Unit: II

PERSONALITY AND THEORIES

Dr. Joseph Anbarasu Personality Theories
After completion of this chapter, the student should be able to a. understand the seven perspectives of personality theories b. evaluate the various personality theories in the context of seven perspectives; and c. appreciate the humans venture with all his or her limitations in understanding the personality.

1. Introduction
There are number of theories of Personality. It starts from Sigmund Freud and goes upto Viktor Frank. That is, it is from psychoanalysis to logotherapy. It is, for many, an area of confusion. Which theory is right? Unfortunately, this aspect of psychology is the least amenable to direct research that pits one theory against another. Much of it involves things that are only accessible to the person him- or herself -- your inner thoughts and feelings. Some of it is thought not to be available even to the person -- your instincts and unconscious motivations. In other words, personality is still very much in a "pre-scientific" or philosophical stage, and some aspects may well always remain that way. Another thing that throws some people about personality theories is that they come into it thinking it is the easiest topic of all, and that everyone -- especially they themselves -- already knows all the answers. It is true that personality theories do not involve all the higher math and symbolic systems that physics and chemistry involve. And it is true that we all have pretty direct access to our own thoughts and feelings, and plenty of experience dealing with people. But we are mistaking familiarity with knowledge, and in much of what we think we know turns out to be prejudices and biases we have picked up over the years. In fact, the topic of theories of personality is probably one of the most difficult and most complex we ever deal with. As we go through the various theories, however, there will be ones that fit well with your experiences of self and other -- that tends to be a good sign. And there will be times that several theorists say similar things, even though they are taking very different approaches -that, too, is a good sign. And occasionally there is a research program that supports certain ideas over others that is a very good sign. Personality theories are interesting if one can actually participate in the process. For which, one does not need labs and funding from agencies. The requirement is simply bit of worldly intelligence, some motivation and an open mind.

Theory
What is a theory? A theory is a model of reality that helps us to understand, explain, predict, and control that reality. In the study of personality, these models are usually verbal. Every now and then, someone comes up with a graphic model, with symbolic illustrations, or a mathematical model, or even a computer model. But words are the basic form.

Different approaches focus on different aspects of theory. Humanists and Existentialists tend to focus on the understanding part. They believe that much of what we are is way too complex and embedded in history and culture to "predict and control." Besides, they suggest, predicting and controlling people is, to a considerable extent, unethical. Behaviorists and Freudians, on the other hand, prefer to discuss prediction and control. If an idea is useful, if it works, one can go with it. Understanding, to them, is secondary. Another definition says that a theory is a guide to action: One can assume that the future will be something like the past. He also presumes that certain sequences and patterns of events that have occurred frequently before are likely to occur again. Therefore he looks to the first events of a sequence, or the most vivid parts of a pattern, to serve as his landmarks and warning signals. A theory is a little like a map: It is not the same as the countryside it describes; it certainly does not give one every detail; it may not even be terribly accurate. But it does provide a guide to action -- and gives him something to correct when it fails.

Personality
Individual differences are talked as personality in general. Each person has unique personality. Therefore, one can say that the personality is called individual differences. For some theories, it is the central issue. These theories often spend considerable attention on things like types and traits and tests with which one can categorize or compare people: Some people are neurotic, others are not; some people are more introverted, others more extroverted; and so on. However, personality theorists are just as interested in the commonalities among people. Another way of saying this is that personality theorists are interested in the structure of the individual, the psychological structure in particular. How are people "put together;" how do they "work;" how do they "fall apart." Some theorists go a step further and say they are looking for the essence of being a person. Or they say they are looking for what it means to be an individual human being. The field of personality psychology stretches from a fairly simple empirical search for differences between people to a rather philosophical search for the meaning of life. Personality psychologists like to think of their field as a sort of umbrella for all the rest of psychology. We are, after all, concerned about genetics and physiology, about learning and development, about social interaction and culture, about pathology and therapy. All these things come together in the individual.

Shortcomings
What is required from one is an open mind. There are quite a few things that can go wrong with a theory. This applies, of course, even to the theories created by the great minds we'll be looking at. On the other hand, it is even more important when we develop our own theories about people and their personalities. Here are a few things to look for:

Ethnocentrism
Everyone grows up in a culture that existed before their birth. It influences us so subtly and so thoroughly that we grow up thinking "this is the way things are," rather than "this is the

ways things are in this particular society." Erich Fromm, one of the people we will look at, calls this the social unconscious, and it is very powerful. Sigmund Freud grew up in Vienna, not Chennai or Delhi. He was born in 1856, not 1756, not 1956. There were things that had to have influenced him, and so his theorizing, would be different for us. The peculiarities of a culture can sometimes be most easily seen by asking "what does everybody talk about?" and "what does nobody talk about?" In India, during the last half of the 1800's, especially in the middle and upper classes, people just did not talk about sex much. It was, more or less "taboo." It was also true in Europe in the same period. Freud has to be commended, by the way, on his ability to rise above his culture in this instance. He saw how strange it was to pretend that people (especially women) were not sexual creatures. Much of ones present openness about sex (for better or for worse) derives from Freud's original insights. Today, most people are not mortified by their sexual natures. In fact, one has a tendency to talk about his or her sexuality all the time, to anyone who will listen. Sex is plastered on ones billboards, broadcast on televisions, a part of the lyrics of favorite songs, in movies, magazines, and in books. This is something peculiar about worlds culture, and one is so used to it, he or she hardly notices anymore. On the other hand, Freud was mislead by his culture into thinking that neurosis always has a sexual root. In any society, one has more problems with feeling useless and fearing aging and death. Freud's society took death for granted, considered aging a sign of maturity, and had a place for nearly everybody.

