1 331 Psych. of Personality 6 – 1 – 99 Tuesday/ 1st Lecture

• Woll will described Personality as a broad subject and discuss all the theories that go with it, including achievement, authoritarian (WWII) personality and Manifest Anxiety. Cognitive is hot now as is biological theories. We’ll go over assessment, research and clinical. • There will be three exams. First test is in two weeks. There are 40 questions plus we choose 3/5 essay questions to do. Multiple choice questions will come from the Study Guide. • For the LOGS, we have to take a theory and apply it to a real life situation and connect the two together. Explain everything specifically. The LOGS should be about 2 – 3 pages in length. We have to do 3 of them. 10 points each for a total of 30 points. We can do an extra one for extra credit. LOGS WILL BE DUE TWO DAYS AFTER THE EXAMS. • THERE WILL BE 5 OPEN BOOK QUIZZES. • 355 points total – 3 tests at 100 each; 5 quizzes at 5 points each; and 3 LOGS worth 30 points total.

1 2

PERSONALITY – what is it? Allport’s definition is the one we will use.

1. Central assumption & concerns of a. Underlying identity; Consistency and Stability b. Individual Differences c. Internal causal forces Vs. situationism d. e. Organization structure. Wholism. f. The role of early childhood experiences

Underlying identity – the person behind the mask. 2 ASSUMPTIONS. Assumes there is a basic core person who is not portrayed in the outside world. Assume that personality is something that is consistent over situations and stable over time. Woll will refer to Consistency only to Situations and Stability refers only across Time. Personality is both consistent and stable

In the late 60’s Walter Mischel wrote “Personality & Assessment” where he described consistency and stability. In the 20’s Hartshorned & May did a study on character and morality. Placed a group of boys in a situation where they could lie and steal. The study found that there was little consistency in morality and character across situations. In the late 70’s, Robert Hindle observed children at school and at home. He found little predictability with their behavior. Also in the late 70’s, McClillard believed that we are consistent and stable. He sites Richard Allport’s works. Allport was a nut in the 60’s who became a hippie and hooked up with Timothy Leary and became a hippie. McCillard noticed his sudden “change” in behavior but found he was still the same “underneath” the mask. Allport was still, intelligent, verbally articulate, had the same expressive behaviors, he was charming. He had an interest in internal consciousness. He acted in high drama, still played power games and still seemed to be looking for a leader to be guided by. Woll mentioned he had an obnoxious student a long time ago but was now held an important job at Tel Aviv – but he was still rude to everyone.

Situationists – believe that behavior is so specific that it is better to look at the situation to determine behavior.

2 3 6 – 2 – 99/2nd lecture/ Wednesday

1. Central Assumption & concerns of personality psychology a. Underlying identity; Consistency and Stability – look at yesterday’s notes. b. Individual Differences – Idiographic Vs. Nomothetic c. Internal causal forces Vs. situationism d. Motivation e. Organization structure. Wholism. f. The role of early childhood experiences

B. Idiographic Vs. Nomothetic (old idea; back to the Greeks) Nomothetic is a concern for general universal laws, as science should be dealt with. Idiographic is concerned with uniqueness. It studies specific cases; it is not a common research method for psychology but is for personality psychology. The main spokesman for this idea is . He died not knowing his ideas would catch on. In 1966, after 30 years of research, he concluded that he did not make an impact in psychology. He died a year later. Then in 1974, this idea became popular.

1958 Lee Cronbach wrote “2 Disciplines of Scientific Psychology” Topic of the first handout. The Two Methods are Experimental Vs. the Correlational approach.

1. is concerned with differences between groups or averages between groups. Usually between an experimental and control group. Or it can be differences between two types of therapy or classes. 2. A correlation is concerned with individual differences – personality research is interested in this. Experimental psychology says if you want to study it, you must manipulate it – preferably in a lab. The control group receives no treatment. The correlation method says: if you want to study anxiety, go out there and measure it in its naturally occurring form. 3. Experimental discipline says if you want to study something (anxiety), you have to control everything. The idea is to restrict the variation of other variables besides anxiety. The correlati0n discipline says to study everything. Let everything vary freely and then measure those other values. 4. Experimental – Assumes people are changeable. We can modify people’s behavior. Coorelational – assumes people are stable and consistent.

3 4 Personality research falls into the Correlational Camp; however there has to be both correlational and experimental research to get at personality. The past 2 decades have seen plenty of experimental methods. Cronbach said “You must put these Two together.” He called it ATTRIBUTE * TREATMENT INTERACTIONS. The idea is you must first measure a person’s attributes, their traits and beliefs – the Stable parts. Then look at the treatments, what has been varied by the treatment. Then most importantly, look at the INTERACTION that has occurred between the two. The correlation method is seen in the Attributes and the experimental method is seen in the Treatments. And Cronbach’s contribution was to look at the Interaction between the two.

Domino wanted to know which students at Stanford would do best with what kind of instruction? He assessed personality on two scales, from the CPI test, ACHIEVEMENT VIA CONFORMISTS – people who score high on this item achieve high by conforming to standards. ACHIEVEMENT VIA INDEPENDENCE - people who accomplish things by their own individual independent effort. These two groups were put in either a classroom setting or in independent study. So conformists did best in the lecture class.

PERSON * SITUATION INTERACTION You need to understand the person’s personality to understand him and also the situation they are in. Are they with friends or in a lecture hall.

C. To explain personality you must look at their internal causal forces such as needs and traits. Such as their ego strength. Controversial debatable idea. Ex. Freud wanted to explain behavior this way because of our sexual instincts and unconscious . David Murray also tried to get at this with his TAT. Murray wanted to find out a person’s Central Needs. Do they need achievement? Independence? He came up with categories of different social Needs. Allport argued for a concept of a trait – something internal that initiates and guides behavior. Personality psychology has traditionally stressed internal causes.

There are people against Internal Causes: 1. B.F. SKINNER - there are no internal causes. You must look at the external behavior/environment. Don’t look in, look out. 2. GOFFMAN – Sociologist. Prefers to see personality as a Vehicular Unit. It’s good to know the traffic rules to get through life. It’s better to know the traffic rules than to know the self. The rules of etiquette & tradition determine behavior more than some inner factor. This falls into the idea of “SITUATIONISM” – look at the situation to determine personality than to know the person in the situation. Knowing the situation gives you a better prediction of behavior.

• Jones & Nisbett – Actor/observer differences. Ask an observer about their friends and they will respond with their internal observations; my friend is having a good time because he is a party animal. When asked about ourselves, why are we having such a good time at the party? We describe behavior in terms of situational factors – because it’s a good atmosphere with all my friends.

This suggests maybe traits/dispositions are things we make up to explain other people’s behavior; but not our own behavior. Maybe we focus on internal dispositions to explain people’s behavior that we really don’t have a clue about.

4 5 LEE ROSS – FUNDAMENTAL ATTRIBUTION ERROR – we are biased towards explaining behavior in terms of traits/personality/internal factors & under emphasize the situational factors. Said we are too much personality and not enough a behaviorist.

STANLEY MILGRAM – did the conformity/authority “obedient” experiment. He put out an ad to call for volunteers to participate in a verbal learning experiment as experimenters. The confederates were trying to “remember” words with “shocks”. In some conditions, 50% of the subjects gave the confederates electric “shocks” up to 450 volts because they were ordered to. Milgram went to Yale/Harvard psychologists and asked them how many they thought would go the full distance in electrocuting subjects. They said “less than one – half percent would go that far.” They said people are not that cruel but they didn’t know the situation they were put in. Milgram commanded that these subjects continue with the experiment. People who would’ve said no, did not.

People who scored high on the Authoritarian personality scale gave more shock to the confederates. People who were in the military obeyed to shock more. Subjects who scored high on moral development did not shock and did not obey to shock more.

D. MOTVATION – what pushes and pulls you. The “Why” behind behavior. Remember Maslow’s Needs Hierarchy. His Needs are in an order up to self – actualization. You need to know what their Needs are to explain their behavior. Some people are happy with only their biological needs being met. Freud had sexual motivations.

George Kelly – Cognitive . “I think motivational concepts are outmoded and redundant and unnecessary. The more familiar we become with a person, the less need we have a concept like drive.

• Motivational concepts are out of vogue now. Might come back as “intrinsic motivation”

E. WHOLISM – Traditionally personality psychologists look at the whole to see a pattern. Organization and Structure. Internally consistent. Freud said everything falls into a pattern; their jokes and slips of the tongue all form a pattern. Eric Bernes – said we all have a LIFE SCRIPT that we follow. If you know a person’s script then everything that they do falls into place. What kind of a career they are going to do – is all scripted. Personality Testing – you need a whole battery of tests. Don’t use just one test to get at personality. Get the whole pattern; Gestalt style – “whole is bigger than the sum of its parts”. More psychologists have been looking at one trait at a time. One of our CSUF faculty, wrote a paper in the 70’s entitled “Where is the person in personalities?” She said too much research has been done on finding only one part of a person.

F: FINAL ASSUMPTION – THE ROLE OF CHILDHOOD EXPERIENCES. Still very controversial. We, personality psychologists, still stress the roles of early childhood. Our personalities are a product of our screwed up childhood life. Freud said the psychosexual stages help to shape your later personalities. Sometimes we get trapped into these stages. So a psychoanalyst must map out your life first to determine where you are stuck and what that implies. Eric Bernes said your script is written by the age of 6. Once it is written it dictates the rest of your life. John Boulby – Psychoanalyst. Argued that there are critical areas of development. Around 9 months to 2 years is one critical period. Children start to bond with their parents. Forming an attachment. Beginning of social emotional relationships. But if there is some kind of trauma then that will affect you the rest of your life. Hazen & Shauer in 1986 said to describe the caretaker when you were young. Then that description will match the description of your mate as an adult.

5 6

6 7 Gorden Allport – PROTOTYPICAL/PERSONALITY – Functional Autonomy of Motives. Our motives become separated from our original motivation. We become independent of our past. We don’t look back to early childhood. It is a mistake to trace everything in our normal adult behavior to childhood experiences. (only neurotics stay in the past). Allport went to Turkey, then asked Freud for a visit on his way back. He noticed a kid with his mom who was cleaning him. Freud asked him if he saw himself in that scenario. Allport was offended by that. “Focus on the here & now.” – famous slogan

Jerome Kagan – wrote “From Birth to Maturity”y in the 60’s. Presented evidence that early childhood temperament was a good predictor of adult traits. Then in the 70’s he said “I take it all back”. He did a study of Guatemalan kids and compared them to Cambridge, Mass. Kids of the same age and found the South American kids seem to lag behind because of poverty in the first year of their life. They spent most of their lives inside the huts with their moms. They were not as attentive and no signs of language development. No stranger anxiety. But then later on, they went out of their huts and saw a new environment that stimulated and enriched them. And they actually surpassed their American peers in development. He said early childhood problems are not set in stone. Then in the 80’s, Kagan changed his mind again. Now he believes that there is at least one dimension of personality that is extremely stable from day one. He says that SHYNESS or his term, TEMPERAMENTAL INHIBITEDNESS,S is always with us. We are born either shy, resistant to stimulation and inhibited. Or we are born adventurous and are afraid of nothing and responsive to stimulation. Probably a genetic connection exist.

FREUD He initially wanted a job as a medical researcher. He was interested in the nervous system. Did research on cerebral palsy and aphasia. But he couldn’t find a lab job at the time so he became a shrink. He also did cocaine research. He ordered many grams and experimented with it to his patients and himself. Prescribed it for anything. He got his friend hooked up on it too. His friend contracted a disease on a scalpel. He got hooked on morphine and cocaine and he became addicted to both and was still in pain.

7 8 Hydraulic Model of the Mind Freud used a lot of metaphors in his theories

Freud studied with Bruk. He was a member of the school of physiology in the tradition of Hemholtz. They took an oath – we will not accept any explanation that cannot be stated in known laws of physics or chemistry. It must be physical to be studied. Freud started to write “Project for a scientific psychology”. This lost manuscript was found in the 50’s. He wanted to study neurons and “quantify” psychology to a science. But there was not enough information at that time on the brain. Freud did feel that psychology could one day be put into physical terms. He said there is psychic energy, psychodynamics and psychodeterminism. He then put these ideas into his HYDRAULIC MODEL. The mind is like a hydraulic machine. Water rushes to a destination and falls into a reservoir. Redirected or harnessed for electrical energy. There is a sudden rush of psychic energy. Economic principle says when you invest energy you must withdrawal some of that energy elsewhere. Example: When starting a relationship you must invest your energy into that relationship and also withdrawal some energy from your school or job life so you can spend more time with that relationship. But if you drop this relationship then your energy is channeled somewhere else. The mind is like a power plant.

FREUD 1856-1939 from history lecture G. Stanley Hall invited Freud and Jung for a visit to the states. Freud gives five lectures on psychoanalyses at Clark University, a popular school for psychology. Jung and Freud are still friends at this time. They analyzed each other dreams. Jung said he killed his dad in his dreams. Jung is more mystical and their friendship begins to sour. Freud did not like America. At Niagara Falls someone said, “Make way for the old man.” Anna O. Case. A hysterical woman who had nervous breakdowns. She had amnesia from her father’s death. Then she remembered and there was an emotional release. How do we know if a memory is important? The memory is accompanied by . Freud made friends with Joseph Breuer, who was a student of Brucke. Breuer showed that the semicircular canals in the ear are for balance. Breuer was a physician and researcher. Anna O. was his patient and it was her case that launched psychoanalysis. The stored emotion that is attached to the memory is called CATHEXIS. When we relive the memory and express it, that is called CATHARSIS. He began work on a book called “Project for a Scientific Psychology” in 1895. The purpose of the book was to explain psychological phenomena in purely neurophysical terms. However there was not enough information back then to study the brain so he turned to psychoanalysis (on Final) Freud borrowed a lot from Nietche. But Freud did not refer to him after he got famous in 1918. In his book “Civilization” he said we are living in a society where it makes everyone nuts. Too many rules to follow to manage your life with all these responsibilities. Like the guy in “Falling Down”. Repression: We hold back memories. Holding back of traumatic memories in the unconscious mind because pondering them in the conscious mind would cause anxiety. The Seduction theory (on Final) Freud said all his patients were sexually molested as children and that was the basis for their hysteria in adulthood. So now he says some of his patients think someone they know had attacked them when they really didn’t. The basis for this neuroses was the repression of sexual thoughts, whether the thoughts were real or imagined. Today we call this false memories.

8 9

DREAMS He said dreams were a wish fulfillment. The id come to life in dreams and satisfies the id’s needs. The id wants and wants. But most dreams are anxiety ridden, so why is this the case. Traumatic experiences may still be part of wish fulfillment, we have to face up to bad experiences. Infants sleep most of the time in REM sleep; the dream stage. So maybe it is part of the brain development process. The brain is active when you are dreaming. Freud’s idea is that when we’re REM might mean we are changing our memory of the days events.

Back to the Anna case: Anna O. eventually became a social worker. Her symptoms were HYSTERICAL, the symptoms are in the mind but nothing wrong is shown physically. She could not move her arms and felt no feeling in her arms. There was no physical reason for this. She showed CLOUDS – deep trances she fell into. She also had hydrophobia, language problems where she would speak only different languages at one time. She also thought she had a made up pregnancy. She also had “Glove Anesthesia” in one arm where she could not feel her hand up to her forearm. Breuer tried her to talk about it by CATHARSIS. Let the emotion out then maybe the symptom would disappear. These symptoms fit in perfectly with Freud’s “Conversion Model”.l Breuer called it “chimney sweeping”.g cannot be expressed so it goes into her arms because it’s got to be expressed somewhere.

9 10 6 – 3 – 99/Thursday Continue with Freud’s Psychoanalysis.

1. c. instincts; cathexis d. ; the rat man e. Dreams of fantasy f. Primary Vs. Secondary process g. The unconscious topographic (al) model h. The Structural Mind i. 2 Theories on Anxiety

2. Contemporary Research of Dreaming/ REM Sleep a. Characteristics & functions of REM b. Laboratory Vs. Home Dreams.

Freud’s Instinct Drive – 2 definition in two papers. This is where the “psychic energy” comes from. Instinct (Drive is the correct translation) “Borderline” concept between the mental & physical. A mental Desire and a physical stimulation and physical urge. The 2nd definition: there are always 4 components of instincts. First component is that Instincts always have a source. The source is always one part of the body – the Erogenous Zones, oral, anal & phallic zones & genital Zones. He got most of his ideas from his friend Wilhelm Fliess (1858 – 1928). Fliess said that the nose was made out of the same erectile tissue that the penis was made out of. Fliess was a flake – Woll says. The “Nose” was an erogenous zone. The 2nd component is “Demand”.d Or “impetus”. Instincts have a certain force sometimes weak or strong. Sometimes you cannot think of anything else. This was Freud’s attempt to quantify/measure psychology. 3rd component – “Aim” Obtain immediate gratification. Expression of energy. What is the term to this desire Freud came up with? – “The Pleasure Principle” instincts left to their own devise would always seek immediate pleasure/gratification. 4th component – instincts always have an OBJECT.T The object or multiple objects is/are a thing through which the instinct is gratified. Freud looked at mental objects;s What thing in our life do we invest our psychic energy into? What thing in our life is the Object to our instinct. This is an important aspect for Sexuality. For Sexual Instincts there are so many objects that we can obtain gratification from. We all have individual differences.

10 11 One more Component to there Four Components. Cathexis – a term used in conjunction with Object instinct. Means “encampment” – Stored energy. Amount of energy that you invest in an object or process, mental function. How much significance does a particular object have on you? Do you spend all day thinking about your job or girlfriend. If so, your girlfriend has a lot of Cathexis for you. Cathexis is the stored emotion attached to the memory.

Cathexis is important for the School of Psychoanalytic Theory – Object Relations Psychology. It says what is most important about your development is the objects that you form attachments too. Particularly parents. You carry around these object Cathexis all our lives and influence our interactions with everyone. Similar to Boulby’s idea of “critical times in childhood”. Think about examples for our paper/logs.

Instincts run into trouble: Conflict with Reality. We can’t always get immediate gratification. “Can always get what you want” And so the child learns to delay gratification and replaces it with the Reality Principle. We put up with tension for the time being. We are all giving up our summer to some extent to finish school on time. Instincts also run into one’s Morality. Freud’s patients were always impulsive and then later they all feel guilty. This would lead to his famous id, ego, and superego theory.

THE RAT MAN The “rat Man” was Eric Tanzer, a law student. He was obsessed with rats. He had a seductive nurse and he was sexually precocious. This nurse let him watch her undress and get into bed with her. He masturbated a lot but was afraid his parents would catch him. He hated his dad. But he knew he wasn’t supposed to hate your dad. Another source of conflict. Around age 20 he was supposed to be watching over his dad and he died while Tanzer wasn’t watching him. He felt guilty – maybe he had killed him in some sense. So he started to masturbate again to deal with the guilt he felt. Tanzer was in love with his cousin, Gisella. He proposed to her several times and she rejected him everytime. He hated her for this but still loved her. Felt guilty again. Another source of conflict. Tanzer started to develop “Symptoms” – called Obsessions & Compulsions. Obsessions are thoughts that you have no control over. By compulsions Freud meant a Behavior Ritual that imposes itself on you and you must do the behavior. So he masturbated when he was reading or listening to something beautiful because he wanted to “Dirty” it. Then he started to study compulsively. He would study in his apartment and then go to the front door and open it to see that no one was there. Then the Rat Man became a religious fanatic. Saying prayers all the time. What’s the afterlife like? He attended funerals that he had no relation to. Maybe he was thinking of his dad. He engaged in rituals to evade guilt. He had premonitions. And finally he started an obsessions with Rats. He was in the army reserve. One of his officers told the soldiers about a torture: You are being stripped naked and laid face down. Then a bucket of rats are poured over your buttocks till the rats bore into your anus. This part stayed in his mind.

