Entry 8

Unconditional Positive Regard --

Definition: The acceptance and caring given to a person as a human being, without imposing conditions on how the person behaves (Glassman 264).

According to Rogers, this is a vital aspect to anyone's life because we all need love and caring, no matter what we do or who we are. It's innate within us to crave or want someone else's positive attention, and in order to be a fulfilled individual, we need others to give us this (if not for motivation, then for reassurance and a sense of belonging, like in Maslow's heirarchy).

For me, it has always been important. When I don't feel the love from other people, I become uninterested in life and what my fullest potential could be. However, most of the time there is always someone I can trust who will give me unconditional positive regard... my parents. No matter how badly I mess up or become now or in the future, I know they will love me. Whether or not they will actually support me in my decisions is another matter, but I know they will think of me in a positive light as their son. But, I know I won't do anything too bad to become ostracized by my friends who will also stick by my side for better or for worse, and give me the caring I need to live through whatever comes my way.

Conditional Positive Regard --

Definition: the acceptance and caring given to a person only for meeting certain standards of behavior (Glassman 264).

This is an important aspect towards growth and development of behavior patterns. It is similar to the idea of classical conditioning in behavioral psychology: when a person does something good, they are rewarded for that behavior (either through praise or physical congratulations). However, a lot of times people take the punishment of their behavior too personally, and think that they are being scolded or ignored for doing the wrong things because of their self, instead of their actions/behaviors. So conditional positive regard has its definite downsides.

As a child, I had to learn a lot about appropriate behavior through conditional positive regard from my sisters. If I did something right, then they would be nice to me or give me something. However, when I did something unacceptable, they wouldn't pay any attention to me, which drove me mad (I was an attention craving toddler). My parents never usually adopted this method, unless I was throwing a tantrum, and instead of trying to hush me or do anything about it, they would ignore me, and wait for me to settle down. The lack of attention is what made me realize my faults. A lot of times in my schooling experience teachers have use conditional positive regard on me. If I answer a question correctly, or do something right in class, they acknowledge it and give me kudos. This is how I have learned to be an effective and productive member of the student body.

Sources:

Glassman, William E. and Marilyn Hadad. Approaches to Psychology. New York: Open University Press, 2004.

Kaboodle. "Care Bears Caring Contest." Book Cover. http://www.kaboodle.com/hi/img/2/0/ 0/28/c/AAAAAhClZOMAAAAAACjD2g.jpg
Infed. "Carl Rogers." Sketch. http://www.infed.org/images/people/ rogers_wikipedia_commons.jpg
Boeree, George C. "Conditional Positive Regard." Diagram. http://webspace.ship.edu/cgboer/ incongruity1.gif
View Images. "Crying Baby." Picture. http://cache.viewimages.com/xc/72342667.jpg?v=1&c=ViewImages&k=2&d=D7D5341DF8CB2C3624C0F336234D6573284831B75F48EF45
Lichtenstein. "Love." Printed Art. http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/singleout/library/Roy-Lichtenstein-Kiss-V-133905.jpg

Entry 7

Abraham Maslow saw basic human needs organized in a very structured, hierarchical pyramid with physical needs at the base and psychological self actualization at the tip (Glassman 273). He broke his model down into five necessities, with the more basic ones at the bottom having to be fulfilled before higher ones can even be attempted. So, physiological needs include food, water, sex, sleep, excretion, air, etc... Most of these must be fully realized before and individual can move on to fulfilling their needs of safety (the next level in the pyramid) which include a secure home life, work environment, family time, health situation (and homeostasis) and flow of income/resources. The next step up is love and belongingness: here is where people must be solid socially, with firm friendships, family situations and sexual relationships. After this step is a step focused on the self... esteem. In order to fulfill the necessary psychological requirements for this step we have to be confident, we have to have respect and be respectful, and we have to be able to achieve or visualize our goals (motivation). Only if all of the previous layers are satisfied can a person be self-actualized. This process involves an individual's ability to be creative, spontaneous, unbiased. accepting, loving and appreciative of the world they are in or have created (274).