Egocentrism
Another potential limitation in theorizing is the peculiarities of the theorist as an individual. Each of us, beyond our culture, has specific details to his or her life -- genetics, family structure and dynamics, special experiences, education, and so on - that affect the way one thinks and feels and, ultimately, the way he interprets personality. Freud, for example, was the first of seven children (though he had two half brothers who had kids of their own before Sigmund was born). His mother was a strong personality and 20 years younger than his father, and she was particularly attached to Sigmund. Freud was a genius. He was Jewish, although neither he nor his father ever practiced their religion. It is quite likely that the patriarchal family structure he experienced as well as the close ties he had with his mother directed his attention to those kinds of issues when it came time for him to formulate his theory. His pessimistic nature and atheistic beliefs led him to view human life as rather survivalistic and requiring strong social control.

Dogmatism
A third limitation is dogmatism. We as human beings seem to have a natural conservative tendency: We stick to what has worked in the past. And if we devote our lives to developing a personality theory, if we have poured our heart into it, you can bet we will be very defensive (to use Freud's term) about it.

Dogmatic people do not allow for questions, doubts, new information, and so on. You can tell when you are dealing with dogmatic people by looking at how they deal with their critics: They will tend to make use of what is called the circular argument. A circular argument is one where you "prove" your point by assuming things that would only be true if your point were true in the first place. There are tons of examples of circular arguments because everyone seems to use them. A simple example: "I know everything!" Why should I believe you? "Because I know everything!" Another example: "You have to believe in God because the Bible says so, and the Bible is the word of God!" Now understand that there is nothing intrinsically wrong with saying that God exists and neither is there anything intrinsically wrong with believing that the Bible is the word of God. Where this person goes wrong is using the point "the Bible is the word of God" to support the contention that "you have to believe in God," since the non-believer is hardly going to be impressed with the one if he does not believe in the other. This kind of thing happens all the time in psychology, and in personality theories in particular.

Misunderstandings
Another problem is unintended implications: It seems that every time you say something, you let loose words that are susceptible to various interpretations. To put it simply, people will often misunderstand you. There are several things that make misunderstandings more likely. 1. Translation Freud, Jung, Binswanger, and several others, wrote in German. When they were translated, some of their concepts were "twisted" a little -- something quite natural, since every language has its own idiosyncrasies. Freud's id, ego, and superego are words used by his translators. The original terms were es, ich, and berich, which are German for it, I, and over-I. They are, in other words, ordinary words, simple words. In translation, they were turned into Latin words, words that sounded vaguely scientific, because the translators felt that readers would be more accepting of Freud if he sounded a little more scientific, instead of poetic. 2. Neologisms. Neologisms means new words. When one develops a theory, he may have concepts that have not had names before, and one finds or creates words to name them. Sometimes he uses Greek or Latin, sometimes he uses combinations of old words (as in German), sometimes he uses phrases (as in French), sometimes he just takes an old word and uses it in a new way: anticathexis, Gemeinschaftsgefhl, tre-en-soi, and self, for examples. It does not take much explaining to see how a word like self or anxiety or ego has hundreds of different meanings, depending on the theorist. 3. Metaphors. Metaphors (or similes, more exactly) are words or phrases that, while not literally true, somehow capture some aspect of the truth. Every theorist uses models of the human 4

personality in one form or another, but it would be a mistake to confuse the model -- the metaphor -- for the real thing. A good example is the common present-day use of the computer and information-processing in general as a metaphor for human functioning. Do we work something like computers? Yes, in fact, several aspects of our functioning work like that. Are we computers? No, of course not. The metaphor fails in the long run. But it is useful, and that's how we have to view them. It's like a map: It helps you find your way, but you'd hardly confuse it with the territory itself. 4. Evidence Evidence, or rather the lack of evidence, is of course another problem. What kind of support do you have for your theory? Or was it something you dreamed up while on a hallucinogenic? There are several kinds of evidence: Anecdotal, clinical, phenomenological, correlational, and experimental. 1. Anecdotal evidence is the casual kind of evidence, usually given in story form: "I remember when...," and "I heard that...," for example. It is, of course, notoriously inaccurate. It is best to use this kind of evidence only as a motivation for further research. 2. Clinical evidence is evidence gathered from therapy sessions. It is more carefully recorded by people with considerable training. Its major weakness is that it tends to be highly individual and even unusual, because you are describing a person who is almost by definition an unusual individual! Clinical evidence does provide the foundation of most of the theories we will look at, although most follow up with further research. 3. Phenomenological evidence is the result of careful observation of people in various circumstances, as well as introspection involving one's own psychological processes. Many of the theorists we will look at have done phenomenological research, either formally or informally. It requires considerable training as well as a certain natural ability. Its weakness is that we have a hard time telling whether the researcher has done a good job. 4. Correlational research in personality usually involves the creation and use of personality tests. The scores from these tests are compared with other measurable aspects of life, as well as with other tests. So we might create a test for shyness (introversion), and compare it with the scores on intelligence tests or with ratings of job satisfaction. Unfortunately, measuring things doesn't tell you how they work or even if they are real, and many things resist measurement altogether. 5. Experimental research is the most controlled and precise form of research, and, if the issues you are concerned with are amenable to experimentation, it is the preferred method. Experimentation, as you know, involves random selection of subjects, careful control of conditions, great concern to avoid undue influence, and usually measurement and statistics. Its weakness is that it has a hard time getting at many of the issues personality theorists are most interested in. How do you control or measure things like love, anger, or awareness?

