Personality Journal

Ramblings. 2011-40555, for Psych 150.

[metapers]

Personal Constructs

George Kelly created a movement which is made to be flexible to change: the cognitive approach. In this approach, he formulated a theory: the Personal Construct Theory. He considers people as a kind of an informal scientist who generated hypotheses about his environment and the world and uses these hypotheses to respond to his surroundings.

At times, a person would encounter something that is different from one of his personal constructs, and there are two ways in which he can respond to it: (1) he would modify/replace the construct to adjust to the new event of (2) he would keep his construct and dismiss the event as another thing entirely. Psychologically healthy people will usually adjust their personal constructs to the new event and carry on with life worry-free. However, those who don't adjust and keep on using their construct in predicting the events of the same nature will experience anxiety and may encounter psychological problems.

While reading this topic from the book, i was constantly reminded of a friend of mine who kept on having problematic relationships with people. Initially, he had a crush on someone, and eventually lost interest because he said she was trying to change him. I thought that was not much of a problem but I accepted his story anyway but the longer I knew him, the more problems he encountered in the same vein as the first event.

The second event was during an org event in which he had to group up with a few other people for a certain goal (I did not have the chance to attend the said event). At first, he was doing fine, but a bit later he encountered another problem with one of his groupmates. As I understood of this story, the directors of the org had them talk their differences out but his groupmate stopped explaining her side as he started to insult her. It seemed to be insults uncalled for and not relevant to their problem; they became personal and below-the-belt.

The third event was another crush, and he was very close to this girl he was interested in. After a while, the girl was avoiding him for some reason and he got very angry at her. In his anger, he sought for other people to empathize with him, and it seems that these other people also had some problems with the girl but were pushed aside. Due to his insistence, they also shared his sentiments and sought to clarify things to the girl. When they met up and talked about the problem, things got awry and he was almost at the verge of hurting the girl. Apparently, she wanted him to lessen down his assertiveness and be a bit more considerate about her, but he couldn't accept this change. The people who got caught into this mess made up with the girl and are now on good terms with her, but my friend still holds a grudge on her.

The fourth event was the breakup of his most recent girlfriend. They got together after two weeks of actually talking to each other (they knew each other for almost a year already). After a month, they had problems because the girl wanted attention from him but he doesn't understand her pagtatampo so he gets angry. They would make up with each other easily and agreed to explain their differences from then on. But when she starts with pagtatampo again and explains after, he gets angry again! He feels that he's a worthless and a bad person because of this, but he still doesn't change his ways. He would also leave her without telling her because he said he wanted to make her be accustomed to it. However, she couldn't, and starts with pagtatampo again. This cycle continues until the girl decided that she couldn't carry on with their relationship and broke up with him. Now, he blames her for being needy and dismisses her as a girl who wants a guy to praise her everyday.

In all these events, he sees himself as a victim and all of the blame must be on the people he had problems with. From an objective point of view, he is actually the perpetrator of these misunderstandings because he doesn't change his view of people. He sees them as people who are inconsiderate because they want him to change. He continues to use this personal construct but doesn't notice that it has been creating the problems for him. What he must not be understanding is that they want him to change a bit for them because they have been compromising themselves to accommodate his ways. This is increased when he starts abusing them verbally and dismissing them as haters and inconsiderate people.

I wanted to help his case but it seems that any person (outside his circle of trust) who brings his problems into light will be blacklisted. He would even start spreading insults over to other people outside the org, creating more problems for the rest of us. I consider him as a friend, but I believe that he needs therapy kasi hindi na namin siya mapakiusapan. It is a big deal for me because he causes his own problems but does not realize it due to blindness from his own actions. It's really sad.

[metapers]

Social-Cognitive Theory

The behaviorist perspective seems to be out of context when talking about personality, but maybe it actually is adequate to define personality through the use of behavior as means of expressing one’s personality. As Albert Bandura’s reciprocal determinism states, there are three interplaying factors: behavior, external determinants and internal determinants. Each factor interacts and influences the others, and there can be times where a factor dominates the rest. Maybe different external events seem the same to you, so you do the same behavior because you followed the same beliefs and expectations for both events. Or maybe the possibility of achievement (external factors) may hinder the feeling of hunger (internal factors) even though food is nearby and you haven’t eaten breakfast (previous behavior) so you still continue on your project (current behavior).

Imagination was also stated by Bandura as a system in which scenarios are created in the mind to determine the reinforcing or punishing potential of an event. In here, one does calculations and probabilities in the goals he sets in life along with the strategies that go with it. I guess everyone chooses the positive chances that they might have encountered as they imagined scenarios, so that they will be rewarded when they accomplish the task. However, not always will the desired outcome happen. For example, I confessed to a girl that I really liked before, but then she didn’t seem to like me back the way I do. Maybe she’s still holding on to her first love or maybe I expected too much of her. However, it wasn’t so bad that I felt punished for what I have done. I imagined that it would be nice to be accepted but I would most likely be rejected since she cannot move on. She still loves him very much and sees a future with him, even if, presently, the guy doesn’t seem to notice her anymore.