This is a good illustration of Conflict. Intra – Psychic Conflict. “Within the mind conflict”. • He hates his dad but feels guilty about “killing” him. • He feels guilty about his desires for his nurse • He loves & hates Gisella.

The rat man’s life is a big conflict. Freud loved counter ideas. One day the rat man was walking down the road that Gisella rode her carriage on. He tripped on a rock that was going to been her way.

11 12 She could fall and he dutifully took away the rock. But that rock couldn’t topple her carriage so he put it back. He still feels anger to her – wants to hurt her. But he still feels guilty about wanting to hurt her. Good example of CONVERSION OF PSYCHIC ENERGY INTO SYMPTOMS. The energy has to be transformed into compulsions and obsessions. He cannot act on these anger ideas or even express them but the energy has to put somewhere – so it transforms itself into OCD. So Rats become his main thought. Each symptom has a symbolic . He has thoughts of rats crawling out of dad and Gisella. Freud’s theory applied only to pathology but he wanted to write about everyday life. Each of us shows a little pathology. Wrote “The Psychopathology of Everyday Life”. Sometimes we showed subtle bits of pathology in our daily lives. Including jokes we make, slips of the tongue – expressing things we don’t want to acknowledge. Also memory lapses. These are classified by Freud as PERAPRAXES –everyday pathology. Most importantly, these pathologies are expressed in our dreams and fantasies. Dreams are unfulfilled wishes – the driving force behind fantasies. Every separate fantasy contains a fulfillment of a wish. Reality is not to our liking so we make up a better reality. Happy people never make fantasies, only pathology people fantasize. Applied this idea to all types of work – literature and myths and fairy tales. Including Shakespeare. Also to religion and art and of course, Dreams. Wrote “Interpretation of Dreams” – his favorite book. 100th Anniversary next year on this book.

DREAMWORK – HANDOUT #2 When you take a dream apart and get to its central core, it is some unfulfilled wish. Dreams are really a “Wish Operator” at different layers working at once. 1st level is the MANIFEST CONTENT - apparent content, what we remember when we wake up. But don’t be fooled that that is real meaning. The real meaning is the LATENT CONTENT. The manifest content is only the disguise of the dream. Latent content – Like a drama critic trying to get at the meaning of a play or movie. Process by which this latent content gets covered up by the Dream Work. 1. Condensation – combining of several wishes and images into one jam-packed image. A person might literally be made up of several people. 2. Displacement – Shifting the emphasis to something that is threatening to something that is innocuous and meaningless. Dream of something that you haven’t seen in awhile like a friend from high school. A woman is in a museum copying a vile painting and then she displaces her threat in a corner by painting a dove. Dream in symbols too – phallic symbols are giant towers in dreams.

We tend to engage in the revision of the brain. Secondary Revision – 2 parts 1. Secondary Editing – Getting rid of the threatening parts. 2. Secondary Collaboration – Filling in gaps. Lots of meaningless images.

And finally, We tend to dream in terms of “Day Residues”.s Those thoughts in the mind that happened from prior days – the dreams seem to be about these “current issues” – but that is simply camouflage for something more deeper.

12 13 Freud interpreted his own dreams. Wrote one on July 24, 1895. He was really proud of this dream. Called the “Irma” dream. Irma an ex – patient of his. She had hysteria. Maybe he was diagnosing too many patients with hysteria. A friend, Otto, said she’s better but still not well. Freud said maybe he diagnosed her. This was the basis for the dream. He was in a hallway and saw Irma in it. He described a lot of sexual symbolism but never realized himself. She opened her mouth up and saw some patches in it. Dr. M looked pale and ill and his friend Otto was there too. She had an infection on her shoulder. Otto gave her a shot of acid. These symptoms were actually from another of Freud’s patient – this is Displacement. Dr. M was his brother. There were also jabs at his brother. The acid is really an aphrodisiac.

Freud got it all wrong. He got rid of his Seduction Theory because of Emma Eckstein’s case. In the Seduction Theory, he thought his patients’ Hysteria were due to childhood molestations. But he later said they were really just imagined. A false memory… Emma also had hysterical symptoms. His friend Fliess wanted to operate on her nose. He botched up the whole operation – he left gauze inside her nose and almost died from bleeding. Freud then asked, “Boy, I sure hoped I did not botch up my diagnosis of Emma the way Fliess botched up her nose operation.” Jeffery Masson was the curator of the Freud Archives discovered a new translated correspondence between the two. Masson wrote a book called “Freud’s Intellectual Dishonesty”. His version is that Freud had patients with “infantile sexuality”. Complained of being abused by their parents. Freud concluded that that many children could not have been sexually abused and gave up that idea. They were remembering innocent episodes as a child and misinterpreted it. Masson concluded that the real reason that Freud gave up this abuse theory is because his friend Fliess was abusing his own children. Act of extreme dishonesty. “Boy, I hope nobody finds out I made this dishonest change.”

Freud’s 2nd Dream: There are always sexual symbols. One patient was having trouble screwing her lover. The dream goes: An officer pursues her on a flight a stairs. She peeks through a keyhole and sees the officer on a bench crying. The pursuit of the officer with red cap and the flight up the stairs – represents “intercourse”. She shuts her pursuer out – represents “inversion” – her lover always withdrew before coming into her. When the officer starts to cry, his tears of sadness represent semen. Also, his tears are her tears. This dream is so obvious about sex, Freud says.

Freud’s 3rd Dream: In terror, she cries for a watchmen. He accompanied by two tramps. They have aprons twisted around them like sacs. They go into a chapel and go up some steps. Then the forest around them becomes denser and denser. Then at the top there is a mountain. More sex representation – climbing up the stairs. The tramps are the male’s testicles. The forest is the genital and the mountain represents the mound (mons veneris) of a woman’s vagina.

Dreams are an example of a particular way of thinking – “The Primary Process”. Form of thinking in infants but carried on into adulthood. Original mode of thinking. Basically autistic. Has symbols and thoughts only you can understand. Egocentric and wishful thinking. Characterized by Vivid images and lacking in everyday logic. Involve personal uninterpretable thoughts of wishful thinking. This carries on into childhood & also into schizophrenic patients and neurotic people. Also plays a role in Adults as well This process is to be distinguished between the “Secondary Process”. The rational normal Adult mind. It is reality oriented. It is more or less Logical. And most importantly it is thinking that is Controlled and Deliberate, unlike Dreams where there is no control and there is no logic to it. Freud thought it was his duty to point out that the primary process is more important.

13 14 Freud said, “Dreams are the royal road to the Unconscious Mind. It is our primary access to our mind.”

The Topographical Model of the Mind Freud was not the first to talk about the unconscious. Usually means just “lack of awareness.” Freud said the “Preconscious” consists of material that we are momentarily unaware of. We can get back to it if we try hard enough. Thinking about someone’s phone number – it comes back. To be distinguished from the “Unconscious” Material thought is NOT accessible. Blocked from awareness. No matter how hard we try. It is blocked because it is threatening. Then add the conscious to it, He called these three components “The Topographical Model.” The 3 geographical areas of the mind. Unconscious – Repression. The force that blocks these threatening thoughts from awareness. To repress is to make things unconscious. Defense is equated with repression. Defense is how we deal with memories.

Gradually Freud said there are other forms of defense we have. Defense Mechanism – Anna Freud, his daughter, came up with her own ideas. 1. Projection – when you acknowledge your sexual impulses, but you attribute them to someone else. “I’m not aggressive, it is that person who is angry at me.” 2. Reaction Formation – Acknowledge sex & aggressiveness like projection, but then you take a strong opposition against it. “I know there’s a lot of pornography out there but I’m in favor of censorship” or “I know there’s lots violence but I am a pacifist.” Woll mentioned that Roy Cohn is the perfect example of this. There was a play on him called “Angels in America” He was gay but supported anti – gay laws. He died of AIDS. He gave speeches on family values.

Intellectualization – Ex. “A medical examination with no sex in it” Or “Yes, I read Playboy, but only for the articles.” Woll’s colleague is writing a serious article on “Cybersex”!

Return of the repressed – does not fade away. Remains in the unconscious in dreams and other subtle ways. If you let your defenses back then the unconscious material will come rushing back to awareness, the return of the repressed. This is what therapy is for psychoanalysis. Today we have kids accusing their parents of molestation that did or did not happen. The real memory comes back or the false memory comes out. The unconscious is a primitive realm with its own laws. Has no sense of reality. No sense of contradiction. No sense of time.

There are problems with Freud’s Topographical Model. It is real hard to verify. Real hard to prove. (Everything comes after the fact). Freud used the term unconscious differently from how we use it. Was it absent-mindedness or was it Freud’s idea of defense.

The Structural Model His model of preconscious, unconscious and conscious had another problem. Repression goes into the unconscious, not in the preconscious or conscious. But the unconscious says it is material we have to repress. We can’t Repress our repression etc…So he finally came up with the whole Topographical Model in favor of the famous Structural Model – the id, ego and superego. This model came in later in Freud’s life. It came because the topographical model did not work out.

14 15 Psychology 331 Personality Class 6 – 7 – 99 Monday/ 4th Lecture

2. Psychoanalytic Theory g. The Structural Model h. The Two theories of Anxiety

3. Contemporary Research on REM sleep & Dreaming. a. Characteristics & functions of REM b. Lab Vs. Home Dreams c. REM Vs. nREM Vs. Sleep onset. d. Dream Recall e. Lucid Dreaming f. Effects of Stimulation prior to and during sleep g. REM Deprivation

1920 – Freud gave up on the Topographical Model in favor of the Structural Model with id, ego and superego. But these were poor translations of the original Germanic language. Betteleheim translated id from the German word “it” meaning non – self. Ego really means “I”. Superego really means “above me”. It’s a set of higher standards the “I” values. Id – Contains everything that is inherited. Congenital sexual and aggressive instincts. Also the life and death instincts. Id is the power plant of personality. It is the source of all psychic energy. It is the organic matter from which we evolve from. Ego – concerned with adaptation and survival. The sexual instincts of the id would cause problems running into the Reality Principle. The ego helps the id get a better deal; he’s like the agent for the id. Ego includes , memory and action. The ego is driven by the id. Id could not function in the real world so the ego acts as the mediator. Superego – Feels melancholia, sadness and depression. Leads to a morbid pathological disorder: painful dejection, loss of interest in the outside world, loss of the capacity to love, inhibition of all activity and lowering of self – esteem to the point where the subject is continually criticizing oneself.

15 16

Depression and Bereavement – both involve the loss or a fear of a loss of an “object”. Similar to object cathexis. A boy goes through stages to achieve a Conscience. There is a loss in two ways: the kid’s in general feel a loss of their parents and the other is the “identification of the same sex parent” part. The young boy fears that dad is much more powerful and will not give up mom and fears dad will castrate him. This is “Castration Anxiety”y and is part of the Oedipus Conflict. He then introspects those Objects inside his “psyche” they become a part of the “Superego” which he will then carry with them for the rest of his life. 2 part of the Superego – love to the opposite sex and hostility to the same sex parent.

The Toxic Theory – anxiety is like a poison that spills over to your guts. When you have been unsuccessful then you begin to repress your ideas. Anxiety is the aftermath of unsuccessful defenses. Freud said this was wrong after he noticed patients with post traumatic stress disorder. Because of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder he changed the Toxic Theory into the SIGNAL THEORY. The Signal Theory – Anxiety is the warning signal to the ego. Signal Anxiety is neurotic anxiety, moral anxiety and real/objective anxiety.

DREAMS Freud had two ideas on Dreams. One was the Wish fulfillment. But there is also the scientific part to dreaming – the nomethetic scientist who wants to know the general function of how dreams work. Dreams serve the function of sleep. Dreams maintain this important activity as a safeguard to sleep. Serves as a safety valve to let off some steam. Dreams serve the function of filling in unfulfilled desires.

16 17 At the University of Chicago, Aserinsky & Kleitman observe subjects in sleep. There are certain clear cut physiological stages of sleep. The noticed REM sleep is where dreams occur. Called it “D – Sleep”.

REM sleep occurs in all mammals except the spiny anteater and the dolphin because of their large brains- maybe they do not need to sleep. Why do we have REM sleep – Sensory Deprivation – subjects were paid to stay in a lab without any stimulation. They wore blinders and were suspended in water to get rid of external & internal stimuli. The patients hated it. And some started to hallucinate. REM serves to give periods of self stimulation. Also, REM & Dreaming are unprocessed memories from the days before. Sir Francis Crick has another theory. He says the nervous system is purging itself in order to free to more space. Also dream recoordinate you’re ocular system.

Hobson & McCarley say dreams are the result of random firing of the neurons and the brain tries to make some sense of it all. Dreams reported in the lab are very different from dreams reported at home. Dreams at home are more vivid and in the lab they are toned down a bit. When you recall a dream at home you will recall the last dream you had. In the lab you are being constantly awaken during REM sleep. Weis and Foulkes did an experiment where subjects were simultaneously dreaming at home and another group was dreaming in a lab. Both were awaken sat the same time to describe their dreams and the lab dreams were a better sample. Do we dream only during REM. There are more dream reports in REM than in nREM sleep. The reports in REM dreams is that the dreamer is an active participant of the dream. Whereas in nREM dreams they are objectively watching the dream. They are a passive character in the dream.

There are Repression Personality Tests – ranked on a Sensitization Scale.e Goes from people pushing it out of the mind to people who deal with stress by dealing directly with it. So Repressors tend to report fewer dreams than Sensitizers who have lots of dreams. If you watch erotic or stressful videos then you recall neutral dreams. Maybe the threatening images are repressed. But if you look at neutral dreams than you dream more. More arousal during REM the less likely you are to recall the dream. The explanation is that maybe too much arousal causes disruption in memory – Called the Yerkes Dodsen model. There is no evidence if repression affecting dreams. How salient/dramatic is it? The more it is, the more likely it is to be remembered. Some cultures emphasize to remember dreams. Memory research – We see the “Serial Position effect” A sequence where the primacy and recency effect takes place.

LUCID DREAMING The more introspective you are the more you can recall. Stephen LaBerge and Jane Gackenbach are researchers who study this. They usually are flying in their dreams – that’s how they know they are in a lucid dream. He felt “invigorated” by meeting a genie! He did an experiment where he told a woman to screw someone – she screwed a tourist in her lucid dream. She purposely moved her eyes to the right to “signal” that she was in a lucid dream. It worked.

17 18 6 – 8 – 99/Tuesday 5th LECTURE

3. Contemporary Research on REM & Dreaming f. Effects of stimulation g. REM stimulation h. Individual differences in dreaming style i. General Class j. Student Dreams

4. Projective Technique a. Background b. Scoring Categories c. Case Study Pete Rogers on the Rorcharch. d. Reliability and Validity on the Rorcharch.

Dement – He gave subjects faint sounds before sleep. Faint innocuous sounds. But the sounds were not incorporated into the dream. But when he made loud sounds like a locomotive, the subjects put those sounds into the dream 60% of the time. In another experiment a recording of the subject’s voices were recorded and played back to them along with other voices. They were able to discriminate between the two at some point.

In the 60’s an experiment was done by Fulkes on the effects of violent TV shows on dreams. Kids watched “Gunsmoke” or they played a neutral TV show called “Bachelor Dad”. The subjects did not incorporate them into their dreams. But their dreams were more intense with no specific content. Kids who watched “Gunsmoke” did not have not have nightmares. Reason: Catharsis; they got it out by watching the show…

Another experiment where subjects watch 3 frightening films – monkey cannibalism, a circumcision without anesthesia and a childbirth using a vacuum method.

18 19 Another story where a recently divorced woman had a dream she was climbing ont0 the El trains in Chicago. “Trying out new wings.” She’s making the first steps.

Freud: Are dreams primitive instincts or do they show current events. According to Freud they are “primitive instincts.”

If you chart the course of the dreams throughout the night. The first dream is about the day’s events and then each successive dream becomes more personal.

Dement - REM is a major function for mammals. We need REM or else we’d go nuts but it isn’t all that bad as it seems, Woll says. Without REM sleep, we have lowered the ability to deal with stress, lowered control. We also show REM rebound where we immediately get REM sleep all at once when we go to sleep to make up for the lost sleep. A study showed that some people get their REM sleep during the day when they daydream and fantasize. This is called SUBSTITUTING.G People who introspect substitute their fantasies for dreams. Whereas analytic people/extraverts have REM dreams. Bogol – did a study finding out that depressed people who do not get REM sleep is therapeutic.

REM deprivation on Memory. People who are deprived of REM cannot recall. Maybe there it is an ego threatening experience. REM serves the function of dealing with threatening images. In an experiment, Greiser handed out difficult anagrams to do. He told one group that that they did poorly. They slept 7.5 hours and woke up. They had REM sleep and could recall what happened on the test. Their ego’s were not threatened. But the deprived group couldn’t remember.

19 20

• You can predict the sequence of dreams. Which came first and last. • Dreaming is correlated with fantasy and daydreaming. • Masculine people have more “powerful” dreams; feminine people have social dreams. • People who sleep during long periods (long sleepers) Vs. people who sleep on a short term basis 6 hours or less. Long sleepers are less self-confident and short-term people are extraverts. • Another experiment found no differences.

• David Cohen said there is a trait called Neuroticism – how emotional you are. They dream in more personal terms and in the past. • People who are Stable dream in an impersonal way. Woll mentioned one of his student’s dreams with a narrator telling her the dream. They dream in the Present.

• Dream interpretation. Cognitive mastery and coping. Trying to neutralize the negative emotions. Defusing emotional events in one’s life. Cohen insulted some dreamers; then when they woke up they felt better because they attacked them him in their dreams. • Several theories that say we incorporate thoughts from the day into dreams. We finish off the day’s events in dreams. Or the dreams solve a problem we couldn’t figure out. Or dreams are a place to place excessive useless residue of purposeless material. This is called the Theory of Cognitive Residue by David Rosembaum. • Jerome Singer – Dreams give us a “portable arousal”.

Dreams may also serve the function that gives revealing information about you. Or it may be for Creative Expression. But Freud said Dreams are not creative at all. They are just old ideas. But his student, Karl Jung said Dreams clearly show the other side of your personality. Jung believed dreams can be prophetic.

Stanley Kreppner – Dreams do one of three things. 1. Express a myth – view of the world. 2. Countermyth 3. Dreams can express a synthesis. A reconciliation between the two.

Dreams may have many creative ideas. • Tartini – Dreamt the devil came to him and played a violin solo. He tried to replay the solo in real life and he did. • Cohen – recited H I J K L M N O, to subjects and they dreamed of water. Because they remembered the H2O from the alphabet. Hokey experiment. • Hall – he says we believe there are symbols in dreams. People want to express their ideas as clearly as possible. Dreams are creative expressions. Maybe lots of inventions came from dreams! Dreams can discover things for you.

20 21

Rorschach’s Inkblot Test Developed to assess disorders initially. This part of the test has some validity. Different disorders would see different things. Each of us has a perceptual style. Rorschach knew it was being taken as a psychoanalytic test. Clients are said asked to say the first thing that comes to mind. They’re ten cards. It is a projective technique. The subjects are projecting their personality onto the pictures. The same cards have been used since 1921! There are several standard scoring categories. First set of categories is the location of the “image”. Where on the picture did the subjects get their idea from. How many total responses did the subject get? And how quickly? Are question that the experimenter must know. If they take too long to answer – maybe because their defenses are up.

21 22 6 – 9 – 99/Wednesday/ 6th Lecture

4. Projective techniques: The Rorschach test. d. Evaluating the Rorschach.

5. Research on Repression, defense and the unconscious. a. “” repression b. “” perceptual defense c. “” subliminal perception

1. Original Research by Lazarus & McClearly 2. Silverman & “subliminal psychoanalytic activation” 3. Current research on Unconscious processes d. The Repression – Sensitization Scale & Related Measures.