Philosophical assumptions
That people -- even famous geniuses -- make mistakes should not have been a big surprise to you. It should also not surprise you that people are limited. There are many questions, ones we need to have answers to in order to build our theories, that have no answer. Some are just

beyond us presently; some may never have an answer. But we answer them anyway, because we need to get on with life. We can call these our philosophical assumptions. 1. Free will vs. determinism. Are we and the world completely determined? Is the sense that we make choices just an illusion? Or is it the other way around, that the spirit has the potential to rise above all restraints, that it is determinism which is an illusion? Most theorists make more moderate assumptions. A moderate determinist position might say that, we are ultimately determined; we are capable of participating in that determinism. A moderate free-will position might say that freedom is intrinsic to our nature, but we must live out that nature in an otherwise determined world. 2. Uniqueness vs. universality. Is each person unique, or will we eventually discover universal laws which will explain all of human behaviour? Again, more moderate positions are available: Perhaps there are broad rules of human nature with room for individual variation within them; or perhaps our individuality outweighs our commonalities. I am sure you can see how this assumption relates to the previous one: Determinism suggests the possibility of universal laws, while free will is one possible source of uniqueness. But the relationship is not perfect, and in the moderate versions quite complex. 3. Physiological vs. purposive motivation. Are we more "pushed" by basic physiological needs, such as the need for food, water, and sexual activity? Or are we more "pulled" by our purposes, goals, values, principles, and so on? More moderate possibilities include the idea that purposive behavior is powerful but grows out of physiological needs, or simply that both types of motivation are important, perhaps at different times and places. A more philosophical version of this contrasts causality and teleology. The first says that your state of mind now is determined by prior events; The second says that it is determined by its orientation to the future. The causality position is by far the more common in psychology generally, but the teleological position is very strong in personality psychology. 4. Conscious vs. unconscious motivation. Is much, most, or even all of our behavior and experience determined by unconscious forces, i.e. forces of which we are not aware? Or is some, little, or even none determined by unconscious forces. Or, to put it another way, how much of what determines our behavior are we conscious of? This might be an answerable question, but consciousness and unconsciousness are slippery things. For example, if we were aware of something a moment ago, and it has changed us in some way, but we are now unable to bring it to awareness, are we consciously motivated or unconsciously? Or if we deny some truth, keeping it from awareness, must we not have seen it coming in order to take that action to begin with? 5. Nature vs. nurture. This is another question that may someday be answerable: To what degree is what we are due to our genetic inheritance ("nature") or to our 6

upbringing and other experiences ("nurture")? The question is such a difficult one because nature and nurture do not exist independently of each other. Both a body and experience are probably essential to being a person, and it is very difficult to separate their effects. As you will see, the issue comes up in many forms, including the possible existence of instincts in human beings and the nature of temperament, genetically based personality characteristics. It is also very debatable whether "nature" (as in human nature) even refers to genetics. 6. Stage vs. non-stage theories of development. One aspect of the nature-nurture issue that is very important to personality psychology is whether or not we all pass through predetermined stages of development. We do, after all, go through certain stages of physiological development -- fetal, childhood, puberty, adulthood, senescence -powerfully controlled by genetics. Shouldn't we expect the same for psychological development? We will see a full range of positions on this issue, from true stage theories such as Freud's, who saw stages as universal and fairly clearly marked, to behaviorist and humanist theories that consider what appear to be stages to be artifacts created by certain patterns of upbringing and culture. 7. Cultural determinism vs. cultural transcendence. To what extent do our cultures mold us? Totally, or are we capable of "rising above" (transcending) those influences? And if so, how easy or difficult is it? Notice that this is not quite the same as the determinism-free will issue: If we are not determined by culture, our "transcendence" may be nothing more than some other determinism, by physiological needs, for example, or genetics. Another way to look at the issue is to ask yourself, "How difficult is it to really get to know someone from a different culture?" If it is difficult to step out of our cultures and communicate as human beings, then perhaps culture is terribly determining of who we are. If it is relatively easy, perhaps it is not so powerful. 8. Early or late personality formation. Are our personality characteristics established in early childhood, to remain relatively fixed through the rest of our lives? Or are we every bit as flexible in adulthood? Or is that, although change is always a possibility, it just gets increasingly difficult as time goes on? This question is intimately tied up with the issues of genetics, stages, and cultural determination, as you can imagine. The biggest hurdle we face before we find a resolution, however, is in specifying what we mean by personality characteristics. If we mean things that never change from the moment of birth -- i.e. temperament -then of course personality is formed early. If we mean our beliefs, opinions, habits, and so on, these can change rather dramatically up to the moment of death. Since most theorists mean something "in between" these extremes, the answer is likewise to be found "in between." 9. Continuous vs. discontinuous understanding of mental illness. Is mental illness just a matter of degree? Are they just ordinary people that have taken something to an 7

extreme? Are they perhaps eccentrics that disturb themselves or us? Or is there a qualitative difference in the way they experience reality? As with cultures, is it easy to understand the mentally ill, or do we live in separate worlds? This issue may be resolvable, but it is complicated by the fact that mental illness is hardly a single entity. There are many different kinds. Some would say there are as many as there are people who are mentally ill. What is a mental illness and what is not is even up for debate. It may be that mental health is also not a single thing. 10. Optimism vs. pessimism. Last, we return to an issue that is, I believe, not at all resolvable: Are human beings basically good or basically bad; Should we be hopeful about our prospects, or discouraged; Do we need a lot of help, or would we be better off if left alone? This is, obviously, a more philosophical, religious, or personal issue. Yet it is perhaps the most influential of all. The attitude determines what you see when you look at humanity; What you see in turn influences the attitude. And it is bound with other issues: If, for example, mental illness is not so far from health, if personality can be changed later in life, if culture and genetics aren't too powerful, and if our motivations can at least be made conscious, we have more grounds for optimism. The theorists we will look at were at least optimistic enough to make the effort at understanding human nature.

