Different theories on personality offer us different perspectives on the development of personality. Some may theorize that the personality is determined while others theorize that the development of personality is an exercise in freewill, and others say that it is a mix between deterministic factors such as genetics and learned behavior. These different approaches give us a better and more complete understanding than one singular theory alone. The “social-cognitive theory holds that both person variables (human agency) and environmental factors [modeling] … determine human behaviour and that human behaviour also affects both the human agency and the environment. Bandura’s theoretical analysis is captured as a triadic relationship” (Oppong, …show more content…
Because of this relationship between the social environment and behavior, it is referred to as the social learning theory. This learning according to Bandura’s theory is mediated by cognitive processes (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Using this approach by I will conduct a self-analyses of my personality.
Reading through this theory it struck me how certain aspects of it seemed congruent with biblical thought. For example Proverbs 22:24 says, “make no friendship with a man given to anger, nor go with a wrathful man, lest you learn his ways and entangle yourself in a snare” (ESV) and Proverbs 4:23 in respect to self-efficacy “keep your heart with all vigilance, for from it flow the springs of life” (ESV). These similarities make of Bandura’s theory for me a little weightier.
When reflecting on my life it seems this approach is seems most applicable when I think about my family, the culture and times I was raised in. Beginning with my parents. When I reflect on how my parents react, and interact in situations and life occurrences in their lives I see many similarities between our reactions to events and circumstances that occur. These similarities in me seem like a blend of the two parents responses to
…show more content…
My father is a very genteel man. He does not burp or express bodily functions around others. His words are discreet about such things as such things are not right to talk about. He is quite patient and easy going to outsiders, just shy of passivity, except it seems when his patriarchal authority is challenged or someone brings up a false belief or false ideas about Christianity. Then there is no passivity left in him. He comes out ready to meet the challenge. I would say while he does not display it, he is a very sensitive man. Yet while his inner personality was sensitive, outwardly his words could be quite sharp when he believed that certain actions and responses were not to the level he expected. Along with the words affirming your misdirection often times there would be swift physical punishment. My father probably had a intermediate amount of self-efficacy when I reflect on it, though someone listening to him would say he would he believed we have to ability to change
Does personality determine behavior? Phelps (2015) dived into this discussion in his article by reviewing the perspectives of personality, how psychology relates to behavior and the idea of self, and further, how behaviorists define personality and all of its components. Phelps (2015) compares and contrasts the common beliefs of personality and the view of self as attributed to personality theorists with those characterized by behavioral theorists. A typical understanding of personality is one that defines it as an internal substance that drives behavior, and therefore, by seeking to understand a person's personality we can almost assume their actions (Phelps, 2015). Behavioral theorists, on the other hand, do not lean on vague internal conditions to explain behavior, but rather they evaluate a person's past and present settings to define behavior, according to Phelps (2015). The conclusion is that behaviorists' perspectives on these topics are far more parsimonious in nature and most popular views of personality speak to a more internal and far-reaching position rather than the behavior itself (Phelps, 2015). Likewise, Phelps (2015) addresses the issue of meeting specific criteria for discerning whether a theoretical viewpoint is valid in helping us understand people. He continued to remark that behaviorists' stances meet a large portion of the criteria as presented by Gordon Allport (Phelps, 2015). For example, they have less assumptions, they are consistent, and not to mention, they are testable and falsifiable, Phelps (2015) supports. In my opinion and critical review, this article is useful because it provides an unbiased assessment of a variety of personality theories and definitions of personality and the self. Likewise, it is simple and easy to understand, thus qualifying it as parsimonious. Overall, I think the article did its ultimate job of evaluating different perspectives and
A Comparison of Psychodynamic and Social Learning in Regards to the Development of Personality "No Works Cited" “Psychologists define personality in many ways, but common to all of the ways are two basic concepts, uniqueness and characteristic patterns of behaviour. We will define personality as the complex set of unique psychological qualities that influence an individuals characteristic patterns of behaviour across different situations and over time.” (Psychology In Life, Phillip .G. Zimbardo, page 509)
Sigmund Freud provides a concept of how a person’s personality is structured and to have a healthy personality requires a balance in the interaction between the id, ego, and superego. Bandura’s theory of observational learning plays a vital role in the persons conditioning process. By understanding the basis of observational learning that includes modeling, disinhibition, and trolling, one can recognize the different types of reinforcements that contribute to how one learns and then behaves in situations throughout their life. The experience and knowledge of self-discovery comes gradually without an instantaneous impact. Although, moments of true realization can give one a release from past insecurities, doubt, and shame just to name a few. Such realizations can change how one views or feels about their past, which includes their choices, successes, failures, and the different relationships they have had from birth to the present. In conclusion, one should invest in getting to know their own personality to educate themselves and receive the benefits of a healthy state of mental
If I were to evaluate a theory and choose the one that I had to accept then I would take away something from all of the theories that we learned about. Theories are created through existing data. However, a theory may not necessarily be correct but it does give us a better understanding of concepts in that it gives people to either prove them correct or wrong. All in all, understanding is being created. Plus, our book stated that “the best available explanation of personality comes from using the best of all the theories rather than attempting to use one or a few of them” (531).
