Individuals Behavior: Why We Behave in the Way We Do - Essay Example

?In seeking to understand why individuals behave in the way they do, it is necessary to use both social and psychological theories. These theories help to explain in part the key levels of behavior and actions, as well as the precipitating thoughts that spur these actions, with regards to the way in which individuals behave and view themselves both as part of the group and distinct from it. As a function of seeking to understand this to a greater degree, the following analysis will describe and discuss some of the key social psychological theories relating to behavior. Although it is impossible to provide a summary and complete delineation of each and every theory that defines both the interpersonal and intrapersonal phenomena/theories concerning this particular topic, the following approach will analyze the means by which individual attitudes, persuasions, social cognitions, self concepts and identity affects the intrapersonal theoretical interpretations whereas theories concerning social influence, group dynamics, relations with others, and interpersonal attraction helped to define and explain the intrapersonal phenomena/theories that define and constrain the social psychological approach to understanding human behavior. Building directly into the first determinate which was listed within the introduction, the reader can understand that human attitudes have a powerful impact with regards to confining and differentiating the means by which individuals behave. A hypothesis put forward in 1983 by Abraham Tesser relates attitudes as inclusive of strong likes and dislikes and often times not to the result of environmental forces but ultimately can be attributed to key genetic makeup (Resnicow & Vaughan, 2006). Thus, cognitive skill and personality traits are dependently linked to some immovable and intractable compounds of human biology. This is of course not to say that certain attitudes with regards to discipline, interpersonal attraction, social perception, and prejudice are ultimately unable to be changed; rather, such an approach merely helps to integrated understanding with the reader that this particular theoretical model appreciates the role to which both nature and nurture can impact upon human attitude (Matthey & Regner, 2011). In short, it is impossible to stay definitively whether or not personality traits, inclusive of attitudes (whether learned or unlearned) are ultimately the result of environmental or biological factors. As such, the safest approach is to infer that they are some type of derivative of both and therefore should be understood in such a manner. The secondary theory of intrapersonal psychological behavioral theories is with regards to the persuasion theory. Whereas the previous model which was discussed emphasizes the means by which genetic factors can help to inform and guide attitude, persuasion represents the flip side of this equation by delineating the impact that a communicator can have on imparting a message to a particular audience through one medium or another. Within this particular theory exists the dual processes of persuasion; which helps to promote the understanding that the persuasion process can take place on two separate peripheries - the peripheral and the central (Cohrs et al, 2007). Within such a dynamic, the central persuasive method seeks to engage the individual based upon facts and existing knowledge. Conversely, the peripheral route seeks to engage individual with regards to a given course of action by appealing to motivational approaches that often times have a direct level of emotional engagement. One would not be remiss to notice that this peripheral approach bears many hallmarks of the pathos as defined by Aristotle. Within this pathos oriented peripheral approach, the individual is engaged based upon innate levels of human attachment and/or distaste (De Bruijn et al, 2007). If there were any one theory or approach to the means by which human behavior is constrained, it would necessarily be with regards to the so-called social cognition theory. Within this particular theory, an understanding of the way in which people perceive themselves as related to the way in which they behave is engaged. From this level of social cognition, a degree of self-concept is thereby created. From this understanding of self-concept, key attributes of personality and the motivating factors by which these individuals often times engage with others as part of a group dynamic is oftentimes noted. As the preceding theories have noted, each and every one of the intrapersonal theoretical approaches emphasizes the role and importance that self-actualization and realization have with regards to the means by which personal behavior is crafted and affected within a particular situation (Rothrock et al, 2011). By the same token, interpersonal phenomenon and theories, to be discussed within the second section of this analysis include the means by which social influence, group dynamics, relations with others, and interpersonal attraction theories help to explain the means by which individuals interact with one another and