Organization
With all the different pitfalls, assumptions, and methods, you might think that there is very little we can do in terms of organizing "theories of personality." Fortunately, people with like minds tend to be drawn to each other. Three broad orientations tend to stand out: 1. Psychoanalytic or "first force." Although psychoanalytic strictly speaking refers to Freudians, we will use it here to refer to others who have been strongly influenced by Freud and who -- though they may disagree with nearly everything else -- do share attitude: They tend to believe that the answers to the important questions lie somewhere behind the surface, hidden, in the unconscious. This book will look at three versions of this approach. The first is the Freudian view proper, which includes Sigmund and Anna Freud, of course, and the ego psychologist, of whom Erik Erikson is the best known. The second might be called the transpersonal perspective, which has a much more spiritual streak, and which will be represented here by Carl Jung. The third has been called the social psychological view, and includes Alfred Adler, Karen Horney, and Erich Fromm. 2. Behavioristic or "second force." In this perspective, the answers are felt to lie in careful observation of behavior and environment and their relations. Behaviorists, as well as their modern descendants the cognitivist, prefer quantitative and experimental methods. The behavioristic approach will be represented here by Hans Eysenck, B. F. Skinner, and Albert Bandura. 3. Humanistic or "third force." The humanistic approach, which is usually thought of as including existential psychology, is the most recent of the three. Often based on a reaction to psychoanalytic and behavioristic theories, the common belief is that the answers are to be found in consciousness or experience. Phenomenological methods are preferred by most humanists. 8

We will examine two "streams" of the humanistic approach. The first is humanism proper, represented by Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, and George Kelly. The second is existentialist psychology, a philosophy-based humanism quite popular in Europe and Latin America. We will look at two existential psychologists, Ludwig Binswanger and Viktor Frankl.

2. Theories of Personality
There are dozens of personality theories. It is possible to introduce only a few of the most influential. For clarity, we will confine ourselves to three broad perspectives: (1) Psychodynamic Theories, which focus on the inner workings of personality, especially internal conflicts and struggles, (2) Behavioristic Theories, which place greater importance on the external environment and on the effects of conditioning and learning, and (3) Humanistic Theories, which stress subjective experience and personal growth.

PSYCHODYNAMIC THEORIES: Sigmund Freud's Psychoanalytic theory

A Viennese physician realized that many of his patient's problems seemed to lack physical causes. "My life has been aimed at one goal only; to infer or to guess how the mental apparatus is constructed and what forces interplay and counteract in it." He evolved the following theory of personality from 1890 till he died in 1939:

Structure or Personality [psyche]

Freud viewed personality as a dynamic system directed by three structures, and each of these is a complex system in its own right --separate and conflicting mental processes -- but most behavior involves the activity of all three. Internal struggles and re-channeled energies typify most personality functioning. Ego sometimes is giving in to the seduction of the Id, and sometimes forced by superego to displace or sublimate behavior to other activities. The ego is always in the middle dealing not only with id and superego, but also with external reality. Anxiety may occur when the ego feels overwhelmed --neurotic anxiety when impulses from the id are barely kept under control --moral anxiety when there are threats of punishment from the superego. Each person develops habitual ways of calming these anxieties, and many resort to using ego-defense mechanisms to lessen internal conflicts. Id. Innate biological instincts and urges present at birth. Self-serving, irrational, impulsive, and totally unconscious, it operates on the pleasure principle: pleasure-seeking urges of all kinds are freely expressed. A well of energy [libido and thanatos] for the entire psyche [personality]: Eros: Life instincts. It is like the well that contains: Libido, energy, which promotes survival, underlies sexual desires, and is expressed whenever we seek pleasure. Thanatos, responsible for aggressive and destructive urges [the long history of wars and violence as evidence of such urges] NOTE: Most Id energies, then, are aimed at a discharge of tensions related to sex and aggression.

Ego
The "executive." It is guided by the reality principle --it delays action until it is practical or appropriate. It is the system of thinking, planning, problem solving, and deciding. It is in conscious control of the personality. It directs energies supplied by the id. The Id is like a blind king or queen whose power is awesome but who must rely on others to carry out orders. The Id can only form mental images of things it desires ("Primary process thinking.") The ego wins power to direct behaviour by relating the desires of the id to external reality.

Superego
Acts as a judge or censor for the thoughts and actions of the ego - an "internalised parent" to bring behaviour under control. A person with a weak superego will be a delinquent, criminal, or antisocial personality. In contrast, an overly strict or harsh superego may cause inhibition, rigidity, or unbearable guilt. Conscience, a part of the superego, reflects all actions for which a person has been punished. When the standards of the conscience are not met, you are punished internally by guilt feelings. Ego ideal reflects all behaviour one's parents approved of or rewarded. The ego ideal is a source of goals and aspirations. When its standards are met, pride is felt.

Levels of consciousness
Unconscious. Beyond awareness. Contains repressed memories and emotions, plus the instinctual drives of the Id. Modern scientists are beginning to find brain areas that seem to have the kinds of unconscious effects that Freud described. Especially important are areas linked with emotion and memory --such as the hippocampus in the limbic system (Reiser, 1985; Wilson, 1985). Unconscious thoughts, feelings, or urges may slip into behaviour in disguised or symbolic form. Conscious. The conscious level includes everything we are aware of at a given moment, including thoughts, perceptions, feelings, and memories. Pre-conscious. Contains material that can be easily brought to awareness. If you stop to think about a time when you felt angry or rejected, you will be moving this memory from the preconscious to the conscious level of awareness. Language, Customs, Rules, Roles, and Morals
Every society must socialize its children by teaching them language, customs, rules, roles, and morals. The job of preparing children to take part in society is typically placed in the hands of parents. This pattern is convenient and fateful. While carrying out socialization, parents leave traces of their won personality in their children.

Psychosexual Stages
A Freudian Fable? Freud theorized that the core of personality is formed before age 6 in a series of psychosexual stages. His account holds that childhood urges for erotic pleasure have lasting effects on development. His emphasis on infantile sexuality is one of the most controversial aspects of his thinking. However, Freud used the term sex very broadly to refer to several different physical sources of pleasure. He identified 4 psychosexual stages. At each 10

stage a different part of the body becomes a child's primary erogenous zone (area capable of producing pleasure). Each area then serves as the main source of pleasure, frustration, and self-expression. Freud believed that many adult personality traits can be traced to fixations (unresolved conflict or emotional hang-up caused by overindulgence or by frustration) in one or more of the stages.