Every single individual has a personality; it is the very quintessence of human existence. Personality drives our interactions with others, our desires – conscious and unconscious, our perceived needs, and to a certain extent, even our actions. Psychodynamic approaches to personality are focused on the belief that we have virtually no control over our own personality, that it is primarily controlled by unconscious powers. Social cognitive approaches to personality centers around the belief that we still have little to no control over our own personality, and that the cognitive influence, that is to say thoughts, feelings, expectations and values – along with the observation of others behavior is the primary influence on personality. These two approaches to personality are so radically different, and yet both have their own merits – they are two of many, and nobody is quite sure what the truth is.
McLeod, S (2011) Bandura - Social Learning Theory Available at: http://www.simplypsychology.org/bandura.html (Accessed: 15 November 2013)
Through Social Learning Theory, an individual can be studied based on the behavior acquired by a role model. Verbal conditioning procedures and observation influences the response to an individual’s personality. Environment factors contribute to the Social Learning Theory. Antisocial model is a major contribute to crime, which influences negative characteristics. The Social Leaning Theory has three core social concepts the must be followed: observational learning, intrinsic reinforcement and modeling process.
Personality is patterns of thinking, behavior and emotional responses that make up individuality over time. Psychologist attempt to understand how personality develops and its impact on how we behave. Several theories attempt to explain personality, using different approaches. The social-cognitive and humanistic approaches are two of many theories that attempt to explain personality. This essay will identify the main concepts of social-cognitive and humanistic approach, identify perspective differences and discuss approach limitations.
Throughout the centuries, we have come across many great thinkers. Most of them, have developed many great theories and ideas to help us grasp a better understanding of our lifestyle and development. When it comes to understanding the human mind, personality, and behaviors, I found the work of Freud and Bandura to be quite intriguing. For instance, Freud explored the human mind and explain what factors influence our behaviors and how our personality comes about, meanwhile, Bandura focus of the different ways through which we learn new behaviors and acquire information.
A Comparison of the Main Approaches to Personality Psychology Psychology of personality is a difficult concept to define and quantify, therefore most personality theories, however different they may be in other respects, share the basic assumption, that personality is a particular pattern of behaviour and thinking, that prevails across time and situations and differentiates one person from another. Most theories attempting to explain personality represent part of the classic psychological Nature verse Nurture debate. In other words, is personality “inherited”, or developed through our interactions with the environment. In addition, we shall compare and contrast two of the main approaches to personality psychology by concentrating on Psychoanalytical Theory (Freud) and Social Learning Theory (Bandura). By looking at the Psychodynamic approach, developed by Freud, we can argue that it emphasizes the interplay of unconscious psychological processes in determining human thought, feelings, and behaviours.
Magnavita, J. J. (2002). Theories of personality: Contemporary approaches to the science of personality. New York: Wiley.
Personality can be defined as an individual’s characteristic pattern of thinking, feeling and acting. Many personality theorists have put forward claims as to where personality is derived from and how it develops throughout an individual’s life. The two main personality theories this essay will be focusing on is the Social Cognitive Theory (SCT) (Bandura, 1986) and the Trait Theory – Five Factor Theory (FFT) (McCrae and Costa, 1995). The SCT allocates a central role to cognitive, observational learning and self-regulatory processes (Bandura, 1986). An individual’s personality develops through experiences with their sociocultural environment. Whereas the Trait Theory proposes that all individuals are predisposed with five traits (Extraversion, Openness, Conscientiousness, Agreeableness and Neuroticism) which determines our personality. This theory also puts forward that personality is stable and cannot change as it’s biologically determined.
Behaviorism and Social Learning Theory are two theories that have been used to describe the development of personality. While Behaviorism places a strong focus on how the environment shapes our personality, mainly through the process of negative and positive reinforcement, Social Cognitive Theory goes one step further by including how one’s thoughts and perceptions combine with behavior and environment to influence personality. Although there are some limitations in both theories, I feel that self-efficacy, self-esteem, and habits are valid parts of the two theories, playing a large role in how personality traits are established and expressed.
The Biological approach to personality places emphasis on the genetic influences related to the development of an individual’s personality. Some may believe that children and their parents can have very similar personalities, for example a young boy having his father’s anger (Stelmack, 1990). Though this approach has often been questioned by psychologists, it is not disregarded all together. Some believe that genetics do have a role in an individual’s personality development; however environments, as well as personal experiences all work in forming personality.
Personality is the expression of a person’s traits according to ones feelings, mentality and behavior. It involves understanding individuals’ traits such as withdrawal and willpower and how various parts of an individual link together to form personality. Personality expresses itself from within an individual and is comparatively regular throughout in an individual’s life. Different people have different personalities dependent on factors such as environment and genetic composition. Our personality is dependent on the success or failure of our development in the eight stages of life. This is proposed by Erik Erikson. Success in the development stages lead to virtues while the failure leads to malignancies.