PROJECTIVE TECHNIQUES/RORSCHACH’S TEST Rorschach used the ink blot technique. It still is a very popular test today. 2nd most popular personality testing technique. Experimenters use it for different purposes. Ask the subjects the first thing that comes to mind. Then you score the answers according to the category you are studying, the location, content and formal quality of responses. Then the clinician interprets the answers. The test is NOT going out of fashion. Woll said all his graduate friends still use the test for whatever…Is used in a variety of ways. Reason why it is called a technique and not a test. It can be used to simply gather information and establish a friendship with a client. It is used in so many ways that it makes it difficult to evaluate. Usually this test is used in conjunction with a battery of other personality tests. There are two steps to this test. Scoring and then interpreting the test. But two people can score the test differently. You can the test in 2 general ways. The first way is to use it as a sign. A sign of something. Or use it as a sample – Ex. sample of a person’s creativity. There is more validity for sample responses but it is not usually for this. It is used mainly for a sign – Sign is used for psychoanalysis. Pete Rogers example, the guy who Woll mentioned his answers yesterday for the Rorschach. He said he saw sex in the pictures, this was a “sign” of his homosexuality. The Rorschach has been around for 80 years. Two standards for evaluating tests, it has to be reliable and valid. Reliability means you get the same results every time you give the test. And that the test be valid, the test measures what it is supposed to measure.

Woll mentioned about split half reliability but the test has only 10 cards, parallel forms reliability, but there is only one form of the Rorschach. Woll suggested that they make a computer Rorschach test with graphics. Inter – scorer method, different judges look at the same test. But each judge will give their own interpretation of the test. So it even difficult to assess the Reliability of this test. Subjects may give multiple answers for each card too. You cannot control how many times they will answer. But if a test is NOT reliable, it is not valid. Very little evidence for the validity of the Rorschach. There are a few valid signs that it can predict something. Pete Rogers was concerned about 22 23 his and his answers showed this. But the interpreter missed this. He saw a lot of gross signs in the cards, a sign for being gay. There is the EXNER SYSTEM, which puts together the best parts of the test. Tries to only include the things that are reliable and valid. But the bottom line is that there is a very little evidence for the reliability and validity for the Rorschach. But it is still being used and there are books and books about this test. The test gives the therapist a lot of power and influence. The therapist can adapt his rules of the test to their clients. Use it for fun – interesting to hear what they say… It can be a rich source of information from the client. A Dr. Samuel Beck said there is a lesion in his patient’s brain after he gave him the Rorschach. And he really did have a lesion in his head. Determined by looking at the results of the Rorschach. Rorschach clinicians say it is unfair to evaluate the test with psychometric rules used for other standardized tests. The Rorschach is rich and fancy and different. How else would we know it works? Some say well, it works for me… Another version of the inkblot test is the Holtzman Inkblot Test (1960). Developed to specifically deal with the problems of the Rorschach. For example, it used 45 inkblots to use. There are parallel forms – 45 cards and another 45 cards. The client is allowed only ONE RESPONSE per card, unlike in the Rorschach where you can say anything.g There is a standardized scoring system. Good deal of evidence for reliability. However there are two problems. Most Rorschach clinicians say one response is not enough. And there is no evidence for validity for this test.

23 24

RESEARCH: 3 CONCEPTS BY FREUD 1. Repression 2. Defense 3. Unconscious

Freud said repression represents the cornerstone on which all of psychoanalysis rests. The most central concept and the most important of his contributions to psychoanalysis. But People who fail to recall dreams or take too long to answer question are using repression. But this is not good evidence for repression taking place. “Hypernesia” – refers to subtly recalling something we haven’t been able to recall. The return of the repressed memories into adulthood. Ex. Child molestation’s but are really false and implanted memories – still a hot topic today. American psychologists wanted to do rigorous laboratory research to find evidence for this. Woll’s own teacher sent a letter to Freud saying he has evidence for repression and he responded! Freud said that repression has already been proved beyond the shadow of a doubt by clinical observations and needed no further proof. Woll’s teacher, Dr. Rosenzierg did his own study. You cannot explore repression in its full-blown form in the lab. But we have to create an ANALOG. An Analog is trying to create an analogy to repression in a lab and then study it. You then have to define Repression. Rosenzierg’s definition said: “Pushing out of the mind and rendering unconscious material that is threatening to your ego. Anything that is an ego threat. Based upon a principle called the Zeigarnick Effect – If you interrupt someone in the middle of a test, that person will recall that test better than people who complete the test. The rational is that people still have unfinished business to complete in their minds. The exception is when you interrupt the test taker and tell them they are failing. Then the person recalls less of the test. Failure is an ego threat, the person recalls less when they fail. Is this a good study of repression? Poor memory following an ego threat is repression. Two groups of kids were asked to solve a puzzle. Half were told they succeeded and the other was told that they failed. Then asked about the details of the puzzle. Failures recalled less detail than those who had “succeeded”. What are the reasons for this? They were nervous/anxious about the test. They couldn’t concentrate as good because they were worrying so much. This is called “ANXIETY PRODUCED INTERFERENCE” Anxiety interferes with the ability to recall.

24 25 Another classic study on Repression was done by Zeller. How do we know that the children didn’t simply the forget the material? As opposed to repression. Repressed material should come back when the threat is gone. So Zeller set up a study with adults in a hokey experiment. Subjects were given paired subjects to memorize and then were given a second task. A block tapping test. They were told these tests were an IQ test. Then they were asked to relearn the syllables by the savings technique. One group was told they failed the drum test and the other group was told they passed. The failed group were did not recall the nonsense syllables as good as the other group. Then they did the block tapping test again and both groups were told they passed. Then they were told to relearn the syllables again and both groups performed well – Aha! The Return of the Repressed. Return of the memory of the words.s Individual differences could’ve occurred. Or Anxiety Produced Interference!e They were no longer worried about failure or ego threat. There are much simpler explanations, lab experiments are supposed to rule out alternative explanations.

In another experiment in the mid 50’s. John Flavell, a developmental psychologist. If it is repression, then you should forget about those specific experiences that are ego threats. You had to learn a 10 non-sense syllables and then give word association to them. Subjects were told half of their responses were normal and the other 5 were abnormal. Then they go back and recall the nonsense syllables but they could not remember both the normal and abnormal syllables. Sounds were more like they were anxious about failing, not repression.

Tom D’zurilla did an unethical study. Subjects learn a list of simple words. Called serial learning. Then they were asked to see what they saw in inkblots. They were given a forced choice test where they had to respond to the test question. Half the subjects were told they were normal and the other half were told they were gay. Then asked to recall the words, the gay people performed less well than those who were told they did well. Then they were told the feedback was false. Then both groups did equally well. Zeller asked them what went on in their heads. They “gay” group said they kept thinking about it. Zeller said that’s not what is supposed to happen in repression. You’re suppose to push it out of your mind. “This is more like anxiety produced interference.”.

David Holmes did the exact opposite. He told them they did great and they subjects still couldn’t recall. Maybe they got caught up thinking they were smart.

NO CONCLUSIVE LABORATORY EVIDENCE AFTER 70 YEARS FOR REPRESSION.

25 26 Dr. Mathew Erdely – said “let’s not sweep depression under the rug.” He had a patient who believed that everyone was gay and they were spreading their gay messages around town. He opposed all this gay propaganda. This is REACTION FORMATION, opposing an idea you embrace. It is hard to establish repression in the lab. “The Return of the Repressed Memory” is a debatable topic. A woman “remembered” by looking at her kid, that her dad had raped someone. Her dad was then put into prison but then later she recanted. All the information came from the media. She read the stuff and thought her dad did it. He was released finally. Clinical observations are still hard to confirm is the lesson from this despite what Erdely said about his gay paranoid patient.

Dr. Ofshe – someone came to her who said he committed all these crimes of child abuse when he really didn’t commit them. But he was admitting to everything. Someone else could have been suggesting these thoughts to him.

PERCEPTUAL DEFENSE:E Viewpoint is that if people defend against threatening things, perhaps they defend against threatening material from the outside. Take words or pictures and flash them into a TACHISTOSCOPE – a projector flashed the words quickly before they could recognize them. Flashed at 1/1000 of a second. If you present threatening material and they end up taking too long to recall only the threatening material then repression has occurred. This is evidence for PERCEPTUAL DEFENSE.E Dr. McGinnes did his study on this. He flashed words to subjects; he used neutral words and dirty words like “bitch” and “whore” and “penis”. He hooked the subjects up to the GSR machine. Galvanic Skin Response machine. Subjects recognized the neutral words more. Furthermore, the showed a clear GSR repose before they could recognize them! So is this PERCEPTUAL DEFENSE? No, not really. The subjects may have been hesitant to say such a dirty word. Called the response bias effect. Maybe people were not used to seeing these words in print. The words “house” and “stove” were always in print compared to bitch and whore. This is called the word frequency effect. Doesn’t really hold though. The test was also forced choice. Did you see the word Bitch or Whore?e

26 27

Erdely said two things: First of all, people have tried to differentiate perception and guessing/Reponse. You cannot separate the two according to him. Woll said he is always guessing when he is driving. Then a new model was being offered – the Information Processing Model. It is model. The mind is like a computer and information is processed in a series of stages. We start out with the word, the subject must be paying attention to the word, then the information is transferred to short term memory. Then it is encoded and then it is transferred to long term memory. And then we retrieve it from long term memory. Maybe then you evaluate it and then you respond… Erdele said where in this series of events do things go wrong when you are defending? Broadbent said it is in the encoding part, We just don’t get the word right.

SUBLIMINAL PERCEPTION Is it possible to take in information without being aware of it. Seeing something and being affected by it but not knowing what you saw; Or you can be affected by a message you don’t even know you saw. Perception below the limen threshold. Original study by Lazarus and McCleary. Subjects learned a list of nonsense syllables then placed in a projector. Half the syllables were paired with shock and half were not. The word came to elicit a conditioned GSR response. Then the words were flashed very quickly after the conditioning. SUBJECTS SHOWED A DISCRIMINATING GSR RESPONSE ONLY TO THE SHOCK RELATED WORDS BEFORE THEY COULD IDENTIFY THOSE WORDS. So is this subliminal evidence? Is this Perception without Awareness?s there is no reponse bias in this. BUT Dr. Charles Erickson said you are equating awareness with being able to verbalize the word. How do you measure awareness? Where is the soul? For the GSR reponse you have a 50/50 chance of getting a response. When you verbalize you have a 1 in 10 chance of getting it correct. You’re going to do better with your GSR response. When you give a fair test, there is no evidence for this subliminal perception because the GSR and the word verbalization are equal in response. But now it is making a comeback in research in the 70’s.

Lloyd Silver proposed “SUBLIMINAL PSYCHODYMANIC ACTIVATION”. It is possible to flash messages and set off unconscious conflicts. Then they get an increase of their symptoms. Possible to activate psychodyamic conflicts on conscious issues. It is better to activate them subliminally than to show it up front where they can defend against it.

27 28 According to psychoanalytic Theory – Depressed people are people with unresolved aggressive impulses that are then turned inward against itself. Hostile aggressive impulses against others but then it is turned into oneself like the Oedipus conflict. He flashed a dagger image to depressed people and their symptoms increased. According to psychoanalytic Theory – homosexuality is a result of strong incestuous wishes that are so threatening that the person to avoid them flees from them and identifies with the same sex parent. So he flashed the message “Fuck Mommy” and their symptoms of gay people were increased. According to psychoanalytic Theory – In the Oedipus conflict. If it is unresolved, then these people have a hard time competing with authority figures. Flashed “Beating daddy is wrong” to men with unresolved conflict leads to lowered performance on a easy task – a dart-throwing task. Stuttering is the result of anal conflicts. Flashing a dog defecating leads to more stuttering.

Flashing the message “mommy and are one” can be therapeutic.

28 29 6 – 10 – 99/Thursday 7th lecture.

Test One will be next Wednesday. It will have 5 of the study guide questions in a shorter version.

5. Research on the unconscious. c. “ “ Subliminal perception. 2. “ “ Psychodynamic activation. 3. Current research on unconscious processes. d. The Regression – Sensitization Scale and Related Measures. e. Revisions of psychoanalytic theory – by Anna Freud

6. Revisions of psychoanalytic theory. a. General Overview b. 1. Personal Background & Relationship with Freud.

Know Silverman’s Experiment for Test 1. Bayley & Sherrin – they could not replicate Silverman’s subliminal experiment and get results. He presented generic images to subjects that did not really relate to the subjects. Silverman never ran the same study twice. What he should’ve done is to tailor the message specifically for the specific problem that his clients had. He failed to show independently that the patients really had the underlying conflict.t

Silverman is making these Assumptions: 1. Some must have registered in the mind. 2. It then activated the underlying conflict 3. Then this led to increase symptoms.

The problem is Silverman never demonstrated these steps; only that the stimulus gave the symptoms. Woll said if he had demonstrated what happened in between stages would’ve added more credibility to the results.

29 30 2 Main methods for studying subliminal messages. Dichotic listening test – you present two different messages to either ear of the subject. You are supposed to “shawdow” by it repeating it. Then another message is presented to the other ear. Focusing in on one conversation and filtering the other stuff. People recall little of the message. They can say if it was a high or low pitched voice or if it is there own voice. But the unattended ear message is NOT recalled, unaware of it. A Dr. MCKay, UCLA professor, did a study on this. In the intended ear, the subjects heard, “the boys threw rocks into the bank.” “Bank” being an ambiguous term. In the unattended ear, the subjects heard river or savings. People who heard “river” said bank meant it was a riverbank, while those who heard subliminally “savings” said the bank meant it was a savings bank. The subjects connected the words only when the words are related in content.

Another test is called a PRIMING TASK. They receive a word like doctor, jeans and black… Then in subsequent tasks, they have to unscramble a message in a puzzle. The words nurse, blue and board were in it and they saw the words quicker than those who did not receive the priming words. So do we acknowledge subliminal messages?…Assumption is that the categories have been primed – the word black has already set off the word board in your mind so it is easier to spot out. Dr. Marcel – presented dr., jeans and black on a screen. Then masked the words with a grid - Too fast to take in. they still recognize the counterparts words quicker. A Dr. Schacter, studied anterograde amnesia – they have no memory after the trauma. Presented the subjects with those same words again. Then present the second list and they still respond to them. This is called IMPLICIT MEMEORY - Cannot recall but the memory is there.

Cognitive Unconscious. A Dr. Kilstrom hypnotized subjects and were given the words again, dr. jeans and black. They were told they would not remember the words when they came out of their trance. But they still pair up the words as associates…

Another study done with multiple personalities where one personality gets the words but another personality memorizes them.

30 31 Woll said there is subliminal perception. The question is “is the Conscious dumb or smart?” The conscious is Dumb! It cannot take in messages. “Buy Coke” is too complicated.

There are individual differences in all these experiments with defense. The scale which came out in the 60’s is the Repression Sensitization Scale. It is a simple pencil and paper test taken from the MMPI. It distinguishes between represses Vs. Sensitizers who deal with threat by mulling things over, a worrywart. This scale is supposed to measure this. Repressors – show a perceptual defense. Harder time seeing threatening material. Do not acknowledge . Report no health problems. Sensitizers – show the exact opposite. They are more vigilant to seeing threatening material. They have a perceptual vigilance. Give more sexual association to words. Report being more comfortable with sexual arousal. Report lots of health problems.

Repression – Sensitization Scale is related to Anxiety. Sensitizers have a lot of anxiety as opposed to the repressors, never report being anxious. Repressors do not recall their dream while Sensitizers do recall their dreams. But it is too highly correlated with other things/traits so we have the…

• MANIFEST ANXIETY SCALE – How much anxiety symptoms do you show.] • SOCIAL DESIRE ABILITY SCALE – Do you portray yourself to others in a social desirability way or not. Sensitizers say we are not desirable. While repressors say we’re desirable. -.90 correlation. Very high correlation so something is up…

All these three scales are measuring the tendency to Complain! – Woll. We’re still trying to study repression according to these measures. But now we measure repressors with the manifest anxiety scale along with the social desire ability scale. We do not use the repression – sensitization scale. This is a correlation approach to studying repression.

31 32 In the 1960’s wanted to study Coping Methods. How do we cope with threatening material. And at the same time, how do we cope by re-appraising the threat, like rationalization. He showed gory frightening movies and looked at their physiological response. He used that circumcision video. And the other was a work shop accident film with limbs being severed. The films clearly aroused the subjects. But there were 3 conditions under which they subjects saw the movie. One group saw the movie as a silent film with no narration to it. Another group saw it with a Denial commentary. Or this “accident” didn’t really occur – it’s all stages with fake blood. The third group heard a narration that treated the film like a National Geographic Special. So they heard an INTELLECTUALIZATION narration. Groups with the narration were better able to cope with the movie easier than the “silent film group” they had less arousal because they were able to cope with the images because of the narration to it. If you present the narration before the film is shown, then there is even less arousal. The are able to cope with it better because they can prepare for it. Certain groups do better with different commentators. College groups do better with the intellectual commentary. And finally, if you put these two commentaries together with the Sensitization Scale, then Repressors do better with the Denial commentary while the Sensitizers do better with the intellectual commentary. This is a good example of the Cronbach’s Attribute * Treatment interaction. The Attributes is the repression – sensitization. The treatments are the commentaries. The idea is that different people do better with different commentaries/coping mechanisms. Don’t give a depressor an intellectual commentary and don’t give a sensitizer a denial commentary because they wouldn’t know what to do with it.

There were Psychoanalytic Students of Freud who ended up rebelling against him. There are three to four revisions of this theory. 1. – Anna Freud, his daughter. And Heinz Hartman & Robert White. Also Eric Erickson. These guys believed Freud underestimated the Ego. The ego is much more active & adaptive than Freud suggested. It is more Autonomous – independent of the id. The ego has its own functions and goals. 1a. Object Relations Theory – Otter Kernberg. Heinzkohut and Mahler. What is critical about personality development is the early relationships that you form with significant objects. Example is your parents. We internalize these relations. We carry them with us and constantly interact, INTROJECT, with these relations. And then we finally separate from them. Being independent. Some people never succeed from breaking away – narcissism disorder.

32 33 2. Neo – Freudians – Alfred Adler, Karen Horney, Erich Fromm. Popular in the 50’s and 60’s. Aim of these guys was to say Freud overemphasized biology and instincts. Neo – Freudians were popular in the 70’s. What counts are social factors - family and society, economics and historical factors. They wrote a lot of pop psych. books.

Carl Jung – Analytic Psychology – Freud was right about that there is an unconscious part of the mind. But he got it wrong on sexual instincts. It is biased. The unconscious is a source of great wisdom and creativity. It should be cultivated. He had another crazy dream that was similar to Catholicism. He was convinced there were people living in his head. He visited a séance and the woman started to speak in different languages and talked to the dead. Jung concluded that there exits the “other”. There is another personality within us. Jung believed this personality to be a reincarnation within his mind! Jung’s theory is similar to Freud’s in that a set of ideas comes together in the unconscious. “Feeling Toned Complexes” always revolve around a nucleus. Some kind of central theme to the complexes – this relates the Freud’s unconscious. Jung viewed this unconscious differently from Freud. Some of these ideas cannot come from the unconscious. The themes were the most important – he believed they were UNIVERSAL. Freud’s ideas were more personal.

33 34 6 – 14 – 99/Monday 8th lecture.

Test is this Wednesday. He will be in his office tomorrow to look at some answers we wrote down for the study guide questions. There will also be an extra credit experiment this Thursday after class. Everyone in class today participated in last week’s personality experiment.