Oral
During first year of life most of infant's pleasure comes from stimulation of the mouth. If overfed or frustrated, oral traits may be created. Adult expressions of oral needs include gum chewing, nail biting, smoking, kissing, overeating, and alcoholism. Fixation early in the oral stage produces an oral-dependent personality --gullible, passive, and need lots of attention (want to be mothered). Frustrations later in the oral stage may cause aggression, often in the form of biting. Fixation here creates an oral-aggressive adult who like to argue, is cynical, and exploits others.

Anal
Between ages of 1 and 3. Child's attention shifts to the process of elimination. When parents attempt toilet training, the child can gain approval or express rebellion or aggression by "holding on" or "letting go." Therefore, harsh or lenient toilet training may lock such responses into personality. Freud described the anal-retentive (holding-on) personality as obstinate, stingy, orderly, and compulsively clean. The anal-expulsive (letting-go) personality is disorderly, destructive, cruel, or messy.

Phallic
Adult traits of the phallic personality are vanity, exhibitionism, sensitive pride, and narcissism (self-love). Freud theorized that such traits develop between the ages 3 and 6. At this time, increased sexual interest causes the child to be physically attracted to the parent of the opposite sex. In males this attraction leads to:

Oedipus conflict
The boy feels rivalry with his father for the affection of the mother --and feels threatened by the father (specifically, fears castration). To ease his anxieties, the boy must identify with the father. Their rivalry ends when the boy seeks to become more like his father. As he does, he begins to accept the father's values and to form a conscience.

Electra conflict:
The girl loves her father and competes with her mother. However, according to Freud, the girl identifies with the mother more gradually. This, he said, is less effective in creating a conscience. Freud believed that females already feel castrated. Because of this, they are less driven to identify with their mothers than boys are with their fathers. This particular part of Freudian thought has been rejected --a reflection of male-dominated times in which Freud lived.

Latency
From age 6 to puberty. A time during which psychosexual development is interrupted --"on hold." Hard to accept. Nevertheless, Freud saw latency as a relatively quiet time compared to the stormy first 6 years.

11

Genital
At puberty, an upswing in sexual energies activates all the unresolved conflicts of earlier years. Cause for adolescent emotion and turmoil. It is marked, throughout adolescence, by a growing capacity for mature and responsible social-sexual relationships. The genital stage ends with heterosexual love and the realization of full adult sexuality. [Neo-Freudians: Karen Horney, Anna Freud, Otto Rank, and Erich Fromm stayed close to the core of Freud's thinking. Alfred Adler, Harry Sullivan, and Carl Jung broke away more completely and created their own opposing theories.] a.ALFRED ADLER (1870-1937). Alfred Alder disagreed with Freud's emphasis on the unconscious, on instinctual drives, and on the importance of sexuality. He felt that we are social creatures governed by social urges, not by biological instincts. In Adler's view, the main driving force in personality is a striving for superiority. A struggle to overcome imperfections, an upward drive for competence, completion, and mastery of shortcomings. He felt that everyone experiences feelings of inferiority. This occurs mainly because we begin life as small, weak, and relatively powerless children surrounded by larger and more powerful adults. Feelings of inferiority may also come from our personal limitations. The struggle for superiority arises from such feelings. While striving for superiority, each tries to compensate for different limitations, and each chooses a different pathway to superiority. Adler believed that this situation creates a unique style of life (or personality pattern) for each individual. According to Adler the core of each person's style of life is formed by age 5. (And valuable clues to a person's style of life are revealed by the earliest memory that can be recalled.) However, later in his life, Adler began to emphasize the existence of a creative self. By this he meant that humans create their personalities through choices and experiences. b.KAREN HORNEY (1885-1952) Neo-Freudian. Faithful to most of his ideas --altered and rejected some and some of her own. She resisted Freud's more mechanistic, biological, instinctive ideas. As a woman, Horney rejected Freud's claim that "anatomy is destiny" --woven into Freudian psychology holding that males are dominant or superior to females. Horney was first to challenge obvious male bias in Freud's thinking. She also disagreed with Freud about the cause of neurosis. Freud held that neurotic (anxiety-ridden) individuals are struggling with forbidden id drives that they fear they cannot control. Horney's view was that a core of basic anxiety occurs when people feel isolated and helpless in a hostile world. These feelings, she believed, are rooted in childhood. Basic anxiety then causes troubled individuals to exaggerate a single mode of interacting with others. Each of us can move toward others (by depending on them for love, support, or friendship),we can move away from others (by withdrawing, acting like a "loner," or being "strong" and independent), or we can move against others (by attacking, competing with, or seeking power over them). Emotional health reflects a balance. Emotional problems tend to lock people into overuse of only one of the three modes. c.CARL JUNG (1875-1961) Jung parted from Freud when he began to develop his own ideas. He, like Freud, called the conscious part of the personality the ego. However, he further noted that between the ego and the outside world we often find a persona, or "mask." It is the "public self." The persona is presented to others when people adopt particular roles (as is necessary in most professions) or when they hide their deeper feelings. Actions of the ego may reflect attitudes of 12

introversion(in which energy is mainly directed inward), or extroversion (in which energy is mainly directed outward). Personal unconscious was Jung's term for what Freud simply called the unconscious. A storehouse for personal experiences, feelings, and memories that are not directly knowable. Collective unconscious, a deeper conscious shared by all humans --Jung believed that from the beginning of time, all humans have had experiences with birth, death, power, god figures, mother and father figures, animals, the earth, energy, evil, rebirth, and so on. According to Jung, such universals create archetypes: original ideas or patterns. Found in the collective unconscious, archetypes are unconscious images that cause us to respond emotionally to symbols of birth, death, energy, animals, evil, and the like. Jung believed that he detected symbols of such archetypes in the art, religion, myths, and dreams of every culture and age. Two particularly important archetypes are anima (representing the female principle) and the animus (representing the male principle). Each person has both. For full development, Jung thought it is essential for both the "masculine" and "feminine" side of personality to be expressed. The presence of the anima in males and the animus in females also enable us to related to members of the opposite sex. Jung regarded the self archetype as the most important of all. The self archetype represents unity. Its existence causes a gradual movement toward balance, wholeness, and harmony within the personality. Jung felt that we become richer and more completely human when a balance is achieved between the conscious and unconscious, the anima and animus, thinking and feeling, sensing and intuiting, the persona and the ego, introversion and extroversion. Jung was the first to use the term self-actualization to describe a striving for completion and unity. He believed that the self archetype is symbolized in every culture by mandalas (magic circles) of one kind of another. ['Memories, Dreams, Reflections,' Jung's autobiography.]