Personally, my physiological, safety and love/belongingness needs are satisfactory, and my esteem needs are just about right. So, I believe I am well on the way to proper self-actualization. However, I don't think any of these steps are easily measurable. I think anyone can be self-actualized one moment, and then be at a loss for love/belongingness needs the next (making them un-self-actualized because a step is left unfulfilled). If someone close to a person dies, then that person will have to go through a process of re-fulfilling their love situation before moving back up the pyramid.

I know that I have been fortunate enough to have my lowest needs met favorably from the minute I was born. My physical and safety needs were completely fulfilled, and my family/friends have always been there for me (and nothing bad has really happened with either group). As a personal matter, my esteem has fluctuated. In middle school I had low self-esteem, and I hated what I was going through. But when I switched schools, met new friends and fit into my environment I felt so much better, and since then I have been so much more confident, eager, out-going and in control of my life that I know I am basically satisfied in that aspect. With regards to self-actualization, I am well on my way (if not partially actualized already). Involved mainly with the growth of an individual, and the idividual's desire to use their personal capacities to the fullest, self-actualization is an ongoing process. But I know that I have may qualities of a self-actualized person (like thinking "outside the box" or appreciating the little things in life while caring for others and seeing things unlike before). In a way, it's kind of like an epiphany that I came upon after being in India for a couple of months. It just struck me hard when I understood the inner-workings of the society I grew up in (based on observations I made comparing it to Indian society). And now I understand myself and the world around me a lot better than before.

Sources:

Glassman, William E. and Marilyn Hadad. Approaches to Psychology. New York: Open University Press, 2004.

Diagram and Picture. Wikipedia, The Free Online Encyclopedia. 2006

Entry 6

Karen Horney was one of the leading researchers on the impact of childhood trauma in adult neurosis, and came up with theories suggesting how people develop neurosis. First of all, neurosis is a psychological way of coping with life or a specific situation that isn't traditionally "normal", or that is traumatizing. For some adults, neurosis is a way of bearing childhood burdens (like the memories of molestation or negligence). However, most people experience neurosis because of what Horney calls "the basic evils", which are parental actions towards children that cause a barrier of coldness or isolation between them and their kids. It's the lack of wanting, caring or love in an early child's relationships that is truly scarring (not necessarily beatings or verbal abuse). Occasions when these evils are most evident include (but are not limited to) when parents favor one sibling over another; humiliation of the child by the parent; broken promises; unfair punishment for small mistakes; and the parents' erratic behavior towards or around the child.

I have two sisters who are older than me, and growing up as the youngest child I always felt that my parent preferred them over me. I understand now that they didn't, but it wouldn't be hard to comprehend why parents favor silbings over another: older siblings are more mature and less obnoxious/uncompliant, or younger siblings may get more attention because they "need" it more than older kids. In any case, I felt that they favored my sisters for the sole reason that my sisters got to do things I wasn't allowed to do all the time. Since my sisters are 5 and 10 years older than me, I see my parents' logic behind keeping me from doing the same things they did (like go to scary movies with friends, or get more allowance, or go places by myself). But back then I thought it was just because they didn't like me, and therefore wouldn't let me be an "individual". I threw tantrums and never got what I wanted. "How come Kate gets to go!?!?" "Why does Rachel get to eat that?!?!" "What did I ever do to deserve this?!?!" As a grown person, in retrospect, it all makes sense to me, and I am not permanently scarred, because the reasons behind the parental restraint were rational.

My mom used to humiliate me a lot. I love her to bits, but when I was younger I remember she used to do things that she knew pushed my buttons, but would make her laugh all the same. Example "A": For a halloween party one year, when I was in the insecure middle school pre-pubescent stage of my life, my mom showed up in a "nerd" costume I specifically told her not to wear. Her response, "It will be fine, honey!" But I knew it could end in disaster. And when she arrived, I was embarrassed out of this world. However, like she said, it was all good, and people enjoyed the humor in her costume choice. Now I have learned to accept my mom (and whole family for that matter) for their quirkiness and things that I realize that I have also picked up over the years.

