Erikson's psychosocial development theory erik erikson's psychosocial crisis life cycle model the eight stages of human development
Yüklə 263,54 Kb. Pdf görüntüsü
|
achievements, acceptance
N.B. I'm not suggesting a direct fit between Erikson's and Maslow's models. Rather, this simply puts the two perspectives alongside each other to show how similar aspects could could inter-relate. Judge for yourself. We might also use the Erikson model to help explain what happens in Maslow's theory when a particular trauma sweeps away a part of someone's life (perhaps due to redundancy, divorce, social exclusion, bankruptcy, homelessness), which causes the person to revisit certain needs and internal conflicts (crises) which were once satisfied earlier but are no longer met. According to both Erikson's and Maslow's theories, anyone can find themselves revisiting and having to resolve needs (or crisis feelings or experiences) from earlier years. Further thoughts and suggestions about correlations between Maslow and Erikson are welcome.
Later Erikson developed clearer ideas and terminology - notably 'Maladaptations' and 'Malignancies' - to represent the negative outcomes arising from an unhelpful experience through each of the crisis stages. In crude modern terms these negative outcomes might be referred to as 'baggage', which although somewhat unscientific, is actually a very apt metaphor, since people tend to carry with them through life the psychological outcomes of previously unhelpful experiences. Psychoanalysis, the particular therapeutic science from which Erikson approached these issues, is a way to help people understand where the baggage came from, and thereby to assist the process of dumping it. To an extent these negative outcomes can also arise from repeating or revisiting a crisis, or more realistically the essential aspects of a crisis, since we don't actually regress to a younger age, instead we revisit the experiences and feelings associated with earlier life. This chart is laid out with the crisis in the centre to aid appreciation that 'maladaptations' develop from tending towards the extreme of the first
('positive') disposition in each crisis, and 'malignancies' develop from tending towards the extreme of the second ('negative') disposition in each crisis. A maladaptation could be seen as 'too much of a good thing'. A malignancy could be seen as not enough. In later writings malignancies were also referred to as 'antipathies'.
Sensory Distortion (later Sensory Maladjustment) Trust v Mistrust Withdrawal Impulsivity (later Shameless Willfulness) Autonomy v Shame/Doubt Compulsion Ruthlessness Initiative v Guilt Inhibition Narrow Virtuosity Industry v Inferiority Inertia
Fanaticism Identity v Role Confusion Repudiation Promiscuity Intimacy v Isolation Exclusivity Overextension Generativity v Stagnation Rejectivity Presumption Integrity v Despair Disdain
Erikson was careful to choose words for the maladaptations and malignancies which convey a lot of meaning and are very symbolic of the emotional outcomes that are relevant to each stage. In each case the maladaptation or malignancy corresponds to an extreme extension of the relevant crisis disposition (for example, 'Withdrawal' results from an extreme extension of 'Mistrust'). Thinking about this helps to understand what these outcomes entail, and interestingly helps to identify the traits in people - or oneself - when you encounter the behavioural tendency concerned. Malignancies and maladaptations can manifest in various ways. Here are examples, using more modern and common language, to help understand and interpret the meaning and possible attitudes, tendencies, behaviours, etc., within the various malignancies and malapdations. In each case the examples can manifest as more extreme mental difficulties, in which case the terms
would be more extreme too. These examples are open to additional interpretation and are intended to be a guide, not scientific certainties. Neither do these examples suggest that anyone experiencing any of these behavioural tendencies is suffering from mental problems. Erikson never established any absolute measurement of emotional difficulty or tendency as to be defined as a malignancy or maladaptation. In truth each of us is subject to emotional feelings and and extremes of various sorts, and it is always a matter of opinion as to what actually constitutes a problem. All people possess a degree of maladaptation or malignancy from each crisis experience. Not to do so would not be human, since none of us is perfect. It's always a question of degree. It's also a matter of understanding our weaknesses, maybe understanding where they come from too, and thereby better understanding how we might become stronger, more productive and happier. maladaptations and malignancies - examples and interpretations examples
unrealistic, spoilt, deluded Sensory
Distortion
Trust v Mistrust Withdrawal
neurotic, depressive, afraid reckless, inconsiderate, thoughtless
Impulsivity Autonomy v Shame/Doubt
Compulsion anal, constrained, self- limiting
exploitative, uncaring, dispassionate
Ruthlessness Initiative v Guilt
Inhibition risk-averse, unadventurous
workaholic, obsessive specialist
Narrow Virtuosity
Industry v Inferiority Inertia
lazy, apathetic, purposeless
self-important, extremist Fanaticism
Identity v Role Confusion
Repudiation socially disconnected, cut- off
Promiscuity
Intimacy v Isolation Exclusivity
loner, cold, self-contained do-gooder, busy-body, meddling
Overextension Generativity v Stagnation
Rejectivity disinterested, cynical
conceited, pompous, arrogant
Presumption Integrity v Despair
Disdain
miserable, unfulfilled, blaming
This section explains how some of the model's terminology altered as Erikson developed his theory, and is not crucial to understanding the model at a simple level. Erikson was continually refining and re-evaluating his psychosocial theory, and he encouraged his readers and followers to do likewise. This developmental approach enabled the useful extension of the model to its current format. Some of what is summarised here did not initially appear clearly in Childhood and Society in 1950, which marked the establishment of the basic theory, not its completion. Several aspects of Erikson's theory were clarified in subsequent books decades later, including work focusing on old age by Joan Erikson, Erik's wife and collaborator, notably in the 1996 revised edition of The Life Cycle Completed: A Review. The Eriksons' refinements also involved alterations - some would say complications - to the terminology, which (although presumably aiming for scientific precision) do not necessarily aid understanding, especially at a basic working level. For clarity therefore this page sticks mostly with Erikson's original 1950 and other commonly used terminology. Basic Trust v Basic Mistrust (1950) is however shortened here to Trust v Mistrust, and Ego Integrity (1950) is shortened to Integrity, because these seem to be more consistent Erikson preferences. The terms used on this page are perfectly adequate, and perhaps easier too, for grasping what the theory means and making use of it. Here are the main examples of alternative terminology that Erikson used in later works to describe the crisis stages and other aspects, which will help you recognise and understand their meaning if you see them elsewhere.