LEARNING THEORIES OF PERSONALITY a.Behavioral personality theory

Any model of personality that emphasizes observable behavior, the relationship between stimuli and responses, and the impact of learning. The behaviorist position is that personality is no more (or less) than a collection of learned behavior patterns. Personality, like other learned behavior, is acquired through classical, conditioning, observational learning, reinforcement, extinction, generalization, and discrimination. Children can learn things like kindness, hostility, generosity, or destructiveness.

b.Learning theorists
A psychologist interested in the ways that learning principles shape and explain personality. They reject the idea that personality is made up of consistent traits. Situational determinants (Immediate conditions (for example, rewards and punishments) in a given situation that determine what behaviour is likely to occur, independent of the actor's personality traits) of behaviour ("Am I honest? In what situation?). Walter Mischel (1973) agrees that some situations strongly affect behaviour. Other situations are trivial and have little impact. Thus, external events interact with each person's unique learning history to produce behaviour in any given situation. Trait theorists also believe that situations affect behaviour. But, in their view situations interact with traits. So, in essence, learning theorists favour replacing the concept of "traits" with "past learning" to explain behaviour.

13

c.John Dollard and Neal Miller

In their view, habits make up the structure of personality. As for the dynamics of personality, Dollard and Miller believe that habits (a deeply ingrained, learned pattern of response) are governed by four elements of learning: (1) Drive. Any stimulus (esp. an internal stimulus such as hunger) strong enough to goad a person to action (such as hunger, pain, lust, frustration, fear). (2) Cue (external stimuli or signs that guide responses, especially those that signal the likely presence or absence of reinforcement). Signals from the environment that guide (3) Responses (any behaviour, either observable or internal) so they are most likely to bring about (4) Reward or reinforcement.

d.Social learning theory

An approach that combines behavioural principles, cognition (perception, thinking, anticipation), social relationships, and observational learning. Behaviourists have recently had to face the fact that they have overlooked --that people think. The new breed of behavioural psychologists, called social learning theorists, include perception, thinking, and other mental events in their views. They also stress social relationships and modelling.

e.Julian Rotter (1975)

The "cognitive behaviourism" of social learning theory can be illustrated by three concepts proposed by Rotter. They are: Psychological situation. How the person interprets or defines the situation (not enough to know the setting in which a persona responds) Expectancy. Anticipation that making a response will lead to reinforcement. To predict your response, we would also have to know if you expect your efforts to pay off in the present situation. Expected reinforcement may be more important than actual past reinforcement. Reinforcement value. Humans attach different values to various activities or rewards. This, too, must be taken into account to understand personality.

f.Self-reinforcement.
Praising oneself or giving oneself a special treat or reward for having made a particular response (such as completing a school assignment). At times, we all evaluate our actions and may reward ourselves with special privileges or treats when the evaluation is positive. Thus, habits of self-praise and self-blame become an important part of personality. In fact, selfreinforcement can be thought of as the behaviorist's counterpart to the superego.

g.Radical Behaviorism
An approach that avoids any reference to thoughts or other internal processes; radical behaviourists are interested strictly in relationships between stimuli and responses. A more extreme view of personality. "Intelligent people no longer believe that men are possessed by demons...but human behaviour is still commonly attributed to indwelling agents," said B. F. Skinner (1971). For Skinner, the term personality is a fiction we invent to pretend we have explained behaviour that is actually controlled by the environment. He believes that everything a person does is ultimately based on past and present rewards and punishments.

14

h.Behavioristic view of development

Many of Freud's major points can be restated in terms of modern learning theory. Miller and Dollard (1950) agree with Freud that the first 6 years are crucial for personality development - but, for different reasons. Rather than thinking in terms of psychosexual urges and fixations, they ask, "What makes early learning experiences so lasting in their effects?" Their answer is that childhood is a time of urgent and tearing drives, powerful rewards and punishments, and crushing frustrations. Also important is social reinforcement based on the effects of attention and approval from others. These forces combine to shape the core of personality.

i.Critical Situations.
Miller and Dollard consider four developmental situations to be of critical importance: (1) Feeding. Can affect later social relationships, because the child learns to associate people with satisfaction and pleasure or with frustration and discomfort. (2) Toilet or cleanliness training. (3) Sex training and (4) Learning to express anger or aggression. The permissiveness for sexual and aggressive behaviour in childhood is linked to adult needs for power (McCelland & Pilon, 1983). This link probably occurs because permitting such behaviours allows children to get pleasure from asserting themselves. Sex training also involves learning "male" and "female" behaviours --which creates an even broader basis for shaping personality. Sexappropriate behaviour. Identification and imitation contribute greatly to personality development in general and to sex training in particular. Identification (which refers to a child's emotional attachment to admired adults, esp. those the child depends on for love and care) leads to imitation. Conscious and unconscious. The actions we choose to imitate depend on their outcome. Girls are less likely than boys to imitate aggressive behaviour because they rarely see female aggression rewarded or approved. Thus, many arbitrary "male" and "female" qualities are passed on at the same time sexual identity is learned. (Classroom situation in which aggressive or disruptive behaviour is reinforced with attention for males and, quietly, rebuked in girls who were, thus, encouraged to be submissive, dependent, and passive.)