My parents never really made promises to be broken in the first place. But I know that some parents, in order to settle their kids down, or to lighten the mood, will tell their kids one thing, and not follow through with it. For example, if some kids really want to go to a water park, their parents might promise them that they can go later that week, getting the childrens' hopes up, and then not actually go, or make up excuses why they can't. This can be crushing, especially for little kids who don't understand the intention behind the broken promise, and it certainly isn't meant to be purposefully devastating from the parents' points of view.

I remember the good old days of getting spanked for things I did that I thought, at the time, were perfectly reasonable. I would do something like talk back to my parents, waiving it off as "freedom of speech", until I realized that isn't true in a household where parents reign. Then I would be punished "unfairly" for what I said. At the time I wasn't happy about this at all. My parent's were doing stuff to me that wasn't justified. But now I realize what a brat I was, and I can cope internally with the rational consequences I recieved. My parents were only trying to teach me that my behavior was unacceptable, which is was, but I didn't realize that at the time.

My family hasn't always been the most organized, composed or punctual family. When we would go on family trips, just getting out the door was a hassle, and everyone's erratic behavior with last-minute packing and scrambling to put everything in its place was almost unbearable. We are still a very scattered, hectic, dynamic family. But that's what I love about us! Growing up I just got used to this behavior and dealt with it accordingly: i joined right in. However, I know some kids might be overwhelmed or frightened by the erratic nature of their parents, traumatizing them for life. Growing up where it was normal, and using the same techniques of erraticism as an adult, I appreciate it and it allows me to be more spontaneous and forgiving of crazy mistakes or unwanted mishaps.

Sources:

Karen Horney Powerpoint. Mataji Sharma. 2008

Crux and Flux. "Punishment." Cartoon. http://www1.istockphoto.com/ file_thumbview_approve/1119816/2/istockphoto_1119816_punishment.jpg

Britannica. "Karen Horney." Picture. http://cache.eb.com/eb/image?id=61953&rendTypeId=4

Entry 5

Alfred Adler was very much interested in ideas if inferiority and superiority and their connections with compensation in an individual with regards to the Darwinian theory of natural selection and fitness. Although he originally thought of these ideas on more of a physical level, they eventually proved themselves to be more ingrained in people psychologically. Inferiority is "the notion that all children experience a sense of helplessness because of their size and dependence on others: this feeling can also be intensified by real or imagined physical defects, social rejection and other factors" later on in life (Glassman 243). Compensation, on the other hand, is "a precess of engaging in activities intended to produce a feeling of superiority over others, in order to overcome feelings of inferiority" (Glassman). So, instead of seeing psychological motivation as a from of sexual tension or aggression (like Freud), Adler viewed it as a lifelong struggle to gain power over oneself and others consciously (with less emphasis on what went on unconsciously).

Thus, Adler developed the concepts of the "inferiority complex" and "superiority complex" which are responses to to childhood experiences that surface as an older individual. When a person is really insecure because they couldn't resolve or overcome feelings of helplessness from childhood, they are said to have an inferiority complex. The superiority complex is a conscious response to inferiority where a person tries to cover up for their weakness by developing "an attitude of exaggerated self-importance" which can be obvious physically or socially (Glassman 243).

I would have to agree with Adler initial impression of inferiority in children as a common occurrence. However, personally I don't think I have had any issues with an inferiority or superiority complex yet in my life. But I do know people who do have common symptoms of these problems.

As a theater person I see a lot of people who take the stage to become someone else, or to cover up for who they really are (some of the best actors are this way: totally different people on stage than off). Although most people in the dramatic arts are very outgoing and personable in real life, there are a select few I've met who are very insecure behind the scenes. Nevertheless, when they get in the limelight, they play their parts like geniuses, and are usually really good. In a different sense this shows a slight superiority complex in their personalities: they take command of the stage and have control over the audience in an overly intense way, coping with their inferiority in this way. I would have to say that it is probably a good way to respond to their insecurities in this way, rather than taking it out on other people in a work-related or social situation where people could take it the wrong way. This way, others take it as mere acting, at least.