Today’s Outline: Revisions of Psychoanalytic Theory b. Carl Jung 2. Attitudes, functions & psychological Types. 3. The Personal Collective Unconscious 4. INDIVUATION

7. Interpersonal Approaches a. Harry Stack 1. Background 2. Energy concepts, anxiety 3. The self – dynamism.

Continue w/Carl Jung: Jung talked more about universal aspects of personality. Introversion and Extraversion are two attitudes. Everyone has both but one can predominate over the other. Introversion is drawing your motivation and focusing your attention inward/internally – our own thoughts. Extraversion is vice versa. But in Jung’s sense extraversion doesn’t mean a “sociable” or “outgoing” personality. It means we get our information from the outside world. Charles Darwin would be an extravert because he observed the external world. A person who sits at a telescope all night is an extravert. They focus their attention on the outside world. Introverts are self-protective. They draw their energy from the outside world for them to keep control. Both have their advantages and disadvantages but both should be balanced for a healthy personality. Extraverts are good at getting ideas across and dealing with people. But he loses contact with himself. Also loses contact with their health. The Introvert gets no contact with no one. So he can get exploited because he doesn’t know how to interact with others. The lesson in this is that you need to be balanced; need to develop both sides.

34 35

Jung says if you don’t do it, the psyche will do it for you. The first 20 years of your life, westerners are primarily extraverts. We concentrate on getting jobs and starting a family. But somewhere around age 40 or 50 in today’s standards people go through a mid – life crisis and wonder what they’ve accomplished in life. So they start to introspect their lives. If we do not do it yourself, which is the best way, the psyche will eventually do it for you.

• FUNCTIONS: Everything falls into pairs. From the HANDOUT. Recall the Meyers/Briggs.

1. Rational Functions: thinking and feeling. These two are opposites of each other. Thinking/conscious means grasping the world from inference and logic. The opposite is Feeling/unconscious is grasping the world with emotion and morals. Jung says you must cultivate both; if you don’t then the immature emotion will come out estranged and childish. An example is a thinking scientist who only relies on logic and ignores Feelings. Then he might erupt in temper tantrums when things go wrong because he never developed these emotions. If you are a Feeling person you might become obsessed with ideas – get too much into religion. 2. Irrational Functions: Or Non – rational. These involve passively taking in experience without analyzing it. There are two irrational functions. Sensing/conscious and its’ opposite Intuition/unconscious. Sensing means taking in the details of the situation. Also means focusing on sensory pleasure. Opposite is Intuition – taking in the overall picture. Example: Looking at the forest instead of the Trees. AGAIN – Jung says you must cultivate both; if you don’t then the immature emotion will come out estranged and childish.

One of these functions is going to be cultivated by Western society – this becomes the Dominant function. Whichever its’ opposite is, is going to be buried into the unconscious, underdeveloped. Then the other pair is called the auxiliary function – these are somewhat supportive. Not highly developed; but not repressed. The trick is to develop all four of these traits. If you take the dominant attitude and combine them with the others you’ll get 8 possible types, then add in the auxiliary types & you get 16 types – the MEYERS – BRIGGS TEST is based on this. That test is based on 32 types on four bipolar scales. Very popular test but doesn’t have good validity.

35 36

Jung stresses the content of the Unconscious but had a different idea from Freud. 2 parts to the Unconscious. The one of lesser importance is called the Personal Unconscious. It consists of material of our personal life that is now unconscious. Three components to this. Material we have forgotten. Material that we’ve repressed. Material that has never been in the conscious. It is subliminal perception that gets through to us. We experience things in life that we are never conscious of. These three are our experiences from our own life… Then there is the Collective Unconscious. These are memories that come from elsewhere. We couldn’t have gotten them from personal experience but is Common to every one of all cultures. It is literally universal and is inherited. There are two components to the Collective Unconscious. One is Instincts – universal patterns of behavior that is seen everywhere. (Jung’s definition). We all have universal fears (snakes), sexual drives and aggression. Also maternal behavior. Also “attachments” if he were alive today. Whenever you find universal rituals, like marriage/initiation ceremonies, you find mutual behavior. The other component is the Archetypes. Universal patterns/categories of symbols. When you find in literature from around the world common ideas then you find these universal archetypes. Woll mentioned the Similarity between archetypes and the characters of STAR WARS. One archetype is the Shadow – the dark side, “Mr. Hyde”, the dark side of the force in Star Wars, Darth Maul. You need to express it though. If not it will come out in antisocial maladjusted behavior. Jung believed WWII was a build up of repressed shadow. The shadow also adds emotional depth to your personality. The animus/anima archetype – animus/masculine and anima/feminine side. Jung had conversation with his anima side. A feminine voice told him he was building blocks to create works of art. Luke/Leia are the animus/anima. • Also we have “The Hero” James Bond; sir Lancelot; Austin Powers; Luke Skywalker • The “Old Wise Man” Yoda; Merlin; Obi Won Kenobi. • The Earth Mother • The Trickster • The Snake/Serpent • Self - Personality

• Why are they so important? Because Archetypes express a part of yourself. You can tell when one side of you wants to come out. There are universal dreams that have archetypes in them. Jung had a schizophrenic patient who pointed to the sun and said that it’s the Sun Phallus. He first thought he was just crazy. The later he found in an ancient legend that the “wind comes from the sun shaking his stick” there was no way the sick patient could have read about that. This was Jung’s students’ patient. But the patient may also have heard of it before too. • Another story goes: Jung had a young male patient who had broken up with his wife and then developed hysterical symptoms in the chest, throat and heel. Why the heel – in his dreams the Serpent archetype came and bit him in the foot. The guy never read the bible but it came to him anyway in the dream… • June Singer wrote a bio. on Jung. She had a patient named Brian. He was a righteous school principal and came to her with scratches on his face. It turns out he fought with his wife, got drunk and woke up in the street with his face messed up. This was happening all the time; he would also steal. But his shadow has to come out one way or another. He never used his shadow for anything positive. Because he never expressed his shadow he ended up becoming mildly “anti – social”. Just like in the movie “Female Perversions.”

36 37

INDIVIDUATION Bring the Universals into our personal life. Individuation means becoming “fully balanced” and also becoming balanced with all those archetype traits between the unconscious and ego with “self” as the fulcrum. The trick is to find a way to give these archetypes a voice to express themselves. there are several methods to do this, art, writing poetry, keep a diary, paying attention to our dreams, and studying religion or mythology. Or writing science fiction – Woll’s idea. Jung said we’ve become too rational in modern times and we should get back to thinking about our unconscious. Jung wrote a book called “Man in Search of a Soul”. The way to do this is to develop the “Self” as the Fulcrum to keep everything balanced. This model is called the “Transcendent Function”.

HANDOUT #5

Harry Stack Sullivan – Neo Freudian/interpersonal theory. Led a crazy life. He grew up in N.Y. His father was an alcoholic and had a domineering mother. He was gay but kept it a secret. Isolated childhood. He studied physics at Cornell. He didn’t like college. He joined a gang and got caught dealing drugs. He was expelled. He went to the loony bin for awhile. Then ends up at fly by night medical school in Chicago. Barely passed, but then he became a well-known therapist. He lied a lot about his credentials but he became renowned for his books. His life is a series of tragedies – he went bankrupt. He left all his money to an adopted son who was insane. He died of a brain aneurysm. Sullivan says Personality is no more or less the consistent way you act with others; your interpersonal relations with people/interactions. Experience is located on a continuum from Tension to Euphoria. We are always trying to go from tension to euphoria. This is an energy transformation. Any consistent pattern or way of reducing tension is called Dynamism. We try to reduce tension by different means. • Moving from Biological Needs to their satisfaction • Moving from Anxiety to Security. Important one; Anxiety is tension produced by others. “Interpersonal tension” or “social tension”. Anxiety is not under your control.

According to Sullivan every child is sensitive to mom’s reaction; children feel the tension of the parent. This is what Sullivan called ”empathy”. Gradually the child develops to reduce tension; these primitive symbols are called “personifications”. Sullivan says symbols come from the outside. Sullivan was influenced by an American school of thought called the Chicago School of Sociology or “Symbolic Interactions”. Names associated with this are George Herbert Mead, Cooley, and Margaret Mead – anthropologist. Symbols develop as a result of early interactions with significant others. These symbols include language and thoughts and concepts. We develop them as a result from interactions from our parents and significant others. These symbols interact with us later on – they feed back and influence us. Sullivan’s theory says we get screwed up symbols and therefore screwed up interactions.

George Mead – “Significant Symbol” – When you can represent to yourself how another person will react to you in a certain way, then you have the significant symbol. Example: if you know what happens when you start to cry – mommy will give you a sweet. You can anticipate social reactions.

Cooley’s notion of “The Looking Glass Self” – Our views of ourselves are simply reflections of others people’s reaction to us, like a looking glass.

37 38 • Sullivan believed that a young child comes to symbolize things for himself as he grows up. These primitive symbols are called Personifications. This symbol stands for a whole bunch of experiences in your life. Example: “John Wayne personifies Heroism”. • Includes the following: the Good Mother – All the positive reactions I got from mom. • The Bad Mother – All the negative reactions. • Symbols of Ourselves – The Good Me – My representation of all the things that I’ve done that have gotten positive reactions. The Bad Me is just the opposite. • Then there is the NOT ME – Those things that I have done that have resulted in awesome emotion – terror or panic – that I do not Symbolize them as Me. Sexual Abuse is “not me”.

Sullivan – we go through life looking for the good things in life. These primitive symbols work very well for avoiding tension but also cause us to have lousy interaction with our lives. They serve the purpose of avoiding anxiety but also distort our experiences of interactions. Anxiety is the Great Educator – the child has to be socialized early in life. The parent must communicate anger to him for him to socialize. Too much anxiety is not good though. But we do learn a lot from the Anxiety Gradient – we learn to discriminate what causes us more and less anxiety. Anxiety lead to defense. • Selective inattention – we learn to filter out meaningless things that cause us anxiety. We just tune out and do not notice it. • Disassociation – More severe mode. Happens in psychotics. Blocking out whole chunks of experience. Blocking out Whole chunks of our lives.

38 39 6 – 16/Last Lecture before Test One Tuesday

7. Interpersonal approaches a. Harry Sullivan 3. The Self dynamics 4. Modes of Experience (Symbols) 5. 5. An assessment System and Research b. Treatment Analysis (TA; Berne) 1. The Structural Model; Ego States 2. The Transactional Model; Games. 3. Script Theory

HARRY SULLIVAN (screwed up dude with a cynical view) Self-dynamism – starts off from self-reflection/self-concept. Self comes from how others appraise you. The self is built up to avoid anxiety. The self adaptive in one sense but maladaptive in the sense that it protects you too much. You need to re-evaluate yourself now and then by anxiety. The self-concept is irrational. And most importantly the self-dynamism is maladaptive if the people who brought you up are not in synch with society. It’s okay if you’re screwed up as long as the rest of society is crazy – Reason why LA life is so popular. He is a social theorist.

He distinguished between modes of experience, Developmental stages but not stages: 1. Prototoxic – no symbols. Least important mode. Child does not distinguish between past and future. Experiences only the present rise and fall of tension. Seen in schizophrenia and panic attacks. 2. Parataxic mode – Child makes symbols. One thing can stand for another. We can distinguish between past, present and future. Two main problems here. The symbols are private symbols that can only be interpreted by the person. An “imaginary playmate”. Doesn’t have a firm concept of cause and effect. Only the conception of causes; going to sleep makes the sun go down. They don’t know anything yet of the earth rotating around in a circle. It is superstitious behavior. The Texas baseball team yesterday started to put their caps backward in the hopes that that would make them win but it didn’t work. Piaget noticed this. He calls this parataxic distortion (OCD).

39 40 3. Syntax Mode – The person has Public Symbols” They are consensually validated. The person has a structure in the syntax. There is a sentence structure. People will be able to understand what it means when they wave or give you the finger.

One approach to this is Timothy Leary’s research into personality! It was based on Sullivan’s work. Leary worked for the Kaiser Foundation. He concluded that there were 2 main dimensions of interactions were dominance and submission. Cross cutting them were love and hate. Look at the handout graph. They polar sides compliment each other. This is called the Principle of complementary. The compliment people work as master and slave sort of. Jerry Wiggens reintroduced this approach. Introduced the Scale called the Interpersonal Adjective Scale. Schizophrenic is out but genetics is in.

Bernes Approach – The Structional and Transactional model. • Ego State – set of experiences that organize around a given idea; these are experiential, things you can feel. There are three of these ego states. They are called the parent, adult and child. • The child is natural and adapted; compulsive and spontaneous part of us. Also innocent. The “child” in us all. Two sub phases: the good child – natural. And then the adapted obedient child in us. • The adult is mature, responsible rational part. Built up through experience. • The parent is the nurturing part. Our parents molded themselves on us. There is also the critical part.

6 Transactional Types of interactions – they are like negotiations. Like a “selling deal”. 1. Withdrawal – trivial one. 2. Procedure/activity – two people have an instrumental goal. Asking someone to help in their HW. 3. Past time – Party conversation 4. Ritual – Societal Norms. “please”, “thank You” 5. Intimacy – You cannot be intimate with everyone so we play games. 6. GAMES – he wrote a book called “Games People Play” – ex. “a player hustling guys”

Games – A complementary transaction. It is an ulterior transaction. A gotten a hidden motives. An ongoing series of transaction. A girl picking up and dumping guys. Leads to a predictable outcome. You can con someone by tapping into their weaknesses; their greed and lust and insecurities – then the con is followed by a switch. The switch is followed by a cross up, followed by a payoff. There are party and sex games. The first game is called, “why don’t you, Yes but.” The person never takes the advice but keeps on asking for someone else’s opinion. He doesn’t really want the advice. The second game is called “RAPE – O” Sex game. One party flirts with the other party. One asks to for date and says “what kind of a person do you think I am.” Like a good cop/bad cop. We play games to avoid intimacy, to avoid anxiety and past time. We also play games to further our script. A script is a kind of blueprint that is set down in our life at age 6. Your script is co-written by your child. • The Script of Sisyphus or “here I go again”. Sisyphus is the Greek legend who has to push the ball of rock up a hill only to have come back down again forever unto eternity. • Little miss Muffet script, or “you don’t scare me”. Someone who learned this in an abusive family.

40 41 Tomkins – “Nuclear Scene” A scene of abuse or seduction that is filled with emotion. Starts gather like a snowball and leads into an entire script. An ex faculty member talked to a Jennifer. When she was young, her pregnant mom was trying to put some boxes away but she fell. She was pregnant at the time and daddy came to pick her up and take her away to the bed. Her dad called mom honey but only Jennifer could be called honey, her dad yelled at her to leave. That stuck with her. She got involved with married men after that. She always got lost on the freeway. This early scene set the stage for the entire life script. Things that start off good can end up bad.

41 42 6 – 16 – 99/Wednesday Test One Today

6 – 17 – 99/Thursday 1st lecture for Test Two

1. Genetic determines of personality a. Background b. Methods for studying genetic influences 1. Animal Research a. Selective Breeding b. Analysis of pure strains

2. Human Research a. Family studies b. Twin Studies including twins reared apart c. Adoption studies

C. Summary of Findings 1. Findings for non – personality dimensions 2. Findings for personality.y

4 TOPICS FOR NEXT TEST 1. Genetics 2. Trait Theorists 3. Personality Assessment 4. Learning Behaviorists Approaches

42 43 Woll gave us a personality test to take. Just like in Testing Class. Take the test and fill in both answer forms and add up the scores according to the 4 groups.

Nature vs. nurture controversy is still with us today. Francis Galton believed traits are inherited. Genius seems to run in families. Wrote a book “Hereditary Genius”. Also criminality and mental retardation runs in families. Galton believed we inherent characteristics from our parents, not true Woll says. He wanted to start a movement in England called the “Eugenics Movement”, so we can breed for certain characteristics, a genius for example. Also breed out criminality. This is the extreme Nature position. The other side are the Behaviorists, John Watson! “Give me a dozen healthy infants and I will give you want you want”. Everything is shaped by the environment. These are two extreme views. We do not inherent a personality. But both count. We don’t start off at blank slates and there is a potential to become like our parent’s personality. There’s always an interaction.

Heritability: How much does genetics play a role in our lives. Heritability means: Given a variation in a characteristic, introversion/extraversion, in a person over a population, How much that variability can be accounted for by genetic similarities?

We start off with ANIMAL RESEARCH to study heritability. The evidence is to combine several methods. Converging evidence is the best way to find the answer. In animals we can selectively breed for speed endurance and aggressiveness. The term used for this is TEMPERAMENT, general emotional and expressive style of an animal or person. Calvin Hall did research in the 1930’s on this. He looked at the temperament in Rabbits. It was possible to breed in a few generations rabbits that were excited and unexcited. The excited rats ran around a lot, stand out. While the unemotional rabbits just sit down.

• You can breed for Activity level, maze ability/IQ of rabbits, aggression. Also dominance and submission.

• Avoidance condition – learning to avoid pain. It is possible to breed a rat to avoid pain. Criminals never learn the punishment of pain.

• We also can breed for responses for alcohol and drugs.

43 44 Analysis of Pure Strains – You take two animals that are genetically similar and see how similar they are in behavior. There are advantages in animal research that you cannot do in humans. You can choose the upbringing one gets, animals breed a lot quicker. There is greater pre – natal control. But you cannot generalize to human behavior.

HUMAN RESEARCH 3 ways to studying humans 1. Family Studies approach. (Consanguinity approaches). Studying hemophilia in Royal families. Galton studies families this way. 2. Twin Studies. You can be viewed as a naturalistic experiment. Experimental Group is the group of monozygotic identical twins, they are clones literally. They also have similar upbringings. Then you have the control group of same – sex dizygotic twins. They have 50% of the same genes just like ordinary siblings. But they too are reared in a similar environment if they are reared together. We have an Independent variable: Genetic similarities 100% vs. 50%. Then the control variable is the Environment. Therefore if you find identical twins are more similar on some characteristic (Concordance rate) than the fraternal twins then that may be due to their genetics. 3. Here are some examples: Eye color (non – psychological trait). The concordance for eye color is 99.6% one is blue the other is blue. But for fraternal twins the concordance rate is 28% 3.5:1 ratio. Another example is Diabetes. The concordance rate is 84% for monozygotic twins and 37% for dizygotic twins. 4. You cannot prove anything from only one concordance rate by itself. You have to compare the identical twin groups to the fraternal twin groups. The assumption of the identical environments is faulty. Identical twins have more significant similarity than fraternal twins do. People dress up identical twins the same all the time. They are treated the same by the parents. 5. There have been several studies of misclassified twins who were raised as monozygotic but were really fraternal but were reared as if they were fraternal. And vice versa. Some fraternal twins look exactly alike but are different. Sandra Scarr and Smith studied these misclassifications. They came up with about 15% of hospital mess-ups. Identical twins reared as fraternal are significantly more similar in traits, personality and IQ, than fraternal twins reared as identical. So genetics do play a role.

44 45

Now we are studying twins reared apart. There are 2 research studies on this. One was done in Sweden by Peterson and the other was done in Minnesota Twin research by Thomas Boushard. We’re watching a video on twins reared apart, they were separated at birth, but when they met up they found they were all alike. Woll mentioned one case called Jim Twins. They married women with the same name and divorced them. Then the next women they married also had the same names. They both liked math. Their sons have the same names too. They also named their dog toy. They never knew each other till later. They gave Segal their signatures. They were from Ohio.

(So if we want to find someone who is wanted by the police we could create his profile by taking his DNA and putting it into a computer to grown inside a program. We can determine what kind of a person he/she is. What will be their favorite pastimes and what kind of temperament they will have. Also, what kind of people they like to hurt. We could put out warning sign to potential victims beforehand. This purports that we have no free will. We can determine what one person will be like if we knew his twin; but if she/he doesn’t have a twin there is another way to find out about him/her…When we have mapped out the human genome we can create a twin in a computer program. We can grow and create this “twin” at different stages of their lives. What they look like and what they will be like even though they do not exist.)