HUMANISTIC THEORY
Humanism is a reaction to the pessimism of psychoanalytic theory and the mechanism of learning theory. At its core is a new image of what it means to be human. They view human nature as inherently good and they seek ways to allow our positive potentials to emerge. They reject the Freudian view of personality as a battleground for biological instincts and unconscious forces, and they oppose the mechanical "thing-like" overtones of the behaviourist viewpoint. We are not, they say, merely a bundle of mouldable responses; rather, we are creative beings capable of free choice. To a humanist, the person you are today is largely the product of all of your previous choices. The humanistic viewpoint also places greater emphasis on immediate subjective experience, rather than on prior learning. Humanists believe that there are as many "real worlds" as there are people. To understand behaviour, we must learn how a person subjectively views the world --what is "real" for her or him.

a.Abraham Maslow (1908-1970)

Idea of self-actualisation. Studies of people living unusually effective lives. An interest in people using almost all of their talents and potentials. Albert Einstein, William James, Jane Adams, Eleanor Roosevelt, Abraham Lincoln, John Muir, and Walt Whitman. Then he moved on to directly study artists, writers, poets, and other creative individuals. His thinking 15

changed radically along the way. It became clear that a housewife, carpenter, clerk, or student could live creatively and make full use of his or her potentials. His primary contribution was to draw attention to the possibility of continued personal growth. He considered selfactualisation an ongoing process, not a simple end point to be attained only once.

Characteristics of Self-Actualizers
a. Efficient perceptions of reality. Were able to judge situations correctly and honestly and were very sensitive to the false and dishonest. Comfortable acceptance of self, others, nature. b. Were able to accept their own human nature with all its shortcomings. The shortcomings of others and the contradictions of the human condition were also accepted with humor and tolerance. c. Spontaneity. Extended their creativity into everyday activities. They tended to be unusually alive, engaged, and spontaneous. d. Task centering. Had a mission to fulfill in life or some task or problem outside of themselves to pursue. Humanitarians such as Albert Schweitzer or Mother Therese represent this quality. e. Autonomy. Were free from dependence on external authority or other people. They tended to be resourceful and independent. f. Continued freshness of appreciation. The self-actualizer seems to constantly renew appreciation of life's basic goods. A sunset or a flower will be experienced as intensely the one-thousandth time as it was the first. There is an "innocence of vision," like that of an artist or child. g. Fellowship with humanity. Felt a deep identification with others and the human situation in general. h. Profound interpersonal relationships. Marked by deep, loving bonds. i. Unhostile sense of humor. This refers to the wonderful capacity to laugh at oneself. It also refers to the kind of humor a man like Abraham Lincoln had. Lincoln probably never made a joke that hurt anybody. His wry comments were a gentle prodding at human shortcomings. j. Peak experiences. Reported the frequent occurrence of peak experiences. These were marked by feelings of ecstasy, harmony, and deep meaning. Reported feeling at one with the universe, stronger and calmer than ever before, filled with light, beautiful and good, and so forth. In short, self-actualizers feel safe and unanxious, accepted, loved, loving, and alive.

b.Carl Rogers (1902-1987).

The fully functioning person, he said, is one who has achieved an openness to feelings and experiences and has learned to trust inner urges and intuitions. He believed that this attitude is most likely to occur when a person receives ample amounts of love and acceptance from others. He based his theory on clinical experience. Rogers' theory of personality centers o n the concept of the:

Self
A flexible and changing perception of personal identity that emerges from the: Phenomenal Field. The person's total subjective experience of reality. The self is made up of those experiences identified as "I" or "me" that are separated from "not-me" experiences. Much human behavior can be understood as an attempt to maintain consistency between one's self-image and one's actions. 16

According to Rogers, experiences that match the self-image are symbolized (admitted to consciousness) and contribute to gradual changes in the self. Information or feelings inconsistent with the self-image are said to be incongruent. It is incongruent, for example, to think of yourself as a considerate person if others frequently mention your rudeness. Experiences seriously incongruent with the self-image can be threatening, and they are often distorted or denied conscious recognition. Blocking, denying, or distorting experiences prevents the self from changing and creates a gulf between the self-image and reality. As the self-image grows more unrealistic, the incongruent person becomes confused, vulnerable, dissatisfied, or seriously maladjusted. When your self-image is consistent with what you really think, feel, do, and experience, you are best able to actualize your potentials. Rogers also considered it essential to have congruence between the self-image and the ideal self (similar to Freud's ideal ego --an image of the person you would like to be). The greater the gap between the way you see yourself and the way you would like to be --the greater the tension and anxiety experienced. The Rogerian view of personality can therefore be summarized as a process of maximizing potentials by accepting information about oneself as realistically and honestly as possible. In accord with Rogers' thinking, researchers have found that people with a close match between their self-image and ideal self tend to be socially poised, confident, and resourceful. Those with a poor match tend to be anxious, insecure, and lacking in social skills. Incongruence - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Congruence

Possible selves
The ideal self or the person we would most like to become, as well as other selves we could become or are afraid of becoming. Possible selves translate our hopes, fears, fantasies, and goals into specific images of who we could be. Law students may envision a successful attorney, husband in a troubled marriage might picture himself as a divorcee, a person on a diet might imagine both slim and grossly obese possible selves. Such self-images tend to direct future behavior. They also give meaning to current behavior and help us evaluate it. Upsetting images might "move" one to do something about something.... Even day-to-day decisions may be guided by possible selves. Purchasing clothes, a car, cologne, membership in a health club, and the like may be influenced by images of a valued future self. Everyone over the age of 30 has probably realized that some cherished possible selves will never be realized.

Humanistic view of development

Rogers' theory suggests mirrors, photographs, tape recorders, and the reactions of others hold such fascination and threat for people because they provide information about one's self. The development of self-image depends greatly on information from the environment. It begins with a sorting of perceptions and feelings: my body, my toes, my nose, I want, I like, I am, and so on. Soon it expands to include self-evaluation: I am a good person, I did something bad just now, and so forth.