Sources:

Glassman, William E. and Marilyn Hadad. Approaches to Psychology. New York: Open University Press, 2004.

Mark Parisi. Cartoon. Off the Mark. http://www.offthemarkcartoons.com/cartoons/1994-11-10.gif

Odiham Community. Sketch. OTMG. http://www.odihamcommunity.org.uk/system/files/ images/Acting.jpg

Entry 4

Erik Erikson believed that all basic drives were those of social origin. To him, maturing and developing is a process of resolving different conflicts at separate stages in our lives to create our own identities and to foster meaning ful relationships with others (thus, the social aspect kicks in). His psychosocial (rather than psychosexual) stages of life didn't just end after puberty, but continued on through old age because, according to Erikson, we keep on growing as individuals until the day we die. (Glassman 246)

Trust vs. Mistrust (0-18 months old): developing trust in others and self. (Glassman 247)
During this stage in my life I trusted others a lot. I didn't hesitate to go up to strangers and crawl into their arms to be handled and, whether or not the person was actually trustworthy, I allowed them to feed me whatever or do whatever to me. I was a rollie-pollie, chubby baby that knew if I had to get anything done (since I had limited skills) I had to learn to trust larger, bigger, adult-like people to do things for me. I figured that out fast, and I don't really have trust issues because I overcame that conflict fast.

Autonomy vs. Shame (18 months - 3 years old): learning self-control. (Glassman 247)
I seem to mention that I was a biter in all my posts, but I guess it comes into play with psychodynamic theories. My biting habit was one that had no reason or initial fire behind it except for my curiosity. However, I can even say that it got out of control. I bit everything! From the sidewallk to bugs to people. And that's where the line had to be drawn. Eventually, I learned, through external forces teaching me acceptable social behavior (thus, psychosocial again) to abstain from unnecessary chomping (by the power of shame in a society). I didn't learn this until later in this stage, possibly making me fixated on chewing, whcih I regress back into in certain situations (see previous blog entry).

Initiative vs. Guilt (3-5 years old): learning to plan and initiate new actions. (Glassman 247)
Over christmas break I visited a friend who had two boys ages 3 and 5. It was clear they were progressing through this stage of psychosocial development by the things they did and ways they interacted with me (a person they had never seen before). One of the first things one of them did when I arrived (without introduction) was to give me a book and say, "Read this to me." I laughed, and read him the book, thinking all along to myself what a motivated, assertive young kid he was. Looking back, I guess he was just initiating his own actions for his own benefit, instead of relying on others to do it for him (like in the trust stage). The other boy (3 years old), later, felt guilty for dragging dirt into the house and having someone else (mom) recognize his mistake when I knew he wanted to try to get away with his beahvior on his own! Little kids...

Industry vs. Inferiority (5-12 years old): absorption in outside activities; developing a sense of competence. (Glassman 247)
This stage is when I know I started to develop a specific work ethic and social understanding that I would carry with me the rest of my life. As a good student in elementary and middle school I overcame the conflict with inferiority by becoming an industrious member of society (however cheesy that sounds). School was my life, and every activity I was invloved in revolved around it (sports, after school classes, music, etc...). Thus, I developed a really good sense of self-competence with the world around me, and I created unconscious strategies of how to deal with it too. I learned the system, and have been living through it successfully ever since, due to my motivation and comprehension of what my part is in my educational years.

Identity vs. Role Confusion (12-20 years old): forming a clear sense of self-identity. (Glassman 247)
So after figuring how to work the system in middle school, and how to get by as just another student in the grand scheme of things, it was time to delve into myself. I am still on this "journey" if you will, but have gotten a lot further than I expected by now. However I know I will continue to change with the times and places I go. Who am I? Why am I going through this? What is important to my? Why? These are all questions I have asked myself multiple times, and I still don't know the answer to any of them, although I know what I am not. I am not a lot of things, but most of all I am not anyone else! I am an individual, and I have come to realize how individualistic I actually am (for example, I don't like it when people emulate me or when I am forced to be like others in everyday life). And I clearly know what I like: everything from theater to fine cuisine, wine to roller coasters, 60s music to lying on the grass in the sun. But I can't wait to see how I will grow and mature in this stage over the next couple of years (especailly after I start going to college in a different town with different people).

