Personality Theory Bandura & Carl Rogers
Running head: Albert Bandura & Carl Rogers
Compare and Contrast Social Cognitive and Humanistic Theories of Personality to the case study entitled Myesha
Course: PSCY3017 Personality Theory II
Personality is an intriguing component in psychology vital for the perception of human beings. Understanding and defining personality has proven to be a difficult task. It is so complex, in fact, that no single theory can adequately define it. If one was to ask an ordinary individual to do so, some of the most common answers might be “a person’s characteristics” or “the impression (s) one makes on others”. Personality Theorists on the other hand view personality as the essence of the person, the individual’s true inner nature (Rathus, 2004). According to Carver and Scheier (2000), “Personality is a dynamic organization, inside the person, of psychophysical systems that create a person’s characteristic patterns of behaviour, thoughts, and feelings” (p.5). For this assignment the assumptions of the Social-Cognitive and Humanistic theoretical paradigms of personality will be applied to evaluate the personality of the case study, Myesha. It will also discuss personality tests- methods/instruments, used to measure whether people are sad, glad or bad and how people with certain personality traits respond to life’s demand. Before one can begin to understand and assess this individual’s personality, it is important to briefly review the Social-Cognitive and Humanistic theories of personality with their respective theorists such as Albert Bandura and for the Humanistic approach, Carl Rogers. According to Passer & Smith (2007), social cognitive theory is a perspective that was developed by Albert Bandura. It “combines the behavioural and cognitive perspectives into an approach to personality that stresses the interaction of a thinking human with a social environment that provides learning experiences” (p.467). It is proposed
Compare and Contrast Social Cognitive and Humanistic Theories of Personality to the case study entitled Myesha
Course: PSCY3017 Personality Theory II
Personality is an intriguing component in psychology vital for the perception of human beings. Understanding and defining personality has proven to be a difficult task. It is so complex, in fact, that no single theory can adequately define it. If one was to ask an ordinary individual to do so, some of the most common answers might be “a person’s characteristics” or “the impression (s) one makes on others”. Personality Theorists on the other hand view personality as the essence of the person, the individual’s true inner nature (Rathus, 2004). According to Carver and Scheier (2000), “Personality is a dynamic organization, inside the person, of psychophysical systems that create a person’s characteristic patterns of behaviour, thoughts, and feelings” (p.5). For this assignment the assumptions of the Social-Cognitive and Humanistic theoretical paradigms of personality will be applied to evaluate the personality of the case study, Myesha. It will also discuss personality tests- methods/instruments, used to measure whether people are sad, glad or bad and how people with certain personality traits respond to life’s demand. Before one can begin to understand and assess this individual’s personality, it is important to briefly review the Social-Cognitive and Humanistic theories of personality with their respective theorists such as Albert Bandura and for the Humanistic approach, Carl Rogers. According to Passer & Smith (2007), social cognitive theory is a perspective that was developed by Albert Bandura. It “combines the behavioural and cognitive perspectives into an approach to personality that stresses the interaction of a thinking human with a social environment that provides learning experiences” (p.467). It is proposed
References: Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy, Encyclopedia of human behavior. Academic Press, 4, 77-81 Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Bandura, A., & Kupers, C. J. (1964). Transmission of patterns of self-reinforcement through modelling Bandura, A (1999). A social cognitive theory of personality. Retrieved on 12th Feb 2010 http://www.des.emory.edu/mfp/Bandura1999HP.pdf Bandura, A. (2001) Social Cognitive Theory: An Agentic Perspective. Annual Review of Psychology Bandura, A. (1974). The case of the Mistaken Dependent Variable. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 83 (3), 301-303. Bandura, A. (1978). The Self System in Reciprocal Determinism. American Psychological Association, 33 (4), 344 - 358. Barone,F. D., Hersen,V., B, V., & Hasselt, V.( 2004). Advanced Personality (1st Ed). Springer. Betz, N., & Hackett, G. (1981). The relationship of career-related self-efficacy expectations to perceived career options in college women and men Betz, N. E., Klein, K., Taylor, K. M. (1996). Evaluation of a short form of the Career Decision- Making Self-Efficacy scale Carver,C.S and Scheier,M.F. (2000).Perspectives on personality (4th Ed.)Allyn and Bacon. Engler, B. (2008). Personality Theories (8th Ed). Wadsworth Publishing. Friedman, S. H., & Schustack, W. M. (2008). Personality Classic Theories and Modern Research (4th Ed) Funder , C. D., & Ozer, J. D. (2001). Pieces of The Personality Puzzle (2nd Ed). Norton and Company Inc. Gladding, T. S, (2000). Counseling: A Comprehensive profession (4th Ed). Prentice Hall, Inc. Harré, R., & Gillet, G. (1994). The discursive mind. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage. Hergenhan, B.R., Olson, M. H. (1999). An introduction to theories of personality. 5th ed. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Pajares, F. (1996). Self efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66 (4), 543-578. Passer, W. M., & Smith, E. R. (2007). Psychology: The Science of Mind and Behavior (3rd Ed). Pervin, A. L., Cervone, D., & john, P.O. (2005). Personality Theory and Research (Eds). John Wiley. Rathus, A.S. (2004). Psychology Concepts and Connections. New York: Thomson Rogers, C Swann, B. W.,Griffin, J. J., Predmore, C. C., & Gaines, B. (1987). The cognitive affect crossfire: When self-consistency confronts self-enhancement Taylor, K., & Betz, N. (1983). Applications of self efficacy theory to understanding the treatment of career indecision