constrain and define their own behavior in general. From earliest childhood it is oftentimes heard the dangers relating to groupthink or peer pressure; colloquially termed as falling in with the wrong crowd. However, such a simplistic definition of human psychosocial behavior is in fact a verifiable and definitive theory (None & Baker, 1992). This of course is related to the social influence theory of the means by which human behavior is evidenced within groups. One of the first aspects in which this social influence theory seeks to define and construct is with regards to the theory of conformity (Nuttin, 1989). A litany of studies have been conducted and have sought to analyze the means by which individuals conform to the majority theory based upon some type of wish for acceptance or innate fear of rejection; even when it is definitively obvious that the majority opinion is completely and entirely wrong (Sheldon et al, 2011). Another salient theory within the interpersonal dynamics of human psychosocial behavior is with regards to the group dynamic theory (Gawronski, 2009). Within this particular theory, one begins to understand and realize the importance that particular norms, roles, and relationships have with respect to forming an individual’s viewpoint on any of a litany of different subject matter. In such a manner, is readily able to be understood why key decision-making processes within groups occur in the unique way in which they do (Sommer, 2011). Although closely related to the prior determinate which has been discussed this particular psychosocial theory goes a great deal further in helping to delineate the means by which the de-individualization process takes place and crowd awareness act upon decision-making to a greater degree than the other norms which have been discussed cannot. Likewise, interpersonal attraction theory states that an individual’s behavioral characteristics, when operating within a group of individuals, is necessarily impacted upon with regards to degree to which certain emotional attachments or dislikes are evidenced. Naturally, one of the first determinants of such a theory that one integrates with is with respect to the emotional attachment that love can provide (Waller, 2003). Although it is true that love provides a powerful mechanism through which interpersonal attraction can take place, it should not be understood that this is the only means by which it can be affected. Moreover, physical attractiveness is only one important metric of the interpersonal attraction that can be seen with regards to group behavior. Intimacy, passion, and commitment, are more nuanced interpretations and only apply to situations in which a sexual attraction is necessarily evidence. That being said, the level of interpersonal attraction that can be witnessed does not always have to be sexual in nature and can merely be platonic (Simms, 2006). However, regardless of the particular nature to which such a relationship or interpersonal attraction develops, it nonetheless has a profound impact upon the way in which the individual both views themselves, and the group as a function of the development and perception of this particular relationship (Silvers, 2011). The final interpersonal theory of psychosocial behavior is with regards to what has been termed as relationship theory. In effect, such a theory, much as one might expect, determines the behavior and means by which an individual integrate with the given situation based solely upon the degree to which they assume their behavior should be confined and constructed with regards to the particular relationships that are evident within the group (Greenfield, 2011). Naturally, these relationships will differ from group to group and from person to person; however, the existence of such a determinacy necessarily frustrates and confounds many of the other theories that here and been presented. Just as with the very first theory of input from personal concepts of psychosocial behavior, this particular interpersonal theory of psychosocial behavior relies upon the means by which both psychological, environmental, sociological, and biological mechanisms impact upon the way in which individual sees themselves as a functional member of a group (Raynor & Entin, 1983. Naturally, more than merely defining the means by which individual plays with reference to this group, this particular theory enables the individual to apply the level of rational thought and differentiation between the group members and to determine whether or not key actions should be taken on the whole or merely at the behest or specific need of an individual within that group. As a means of understanding the theories that have been presented thus far, it is incumbent upon the reader to realize the fact that psychosocial behavior theory is not an exact science. Rather, it is constrained by the specific experiential and environmental/biological factors that impact upon the individual within the group. Due to the fact that each and every group is comprised of a number of individuals from a variety of different backgrounds and experiences, it is not absurd to assume that certain psychosocial