Twins have been known to have other twins before birth. Statisically speaking, twins are left handers for some reason. Oscar Store and Jack Youth is another example. One went to Germany and became a nazi and the other went to San Diego. They did not want to meet each other. But they were much alike. They wore the same clothes. Their habits were the same, eating habits and dress habits. Oscar was abusive to his wife as was Jack. These are not representative of all twins though. And they are not representative of all the population. this is not a random assignment.

Woll mentioned a classic twin study by the author of that book I bought on schizophrenia and Manic – Depressive Disorder. This study was done by Gottesman and Shields in the 1970’s. They looked at the admissions records at a hospital in London called Maudsley Hospital from 1946 to 1964. They found 57 patients diagnosed with schizophrenia and they hunted them all down. They did finger printing and blood tests on them to determine that they were twins. They gave them the MMPI test (remember that’s for nuts). They collected all kinds of data on them. The concordance for identical twins was 50% compared to the fraternal twin, 9 – 10%. There is a 5:1 ratio aspect.

45 46 Then there are adoption studies on twins compared to biological parents. Take the offspring and compare to their biological family that they have very little or no contact with. They are more similar to their biological family so there is a genetic link here. But adoption companies selectively place the kids to families. They adoption companies place the kids in similar households to their biological families. This is a confounding variable that doesn’t make the results valid.

1960’s A study done by Heston. There was an experimental group, 47 offspring of schizophrenic mothers and compared them to 50 adopted offspring. The control group was a group of 50 adopted offspring of normal biological parents. They studied these people at mean age of 32. Of the 47 offspring of schizophrenic mothers, 5 were schizophrenic corresponding to the control group which was zero. Heston concluded is that there is a significant genetic impact in deviance on general.

46 47 6 – 21 – 99/Monday 2nd lecture for test 2

Continue from last lecture about Heston’s study on Schizophrenia and adoption. He concluded that genetic variance counts for the general population.

Gettesman looked at the Heston study and said, “What this does prove is that upbringing and environment alone in the absence of some disposition (a genetic trait) does not account for schizophrenia. It simply rules out the environment interpretation as the sole cause of schizophrenia.”

Today’s Outline: 1. Genetic Influence b) Methods 2. Human Research c. Adoption Studies C. Results 1) Non – Personality Dimension/characteristics 2) Personality dimensions D. Complications 1) Loehlin & Nichols (1976) 2) Twin vs. adoption results. The role of new shared environment.

Non – personality dimensions 1. – The strongest genetic influence – 40 to 70 percent genetic influence. 2. Schizophrenia also has a strong genetic component. 3. Criminality 4. Homosexuality – 50% is genetics.

Also genetics count with depression, manic depression, alcoholism, smoking. We are born with a susceptibility to these things. We are not born to be killers or become alcoholics automatically.

GENETIC PERSONALITY TRAITS 1. Introversion/Extraversion – Clearly genetically influenced. 2. Neuroticism AKA Emotionality/emotional stability. 3. Activity Level – Are you active or passive? 4. Emotional Expressiveness – Do we show our emotions? Darwin said emotions were the residue of animals/evolution. 5. Dominance vs. submission – at first this was researched only for males.

One and Two are the most clearly established genetic traits so far.

47 48 In the early 80’s, Goldsmith did a research where he found six more genetic traits. 1. Sensation Seeking – Do you seek out thrills? Do you like novel experiences? (Zuckerman). 2. FEAR – Jung said fears are universal. Fear is genetic. 3. Locus of Control (Rotter) – Do you believe that your life outcomes are determined by you or is someone else is controlling your outcomes. Who determines outcomes? You, chance or God. There is internal or external locus of control. 4. Aggression – remember you can breed animals for this. 5. Altruism – know the sociobiology reason. To help preserve the species as a whole. 6. Shyness AKA Temperamental Inhibidness.

3rd Wave of research comes from the 80’s by the Minnesota Twins Study. Looks at identical twins reared apart and together and the same for fraternal twins. (Tellegan 1988). They found 11 dimensions. 1. Social Potency 2. Conformity/traditionalism – Do you follow the rules? It is a genetic trait. 3. Creativity 4. Optimism/Well Being 5. Paranoia 6. Cautiousness 7. Orderly Environment 8. Aggressiveness 9. Ambitiousness/achievement 10. Intimacy/Social Closeness 11. ? (Woll didn’t know).

4th Wave to come is found in Molecular Biology

48 49

COMPLICATIONS IN 1976, John Loehlin and Nichols, two behavioral geneticists wrote a book on this and said the previous studies used too little subjects. So there is a large standard of error of measurement. They needed a larger sample to generalize to the population at large. So they went to look at students who took a Merit Scholarship from 1964 and found 800 pairs of twins. They tracked them down and sent them a survey/questionnaire to fill out. But this sample wasn’t really representative of the population at large. It used smart kids who want to go to college.

The identical twins were similar on everything. The second finding was that MZ twins were similar in IQ but not as similar as in vocational interest and self-concept. But personality fell in the middle as measured by the CPI.

The CPI contains 15 scales. Some scales are genetic and some are not. Socialization – not a “genetic scale” says Woll. But it was found that all 15 scales on the CPI were genetically influenced to a similar degree. Similar environments does not predict personality in the future, A shared environment is a poor predictor for later personality. Non-shared environmental factors have stronger prediction such as one brother living at a different socioeconomic status.

Another by Carey et al. in Minnesota. The 15 scales on the CPI overlap each other. When you want to find information on the overlap you do “Factor Analysis”. One of the Factors on the CPI contains the following scales; it is Extraversion/Introversion. 1. Sociability 2. Dominance 3. Social Presence 4. well-being

49 50 If you compare the results of twin studies with adoption studies the estimates vary greatly. In adoption the estimates are about half. A study by SCARR did an adoption study. They compared the kids to the biological parents and adopted parents. Compared them on two dimensions, Extraversion/introversion and neuroticism. The children were more similar to their biological parents – genetics got the stronger hand. But as adoption kids as they grow older grow increasingly similar to their genetic parents not their adoptive parents. Maybe some genes don’t kick in till later. The Estimate of the genetic component is half of what the twin studies find. Twin studies find genes account for 40% of personality but only 20% is found in Adoption studies.

ROBERT PLOMIN (1990) genetic researcher. Here’s the components of personality: 1. Genetic 20% 2. Non-shared environment 61% plus error. 3. shared 9%

Second review: By BOUSHARD based on twin studies. 1. genetic 40% 2. non-shared plus error 53% 3. Shared 7%

Boushard said since non-shared is basically half-and-half lets cut them both. So Boushards findings for non-shared come down to 27% while Plomin’s comes down to 31%. Conclusion: there is clearly a genetic component to personality in the twin studies but lower for non-shared environment. Which is really higher though? Genetics or Environment… Genetics count, but how much. How pervasive is genetics? Ten years from now we’ll have molecular genetics answer all this. Seems to be everything according to studies even religiousness is genetic. And television watching (probably a boredom link). Woll says genetics count a little more, he said not to put “the environment counts in personality.” Woll said there was a lot of “upbringing” studies in parenting when he went to school. But they were really influencing them by genetics not environment.

50 51 Outline 2 1. Genetic Influences e. Explanatory Principles – differences in susceptibility (sensitivity) to the environment – genetically determined. 2 Interactionist views. 3 examples: 1. People are susceptible to TB more than others. You get TB from the environment but your body’s immune system is genetic. 2. Schizophrenia – Vulnerability hypothesis or Diathesis theory. Children differ in the degree to which they are affected by crazy parenting/traumatic events. Some are vulnerable and some are not. Some kids can survive a lot but others cannot. 3. Introversion/Extraversion – HANS EYESNECK, a British psychologist. His theory is that introverts are born with a different type of nervous system than extraverts and vice versa. The introverts are sensitive to cortical stimulation compared to extraverts so they do not seek out more stimuli. Introverts are easily overwhelmed by too much stimulation so they shy away from bars and such. They are “stimulus shy”. Whereas extraverts have a low cortical stimulation level and need to seek out excitement to keep them going. They are “stimulus hungry”. In the text it said the same level alcohol would make the extravert more drunk because their responsiveness to activity is already low. Alcohol is a depressant. Whereas an introvert could drink a lot more alcohol because his sensitivity is so high…

The other principle is SELECTIVE EXPOSURE – different people are exposed to different environments, including different reactions. And that exposure may be genetic. Gottesman found that introverts are non – cuddlers. They are resistant to contact. They have strained relations with people. Infants differ in temperament. Opposite for extraverts.

TRAIT THEORIES Now the dominant area of personality psychology. GORDON ALLPORT started this at Harvard in the 1920’s. Wrote the first textbook and taught the first class on this. He articulated upon the central assumptions we learned the first day of class. 1. Motivation 2. Consistency & Stability 3. Individual differences 4. Childhood – Allport didn’t believe in this! 5. Internal Causes 6. Organization and Structure – Allport concentrated on this.

51 52 Allport said, “what units shall we employ?” Personality is something else, it’s not like biological cells or neurons. He gave 5 different levels of personality. They can be organized. The smallest one is the CONDITIONED RESPONSE. This exist but does not capture personality. 1. conditioned response 2. Habits – how dress up, the way we respond to people are habits. 3. TRAIT – he concentrated on this the most. Combination of habits and conditioned responses. 4. Self – combination of traits. 5. Personality – Way too general though to study. Too abstract, so the best level to study personality is at the Trait level.

Allport called himself a realist. He believed on faith that traits really exist. Traits really existed. Called them the “neuropsychic” structures. He compared this position to nominalism. Nominalism means giving verbal labels to things that do not exist. Allport said traits are real and do exist. Traits simply mean an “inferred construct” that is invoked to account for consistencies in behavior across a variety of different situations.

Woll said to give him traits for being “macho”. Macho is an inferred construct that helps to account for similarities in behavior across diverse situations. Allport said this viewpoint: “Heuristic realism”. Traits are real and must serve as mental aids to “make sense of things”. Allport distinguished between two types of traits. 1. CARDINAL TRAITS – Powerful pervasive trait. So powerful that it controls everything. He was guy who came up with the terms: Sadistic and Machiavellian, author of the “Prince” and chauvinistic after a French general. Only some people have these cardinal traits. 2. What all people have though is Central Traits. These are the most central and important to you. They are to be distinguished from the secondary traits – only show on some occasions. “Being polite in some situations”.

Most of us do not have cardinal traits but we have Central traits.

2nd Distinction: we have common traits. Traits that we share with everyone else. Extraversion/introversion. Different from the individual traits. AKA Individual Traits – what makes us different from everyone else. He spent his entire career trying to find IDIOGRAPHIC traits. He looked at personal documents – diaries and letters and autobiographies. But in 1966 the year before he died he wrote “Traits Revisited” and basically cried uncle and said he didn’t make a mark in psychology looking for traits. Then in 1984 the idiographic approach came up. Now it is a common technique that is used to study personality. Contrasted his approach to “galloping empiricism” (his term) meaning other trait researchers hunt down traits by looking at data w/o preconceptions and common sense. Wrong way to study traits.

52 53 6 – 23 – 99/Tuesday 4th lecture for test 2

3. Trait Approaches B. Cattel 1. Types of traits 2. Factor analysis 3. Cattel’s use of F/A. 4. Critique of the use of F/A

C. Hans Eyesnick 1. Initial research and scales 2. Theory of introversion, neuroticism, etc… 3. Subsequent research on intra – extraversion.

Woll said to skip question #8. Hard lecture Today on Factor Analysis.

Recall – “The Galloping Empirism” – Allport opposed this. Allport’s version’s involved three stages: • Armchair Speculative Research – he just sat back and speculated and did not collect data. Dr. Segal does now in her career stage. • Clinical Stage – they collected data and used empirical observation of subjects. • Scientific Stage – the stage where we do precise measurements. He said “Science demands measurement.” This is Cattel’s quote in 1990.

Cattle identifies surface traits – traits that you can see, shy, politeness and rudeness. But this is only the surface. Science needs to probe deeper to the source. What is the root cause of personality? There are three types of SOURCE TRAITS: 1. Ability Traits 2. Dynamic Traits – motivational forces. 3. TEMPERAMENT TRAITS – We’ll concentrate on these. Woll called them “emotional style”.

53 54

FACTOR ANALYSIS This is statistical procedure Cattel tried to get at the root sources of personality. F/A is the most popular techniques in personality and all of psychology. It is an extension of the correlation. How much variables co – vary. But with F/A we use many, sometimes 100, variables to see if they co – vary.

Intelligence has been investigated by using F/A. Is their one G, general intelligence or are their many more types. Today’s current hot topic is “emotional intelligence”. To find “Verbal Intelligence” you would give a person different tests on verbal ability, comprehension and math, etc…then see how much they co-vary. If they are related then they are not measuring different things but you are really measuring the same underlying factor.

F/A tries to do two things. 1. look for clusters of variables that co-vary 2. F/A also looks for clusters/factors that are uncorrelated to each other. This is called an orthogonal relationship. They are at “right angles” to each other. They do not relate to each other.

FACTOR LOADING – how highly correlated a given item correlates with the underlying hypothetical factor.

Cattel picked out 4,500 traits but finally reduced them to 35 clusters then to 16. There is the a test called the 16PF test! Assumes there are 16 source traits of people. There was no computers back then. He spent millions of our dollars finding this. Cattel gave them numbers and nonsense names; he wanted be “scientific” about it. He tried to give them biological links to the traits. Not everyone likes these names. They have no theoretical meaning. But they do have a practical applied value. You can put them into equations and make predictions. Take GPA by administering the 16PF. Look at which factor is the best predictor for GPA. The first one would be weighted the most and so on…till we get through the 16 factors to predict grades. It will work!

54 55 In 1964 there was a book called “Clinical vs. Statistical Prediction”. Which does better. Statistics always do better than human judgement. Written by a Meuhl. The ratio is 200:0 in favor of statistics.

Profile matching – who’s going to make a good piolet or teacher. Get a group of successful people in these fields and look at their scores on the 16PF to get their profile. Then give the tests to new students and compare the profiles to each other. The lower the descreppancy the better they will make a good whatever. (empirical keying to a degree.) We have a class called multivariate statisitcs that goes over this.

David Liken – he was one of the Minnesota group. Back in 1973 he published a paper which was a critique on factor analysis. There are 3 uses. 2 are useful and one that is not. Cattel used the “useless” one. 1. F/A as a data reduction technique. You collected thousands of measures so you factor analyze them to reduce the size. CORRECT METHOD 2. Confirm how many dimensions you have in your data. For example: you have 10 measures that measure anxiety. We check to see if they load on the same factor or not. Or on “political awareness” We F/A different traits and we find out 2 traits relate to political awareness: how knowledgeable you are and how much involvement you do. CORRECT METHOD 3. Use to discover the basic structure of some domain. Cattel believed that F/A showed him the structure of personality. That F/A data would speak for themselves. Lee Cronbach made fun of this assumption. INCORRECT METHOD ACCORDING TO LIKEN.

David Liken said he didn’t feel that represented personality. Liken said to take some known systems where we already know the structure to them a plug in the F/A numbers to see if it will work. He tried to an electrical circuit system and it didn’t work out. Then he tried to use the system of a “car”. Also bore no relationship to F/A. (Kind of stupid to compare human personality to a car…) He tried to measure the personality of a car and came up with four factors. He found engine size correlates with speed. The second factor had loading on price and brake size. Liken said if you cannot reproduce F/A on known systems then why should I believe it works for personality. (cars are not humans – my idea) 2nd criticism: Different people who use F/A also come up with different numbers. Cattel said numbers just show up but F/A influences structure on the data. Hans Eyesnick said there are two or three. Then today we have the “Big Five”.

The BIG FIVE personality dimensions: 1. Extraversion – Socialableness 2. Emotionality – how nervous are you? How self – pitying are you? 3. Conscientiousness – how reliable you are, self-discipline 4. Agreeableness – How good-natured are you? 5. Openness to new experience or Intellect or Culture

They are sometimes called supertraits because they are so broad. Similar to Cattel’s second strata of traits. These are universal traits everywhere. But to also things that are not human! There’s a problem here – nominalism. We are giving verbal labels to things that don’t exist maybe. A San Diego professor in the 60’s: did an experiment called semantic similarity judgement. Everything can be described by using these terms. Then another professor did a Trait co – occurrence experiments how do traits co varies with each other. Same results. These are the 5 basic traits of “word meaning” they are “language factors” not personality factors. The big five is a nominalist position.

55 56 An anthropologist, Schrader, did a systematic hypothesis. (in text) when you judge someone you are really judging yourself with language use. Woll said it was a wrong idea. Woll said we do describe a person’s character well. But language use will distort somewhat your impressions of the person. this holds true when you go by memory. Judging people from the past will be a distorted description. Donald Fisk – found the big 5 in the late 40’s. he said to get rid of common sense language and try and look at non – verbal behavior. Likens says all these criticisms would be beside the point if he could show that his terms could really relate to a biological concept, then this would be greater evidence for his ideas.

56 57

6 – 23 – 99/Wednesday 5th lecture for test 2

2. Trait Approaches c. 1) Initial research 2) Theories of introversion/extraversion 3) Research on “”

4. Personality Assessment a. Background b. Strategies of test construction c. Comparative test of the strategies.

Going over the NEO test. (Neuroticism, extraversion, openness to new experiences) the new revised NEO personality test has 35 scales. Guaranteed to be the next test of the next decade. Woll asked us what the results were for us. It predicted my personality a little but not all.

CATTEL – He was supposed to get an award but was accused of being a racist and died a few years ago. One of the criticisms of his work is that he never bothered to show that his factor had any basis with any criteria. There was no physiological/biological basis. He thought it wasn’t necessary. If traits cluster together then that should be enough to prove their existence.

57 58

Hans Eysenck – He died last year. He was Cattel’s archrival. British psychologist who was very influential European researcher. His research starts in WWII on soldiers who had been hospitalized/traumatized in the war. He wanted to help them with psychiatry. He collected all kinds of information on them and F/A all the data. He came up with TWO FACTORS. He predicted to find these two factors. He hypothesized from the 1,000 years of the to find introversion/extraversion and neuroticism, which he did find.

He revised the test called the MPI – Test to make the dimensions orthogonal to each other. The revised test is called the Eysenck Personality Inventory EPI. He made the factors independent from one another purposely. F/A was supposed to separate dimensions and see what clusters/factors that are independent to one another. Then in the 1960’s he added a third factor called: “psychoticism” then he added three more scales and called the EPQ, Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. Then he distinguished himself from others by developing a theory about the basis for extraversion and introversion. He came up with a biological theory about their cortical stimulation levels. They are different for each group, with introverts having a lower threshold to handling incoming stimuli. He said the RAS, reticular activating system, as a “toggle switch” that arouses the cortex. RAS switching appears to occur at one of two times: when we become emotionally charged up or when we relax. When we become “charged up” our cerebral cortex is shut down and we revert to the primitive limbic system and let instinct take over. Introverts shy away from too much stimulation and hence they show behavior that shows them as withdrawn. Extraverts are just the opposite on the continuum. They have to seek out stimulation. They are stimulus hungry and seek out bars and parties. So you would have an introvert be the designated driver because he can drink all he wants without getting drunk because his arousal level is so high to begin with. As opposed to extraverts whose cortical arousal level is already low to begin with and the depressant alcohol would only bring it down more. Now for Neuroticism, emotionality is based on the autonomic nervous system. It is based on the “visceral brain” – the limbic system. People who are neurotic/unstable get aroused/emotional very easily. They stay this longer because of their nervous system. Extraverts are emotionally stable, because of their nervous system.

• “psychoticism” is based on some neurotransmitter. Probably dopamine. • These are all biologically based and due to genetics. • The RAS was a hot topic in the 1960’s and he continued to do more research.