Erikson used the terms 'syntonic' and 'dystonic' to describe the contrary dispositions and effects within each crisis stage - 'syntonic' being the 'positive' first-listed factor (e.g., Trust) and 'dystonic' being the 'negative' second-listed word (e.g., Mistrust). Again realise that a balance between syntonic and dystonic tendencies is required for healthy outcomes. Extreme tendency in either direction is not helpful. Syntonic extremes equate to maladaptations. Dystonic extremes equate to malignancies. The words syntonic and dystonic outside of Erikson's theory have quite specific scientific medical meanings which are not easy to equate to Erikson's essential ideas. Syntonic conventionally refers to a high degree of emotional response to one's environment; dystonic conventionally refers to abnormal muscular responsiveness. See what I mean?.. neither literal
definition particularly aids understanding of Erikson's theory and as such they are not very helpful in using the model.
Erikson later used 'Adaptive Strength' as a firm description of the first disposition in each crisis, e.g., Trust, Autonomy, Initiative. He used the description loosely early in his work but seems to have settled on it as a firm heading in later work, (notably in Vital Involvement in Old Age, 1986).
'Basic Virtues' Erikson also called 'Basic Strengths' (the word 'basic' generally identified the single main virtue or strength that potentially arose from each crisis, which would be accompanied by various other related strengths).
Erikson (or maybe Joan Erikson) later used the term 'Antipathy' as an alternative for 'Malignancy' (being the negative tendency towards the second resulting from unsuccessful experience during a crisis stage).
'Sensory Distortion' was later referred to as 'Sensory Maladjustment', being the maladaptive tendency arising at stage one (Trust v Mistrust).
'Impulsivity' he later changed to 'Shameless Willfulness', being the maladaptive tendency arising at stage two (Autonomy v Shame & Doubt)
Erikson generally used the simpler 'Trust v Mistrust' instead of 'Basic Trust v Basic Mistrust' which first appeared in the 1950 model.
Erikson later refined 'Industry' to 'Industriousness'. Erikson later referred to 'Role Confusion' as 'Identity Diffusion' and 'Identity Confusion'.
He later referred to 'Intimacy' also as 'Intimacy and Distantiation'. (Distantiation means the ability to bring objectivity - emotional detachment - to personal decision-making.)
'Ego Integrity' he also simplified at times to simply 'Integrity'. 'Stagnation' was later shown alternatively as 'Self-Absorption', and later still reverted to 'Stagnation'.
At times he extended 'Despair' to 'Despair and Disgust' (Disgust here being a sort of 'sour grapes' reaction or rejective denial).
Erikson's psychosocial theory very powerful for self-awareness and improvement, and for teaching and helping others. While Erikson's model emphasises the sequential significance of the eight character-forming crisis stages, the concept also asserts that humans continue to change and develop throughout their lives, and that personality is not exclusively formed during early childhood years. This is a helpful and optimistic idea, and many believe it is realistic too. It is certainly a view that greatly assists encouraging oneself and others to see the future as an opportunity for positive change and development, instead of looking back with blame and regret. The better that people come through each crisis, the better they will tend to deal with what lies ahead, but this is not to say that all is lost and never to be recovered if a person has had a negative experience during any particular crisis stage. Lessons can be revisited successfully when they recur, if we recognise and welcome them. Everyone can change and grow, no matter what has gone before. And as ever, understanding why we are like we are - gaining meaningful self- awareness - is always a useful and important step forward. Erikson's theory, along with many other concepts featured on this website, helps to enable this meaningful understanding and personal growth. Erikson's psychosocial theory should be taught to everyone - especially to school children, teachers and parents - it's certainly accessible enough, and would greatly assist all people of all ages to understand the connections between life experiences and human behaviour - and particularly how grown- ups can help rather than hinder children's development into rounded emotionally mature people. Erikson was keen to improve the way children and young people are taught and nurtured, and it would be appropriate for his ideas to be more widely known and used in day-to-day life, beyond the clinical and counselling professions. Hopefully this page explains Erikson's psychosocial theory in reasonable simple terms. I'm always open to suggestions of improvements, especially for a challenging and potent area like this one. I recommend for more detail you see the wonderful materials created by Professor George Boeree of the Shippensburg (Pennsylvania) University Psychology Department, and specifically George Boeree's Erikson theory explanation .
Or read any of Erikson's books - they are very accessible and rich in ideas, and they do have a strong resonance with much of what we face in modern life.
Yüklə 263,54 Kb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|