Critiquing Two Theoretical Approaches to Personality

For centuries, theorists have been seeking to determine why people behave the way that they do in society. Some theorists posit that an individual’s personality is a result of conflicts in the human mind, while other theorists assert that behavior is shaped by environmental influences. Despite these two different approaches to personality, most theorists agree that personality is a result of a combination of the process in the human mind and the environment. Nonetheless, while the Psychoanalytic Theory and Behaviorist Theory examine personality in two different ways, both theories are effective approaches to understanding a person’s behavior.

The first theoretical approach to personality that was selected is the Psychoanalytic Theory. The Psychoanalytic Theory was developed by Sigmund Freud in the early 1900s. The philosophical basis for this approach is that mental functioning operates on an unconscious, preconscious, and conscious level, and personality is a result of conflicts in the unconscious mind (Westenberger-Breuer, 2007). This approach posits that the mind is composed of the id, ego, and superego. Horner (2006) explained that the id is driven by our wants and needs, while the ego tries to satisfy these desires in a realistic way. Further, the superego provides individuals with moral reasoning (Horner, 2006). Together, the id, ego, and superego work together and regulate our behaviors in society.

The Psychoanalytic Approach to personality emerged at a time when sexuality was not discussed publically in the nation and around the globe. Most of Freud’s theories on personality relate to the sexual development of gender differences in children, sexual fixations on one’s mother and father, and repressed sexual feelings or memories. Furthermore, Psychoanalytic Approaches to personality emerged when cocaine was widely prescribed as a treatment for a variety of medical conditions. As a result, Freud abused the drug, and many of his theories were created when he was high on cocaine. 

Freud’s Psychoanalytic Theory has two main strengths to its approach to personality. First, the Psychoanalytical Theory is a great technique to utilize when trying to analyze one’s past. Westenberger-Breuer (2007) explained that the Psychoanalytic Theory primarily focuses on exploring one’s unconscious mind. Since many memories are stored in the unconscious mind, they may have been repressed over a period of time. As a result, these events may be affecting our personality in the present. For example, if a person is depressed today, they may not recall being sexually molested as a child. Therefore, the Psychoanalytical Theory can bring repressed memories into a person’s conscious mind, and then they will be able to confront the event and change their behavior. 

In addition, a second strength to the Psychoanalytical Approach to personality is that Freud proposed how to change one’s personality when applying the theory. Westenberger-Breuer (2007) found that when confronted with a fear, Freud “recommends having the phobic seek out the feared situation” (p.477). This recommendation is actually a common technique used by therapists today when dealing with patients who are highly anxious and who have phobias. For example, if a person has high levels of anxiety when being at the mall, frequent exposure to malls can reduce the levels of anxiety in the individual. Therefore, the Psychoanalytical Theory is a useful approach that is utilized today to reduce the quantity of traits in people.

Conversely, the Psychoanalytical Theory also presents two weaknesses. First, this approach to personality is flawed since theorists have yet to confirm that the id, ego, and superego actually exist. Horner (2006) supported this assertion when it was determined that no scientific data has confirmed that these mechanisms exist in the brain and work together to influence our behavior. Also, the Psychoanalytical Approach to personality is a weak theory since the theory now states that our conscious minds and the id, ego, and superego influence behavior (Horner, 2006). Unfortunately, this revelation presents a problem for Freud’s theory which primarily focused on how the unconscious mind could influence personality.

A second theoretical approach to personality is the Behaviorist Theory. Behaviorism was developed by John Watson but was later promoted by B. F. Skinner in the 1950s. The philosophical basis of this approach is that “psychologists should be concerned with determining the conditions under which human behavior occurs so that they can predict and control it” (McGraw-Hill, 2002). Skinner found that behavior was a result of learning that was acquired through the conditioning of stimuli in the environment (McGraw-Hill, 2002). As a result, Skinner posited that the environment, our motivation and achievement influences how we behave and act in society.

Skinner’s Behaviorist Approach to personality emerged after psychologists began to question Freud’s findings on personality. In Russia, Ivan Pavilion began to examine the behaviors in dogs, and Watson would later expand on his findings in the United States with his infamous Little Albert experiment. Watson argued, “that psychology must deal with the control and prediction of behavior and that behavior-not introspection, consciousness, or the mind-is the basic data of scientific psychology” (Mc-Graw-Hill, 2002). Therefore, Skinner would expand on Watson’s work and begin to apply behaviorism to a variety of stimuli in the environment. 

There are two strengths to the Behaviorist Approach to personality. First, the Behaviorist Theory excels at explaining how behavior can be controlled by environmental influences. This theory is applicable to examining the behavior of people in many situations, such as those who were under the control of a kidnapper for an extended period of time. Further, the Behavioral Approach’s strengths lie in the fact that the findings are based on observed data (Goddard, 2012). 

Nevertheless, this strength allows data in studies to be proven and repeated by future researchers. Unfortunately, there are also two weaknesses to the Behaviorist Approach to personality. First, Goddard (2012) found that the behaviorist theory does not take into account how thoughts and feelings factor in our personality. Interestingly, even though Skinner’s approach does not acknowledge the unconscious mind, he did acknowledge that it influenced behavior (Goddard, 2012). In addition, the Behaviorist Approach is weak since most experiments are conducted in a laboratory and these conditions do not exactly mimic those influences in the real world.

When comparing the Psychoanalytical Theory and Behavioral Theory, both approaches to explaining personality are similar. Goddard (2012) explained that “Skinner and Freud agreed that humans may not be aware of the true causes of their behavior” (p. 565). This shows that both theories acknowledge that the human mind may influence behavior. Also, both approaches hold that our past experiences can influence our personalities (Goddard, 2012). Goddard’s findings prove that both theories acknowledge the fact that our past can affect how we act in the present. However, the Psychoanalytical Theory and Behavioral Theory differ since Freud’s findings were based on data that has still not yet been validated, whereas Skinner’s experiments have been repeated and validated numerous times over the years.

After comparing the Psychoanalytical Theory and Behavioral Theory, the approach that is favored is the Behavioral Theory. It is agreed that our behavior can be learned whether from our parents or from our friends and that environmental influences affect our personality. For example, if a person is taught to fear snakes, they will become anxious when they encounter a snake in their backyard. Therefore, it is this belief that the Behavioral Theory is a more effective approach to explaining personality since the environment influences our behaviors more than our minds.

To conclude, while the Psychoanalytic Theory and Behaviorist Theory examine personality in two different ways, both theories are effective approaches to understanding a person’s behavior. The Psychoanalytic Theory aims to explain personality by examining the conflicts in the human mind, while the Behaviorist Theory seeks to confirm that behavior can be learned. In all, while both approaches have their strengths and weaknesses, the Behaviorist Theory is a more reliable approach to explaining personality since the findings of theorists have been validated. 

References

Goddard, M.J. (2012). On certain similarities between mainstream psychology and the writings of B.F. Skinner. The Psychological Record, 62(3), 563-575.

Horner, A. J. (2006). On the limits of psychoanalytic theory: A cautionary perspective. Journal of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis and Dynamic Psychiatry, 34(4), 693-707.

McGraw-Hill. (2002). Learning theories- Skinner: Behavioral analysis. Retrieved from http://highered.mcgrawhill.com/sites/0072316799/student_view0/part3/chapter10/chapter _outline.html

Westenberger-Breuer, H. (2007). The goals of psychoanalytic treatment: Conceptual considerations and follow-up interview evaluation with a former analysand. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 88, 475-488.