behavioral patterns will emerge in key situations and among key actors to a greater extent than they might emerge within another group or individual. In seeking to answer the question and prompt that was put forward within this essay, it is the determination of this author that trying to understand what motivates, influences, and drives an individual, or group of individuals, to action is vitally important. One does not need to consider a great deal of current complexity and group dynamics in order to realize that anticipation and appreciation for these motivating factors is ultimately what defines success and failure in many group situations. Whereas it might be convenient to envision a group of people as something comprised of less than 25 individuals, the fact of the matter is that the global situation is one that is defined by a litany of different groups that can include but is not limited to groups ranging in size from three to several million. Within such a dynamic, seeking to appreciate these motivational and behavioral factors that determine action and likely consequences is one way in which a degree of anticipation, almost clairvoyants, can be applied with respect to the outcomes that will likely be achieved in any number of distinct situations. References Cohrs, J., Maes, J., Moschner, B., & Kielmann, S. (2007). Determinants of Human Rights Attitudes and Behavior: A Comparison and Integration of Psychological Perspectives. Political Psychology, 28(4), 441-469. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2007.00581.x De Bruijn, G, Kremers, S, De Vet, E, De Nooijer, J, Van Mechelen, W, & Brug, J 2007, 'Does habit strength moderate the intention-behaviour relationship in the Theory of Planned Behaviour? The case of fruit consumption', Psychology & Health, 22, 8, pp. 899-916, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 4 July 2013. Gawronski, B 2009, 'Ten Frequently Asked Questions About Implicit Measures and Their Frequently Supposed, But Not Entirely Correct Answers', Canadian Psychology, 50, 3, pp. 141-150, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 4 July 2013.LONGO, S, & MALONE, N 2013, 'Examining the Bases of Power, Inequality, and Human Variation', Monthly Review: An Independent Socialist Magazine, 64, 10, pp. 53-56, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 4 July 2013. Greenfield, EA 2011, 'Developmental Systems Theory as a Conceptual Anchor for Generalist Curriculum on Human Behavior and the Social Environment', Social Work Education, 30, 5, pp. 529-540, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 4 July 2013. Matthey, A, & Regner, T 2011, 'Do I Really Want to Know? A Cognitive Dissonance-Based Explanation of Other-Regarding Behavior', Games (20734336), 2, 1, pp. 114-135, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 4 July 2013. Mone, M, & Baker, D 1992, 'Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Determinants and Consequences of Self-Set Goals: An Integrative, Dynamic Model', Human Performance, 5, 3, p. 213, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 4 July 2013. Nuttin Jr., JM 1989, 'Proposal for a heuristic quasi-social analysis of social behaviour: The case of Harlow's 'Nature of Love'', European Journal Of Social Psychology, 19, 5, pp. 371-383, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 4 July 2013. Raynor, J, & Entin, E 1983, 'The Function of Future Orientation as a Determinant of Human Behavior in Step-Path Theory of Action', International Journal Of Psychology, 18, 1-4, pp. 463-487, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 4 July 2013. Resnicow, K, & Vaughan, R 2006, 'A chaotic view of behavior change: a quantum leap for health promotion', International Journal Of Behavioral Nutrition & Physical Activity, 3, pp. 25-7, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 4 July 2013. Rothrock, L, Wysk, R, Kim, N, Shin, D, Son, Y, & Joo, J 2011, 'A modelling formalism for human-machine cooperative systems', International Journal Of Production Research, 49, 14, pp. 4263-4273, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 4 July 2013. Sheldon, K, Cheng, C, & Hilpert, J 2011, 'Understanding Well-Being and Optimal Functioning: Applying the Multilevel Personality in Context (MPIC) Model', Psychological Inquiry, 22, 1, pp. 1-16, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 4 July 2013. Silvers, S 2011, 'Methodological and Moral Muddles in Evolutionary Psychology', Homo Oeconomicus, 28, 3, pp. 297-318, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 4 July 2013. Simms, JR 2006, 'Technical and social innovation determinants of behaviour', Systems Research & Behavioral Science, 23, 3, pp. 383-393, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 4 July 2013. Sommer, L 2011, 'The Theory Of Planned Behaviour And The Impact Of Past Behaviour', International Business & Economics Research Journal, 10, 1, pp. 91-110, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 4 July 2013. Waller, JE 2003, 'Our Ancestral Shadow: Hate and Human Nature in Evolutionary Psychology', Journal Of Hate Studies, 3, 1, pp. 121-132, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 4 July 2013. Read More