58 59 Introversion and extraversion is related to “everything under the sun”. Number One, the most direct evidence that this comes from the RAS. Do introverts have a more active RAS, a sensitive “evoked potential”. The evidence is mixed at best. There are studies that favor both sides and some that do not show anything. There is indirect evidence though. There is a “Sedation Threshold” experiment where you give introverts and extraverts a sedative and see how much they can take in before blackening out. Introverts need more quantity than extraverts do. Like the “drunk with beer” example. Another experiment is “perceptual illusion” introverts can see the “afterimage” after seeing a spiral and move your vision to a blank white wall and we’ll see the afterimage of it. Extraverts do not see it. Introverts are sensitive to these stimuli and they continue to reverberate in the mind after the stimulus is gone. Then there is the “Critical Flicker Fusion Task” – involves showing a strobe light very rapidly, 20 strobes in a few seconds and then ask the how many did you see. The introvert will get it more correct.

One of Eysenck’s students – Cyrol Franks put subjects in a chair and gives them a conditioning task. You present a puff of smoke into one’s face and pair it with a light. Turns out that introverts form a conditioned response to this and blink automatically when light is shown into their eyes. They learned better from “punishment” much more than extraverts. Maybe that’s why criminals do not learn and become anti – social. Maybe introverts are this way because they learn about punishment better and pay attention to rules as opposed to extraverts. It is much more complicated than this though.

Here are some correlates that Woll gave: • Extraverts are the quick self-starters that later peeter out whereas introverts take their time starting but do not give up. Extraverts are the hare while introverts are the tortoises. • Extraverts do better at social jobs, such as sales and PR whereas introverts do better at technical and theoretical science. • Introverts are more conscientious and reliable & persistent. • Extraverts are influenced by suggestion! We can get them to buy things from advertising vs. introverts. However extraverts can make introverts go there way.

59 60 • Extraverts have different humor – they like Howard Stern where introverts like “puns”. • Extraverts are more kinky and have more partners for screwing. They gamble more and take more risks than introverts. • Extraverts are more permissive in their attitudes. • Extraverts break more rules. They find their way to prison more likely. They also have more traffic tickets.

PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT Personality tests are fairly new. Date back to WWI. China has been doing this for thousands of years though. It started with a guy named Woodworth. The test was called “personal data sheet”. The U.S. government wanted to predict what soldiers would do well in battle. Who would withstand the stress of battle. Then Lou Goldberg did a review in the 1970’s of all personality tests and concluded that there are 2 main influences of tests. • There has to be some applied socially relevant need. There were three classes of this: 1. To predict academic achievement such as the Stanford Binet test. The French asked Binet to find which kids would do well in school. 2. Also to find who would do well in personal/social adjustment. The MMPI does this too. MMPI was for crazies. 3. Also a class to predict vocational success. Such as the Strong Interest Inventory.

• The 2nd influence is the concern to find individual differences, particularly among American psychologists. The use of F/A counts for this.

4 different strategies for developing tests. The first strategy is called the Rational Intuitive Strategy (Rational Correspondence). You start off with some kind of vague conception of what you want to measure then sitting down and intuitively writing items that seem to tap into that dimension. Example: to find marital satisfaction, so we would write down, “my spouse and I can talk about anything”. Then they would answer yes or no and continue along this line. Woodworth did the WWI test this way. Allport made a test like this called the “Study of Values”. It was based upon a German philosophy. It included 6 different values.

60 61 • Woll was approached to write a test for Cosmopolitan! • Supermarket magazines have used these intuitive methods of just “making stuff” up. But id people believe it and it works then why not?….

There are 4 criticisms on the Rational Test methods. 1. Assumes everybody who reads the items will understand it the same way. Also that everyone will read it the same way as it was intended. Some tests are vague. 2. Assumes People are honest, people will lie to get jobs. 3. Assumes that everyone knows about himself or herself to answer correctly. A schizophrenic will have a hard time answering these questions. 4. The item may measure another factor than the one that was intended.

Then in 1945 Meuhl said who cares? Let’s do Empirical Keying. Why should assume anything? Let others determine the meaning of an item by empiricism. Let’s determine the meaning of an item by seeing how people answer them. So if constructs a test on schizophrenia; Test schizophrenics first and look at their answers to the items. This is called the “Contrasted Group Design”. This means that the experimental design is used for test construction. The experimental group is the criterion group – this group has the characteristic we want to measure, the schizophrenic group. Then take a control group who does not have this characteristic and give them the same test. Then compare their answers and look at the discrepancies. The ones that are answered the same are thrown out while the ones that are answered differently by the schizophrenics are used to make the test. If you answer like a duck, if you talk like a duck, if you fly like a duck, then you are a duck.

61 62

Recall the STRONG VOCATIONAL INTEREST INVENTORY By Strong. He used the empirical keying method to make up the test. He took professionals and asked them questions about themselves. The criterion is the professional group. The control group is the non – professional group. Ask both groups the same questions and then look at the answers. Any item that the professional endorses but the control does not goes on the scale. “only a particular profession has this quality”. If it discriminates between the groups then we’ll use it. Who cares why they answered the way they did it just works. Pragmatic belief.

MMPI test. It was constructed during WWII. It was given to soldiers being inducted to war. Made by Hathaway. There was a schizophrenic item part on the test. There are also scales for paranoia, depression, mania and hysteria. Suble items – These are ambiguous items that don’t make much sense. But they do discriminate for some reason between two groups. An ex. is like depressed people answering “no” to “I like to tease animals”. Doesn’t make sense but it works.

The advantage is that you can be deluded and crazy when you answer the test just as long as everyone like you answers this way. There are validity scales to watch out for dishonest answers. It contains the suble items that do discriminate between groups.

The disadvantage is that the suble items are artifacts; they do not hold up to different groups. A Douglas Jackson the items that are good are the ones that make sense. Your scale is only good as the criterion group. Some traits are hard to make a criterion on like shyness. What is the criterion group for shyness? 3rd criticism is that all you know is that the item discriminates between two groups; but we don’t know why it does discriminates. Also some of the items may say it measures being gay, but really measures something else. Maybe the control groups answer in a different way for different reasons. People who are educated always score high on the feminine side of the scale but they aren’t really gay, they’re just smart like women are.

The MMPI is the most frequently used clinical test. It gets graded quick on a computer and gives a lot of feedback from the results. MMPI – 2 does not include suble items.

62 63 THE CPI, CALIFORNIA PSYCHOLOGICAL INVENTORY By Harrison Gough

The CPI is the sane man’s MMPI. There are 15 total scales. One is the Socialization scale, how well socialized are you. The criterion group was model high school students – “teacher’s pet and nominated by their peers” contrasted with a group of delinquents. The discrepancy items went on the scale. The CPI was recently updated.

The Construct Substantive by Cronbach and Meehl. Start out with a clear theory to help you write your items on different scales. And finally using this theory to validate your scales.

Douglas Jackson made the Personality Research Form. Based on the theory of Henry Murray on personal social needs. A need for achievement and affiliation. Henry Murray made the TAT to test for Needs and Press. So the test is based on either a theoretical assumption or empirical finding. They wrote items for individual scales to make sure they measured only one need. They also collected evidence for each of the scales. Ex. People who score high on achievement do better in schools. Woll said this is a good test! Advantages are: it is based on a clear theory, combination of rational, intuitive and empirical research. But there are not too many clear views on personality in psychology. It is expensive and time consuming. Jackson got millions of our tax dollars and it may not work all the time.

63 64 6 – 24 – 99/Thursday 6th lecture for test 2

3. Personality Assessment

4. Learning, Behaviorist approaches. a. Basic assumptions and comparisons to those for traditional personality 4. b. Dollard & Miller 1) Background 2) Hullian Background 3) The Miller – Mowrer 4) Extensions & applications of the paradigm 5) Critique of paradigm

C. Social Behavior Theory (Baldwin, Michael)

EMPIRICAL INTERNAL STRADEGY Some of the tests that used empirical keying were the Strong test, CPI, and the EPI. For F/A strategies there was the 16PF and the NEO test.

4 strategies to make personality tests (handout 7) 1. Rational intuitive 2. Empirical keying 3. F/A 4. Construct Validity

Ace & Goldberg, late 60’s, did a study on the validity of the these methods. They started out with 450 items; they were from the 11 scales on the CPI. Then they started to make up scales according to the four strategies. They used the existing scales from the CPI. The second strategy is F/A. and they came up with 11 scales based on 11 factors. The third strategy is the rational – intuitive. The CPI was developed to stay away from the rational intuitive method. The 4th strategy is the theoretical strategy. They went to the writings of Henry Murray. And they looked up 11 of Murray Needs. (Need for affiliation and achievement) and put them on scales for achievement and sociability. Then there was a control scale to control for response bias – to make sure that the subjects were answering the items in a meaningful way. One of their control scales was random assigned scales, and then scales for response biases and one for acquiescence – meaning compliance or conformity – so you say “yes” to everything.

There are now trying to predict for popularity, conformity, and academic achievement. All four of these strategies did better than the control scales. Which strategy should have started with an advantage? The CPI. Rational intuitive is at a disadvantage. But none of the different strategies did better than each other; they were all equally predictive. This vindicates the rational – intuitive them most because that’s the most “subjective” one. It may have also shed some doubt on the empirical keying approach. Since no one strategy works best, use the cheapest one – the rational intuitive approach.

64 65 DOUGLAS JACKSON - “I“ don’t think that empirical keying is all that cracks up to be, I’ll bet you that I can take a bunch of naïve introductory psychology students and have them write items that are just as good as items written by graduate psychology students. Ashton & Goldberg took him up on this bet. They measured 3 traits: sociability, traits and achievement. Then both group made up items for them…. The resulting items were corrected for grammar then they were given to a group of subjects along with scales from the CPI and the PRF too. For the grad students, their scales were equal to the CPI scales. For the intro students their scales were not as good because they wrote unreliable items, but if you get rid of the unreliable items then they equal the CPI scales! Then this suggests that you should use the cheapest test available if no one strategy works better. A German psychologist said this in the 1980’s.

LEARNING BEHAVIORAL APPROACH Sorta the opposite approach to the assumptions of personality. But there is a connection that was made….

Behaviorist Assumptions – 3 of them: 1st Assumption: Objectivity 1. We should emphasize OBJECTIVITY; John Watson championed this view. Leave all mental events outside the realm of psychology and pay attention to directly observed findings/behavior. It has to be something that can be measured so methods like are not welcomed by the behaviorists. “Give a dozen healthy babies and I’ll make them in whatever you want me to make them into… 2. Clark Hull – in his autobiography, said too much subjectivity is responsible for all the world’s misery. If we could look at the world in a more objective manner then all the problems in the world would be gone! 3. B.F. Skinner – Pay no attention to internal states. The personality psychologist Walter Mischel said, “We should focus on what the person is doing (action) rather than inferring an underlying personality.

2nd Assumption “Nothing but approach” We should focus nothing but the essentials and the basics. Then work our way up to personality. First look at “tissues”. Clark hull said, “An ideally adequate theory of purposive behavior should start with colorless movements and simple receptor impulses. And from those we should work our way up to behavior.” so we start with simple organisms. We should start off with the minimal number of assumptions.

65 66

3rd Assumption “Universal Laws” There are certain universal laws of learning, such as classical conditioning and instrumental condition. All of psychology is based on this. Personality is a combination of these applications. We all have to take learning and memory. They believe that “personality” is learned. The recent critics of behavioral genetics have been behaviorists. I think if we go through life without any thought to making significant decisions for ourselves then our genes take over. It’s like we’re going on “automatic” and we’re letting something else run our lives without us even knowing it. I think we can make a decision for ourselves to not becoming a criminal even if one’s entire family is in prison and you’re in a foster care home. But if we go on automatic then that’s a different story. Genes may guide your life only if you let them. So maybe both camps are correct – it’s just that we are all individuals and we “choose” which path to take. Not making any decision leads us to the genetic path though because that’s already preprogrammed into us. We have to make an effort first to change that which I think is possible. Learning about our families’ lives & occupations may give a hint at what we have inherited and what to strive for.

3 assumptions: 1. Personality is learned rather than innate. 2. Personality is determined by external factors, rather than internal factors. 3. Personality is specific to the situation.

Some of their assumptions goes against personality assumptions. Recall that personality is organized, it is consistent and we are all individuals. Behavioral and learning approaches seem to go against the assumptions of personality. But… A group of Yale psychologists like Freud’s psychoanalysis and also so they decided to combine the two together! One of them was Mowrer. He wrote a couple books on conditioning. He was crazy too. Woll knew Mowrer but he suffered from depression. Mowrer’s wife died and he couldn’t go on. He died in his early 90’s by suicide. Another name was John Dollard, sociologist, did classic research on racism and wrote a book on personality in psychopathology in learning terms. And the third figure is Miller – in his 90’s now. He was an animal psychologist who did classic research on biofeedback and reward & punishment.

66 67 CLARK HULL These guys wanted to combine Freud and the learning theory of Clark Hull, a Behaviorist. Can there be a reconciliation? Can we also make psychanalytic theory more testable? Clark Hull believed in simple stimulus – response learning where learning occurs step by step, trial by trial. This builds up to Habit Strength. Builds up by the repeated pairing of a stimulus and a response in the presence of a reinforcement. Recall the formula. Reinforcement is based on Drive Reduction, such as pain or hunger or thirst. The third item is weird to understand. This is a concept Hull called – rg . This is called the Fractional Anticipatory Goal Response. The little g was Hull’s concept of getting rid of subjective concepts such as mind and symbols and change them into behavioral organic terms. This is all based on Classical Conditioning. Recall the UCS (food) is paired with a neutral stimulus to get an UCR of salivating. Then later the CS overrides the UCS to get the CR. Recall that the NS is paired just before the UCS (food). You may say the dog is thinking about and “anticipating” the food but Hull says “no”. It is just a reflex, the little g, it is a mechanical process of the UCResponse, some fractional part creeping up in time to become anticipatory. It’s not really thinking, it’s just a mechanical process. These are fractional goal responses.

You take a rat in a compartment that is colored white. And then it is shocked in the White Box for five seconds and off for 5 seconds. At the end of the minute a door opens to a Black compartment, where there is no shock. After you put the rat into the white box again he runs back into the white compartment. Two types of learning here – Classical Conditiong. Shock is the UCS to elicit a UCR. Then you pair the shock with the CS, the white box. And it learns to avoid the white room to go into the black room. Another form of learning is instrumental conditioning. He learns an avoidance response.

Then in another experiment; the rat has to turn a wheel to open the door or bar press to open it. The rat learns to do that without having to be shocked. He just has to see the white box. Learning occurs only to drive reduction, according to Hull’s theory. There is a reduction of physcial pain; and now after conditioning the drive that is being reduced is FEAR, the little g. Mowrer said you don’t need to be reconditioned to the shock again to learn your lesson. These fears in humans stay with us for a long time. Whether it be jerking off or cursing in front of someone.

• We can learn to fear anything, any neutral stimulus, if it is paired with pain – Aversive Conditioning. What Watson did to “Little Albert” with his loud noises and a white rat. We can learn appetites too by pairing objects with pleasure. • Also works for Achievement too. • A UCLA professor, John Garcia, made coyotes nauseous by pairing lambs with x-rays to make them sick. Then the coyotes avoided the lambs… • Phobias – These can be accounted for by these mechanisms. These are simply learned avoidance responses. A young boy associated his bed with phobias because his babysitter caught him jerking off in the bedroom. • Hysterical Systems – Can also be seen this way. A woman who was afraid of sex, became “paralyzed” from the waist down, but she wasn’t really hysterical.

67 68 Another one is OCD – A patient started to count obsessively to get rid of her thoughts of men of looking at her, counting kept her mind off of those thoughts.

Seligan – did research on Learned helplessness. A dog is strapped and shocked but the dog can do nothing about it. Then take him to a shuttle box where he can escape but those who have learned helplessness do not do anything but take in the pain. Suligan sees this as analogous to human depression. You cannot escape it, no use in trying.

Now let’s connect Freud with these concepts, Dollard & Miller said “no problem”: • REPRESSION – This is simply a learned avoidance response. “Cognitive avoidance response”; they have not labeled their painful experience/sexual urges. This is simply an instrumental response. • CONFLICT – This would relate to Hull’s theory. Freud’s id, ego and superego is now turned into the goal gradient. As you get closer to your goal you will push harder and harder to get to that goal. As you get closer to your goal the strength of your response increases. Rats run harder as they get closer to “food”.

APPROACH AVOIDANCE CONFLICT A rat may literally run back & forth not deciding whether to get the food or avoid the shock.

So Freud’s idea of Conflict really can be interpreted as Miller’s Approach – Avoidance Conflict model based on Hull’s ideas.

First example of this was done by Solomon and Birch – they called it the Opponent Process Theory. Motivation can be based on a model of drug addiction. You first get an initial high then a withdrawal effect. As you can take more drugs then the highs get less & less as the withdrawal symptoms gets worse and longer in time. Then pretty soon the drug user is taking the drug not to get high but to avoid the withdrawal. Soloman wants to apply this to everything. People want to stay in relationships to avoid the withdrawal. It also works the other way too. People get an initial fear of sky diving then you get a rebound of “highs”. Or we continue to exercise to get the “high” results.

• Learning the resistance to temptation - 1950’s, Solomon gave food to a dog, and then slapped the dog before he ate it or he slapped the dog while he was eating the food. The group who gets slapped with a newspaper continues to eat the food whereas the other group does not eat the food, they do not give in to temptation. • 1969 – A study done by Miller and DiCara appeared in “Science” magazine. It was possible to condition by reward & punishment to control animal “metabolism”. They could learn to control the rate of urine formation in the kidneys. They could learn to control the amount of blood going into their tails. This lead to biofeedback research. He committed suicide after he left his lab – he got a bad reputation for doing this. • Manifest anxiety – Developed by Kenneth Spence and his wife. The Ph.D. dude, he was Hull’s student. Some people show lots of overt anxiety symptoms in lots of situations like a trait. This can be accounted for by simple Aversive Conditioning. The anxious person has received lots of aversive consequences in connection with lots of different stimuli and then generalizes to everything and become anxiety ridden. This is “Stimulus Generalization”. • The Frustration – Aggression Hypothesis, made by the Yale team. Aggression is the result of frustration by not reaching a goal.

68 69

CRITICISMS By McGaugh & Bregerd

You are reasoning by analogy. You are taking simple animal studies and making analogies to complex human behavior. That is hard to accept. Furthermore the analogies are based on the little “g” mechanism that is supposed to a behavior but no one knows what it really is. Is it a neural response. Closest we’ve come to it is that there is activity in the purkinje fibers. The 2nd criticism is that it might work for simple isolated behaviors and simple phobias. But personality is complex and organized and creative it is hard to believe we could learn all this trial by trial. It would take 200 years to learn a language if we were not pre-wired for language in the first place. Bruer said this about language acquisition. Learning to “fear” is hard too, similar to learning language. There are certain universal fears – the dark. We also don’t have to get aids to fear aids. Averse conditioning in real life, the person doesn’t learn to fear cigarettes, he learns to be indifferent about it.

Final criticism by : He criticized B.F. Skinner. You need something very precise in measurement. Everything becomes a stimulus and everything becomes a response for any condition. Concepts that have precise meaning in labs are just analogies in real life when applied to the real world. It gives the illusion of precision when there is none.

69 70

6 – 28 – 99/ Monday Last Lecture before Test Two

4. Behaviorist Learning Approaches b. Dollard & Miller 4) Criticisms by later Behaviorists c. Social Behavior Theory (Bandura, Mischel)

1) Basic Arguments 2) Bandura & Walters a. Initial Work on observational learning b. Critique c. Revised

3. Walter Mischel “Cognitive Social Theory of Learning”

Criticisms about Dollard & Miller’s rat experiment. • We are now entering the fourth stage of Learning says Woll, the first was trait theory, then critique of Mischel, then the big five and now the fourth stage of |”cognition”.