Sources:
Glassman, William E. and Marilyn Hadad. Approaches to Psychology. New York: Open University Press, 2004.

Entry 3

Defense Mechanisms are used to protect the ego from anxiety by distorting reality. Anxiety, in the Freudian sense, is a conflict between two of the parts of the psyche (Id, Ego, Superego). (Glassman 228). Some include:

Regression --

Definition: Reverting to behaviors typical of gratification in an earlier stage. (Glassman 228)

As was mentioned before, I was a biter at an early age. It was a comfort habit that gave me satisfaction immediately. When I am stressed or in a foreign situation I revert (or regress) back to the behavior of biting just because I know (subconsciously) that it will provide me with a quick fix of something I am used to. This includes biting my fingernails or cuitcles, or chewing on pens, or having a sudden urge for gum or some sticky candy. I can't help it, it's just my ego going back on my usual behaviors.

Sublimation --

Definition: Redirecting drive energy into a socially acceptable activity. (Glassman 228)

In my case (and probably many others') this drive energy may not always be negative. If I am smitten or feel really happy, I tend to divert this energy into artistic work. This may include writing, drawing or even acting when the time is right. Thw positive energy gives me motivation to do those things. However, with negative energy, such as being angry at someone, I usually funnel that into playing sports or doing something more physically active or adrenaline packed. This allows me to divert this energy into something useful rather than sulking or being mad at the world instead.

Rationalization --

Definition: Explaining one's behavior by offering an acceptable reason instead of the true reason. (Glassman 228)

Funny story (an I am sure this happens a lot): When I was in middle school I vividly remember looking at this girl I had a crush on for long periods of time during a class. She never noticed me, so it was fine. Until one day the teacher came up to me and asked why I was looking at the girl. Of course, without even thinking about an answer, my mouth (controlled by my overreactive ego) spouted out some lame excuse like, "Because she has something in her hair", or, "I wasn't looking at her. I was looking at the poster on the wall behind her!" It was obvious the teacher new I liked her, though, because each time the excuses got worse and worse until the teacher said, "If that's the case, then why don't you ever tell her to take the 'thing' out of her hair!?" Oops, busted...

Projection --

Definition: Atttributing one's unacceptable thoughts and impulses to others. (Glassman 228)

When I was young I pulled this defense mechanism on my sister all the time. We're five years apart, and we used to fight like there was no tomorrow. So, when we got caught by my mom, I (being the youngest) would just start to cry and point the finger at my sister saying, "She started it! She was being mean and mad and stupid!" My sister would try to rebut, but with no avail (was it because I was cuter?). However, all along I knew I was the one to blame: I was the obnoxious, insolent little sibling who wouldn't leave my sister alone. I got away with murder...

Reaction Formation --

Definition: Reacting in a way which is opposite to one's actual impulses. (Glassman 228)

I don't know if I have ever done this (but I probably have without ever thinking about it), but I used to see it all the time. Last year, back in America, I worked as a teacher's aid for 5th grade students. I could tell which guys like which girls, and visa-versa just by the way they treated each other using reaction formation. Guys would ignore or be mean to the little girls they had a crush on, and girls would be totally shy and unwilling to approach the guys they liked (which are opposite reactions to their inital impulses). It was hilarious to watch, and even more funny to see their peers accusing them of liking the opposite sex because of how they behaved!

Sources:

Glassman, William E. and Marilyn Hadad. Approaches to Psychology. New York: Open University Press, 2004.

The Psych Files (diagram). Defense Mechanisms. http://www.thepsychfiles.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/03/ defensemechanismsdn.jpg

Cold Bacon (cartoon). Defense Mechanisms. http://www.coldbacon.com/pics/clouds.gif