In lieu of loving, it seems that people are very resilient when it comes to things that they love. In here, self-regulation occurs so that they wouldn’t lose hope if the first time doesn’t work. Behaviorism supports this: internal reinforcement increases the probability of people behaving the same way again, and would come back to a more predictable state. This manifests in the workplace where an employee may receive a bonus when he does his job very well, which apparently reflects his love for the job. He will then continue serving the company and expect a higher raise after a few months. Exploitation might then occur because the company may be trying to grab his best traits through intermittent operant conditioning in order to keep him on the job, so that he can continue making more money for the company. This may also happen at home, where the parents will try everything to make a certain behavior manifest, without concern for the internal processes of their child. The child might grow up into a confused adult because he is made to do things without apparent purpose but with reinforcement.

[metapers]

The Fully Functional Person and Sikolohiyang Pilipino

The humanistic approach as a tool for empowerment is very helpful in making a person realize his capability and strengths. This entails a not only making salient of the good traits of the person but also making them learn to accept their faults instead of hiding from them. This starts with creativity with redirecting their weaknesses into activities that helps them solve their problems.

In line with this idea, it might be reasonable to consider the Filipino as a population as a person that is not fully functional. The Filipino always comes into contact with information that is inconsistent with the way he looks at himself, which could be translated to colonial mentality, wherein a Filipino would consider himself inferior compared to the so-called better culture of the Westerners. Due to globalization and enhancement of media sharing, we find more information of other cultures and accounts that could be considered better than our own lives. We might get envious and find that we are in such a stagnant situation and that we must go out of the country to experience the good life. This way of thinking is a manifestation of a defense that keeps anxiety at bay, in this case distortion. Instead of accepting the problem, we escape it by finding a safe zone, letting the problem stay unresolved. If humanistic therapy could be done to the whole population, it might be able to empower the masses to accept their weaknesses (rather than escape them) and develop their skills (rather than wallow in failure of past endeavors).  Such a therapy may not be feasible at the moment, but it gives me hope that there will be a way to alleviate the current state of the Filipino.

One of the main functions of Sikolohiyang Pilipino is to empower the masses through the use of Psychology that is brought out from the experiences of the Filipino people. Being a part of UP Buklod-Isip, we try to apply what we learn to the problems that the common Filipino faces. Our current focus is a home for the aged that is a government institution but does not take good care for their inhabitants. Apparently, they have no power over their own lives and the caretakers don't seem to care for their well-being, and the administration turns a blind eye on them. This is a good venue to practice what we have been learning in our psychology courses and give true empowerment to the elders who live in this institution, a way to give back to the people.

[metapers]

Temperament

I honestly don’t know why parents would seem to find their children as inadequate or lacking as a person, of the child inheriting salient characteristics of his or her parents. Probably I watch too many telenovelas, where I would see fathers getting angry at their sons when they find out that they have a gay child. Or when a mother couldn’t quite understand her daughter when she starts talking back in a tone she has previously never used. A recent telenovela showed how a guy was maltreated just because his father is a criminal and people expect him to be one himself. Somehow, parents have an idea of the ideal child, and innately wish their kids to be the same. Humans aren’t perfect, however, but that doesn’t mean that we all have to wallow in desperation when things don’t go as smoothly as we expect.

Temperaments are general behavioral dispositions that come from a person’s genetic predispositions to create certain personalities. Three temperamental dimensions were found: emotionality, activity and sociability. If was found out that temperaments are largely inherited. In the previous generations, parents may brand their child as “difficult” when the child misbehaves or cries a lot. The result here is immediate and harsh punishment without explanation of what they did wrong. I’m not sure if parents might be a bit lazy in trying to clarify to their children the reason of the inhibition of their actions but this omission has great effect on their kids. It’s a good thing that parents nowadays are more reasonable and responsive to their kids’ reactions, maybe because they don’t want to be raised the same way as they did under the dictatorship of their parents.

It is good that parents nowadays know that their children may or may not be what they want to be and rather adjust their parenting style to the type of temperament their kids may have. Three temperament types were well-adjusted (self-controlled and approaches new situations with little difficulty), undercontrolled (impulsive and restless) and inhibited (fearful and reluctant). Parents like well-adjusted children, but I’ve seen parents tying one of their child’s hands to a leash, probably because they’re undercontrolled. It makes me wonder why they don’t see themselves as unethical or unlawful treating their children similar to dogs or are they just lazy parents. Other parents with inhibited children would get angry at their children when they suddenly become scared and cry without apparent reason. Still, I’m confused on how parenting styles should be because there is no right or wrong style, also because it depends on the child’s temperament.