Conditions of worth
Rogers believed that positive and negative evaluations by others cause children to develop internal standards of evaluation called conditions of worth. We learn that some actions win our parents' love and approval --some are rejected. This learning to evaluate some experiences or feelings as "good" and others as "bad" is directly related to a later capacity for 17

self-esteem, positive self-evaluation, or ^positive self-regard. To think of yourself as a good, lovable, worthwhile person, your behavior and experiences must match your internal conditions of worth. The problem is that this can cause incongruence by leading to the denial of many true feelings and experiences.

Organismic valuing
Rogers believed that congruence and self-actualization are encouraged by replacing conditions of worth with organismic valuing --a direct, gut-level response to life that avoids the filtering and distortion of incongruence. It is the ability to trust one's own feelings and perceptions --to become one's own "locus of evaluation." Most likely to develop, Rogers felt, when children (or adults) receive "unconditional positive regard" from others. When they are "prized" just for being themselves, without any conditions or strings attached.

I OVERVIEW AND COMPARISON OF PERSONALITY THEORIES:

The meaningful organization of observations of human behavior in each theory adds to our understanding of personality. None of the major theories can be proved or disproved. If any could be proven as true, it would no longer be a theory --it would be a law. The implications and predictions of theories are also neither true nor false. Judge in terms of usefulness for explaining behavior, for stimulating research, and for suggesting ways of treating psychological disorders. Each theory has fared differently in these areas.

Psychoanalytic Theory
By present standards, psychoanalytic theory seems to over-emphasize sexuality and biological instincts. These distortions were corrected somewhat by the neo -Freudians, but problems remain. Psychoanalytic theory is good at explaining things after they occur, but offers little help in predicting future behavior. For this reason, many psychoanalytic concepts are difficult or impossible to test.

Behavioristic Theory
Learning theories have provided a good framework for personality research. Behaviorists have made the best effort to rigorously test and verify their ideas. They have been criticized for understating the impact that temperament, emotion, and subjective experience have on personality. To a degree, social learning theory is an attempt to answer such criticisms.

Humanistic Theory
Great strength of humanists is the light they have shed on positive dimensions of personality. As Maslow (1968) put it, "Human nature is not nearly as bad as it has been thought to be. It is as if Freud supplied us with the sick half of psychology and we must now fill it out with the healthy half." However, humanists can be criticized for using imprecise concepts that are difficult to measure or study objectively. Even so, humanistic thought has encouraged many people to seek greater self-awareness and personal growth. Psychoanalytic Behavioristic Theory Theory Negative Neutral Determined Sex & aggression Determined Drives of all kinds 18 Humanistic Theory Positive Free Self- actualization

View of human nature Is Behavior free or determined? Principal motives

Personality structure Role of unconscious Conception of conscience Developmental emphasis Barriers to personal growth Reference:

Id, ego, superego Maximized Superego Psychosexual stages Unconscious conflicts; fixations

Habits Practically non-existent Self-reinforcement Critical learning situations: identification and imitation Maladaptive habits; pathological environment

Self Minimized Ideal self, valuing process Development of self-image Conditions of incongruence

Bergeman CS, Chipuer HM, Plomin R, Pedersen NL, McClearn GE, Nesselroade JR, Costa PT Jr, McCrae RR Genetic and Environmental Effects on Openness to Experience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness: an Adoption/Twin Study. J Pers 1993 Jun; 61(2): 159-179 (Abstract) Carey G, DiLalla DL Personality and Psychopathology: Genetic Perspectives. J Abnorm Psychol 1994 Feb; 103(1): 32-43 (Abstract) Coon, Dennis. Introduction to Psychology, Exploration and Application. St. Paul: West Publishing Company, 1989 Eaves, L., Eysenck, HJ., & Martin, NG. (1989). Genes, Culture, and Personality. New York: Academic. Goldman, D,(1996) High Anxiety, Science, 274. A Commentary on the Use of Genetic Marker Studies of Behavioral Traits. Hershberger SL, Plomin R, Pedersen NL, Traits and Metatraits: Their Reliability, Stability, and Shared Genetic Influence. J Pers Soc Psychol 1995 Oct; 69(4): 673-685 (Abstract) http://www.ark.ship.edu Klaus-Peter Lesch et al. (1996) Association of Anxiety-Related Traits with a Polymorphism in the Serotonin Transporter Gene Regulatory Region Science, 274. Loehlin, JC. (1992). Genes and Environment in Personality Development. NewberryPark, Ca.: Sage. Plomin R (1999) Nature Dec 2; 402(6761 Suppl): C25-9 Genetics and General Cognitive Ability. (abstract) Plomin R, Corley R, Caspi A, Fulker DW, DeFries J. (1998). Adoption Results for Self-Reported Personality: Evidence for Nonadditive Genetic Effects? J Pers Soc Psychol 1998 75 : 211-218 (Abstract) Plomin R, Nesselroade JR. Behavioral Genetics and Personality Change. J Pers 1990 Mar; 58(1): 191220. Abstract Plomin, R. (1994). Genetics and Experience: The Interplay between Nature and Nurture. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Plomin, R., & McClearn, GE. (Ed.). (1993). Nature, Nurture, and Psychology.Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association. Rowe, D. C., 1999 In Derlega, V., Winstead, B.A., Jones, W.H. Personality: Contemporary Theory and Research. (2nd Edition). Nelson Hall, 1999, Chicago. Vandenbergh D.J., Zonderman A.B., Wang J., Uhl G.R., and Costa P.T. Jr.: No Association between Novelty Seeking and Dopamine D4 Receptor (D4DR) Exon III Seven Repeat Alleles in Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging Participants. Molecular Psychiatry 2: 417-419, 1997. (Abstract) www.ship.edu/~cgboeree/sevenpersp.html

Self Study Questions: 1) Write short notes on a. Sigmund Frends Psychoanalytic theory b. Ego, Superego, Conscience, Ego ideal

19

2) Explain Abraham Maslows idea of self-actualisation and give the characteristics of self-actualisers 3) Compare the various personality Theories

20

21