• #3 on the study Guide. The first stratum is the 16 traits and then comes the second and third become the “Super traits”. • First set of criticisms came from James McGaugh, UCI biopsych. teacher. • Second set of criticisms by later behaviorists by Walter Mischel and Bandura a. Dollard & Miller claimed to be behaviorist but talked about “conflict” and “repression”. Too Freudian. They were not true behaviorist. b. They took psychoanalysis and tried to find new ways to describe. This is a “cop out”. c. Psychodynamic Behaviorisms – Bandura’s term for Miller’s research, that is Bandura’s derogatory term for it. d. So Bandura wants to start from Scratch using no psychoanalytic stuff. e. Miller & Dollard assumed too much about being consistent when there really wasn’t.

70 71 The alternative approach – “Social Behavior Theory” – the term Woll’s term that contrasts Dollard & Miller’s theory. a. This theory will focus on observable objective behaviors & observational situational factors. We should focus on what the person is doing not any underlying motive – Mischel. b. Behavior is not consistent or stable it is specific to the situation; Mischel said behavior is situation specific. c. Social behavior theory will focus on human behavior, not animal research. I don't believe this is correct.

If you take the first two assumptions of these theories then the assumptions we first learned about personality is being denied! This is a nontraditional personality approach. Woll says they are wrong though. The original book on this topic came out in 1963 by Bandura and Walters, “Social Learning & Personality Development.”

Woll backs up a little: Recall the writings of B.F.Skinner – he was a radical behaviorist. He was opposed to any mention of internal factors. He called them “mental way stations”. Did not like psychoanalysis and to trait theories. There is no “inner man” to explain unexplainable behavior. Then we still cannot explain the inner man but we are satisfied with this result. Explanations stop with the “inner man”. How did they get that ego? You should just study external behavior and environmental factors.

There was a case study by Haughton and Ayllon. They found a schizophrenic woman lying all day and they wanted to shape her like Skinner would. They would use cigarettes to hold the broom. Pretty soon they had her holding the broom all day for cigarettes. Then they just quit. But they asked some psychiatrists to explain her behavior. They gave Freudian explanations. But all that what was really happening is that she was reinforced to hold the broom. Maybe all our behaviors are controlled by environmental behavior. So Skinner proposed to explain behavior – “Functional Analysis of Behavior”. This means specifying 2 things: the stimulus antecedent and the reinforcement consequences. Then behavior will come along. Woll had a teacher say maybe if we could control all of the environment, then we could cure mental retardation! Not true says Woll!

71 72

Back to: The original book on this topic came out in 1963 by Bandura and Walters, “Social Learning & Personality Development.”

• The book looked on gender roles and aggression and children’s roles. • How do we acquire a personality so quick? Like how do we acquire a language so fast? He seemed to solve this. We can’t learn a personality by simple classical conditioning. We don’t really do this by trial and error learning. Doesn’t require reinforcement for complex social behavior. Doesn’t take a long time. We don’t even have to perform the behavior. All we have to do is simply observe someone else doing it – OBSERVATIONAL LEARNING! • AKA VICARIOUS CONDITIONING & MODELING. We can learn in one “swoop”. Woll’s twins learn from each other watching their parents. • All we have to do is watch someone else do it and get rewarded for some act. Bandura makes a distinction between acquiring the behavior vs. performance. We can acquire a behavior by observing, however if we are to perform this act depends on the reinforcement to the model – recall his classic experiment with a “bobo doll”

Bandura, Ross & Ross (sisters) did this classic study. They took kids in pre-school and had them watch Ross beating up a Bobo doll. She engaged in novel aggressive acts such as using a hammer to kill bobo, she yelled rockem sockem! She was either rewarded, punished or received no consequence. The kids who saw Ross get rewarded and get no reward did beat up Bobo. But not the group that was punished. But then Bandura gave them a reward for engaging them a reward of food – all of the kids could reproduce the behavior. All the children acquired the behavior even if they initially did not kill the doll. Modeling can be applied to so many things though. Modeling can be a socially relevant behavior. We learn aggression by watching parents and watching our friends, gang member, movies & TV, and even cartoons. We can learn gender role behaviors from others. Think of Hilary Clinton. We can learn to be assertive and or extraverted. And learn self – control. We can learn sexual behavior by watching pornos too! We can also Delay Gratification – Mischel did a study on this. We can learn symbolic behavior by Rosenthal & Zimmerman such as morality and language by modeling. Modeling can apply to everything. Just like the Big 5 applies to everything.

Too broad a definition but Bandura & Walter never explained what is the process involved. This is different from Classical Conditioning and does require some thinking.

72 73 Continue Criticisms: • There are physical limitations to acquiring a skill. We can watch sports people fly in the air but we’ll never be able to do that. • Also we can never be an Einstein no matter how much we study him.

But sometimes children cannot learn everything at once their parents teach them such as saying a sentence correctly. Child cannot learn a language that quickly. There are cognitive requirements that are involved in this. Bandura never bothered to explain this fully. He just said, “I never said modeling is imitating. Rather modeling is learning a rule from behavior. The child is has just over genralizing the rule of “past tense” by saying “runned”. He is not learning a specific behavior, he is learning a rule. Woll started to criticize this too. He said, Alright, I’ll agree with that but that opens up a Pandora’s box of questions. What is observational learning and what is not? If we learn to cheat by cheating on our taxes, is that learning?

Bandura talks about verbal modeling where the person models what the person says and not what he does.

Woll’s conclusion is that Bandura uses the term “modeling” to broadly. If we act very similar to people in our responses then this is learning by “modeling” by Bandura’s thinking.

In the late 60’s Bandura revised his theory to conform to cognitive ideas, psychological processes needed for learning to occur. To learn you must (1968 version): 1. You must first of all pay attention. The model must be attention getting, colorful. Like a flower’ colors to a bee. 2. Then we are required to store the model’s behavior. So Bandura talks about “symbolic encoding processes” There are two main codes: verbal & imagery. Hank Aaron used to imagine himself hitting the ball before going up to bat. 3. There are other types of encoding by Burger – they encode by “muscle memory”. Ballerinas would do this. Different people encode in different ways.

Different types of professional encode in different ways from the novices. We learn in our own manner and get used to it. Rehearsal is another part of memory. It helps to rehearse the behavior. Is it better to rehearse behaviorally or symbolically? Robert Jeffery did a study on this – symbolic rehearsal did better then behavior action. You must also be able to translate your interpret your encoding memory into action. Bandura called this the MOTOR PRODUCTION PROCESS. Includes physical abilities being to monitor your own performance, putting your components together. Woll says video games are dangerous; people are now killing in the first person.

73 74 Motivation – you have two types, incentives – you must like what you’re going to get. Then there are expectation motivations. A belief that you will get an outcome. (outcome expectancies). Then he added another expectancy: EFFICACIES – the objective belief that you can successfully perform the behavior. You can teach your client to do whatever. Self – efficacies. This is internal causes though and Bandura is a behaviorist! He changed his mind. Recall that traits are global. But – Now Bandura is studying specific individual & independent cognitive processes. They are not broad global processes. They are not consistent over situations & stable over time. These cognitive processes are pretty much under the control of the environment. Woll said “you cannot control cognitive processes or else we’d all get A’s in this course” They are responsive to the environment but not under its’ control Woll says. Woll does not like Bandura’s 180 degrees on his views. Mischel is saying that we used to think the stimulus led to the response but now it is the meaning of the stimulus that causes the response. But what is the “meaning”; we have to establish more stimuli to control that meaning and so and so on… It is a never-ending cycle…Behaviorism & Cognition do not go hand in hand. The two cannot be reconciled in a meaningful way. One says your mental cognitive processes control your environment whereas the other says the environment determines your actions.

Bandura gave a convention about his self-efficacy. Bandura concentrates on this in his last book and acknowledges the environment and other internal forces that cannot explain all of personality.

Mischel – 1960’s dude. He worked in the Peace Corps and did personality tests. But he saw they did not predict human behavior very well. He came up with .3 so 9% of variance on the test accounts for personality. In 1973 he wanted to give something back. Person variables (personality0 account for individual differences. People react to the same stimulus in different ways so he came up with person variables.

74 75 Mischel mentioned 5 different variables: 1. Cognitive & Behavioral Construction Competencies – People differ in their ability to generate social behaviors. Example: some people are good at telling jokes. Some are able to become assertive but some are not. Maybe these competencies are consistent over situations and stable over time like abilities/competencies. Not like traits. Maybe a person has the competency to become assertive but does not show it. Like an Akita’s aggressiveness. Another example: A hokey one is if you can order in one restaurant you can order in all restaurants! Silly example.

2. Encoding Strategies/ Encoding Constructs – Two people code the same stimulus, but one may view the “glass half empty while the other half full”.

3. Behavior Outcome & Stimulus Outcome Expectancies: People differ in their beliefs in what behaviors are connected to what outcome. One person may believe working hard will lead to good grades while others think cheating is the way to get good grades. Single bars are a great way to pick up women & some say “no”. Bandura heard someone say all blondes are gold-diggers.

These Expectancies come from the work of – “Generalized Expectancies” OR “Internal vs. External Locus of control” some people their outcomes are under their control (internal locus of control) while others believe outcomes are by chance and fate (external locus of control). Mischel says this idea works well with a situation specific idea.

4. Values – Best example of combining cognition and behaviorism. This too is situation specific. Some people value money and prestige while others may not. Other people may value success.

5. Self-Regulatory systems – Some people exercise self-control. Some set high or low standards for themselves. Some plan out their lives and some do not.

Mischel now combines 1 and 5. Number 5 is now called “Affective” –Woll says this discredits him ideas when he keeps changing his mind. But Bandura never admitted he changed his mind.

75 76 6 – 29 – 99/ Tuesday Test Day

6 – 30 – 99/Wednesday First lecture for Final Exam

1. Phenomenological Approaches & Humanistic Approaches. a. Basic definition & distinctions b. 1) Therapeutic Background 2) The Self – Concept a. Development and functioning of the self-concept. b. Two sources of values, conditions of worth. c. Measuring the self-concept d. Early research on the self-concept e. Current day research on the self concept

2. The Organismic Valuing Process and Activating Tendency.

These three topics overlap each other but are not the same. These three plus one more next week will be the final subjects:

1. PHENOMONOLOGICAL APPROACH - Concerned with subjective experience, “”w/ an individual “internal frame of reference”. How I see the world as opposed to a scientist sees the world. How you experience the world is reality to this person. You experience things as naively & unbiased as possible – get rid of all your assumptions and categories. It can be about anything, any subjective research. This is Carl Rogers’s view. 2. Humanistic Approaches – Concerned with distinctively human qualities/accomplishments that distinguish us from other species. Such as Psychology of creativity, religion and literature…we are concerned with higher forms of thinking/reasoning. (our frontal cortex thinking). We study health & Growth rather than pathology. championed this view. You can be objective about studying people in a humanistic manner. Maslow can be scientific about it.

76 77 3. Existentialism – Narrowest of the three subjects. It is derived from existentialism from philosophy. Concerned with the nature of “being”. Concerned with human choice. With our exercising and taking responsibility for taking our choices. Ronald May and Victor Franco, a concentration camp survivor.

It is possible to be humanistic without being existential. But Maslow says existential psychology is all wrong.

Carl Rogers – Started nondirective therapy. Meant that the therapist is not to direct the client’s subject matter. The therapist’s job is just to reflect back what the client is saying. An example about this being all wrong is that is a client wants to jump out of a window, then the therapist will say “Hmm, you want to jump out the window?” Roger’s did not like this story and would never do this. Rogers changed his mind – then came up with client centered therapy. This says the task of the therapist is to get in touch with the clients’ point of view. If it is practiced as Rogers says so, then this is a perfect example of a phenomenological approach.

Rogers found out that a lot of clients talked about the “self”. So he developed the “self – concept”. We talked about the “ego” with Freud.

After Break: The self is an organized set of experiences, they all go together; but they are also clearly distinct from the rest of your experiences. Example – The “Gestalt figure” Rogers says the self is the same thing. The self – concept starts off in childhood, he is not born with it. The world is chaos of confusion; only after experiences does a child symbolize things. He starts to check out feelings & behaviors against the world. This process of testing some experiences gets symbolized. What’s happens when I kick someone? Gradually the self becomes a set of organized symbols as “being me”. A definition of a self – concept is: It is a Gestalt idea. How I perceive myself. It is my perception of my relation to others. The values that I attach to the other two components.

• Rogers’ says there are two conflicting sources of values: 1. Values that are intrinsic. We are born with these natural values. These are, are intuitive values – the ORGANISMIC VALUING PROCESS. 2. The other set of values is the values imposed by others – society, parents & significant others. Woll wants to go over these more – Woll calls them the Extrinsic values.

77 78

Rogers says we pay attention to other people’s values because we have a basic need. The need for positive regard. We need to be accepted by other people; we need to be approved of. As we develop a skeletal self a secondary self/need takes over, this is the need for self regard. (Positive self-regard – Rogers term) Your behavior and feelings fit in with your self – concept in a consistent manner. And that you get rewards from others. All of us are governed by conditions of worth. There are certain strings attached to your experience. Only certain things about you are worthy. You are not open to everything. The problem is that most of us are shut down; we don’t allow ourselves to feel mad or depressed. The reason we develop these conditions of worth is that people and parents have given us regard. Assumption is that if people receive unconditioned positive regard/love then you would not have needs of condition. So a parents attitude should be of disapproval of the behavior but not the person.

Conditions of worth – when you have these conditions placed on your experience then there are things happening inside you that are not going to be worthy. At some level we are aware of what’s going on but are not able to symbolize it – called Subception. Subseption then leads to Incongruence. This is awareness of a perception of a gap between how you define yourself and your actual behavior. Incongruent causes a gap your self and action. This leads to anxiety. This leads to defense. You can deny feeling this way – “I didn’t yell at you” and distortion. If you received unconditioned love, then there would be no incongruence and no anxiety. You would in fact be open to all experiences. Example – A woman forbid herself to feel anger.

When Rogers was at the University of Chicago, in the 50’s, he had a collogue named William Stevenson. He came up with the Q sort technique – from Testing Class! Woohoo. You sort out cards that have traits that are least and most like you. Then you put them on a bell curve. • Most of the descriptions go in the middle. It is a forced choice format. The descriptors are either positive or negative. “I am smart” or “I am hopeless”. The first thing you can do is how these views change over time. Take this test before and after therapy. • Or another way is to do one where you judge yourself and then one where you’d like to be. See what the gap is between your “goal” of this hypothetical “you”.

2 classic studies on the self – concept and the Q – sort 1954 – Choderkoff wanted to test three different assertions from Roger’s theory. People who show a good deal of incongruence are people who will be maladjusted. People who are incongruent should be defensive. People who are congruent should be well adjusted. They had subjects take the TAT and the Rorschach Test. Then they filled out the Q – sort test. They also filled out a biographical inventory. All this information, except the Q-sort, was given to a panel of clinical psychologists at Wisconsin. That panel was asked to do a Q – Sort on the subject. The measure of incongruence would be the doctor’s score and the person’s score. Now how do we measure defensiveness? They used the tachistiscope to measure perceptual defense. They had to use subjects who were rated as emoti0nal or unemotional and then they had to use subjects who did not respond to words quickly. Then take the neutral words with the emotional words and put them into a tachistiscope. Then see how long it takes them to respond. If the emotional words had to be up there longer than the neutral words before they recognized then that would be “repression”. If not, then these people were normal…

78 79

The RESULTS: Incongruence was correlated with maladjustment and defense. Negative words caused repression. All 3 predictions were confirmed. This experiment was heavily criticized. The used non – valid tests to get at personality. But this was in the 50’s so knowledge of their validity was not well known.

Continue Criticisms: • Words themselves may not cover self – concept. • It is hard to measure self – concept. Rogers’ isn’t really a psychologist. • Desmond Cartwright – Personality psychologist. Rogers supervised his dissertation. “According to Rogers’ Theory people should have a more difficult time making sense of “processing” information that is incongruent inconsistent with your self than material that is consistent with your self. • Cartwright tested this theory – he gave them the Q – Sort. Took the descriptions that were least like you (4 of them) and most like you.

79 80

7 – 1 – 99/Thursday 2nd lecture for Final Exam

1. Phenomenological & Humanistic Approaches c. Carl Rogers 2) The Self Concept e. Current Research of Self 3. The Organismic Valuing process & actualizing tendency.

C. Abraham Maslow 1. Personal & Intellectual Background 2. Theories of Motivation, hierarchy of Needs

1. Self – Actualization a) Criteria & characteristics b) List of Self – Actualizing people

Hazel Markus (1977) • Cognitive psychology was coming out. The Self was coming out too again. Her term for the self was the "self schema”. The notion of a schema refers to a structure of knowledge. The self schema refers to knowledge about ourselves; a set of beliefs about ourselves. A set of beliefs we have about ourselves. A major way in which we encode information. • She says some people are schematic on some topics. Lots of beliefs about themselves like men thinking themselves as masculine. But some don’t even care about anything about their “selves” are called aschematic. • People who are schematic on a given topic are quicker to respond to issues that are related to that part of our lives, make better predictions, can list more behaviors, remember more about that topic than people who are aschematic. Don’t look at traits so much as one’s schema. • She has extended this in the 1980’s. She put forth a theory of possible selves. What are the possible alternate selves. • She also has compared the way American & Japanese conceptualize themselves. Western countries tend to see people as separate and individual while eastern self concepts are more interdependent selves. Everyone is out for themselves in the U.S. But in Japan, they have obligations to make a whole social system function normally.

80 81 Tim Rogers concept is called the “Self – Reference” Effect. Them major way we can make sense out of the world & encode new information is in term of how it relates to the “self”. If it relates to the self you will remember this more. “False Alarm Effect” – subjects chose item that described you. 2.5 months later, these same subjects they saw a list of 42 of the 84 descriptors from two months ago. Then they were given the entire list of 84. Which one did they see? Subjects falsely remembered some of the words that they had not chosen. Which one did they falsely remember? The ones that were rated as highly self descriptor 2 months earlier. Because they were highly descriptive they believed in them. 2nd study is the “self – reference test” Learning & Memory paradigm. Subjects received trait descriptors and were asked to make one of four judgements of them. In one group they were asked, “Were the words capitalized?” or “does this word rhyme with another word” the third condition was, “does this word mean this other word? (you had to know deeper meaning on this one). So it is a successive deeper memory process. Then the 4th condition was, “does this word describe you?” then they were asked to go back and recall the words. Subjects recalled the condition in which they were asked to describe themselves – making that decision required “deeper thought” so they remembered it more.

Torry Higgens – “Self – discrepancy” theory. We not only have a self concept but two self guides. One is the “ideal self” and the “off self”. Higgens argument that different types of discrepancies between the self and different standards would produce different types of emotions. They are associated with different types of emotions. The discrepancy between your self concept and your ideal concept. This discrepancy will lead not to anxiety but to depression. (Recall this from last lecture about leading to anxiety) What does lead to anxiety, according to Higgens, is the discrepancy between what you view your self concept to be and what standards society has put upon you. Failing to meet up to society’s standards.

Back to: Carl Rogers – The ideal state of affairs is when you have opened yourself to all types of experience. And he says once you cut out these self imposed values then the other valuing process takes over – “the Organismic Process” Refers to our built in innate natural wisdom, our intuitive sense. But we have lost contact because we have been concerned with too many of the values imposed on us. we have lost contact with ourselves for the sake of pleasing others. We have become estranged. When we trust this intuitive wisdom, then we make “good decisions” – the Organismic process automatically chooses things that are good for us, adaptive for us, devalues things that are potentially harmful.

81 82 This Organismic process, the moral compass that keeps us on track to fulfilling the “Actualizing Tendency”. The notion is we have within us a natural striving towards actualizing our potential. This is set down by human nature. So we our fulfilling our destiny based on human nature. This is an anti- phenomenological view. This is a humanistic point of view. We are all like plants, seeds that if we are simply given minimal conditions of growth. Then we will blossom into a healthy fully functional individual. The problem is that we lose contact with that natural striving because other people have distorted this view with their own values.

