension. (Chanen, 2000) Motivation in Jung’s Theory: The motivational basis of individual human beings is therefore based upon the category of personality type that he or she belongs to. Based upon the individual combination of the eight different levels identified in the four psychological dimensions above, the inner forces that drive and motivate an individual can be recognized and utilized for progress. For example, depending upon whether a person is extroverted or introverted, he or she will respond differently to situations – while an extroverted personality will be motivated by situations that involve dealing with people, the introverted person is more likely to be motivated to engage in work that requires quiet reflection and allows peace and quiet. Similarly, a thinking individual will be motivated more by reason , intellect and logic while a feeling person will be motivated by emotions and intuition. Through the application of these eight levels, an individual will be able to find and use their inner strengths in order to ameliorate any existing weaknesses.(Lawrence, 1993) Rogers’ Humanist Theory of Personality: Rogers’ approach to personality is person centered and based upon the generally positive attributes of human beings. He views human behavior as being “exquisitely rational” (Rogers, 1961, p 194) and that man is a “trustworthy organism” (Rogers 1977, p 7). Additionally, he also believes that “the core of man’s nature is essentially positive” (Rogers, 1961, p 73). Based upon this belief, Rogers’ humanistic theory of personality imbues each individual with a self actualizing tendency which leads to a drive to fulfill inherent potential which according to Maddi, is a “biological pressure to fulfill the genetic blueprint” (Maddi, 1996, p106). The autonomy of the human being is another vital aspect of his theory, and he views the individual as a person capable of “evaluating the outer and inner situation, understanding himself/herself in its context, making constructive choices as to the next steps in life and acting on those choices. “ (Rogers 1977, p15) The concept of the self is therefore the central construct in Rogers’ theory and the self develops through interactions with others and the growing awareness of being and of fulfilling the inherent potential. Based upon the kind of social interactions that an individual has had, he or she develops a self concept which is “the organized set of characteristics that the individual perceives as peculiar to himself/herself.” (Ryckman, 1993, p 106). Since, Rogers’ view is primarily positive, he views the self actualizing tendency as being indicative of unlimited possibilities for human beings, so that it is only when maladjustment occurs in a person due to an alienation from the true self that the individual becomes destructive rather than constructive. Rogers characterizes such a man as one who is not functioning freely and therefore is “less than fully man” and that is when he is to be feared.(Rogers, 1961, p105). The tendency to maladjustment develops when a human being does not receive positive regard, which is something all human beings instinctively value and need in order to develop positive attitudes and a positive self regard. Hence, a fully functioning person is likely to be creative, open to experience, defense free and motivated to achieve the fullest extent of his inherent potential. The mal adjusted individual on the other hand is deprived of positive regard and feels small and helpless, as a result of which he or she is defensive and lives life according to a preconceived plan, while also feeling manipulated rather than feeling free. Comparison of Personality and motivation under the two theories: The two theories differ from each other in that Jung’s theory is based upon the views of Freud who sees conflicts as inevitable and human beings with destructive tendencies. Therefore, as opposed to Frued/Jung’s view of individuals as potentially bad or sick, Rogers views human beings as basically good or healthy. However, Rogers’ theory is based upon one simple concept of the tendency to self actualization; which is the factor responsible for providing the built in motivation for every individual to achieve the highest potential of which he or she is capable. Therefore Rogers believes that individuals strive to recognize their inner potential and to make the best of their existence. Jung’s theory on the other hand, assumes that there are fundamental differences in the manner in which people process information and this is based upon their personality. Through the application of these personality assets, human resource managers can determine how suitable a person may be for a particular job. For example, any person involved in sales work needs to be an extrovert, while those engaged in occupations where logic and reason are required must be the analytical types. These classifications based on personality also provide the necessary information on how an individual is likely to be motivated. When an individual’s job is matched to his or her personality, the person is likely to be motivated and continue to perform well in it. On the basis of the above, it may be noted that from the perspective of personality, Jung’s theory offers a much more comprehensive assessment of personality by providing for the classification of people into different personality types based upon their inherent characteristics. As opposed to this, Rogers’ assessment of personality is more simplistic, because he views individuals as being essentially of two personality types – well adjusted or mal adjusted. While this may serve to distinguish the distinctly maladjusted individuals, so that they can be categorized as bad or sick or needing therapy, it does not function so effectively in identifying personality among the rest of the population, lumping them all into one category of individuals who need positive regard in order to develop as self fulfilled individuals. However, Rogers’ theory is extremely important despite its apparent simplicity, because most cases of maladjustment in