Theory Tables For Psychology 645 At University Of Phoenix

Theory Tablespsych645 Version 11university Of Phoenix Materialtheory

Complete the tables as a Learning Team. Each table should be completed and submitted for its respective week, starting with Week Two. By Week Five, the entire table should be completed. Each week you should submit a portion, and by week 5 the entire table should be completed. Week Four Theory Key figures Key concepts of personality formation Explanation of the disordered personality Scientific credibility Comprehensiveness Applicability Behavioral Cognitive Social cognitive

Paper For Above instruction

The development of personality theories has profoundly contributed to our understanding of human behavior, motivation, and individual differences. In this paper, we will analyze key figures, core concepts of personality formation, explanations of disordered personalities, and the scientific credibility, comprehensiveness, and applicability of behavioral, cognitive, and social cognitive approaches to personality psychology. This comprehensive assessment aims to elucidate the strengths and limitations of these theoretical frameworks within the context of personality development and pathology.

Key Figures in Personality Theories

Several influential figures have shaped the landscape of personality psychology. Sigmund Freud, the father of psychoanalysis, introduced psychoanalytic theories emphasizing unconscious motives and early childhood experiences in personality development (Freud, 1917). Carl Jung expanded the psychoanalytic perspective, focusing on archetypes and the collective unconscious (Jung, 1964). B.F. Skinner advanced behaviorism by asserting that personality is a result of environmental contingencies and reinforcement histories (Skinner, 1953). Albert Bandura’s social cognitive theory emphasizes observational learning and self-efficacy, integrating cognition with behavioral principles (Bandura, 1986). Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow are key figures in humanistic psychology, emphasizing self-actualization and intrinsic motivation (Rogers, 1951; Maslow, 1943). Each figure has contributed foundational insights that continue to influence personality theory and practice today.

Key Concepts of Personality Formation

Personality formation involves complex interactions among biological, environmental, and psychological factors. Psychoanalytic theory posits that unconscious conflicts rooted in early childhood shape personality traits (Freud, 1917). Behaviorism emphasizes learned behaviors through reinforcement and punishment. Social cognitive approaches propose that personality results from reciprocal interactions among personal variables, behavioral patterns, and environmental influences (Bandura, 1986). Humanistic theories highlight self-concept and the pursuit of self-actualization as central to personality development (Rogers, 1951). These diverse perspectives underscore the multifaceted nature of personality formation, with each emphasizing different mechanisms such as unconscious drives, learning processes, or self-directed growth.

Explanation of Disordered Personality

Disordered personality refers to enduring patterns of perceiving, relating to, and thinking about the environment and oneself that deviate markedly from cultural expectations and cause significant distress or impairment. Psychoanalytic models interpret personality disorders as manifestations of unresolved intrapsychic conflicts, often rooted in childhood trauma or unresolved unconscious issues (Kernberg, 1975). Cognitive-behavioral models see these disorders as maladaptive thought patterns and behavioral responses that maintain dysfunction (Beck, 1991). Social cognitive theories suggest deficits in self-efficacy and maladaptive observational learning contribute to personality pathology (Wood & Bandura, 1994). Humanistic perspectives view disordered personality as a failure in the self-actualization process, leading to incongruence and maladjustment (Rogers, 1951). Understanding these diverse explanations aids in developing comprehensive treatment approaches.

Scientific Credibility, Comprehensiveness, and Applicability

Behavioral Perspective

The behavioral approach has substantial scientific credibility due to its empirical foundation and rigorous experimental methods. It emphasizes observable behaviors and measurable environmental variables, making it highly testable and replicable (Skinner, 1953). However, critics argue it may lack comprehensiveness, as it tends to neglect internal mental states and biological influences (Bandura, 1986). Its applicability is evident in behavior therapy and interventions targeting maladaptive behaviors, but it may fall short in explaining complex personality traits and subjective experiences.

Cognitive Perspective

The cognitive approach garners credence through a strong evidence base linking thought patterns with behavior and emotional well-being. Its focus on internal processes enhances its comprehensiveness by capturing mental states that influence personality development (Beck, 1991). It is notably applicable in cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), which is effective for various personality disorders and mental health conditions. Nonetheless, critics highlight that cognitive models may oversimplify the dynamic interaction of cognition, emotion, and social context, sometimes underestimating biological and environmental factors (Baron & Byrne, 2000).

Social Cognitive Perspective

The social cognitive perspective integrates behavioral and cognitive theories, emphasizing observational learning, self-efficacy, and reciprocal determinism. Its scientific credibility is supported by numerous empirical studies demonstrating the influence of modeled behavior and belief systems on personality (Bandura, 1986). It is comprehensive, as it accounts for social influences, cognition, and environment simultaneously. Applicability is seen in interventions that focus on changing environmental factors, modeling positive behaviors, and enhancing self-efficacy, making it particularly useful for addressing personality development within social contexts (Wood & Bandura, 1994). Critics note, however, that it might underestimate innate biological factors inherent in personality traits (Mischel, 2004).

Conclusion

In conclusion, personality theories offer diverse insights into the formation, development, and disorders of personality. Figures like Freud, Jung, Skinner, Bandura, Rogers, and Maslow have laid foundational principles that underpin contemporary understanding. Each theoretical approach—behavioral, cognitive, and social cognitive—has strengths in scientific credibility, scope, and practical application, yet each also faces limitations. Integrating these perspectives provides a more comprehensive understanding of personality, informing effective interventions and fostering advancements in both theory and practice. Ongoing research continues to refine these models, emphasizing the importance of a multifaceted approach to studying personality.

References

• Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall.
• Beck, A. T. (1991). Cognitive therapy: A way of thinking about mental health problems. Principles and Practice of Psychiatric Treatment, 25–36.
• Freud, S. (1917). Introductory lectures on psycho-analysis. W. W. Norton & Company.
• Jung, C. G. (1964). Man and his symbols. Random House.
• Kernberg, O. F. (1975). Object relations, ego functions, and the therapeutic process. Jason Aronson.
• Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396.
• Mischel, W. (2004). Toward an integrative science of the person. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 1–22.
• Rogers, C. R. (1951). Client-centered therapy. Houghton Mifflin.
• Skinner, B. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. Free Press.
• Wood, R., & Bandura, A. (1994). Social Cognitive Theory of Personality. Handbook of Personality, 154–196.