[metapers]

Big Five

It’s still kinda weird when I see the citation Costa & McRae, because Costa is almost the same as Costo. I might interchange them, haha.

Anyway, I took the Big Five test and it told me that I was low in openness. It said that I was not creative. I was not creative!? Fyi, I can do a LOT of things:

Draw traditionally and digitally

Play the violin, guitar, and piano

Sing and beatbox

Code websites and games

Create interactive modules with electronics and codes

Do tricks on a yoyo

Braid hair in four different styles and string in many ways

Crochet and knitting

And I’m most certain that I’m creative. Not to be boastful but I can’t really accept the test telling me that I’m not creative at all.

Apparently, not all of the traits listed under low openness actually apply to me. ‘Uncreative’ was one of them, and it was synonymous with ‘conventional’ at the low end of the spectrum. I was relieved when I found this out, and actually realized something: I become a good editor during paper-making. I saw this when we had a preliminary output for Psych 115 (Experimental Psych). After compiling all the data and the parts my groupmates created, I edited everything and added comments for them to correct and then I start editing again. They were generally satisfied with my editing job and I’m glad to finally appreciate how being conventional can help in my life. I am more comfortable with following rules than breaking them, and think inside the box rather than outside. It may sound negative but it just means that I’m more practical than experimental for the most part. I guess that’s why I always like finding inspiration for more creative outputs, such as the site Instructables.

[metapers]

Interaction Styles

Karen Horney identified three interaction styles neurotics use to adapt to their experiences. She called them moving toward people, moving against people, and moving away from people.

Moving toward people emphasizes on helplessness and dependence on other people, and when I was about 12 years old, I have been branding people as clingy just because they have friends. It’s like they can’t function as a person without anyone around them. An instance would be a classmate of mine going out to the cafeteria, but needs to always ask his best friend to accompany him just for a little while. I would think that they are needy and incapable of doing things on their own. In short, lazy and unmotivated. I guess I have projected my desire to be popular like these kinds of people, maybe because it caused me anxiety that they have what I couldn’t receive at that time.

Moving against people emphasizes on hostility and can indicate insecurity through aggression and hostility. I remember when I was in 2nd year high school when I had this classmate whose hobby is boxing on the side. I don’t know why, but he likes bullying other people. For the most part, he would just verbally bully the weird people in class, but for some odd reason that I can’t remember, he tried to pick a fight with me. The premise of this scene really escapes me when I try to remember this event (most probably repressed as Freud would’ve diagnosed it) but the fact that he grabbed my collar and repeating, “Gusto mo sapakan tayo? Papatayin kita” for almost two minutes was very memorable. I knew I wouldn’t win in a fistfight with him, I kept on insisting we do it in the classroom, and he must kill me right there and then. His replies were certainly ambiguous but he still wanted to get the fight outside. I was still reluctant and kept sitting on my chair until the next class started and our moderator came in to prepare for his Math class. He didn’t seem to notice that my classmate was trying to pick a fight with me, but the latter seemed to feel that the next class was starting and retreated. I felt totally relieved after surviving his pang-aangas. It was interesting to note that his friends didn’t try to help him in any way because they knew his actions were futile. Probably he’s just pissed off at what I did to him, which still doesn’t reveal itself to me.

Moving away from people emphasizes on privacy and apparent self-sufficiency. This was my style when I was in grade 6, when I was still in Switzerland. Thinking about it now, if I had tried moving away from people today, my friends would certainly wonder why because I’m quite a noisy person around them. But six years ago, I was more of a loner, and my friends knew that so I guess they didn’t try to approach me or anything… which was fine with me, but still I craved for the attention the popular people enjoyed. For the most part, I enjoyed keeping to myself and tried to hone my skill in art, although my gained experienced notably wore down over the years. It might be correlated to my being with friends more than before, haha.

[metapers]

Psychosexual Stages

Freud came up with a developmental theory based on the erogenous zones (mouth, anus, genitals). He created five stages for development, based on the childhood years and experiences: oral stage, anal stage, phallic stage, latency stage and genital stage.

I think I got stuck at the oral stage. The oral stage starts at birth, when the mouth being the focal point of pleasure due to breastfeeding. Babies would explore their world by putting things into their mouths, leading to gratification. I believe that I had too much gratification, which made me quite immature and still do things to create pleasure through my mouth. I did notice that I always bite the caps of my pens when I get bored. I also enjoy eating candies and chewing gum for a long time. When I'm bored, I even bite my nails. I don't know why I still have these habits but they do relieve me of stress.

It was said that smokers are people who have a fixation on the oral stage. I hope I don't end up like that. Kakain na lang ako nang kakain :))

[metapers]

I'm thinking...