individuals may indeed be caused by a lack of positive regard in childhood, therefore the need for love and approval may be an inherent need that all individuals of all personality types have and satisfying this need is likely to produce well integrated personalities in an emotional sense. This theory would appear to better explain the notion of motivation in individuals, because irrespective of the kind of personality an individual has, the basic factor that will motivate every individual deep down is likely to be the driving need to fulfill the fullest extent of one’s inherent or existing potential. Personality in employment: Jung’s theory can be very usefully applied in the work situation. It not only helps to identify different personality types on the basis of the permutation and combination of the eight constructs of the psychological dimensions, but it helps to tailor individuals into those kinds of jobs that suit their personality. Jung’s theory is also more useful in a work situation because it can help to identify the specific factors that are likely to motivate each of the different kinds of personality types. Rogers’ theory of motivation is applicable in a general context to all human beings, however many individuals may themselves be unaware of their own inner potential, especially if they have not enjoyed the benefit of positive regard during their younger, formative years. Therefore, from an employer’s perspective, it becomes more difficult and ambiguous to specifically identify which factors are likely to motivate employees in an organizational setting. Conclusions: Rogers’ theory offers a more positive definition of personality as compared to Jung’s outlook. It focuses more on the positive aspects of humanity and views human beings as intrinsically good. Moreover, the development of personality is a conscious process, wherein the individual utilizes the self actualizing tendency to maximize potential. As a result, man is in control of his personality and can consciously work towards reforming his own weaknesses. On the other hand, Jung’s personality theory presents a more negative outlook, because it is premised upon the unconscious drives that exist in human beings, which are the prime movers in determining whether an individual will be a good or a bad personality. Such unconscious drives are not completely within man’s control, since some of them are unconscious while others are premised upon the unconscious factors that are shaped by the experiences of our ancestors. Jung’s theory, like that of his predecessor Freud, views human beings as bad or sick individuals who may need therapy and a realization of their unconscious drives before they can attempt to face and overcome them. It is largely these unconscious drives, some bad and some good, that may motivate an individual and condition his decisions and choices throughout his life. Roger’s theory of personality views individuals as intrinsically good and therefore offers a much more positive outlook on motivation, in which human beings seek to achieve a positive outcome and to develop their creativity and freedom. Moreover, even the mal adjusted individuals are not viewed as intrinsically bad, they are merely the victims of a lack of positive regard as a result of which they have become withdrawn and fearful and may thus engage in bad acts. On an overall basis, it may therefore be concluded that Jung’s theory offers a much more complex assessment of personality and may be much better suited for administration in the organizational context. His theory appears to be best suited to explain the dimensions of personality and serves to explain the fundamental differences between people. From the perspective of motivation however, Rogers’ theory appears to offer a better definition of what really motivates people deep down. Irrespective of the kind of personality an individual has, they are all likely to respond well to positive regard and encouragement in maximizing their inner potential. Rogers’ theory seems deceptively simple, but it is strong and effective because it is based upon an inherently positive premise – that man is a good, moral being. It allows for the incorporation of a moral framework, rather than projecting the unconscious as an excuse for man’s aberrations of personality. From a logical, rational perspective, Rogers’ theory therefore places man’s personality within his own control and parents can play a significant role in providing positive regard for their children, so that the incidence of maladjusted personalities is lower. I personally favor Rogers’ theory because it makes a person squarely responsible for his or her own actions and allows them to access and develop their own inner potential. On the other hand, placing too much importance on unconscious drives, as is the case with Jung’s theory, may often allow individuals to escape the consequences of their negative acts. The approach is also generally negative, viewing people from the perspective of bad or sick individuals, unlike the positive approach adopted by Rogers’ theory. References: * Chanen, Jill Schachner, 2000. “Try a little typecasting” ABA Journal, 86 (68):1 * Frued, Sigmund, 1962. “The Ego and the Id” (First published 1927) New York: W.W. Norton Company * Jung, Carl G, 1923. “Psychological Types” New York: Harcourt and Brace * Lawrence, Gordon D, 1993. “People types and tiger stripes” (3rd edition), Center of Applications of psychological type. Available from www.eric.ed.gov, ERIC Document no: ED 382320 * Maddi, S.R., 1996. “Personality theories: A comparative analysis” (6th ed.). Toronto: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co. * Rogers, Carl, R, 1961. “On Becoming a person” Boston: Houghton Mifflin * Rogers, Carl, R, 1977. “Carl Rogers on personal power.” NY: Delacorte Press * Ryckmann, R.M. (1993). “Theories of personality” (5th ed.) California: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co. * Theories of Personality: Jung. [online] Retrieved October 1, 2007 from: http://www.unt.edu/cat/classes/psych4520/feist_ch04Jung.ppt#1 Read More