Maslow gives a description of a small seaweed plant. It was battered by the waves on the ocean. he said this is the tenacity of life. Life adapts and develops The seaweed survives the rocky crevices and waves till it actualizes its’ growth.

Carl Rogers wrote a paper to expand his ideas to the universe… The general tendency to grow and to become more complex and ordered. The human actualizing tendency is the tip of the iceberg of the entire universal growth tendency. Physicists says the exact opposite is happening where entropy will eventually destroy the universe, growth won’t build a new universe. “As you get old and senile, you apply your theories to the universe.” Rogers started off simply trying to describe how his patients grew; how his patients made decisions. But now at the end of his life he is trying to put in on the entire universe. This is part of Rogers’ theory qualifies him as a humanistic psychologist not as a phenomenologist. It goes against phenomenology. That says the way one experiences the world is important, not objective. But now he is talking about universal laws.

ABRAHAM MASLOW Self – Actualization Theory

The first person to come up with an idea of self actualization was a German named Goldstein (gets no credit for all this). He did research with a particular group of patients who had been wounded in WWI. They had neurological damage. But also some people who were born with brain damage. He thought they suffered from common symptoms. They were all rigid in their behavior. They were obsessed with routine. They had problems “coming to terms with their environment”. So they restricted their environment to places where they could handle. If they went outside to another place they couldn’t control, they would have a panic attack. Goldstein called it “Catastrophic Anxiety Situations”. They couldn’t understand abstract problems like math problems. Hypothetical situations are not comprehensible. “Failure of the Abstract attitude”. They understand of a rectangular shape.

82 83 They couldn’t plan ahead. These patients were concerned if they could handle the world or not. Goldstein says, “All of us at one time or another are concerned with coping, getting rid of anxiety.” But most of us also show the opposite tendency. To challenge ourselves, expanding ourselves. So us normal people go back & forth between these extremes. These pathological can’t do that for some reason. When there’s too much anxiety as a primary motive then something is wrong. Our main motive should be expanding our selves. The major motive in a normal life is actualizing the “self”. The first discussion of this concept but he never gets credit…

Now on to Maslow… Maslow was born in . He had horrible parents that called him ugly. He grew up thinking this was true so he grew a mustache to hide his face. He couldn’t understand why his wife married him. Bertha was ugly too though. Maslow discovered psychology in the writings of John Watson. But he gave up on Behaviorism when he had his first child. Maslow graduated at Wisconsin. He was the student of . He did the experiment with the rhesus monkey who preferred a cloth mother rather than food. He was a comparative psychologist. Maslow also did research in Monkeys. He dealt with sex and dominance in monkeys. He found that monkeys make faces to show dominance over other monkeys. Maslow called this “Dominance Feeling”. They open their mouths wide and snarl to show dominance. Then he looked at humans and found the same thing. This is a good thing. Dominance is characterized by high self – confidence, being self – assured. Having high self – efficacy. Never being too shy or too self – conscious. They are competent and superior. This is the origin of self – actualization.

Maslow was appalled by WWII. All the hatred and violence. So he started to keep a notebook in which he wanted to keep a record of the other side of human nature. He called it the GHB book. “Good Human Being” Book. He starts to nominate students from class and interviews them in 1945 and gives them the Rorschach. And decided from that who are good people. Then he started to read biographies of all types of people, movie stars, theologians, and politicians.

83 84 After Break: Maslow’s Needs Hierarchy theory: • Human nature is universal and biologically based. It can be specified and studied objectively, Not a product of upbringing. The basic unit of this nature is the NEED. • These NEEDS are arranged in a specific order from lowest to highest priority – the Hierarchy. The lower needs are called “Pre – potent”. You must one need at a time. It is a process of psychological growth to climb up the ladder. • Two types of NEEDS, two different Realms. The lower needs – “The Deficiency Needs” these are the needs of unhealthy people. These are the needs that most of psychology has concentrated on. Then there’s the higher needs – “The Growth Needs, Being needs, Meta needs” Psychology hasn’t studied this much. It’s concentrated on the lower needs too much.

All these needs are called “Instinctoid” needs. They are like instincts, but not really. A humanoid is like a human but not really… They are universal & weak. They are covered up by culture. You have to listen hard to our instinctoids. Instincts not only involve motives and behaviors, they are thought to involve emotions and thought patterns; but instinctoid do not have any of these – there are no specific behaviors. They are simply felt as vague yearnings to fulfill something. What is the evidence for these instinctoids? From the study of neurotic people. They are lacking in some fundamental needs, they are missing love and security. Fulfilling these needs leads to health. One more piece of evidence…”Specific Hungers”. Cornelius Richter and P.T. Young in the 1920’s. If you are deprived of some substance, thiamin or calcium, and put this person in a cafeteria they will automatically choose to eat what they are deficient in. this research has been disconfirmed. The reason animals choose what they do is because the color or taste – so novelty counts. But we do like sodium. It’s a large leap from saying an animal would chose calcium so a human would choose love. None of this is really valid though. It is not convincing enough. These theories don’t really work out.

Now on to the Hierarchy of Needs: 1. The first need is biological. This must be met. 2. Then you become concerned about shelter and safety. You need a roof over your head. You need security from violence. 3. Love & Belonging needs – you need to be part of a group; love and affection. So. Cal. Had a major problem with this. We’re all spread out into groups. 4. Esteem Needs – need for self – regard and regard from others.

84 85 Then you get into the Second Realm of the Needs – the Growth/higher lever needs. These needs do not have any ascending order. • Cognitive Needs – need for logic and order • Aesthetic Needs – Need to study beauty • Self – Actualization – Need to fulfill your talents and capacities. • Transcendence Needs – Go beyond human nature. Not based on religion though.

The lower and higher needs are qualitatively different. Maslow lists about 25. But Woll gave us these: • Lower level needs involve threatening situations and warding them off. While higher level needs say it is good to seek out knowledge, it is not threatening. • Lower level needs involve unpleasant feelings, it is not good to have no love or food, while higher level needs involve tension that is good – it’s good to challenge yourself to a degree. To seek out new life forms and civilizations. It is “pleasurable tension”. Similar to Allports’ view to a healthy personality in challenging oneself. • Lower level needs are attainable, but higher level needs are unattainable. You can never get enough knowledge and you can never really reach self – actualization. But maybe you could come very close to reaching your potential. • The lower needs are universal, “species wide modes of gratification”. There only so many ways to satisfy hunger; highly needs are more idiosynchratic – there’s lots of different knowledge you can get as well seeing what is beautiful. • As you go up the hierarchy, you are becoming more and more independent of the environment. You are becoming more self – sufficient. They are a person unto themselves. They do not need anyone’s help really.

85 86 7 – 6 – 99/ Tuesday Last week – 3rd lecture for Final on Thursday

Continue with Maslow’s Theory on Self – Actualization: 1. Phenomenological Approach c) Maslow 3. Self – Actualization: a. Criteria & Characteristics b. Critique

4. BEING – psychology & B – values c. Existential psychology 1. Background 2. Basic Arguments or critique 3. Binsworth & Boss 4. 2 Case Studies – Isle & Ellen West.

There are 3 or 4 criteria to be self – actualized. • You must be free of pathology • Must show evidence that they fulfilled all our lower needs. • Addressing their cognitive needs – they are bright and knowledgeable. • These people must show evidence of fulfilling their potential. • Comes from friend, Victor Frankl – Must be devoted to something, find some cause to your life’s work. Some mission is devoted outside of yourselves. Doing things for others I guess.

Maslow – chose several people out of history and current day history for him (back in the 50’s) and found some commonalties among them. Here’s some of the shared characteristics of self – actualized people: • The general ability of these people is that they simply see reality better – more efficiently and are content with that reality. Most of us have a clouded view of reality. You only see people according to values from other people. Lower needs act as cataracts to vision. You are all blinded by these needs. Actualize people do not have these needs. For pro – prop 187 people – clouded people think that immigration is the cause of all ills and anti – 187 people think illegal immigration and more mass immigration is great for the U.S. they are clouded by their own subjective vision and unfulfilled lower needs. While an actualized person can see what the true benefits & detriments are to prop 197 and immigration issues in general. • Actualize people are biological assays – they are like tests. Use them to sniff out reality with their objective views on reality. We should have only actualized people to be on juries to see the truth behind race card games and lies. • Self – actualize people are more natural and spontaneous. They are most in contact with human nature. Do not show pretentiousness. • They have originality and creativity. • Also – they are problem centered rather than ego centered. They are focused on problems outside of themselves. They are devoted to some mission or cause. All These ideas follow from Maslow’s theory. • Self-actualized people are democratic – they show a sense of respect for others. Always have a strong ethical sense. • There’s a clear distinction between means and ends.

86 87 • There’s a philosophical sense of humor. They do not joke about people’s mistakes. So Howard Stern is not on this list. • They are involved in deeper and more profound relationships. • They enjoy their privacy. Maslow studied the prototypes: Gestalt psychologist Max Werthiemer and anthropologist Ruth Benedict who enjoyed their privacy. Maslow had a hard time interviewing them because of this. She was very humanitarian but secluded. • They are more independent of their environment. They are self – sufficient. They don’t need their environment a lot to live. • They “resist” enculturation – they a non – conformist. They march to their own drummer.

Self – actualize people are more likely to have had “peak” experiences. “Highs” in “Being”. Maslow found from his students that states like these exist. The students described what happens when something good happens to them. All the students said they had these natural “Highs”. There are two meanings to “PEAK” 1. PEAK – the Highs 2. PEEK – we have insights into reality. So we have highs in great insights. We see the world more clearly to have these insights.

Maslow came to believe that they were not all the same. “Peakers” have mystical experiences while non-peakers are more pragmatic in getting things done.

Here’s Maslow’s list of Self – Actualized people: 1. Lincoln – In his last years as president 2. Thomas Jefferson 3. Eleanor Roosevelt 4. Jane Adams – the founder of Hull House 5. – American psychologist 6. Albert Schweitzer – violinist 7. Adous Huxley – writer, wrote “The Doors of Perception” while he was on mescaline. 8. Einstein 9. Spinoza – Maslow’s favorite.

Maslow made this list out with the available information he had then. A CRITICISM Woll made of this list is that it is mostly men. These are all Western views. Women did not really have a chance back then to become actualized. It is a very subjective point of view (even the criteria) by him. There were some other people who almost made the list, including a few minorities. William James was a hypochondriac, also Eleanor Roosevelt had some sexual hang ups. These were not perfect people – Jefferson had slaves and impregnated them too. This is clearly an elitist theory. 1% of the population is actualized. In fact, it may seem like the nazi view of looking at only the “supermen” in society. He was called a sugar coated nazi! And Maslow was appalled by the nazi holocaust. He thought these people were better than we normal people are – he felt we should emulate them. Is this arguing for a master group of people. Fritz Pearls was the one who criticized him. He said this was science, with no biases but there really was. He gave a subjective viewpoint on who is actualized.

87 88

When he interviewed his students and set out on this Actualization theory – he set out to create a whole new psychology emphasizing the “BEING” idea. It was a psychology to be based on these actualized people. they think differently from lower people. he called this Being cognition. They don’t see things in B/W, but see things in transcendence. They have different feelings of Being – Love. They have a more altruistic view. The are more concerned with the welfare of their partners. Their B – Values are also different and significant. Maslow wanted to establish a humanistic theory of values. He wanted to study human nature values. Maslow said his approach will be unique – we look to often outside ourselves for these answers instead of looking at the values of mankind, striving values, by looking into the best people of the world. He was doing “Empirical keying” on the actualized people and came up with the B – Values – Look in the book we had to buy. He discovered playfulness as one of the B – Values. They do things effortlessly and simple. Maslow said they also suffer pathologies but they suffer Meta pathologies. Recall the list in the book.

Criticisms You have to agree with the people before you agree with the values. Some may not belong on the list and it is a very narrow range of people – Western men. Then given you like these guys: there’s a problem of the Naturalistic Fallacy – You cannot derive a statement of value from a statement of fact. You cannot say what ought to be by looking at the facts. Tripper, a famous sociologist, says differences in sex – roles seemed to be evolutionary in cause. But it doesn’t mean we should promote it. An M.B. Smith, a chancellor at Santa Cruz, says we cannot establish theories of nature from looking at biology. Values are things we work out with other people.

Existentialists argue that we determine who we are by the choices we make. Maslows says no, we have a built in natural instinctoid need that wants to be fulfilled. We have a need to become self actualized.

Existentialism It has no one leader. Just a group of people – philosophers: • Kierkegaard – Originator of this philosophy, Danish philosopher. Suggested it is difficult to make choices. • Frederick Nietzche – “Will to Power” to become a non – conformist. • Martin Heideggar – Came up with “DASEIN” – being in the world. • John Paul Sartre – French philosopher.

Here’s some existential psychologist: • Ronald May – Wrote a great book on this subject. • Victor Frankl – Lived existentialism in the concentration camps. • R.D. Lang – Try to apply this to therapy • Perls – tried it too. The “hippie nut” • Yalom – also gave

Philosophy’s standpoint is that psychology is too concerned with abstractions. Psychology goes about toying to find essences of human nature. They did not like Freud’s universal instincts. Too “universal” abstractions. When you start to talk about these abstractions you lose out on individual personal experiences. Similar to Gordon Allports – idiographic approach.

88 89 Sartre – Existence precedes essence: this means that the concrete individual experience precedes abstraction. Abstractions come after the fact. Kierkegaard said, “truth is what you produce in your own actions.”

One of the essences that existentialists disagreed with is the ego self. Cannot talk about Me apart from experiences in my world. Boss – the little word “I” is not separate from the world. Martin Heideggar – Came up with “DASEIN” – being in the world. I exist in the world, I exist in my world. The world exists so I can experience it. Cannot separate the knower and known. RD Lang: if you want to understand a schizophrenic, you have to understand how they are experiencing the world. Existentialism is properly termed existentialism – phenomenology. (Rogers theory). The existential side says, “That’s who the person is” or “A person’s existence is his world.”

Existentialists are opposed to determinism. They are also opposed to cause and effect. We are born with certain limitations but we are capable of transcending those limitations, by projecting beyond them We always have choices. We have a choice of attitudes to take. Victor Frankl survived because of his decisions and strong will. Frankl: he said we have 3 values: Creative Values, get value out of creating. The Experiential Value, experiencing the world has value. And Attitudinal Values toward your own suffering and your own life. This is the reason why he survived the camps when so many died. He had his whole family killed and his book/diary was thrown out. But they did not leave him without any choice. He was self – determined. We have a choice whom to become. Sartre said this too. If you blame yourself on your background or current social situation. If you say “It’s just the way I am”. Then Sartre says that is an exercise in bad faith. There are always choices out there to choose from. You have to take responsibility for your own life.

Now there’s this issue of cause and effect: Example: if the wind blows the window shut then the window is the cause. But if a person does it; then that is not cause and effect because the wind had no choice but humans do. The human did it for a reason – to get rid of the cold, the wind did not have any reason. Instead of looking for internal causes, you have to look for meanings.

Existentialism emphasizes how we become alienated from our work and religion. And even from ourselves as in schizophrenia. Being authentic – being self determined. Being truth to our beliefs. Taking responsibility for our own actions as opposed to letting others choose for us. Remember said Nietzche said to not conform to rules. • Self – Regulation – Perls’ said to be true to yourself.

Frankl emphasized the concept of commitment to a goal. You find yourself outside your life. Self – transcendence. Have a goal outside your life.

Existential Angst – anxiety, or existential dread. We are anxious and filled with dread by virtue of being human. It derives from 3 different sources: Dread by virtue of being human. We make choices that we alone are responsible for. Life may be meaningless, there is no assurance about life being perfect and meaningful. In Kafka’s the Trial, a man wakes up finding he’s been charged of something he doesn’t know of.

89 90

90 91

I may write a book that no one will read. There are no assurances that it will be read by a publisher. The Denial of Death – Trying to deny our eventual fate causes anxiety. Death will become an issue for us someday. It’s gonna come someday. So our choice is to face up and deal with anxiety or let other people make decisions for you which is even worse. This is different from Maslow’s and Rogers’ view that says if you trust your instincts then you will make the right decisions. Existentialism says you just have to take chances.

The 2 existential analysts are Ludwig Ven Wagner and Ed Boss. He and Freud were “Friends” but not like psychoanalysis. Freud said at the age of 80, that they’d still be friends. Boss studied with Heideggar.

There are 3 different modes of existence: 1. “Umwelt” – the world of around my body; the world around me. 2. “Mitwelt” – world with others – the social world. 3. “Eigenwelt” – world of subjective experience, of our own subjective thoughts.

Psychologists concentrate too much on one of these specific topics. When all three are important. Also only some of us live in one or two of these modes. Vin Wagner said you need to get in touch with a person’s world design. You need to look at the recurring themes in ones life. Boss talks about existentials – the fundamental things on how to experience your body and time. Win Wagner differentiated from “throwness”. We have certain givens in our body, our limitations. We are thrown into the world with certain limitations, physical and time we are born. So all the rest are our possibilities. Even with these constraints is that we have huge possibilities for us. we just don’t know about them. Some people never acknowledge their throwness and change their physical body.

91 92 7 – 7 – 99/Wednesday Last lecture before final exam

2. Cognitive approaches a. George Kelley 1) 3 ways of looking 2) Characteristics of constructs 3) Carvier & Shier’s Self Regulation Theory

Boss: Existentialist. There are certain experiences of our space & time, body and our history. We need to understand there these aspects in the person.

Boss’ case study was a paranoid man in France who believed everything was going inside his stomach. He said some people feel great one day and miserable the next. So it is good to keep a log to show that nothing has really changed from to day.

Another case study of Ilse, she had a tyrannical father and an angel of mother who was abused by the husband too. Ilse watched the play Hamlet and got an idea. She burned her hand in a stove to show to her dad “how much she loved him.” Doesn’t make sense though but she went ahead and did it. Binswagner said her “World Theme” revolved around her dad.

Ellen West – another case study. She was an anorexic. She started off as a rebellious child. She was a tomboy. She did things in a compulsive way. She was a good writer of poetry. Maybe she was a manic-depressive. All these themes were put into her body. When she was 21 her father rejected her fiancée and decided to lose weight. She became emaciated but people began to feed her and she ballooned to 160. At 28, she married her cousin who later became her friend. She lost weight again. In her early 30’s she tried to commit suicide by stepping onto a car and jump out a window. Neither killed her. She was locked up in a sanitarium but later released. She “becomes happy”. She walks with her husband and writes poetry. But one day she took poison and died calmly.

Binswagner said her problems were she never “reconciled” with her “throwaway features” and so saw only two possibilities, to float herself away from her body or to be entombed in her body. But Carl Rogers said no one listened to her. Rogers believed he could have helped her if he saw her first.

R.D. Laing – Binswagner claims to be an existentialist. It’s almost as if he sees her life as a scroll with her life on it.

92 93 FINAL TOPIC • Personal Construct – A filter through which we see life. Constructs are ways in which we see the world. Our constructs are who we are. We do categories like Kant out of them. • Constructs are not to be judged as true or false. George Kelly got his ideas from Kant. • Kelly called his theory Construct Alternativism; there are many ways to interpret events. • We need to be aware that constructs apply to a group of events. • His model is a model of the scientist. We think like one all the time by making predictions by our actions – even simple ones. • Kelly gave his students and patients the same advice. Make a hypothesis from observations and go from there. Kelly’s view is that we are all amateur scientists. We live with our predictions. We constantly form hypothesis. So the best thing to do is to become a good scientist. But people hang on to their constructs long after they outlived their usefulness. • Constructs are your personality. That is what determines your behavior. Constructs have a finite range and focus of convenience. They only work in certain situations. • Fighting is a good in sports but not in personal relationships. • Experience – A permeable construct is one where it lets new experiences into its range. A closed construct allows no experience to change it. • A persons’ construct of music could include “rap” or “classical”

93