That people differ from each other is obvious. How and why they differ is less clear and is the subject of the study of Individual differences (IDs). Although to study individual differences seems to be to study variance, how are people different, it is also to study central tendency, how well can a person be described in terms of an overall within-person average. Indeed, perhaps the most important question of individual differences is whether people are more similar to themselves over time and across situations than they are to others, and whether the variation within a single person across time and situation is less than the variation between people. A related question is that of similarity, for people differ in their similarities to each other. Questions of whether particular groups (e.g., groupings by sex, culture, age, or ethnicity) are more similar within than between groups are also questions of individual differences.
Personality psychology addresses the questions of shared human nature, dimensions of individual differences and unique patterns of individuals. Research in IDs ranges from analyses of genetic codes to the study of sexual, social, ethnic, and cultural differences and includes research on cognitive abilities, interpersonal styles, and emotional reactivity. Methods range from laboratory experiments to longitudinal field studies and include data reduction techniques such as Factor Analysis and Principal Components Analysis, as well as Structural Modeling and Multi-Level Modeling procedures. Measurement issues of most importance are those of reliability and stability of Individual Differences.
Research in Individual Differences addresses three broad questions: 1) developing an adequate descriptive taxonomy of how people differ; 2) applying differences in one situation to predict differences in other situations; and 3) testing theoretical explanations of the structure and dynamics of individual differences.
Taxonomies of individual differences:
Taxonomic work has focused on categorizing the infinite ways in which individuals differ in terms of a limited number of latent or unobservable constructs. This is a multi-step, cyclical process of intuition, observation, deduction, induction, and verification that has gradually converged on a consensual descriptive organization of broad classes of variables as well as on methods for analyzing them. Most of the measurement and taxonomic techniques used throughout the field have been developed in response to the demand for selection for schooling, training, and business applications.
Test Theory
Consider the case of differences in vocabulary in a particular language (e.g., English). Although it is logically possible to organize people in terms of the specific words they know in English, the more than 2^(500,000) possible response patterns that could be found by quizzing people on each of the more than 500,000 words in English introduces more complexity rather than less. Classical Test Theory (CTT) ignores individual response patterns and estimates an individual's total vocabulary size by measuring performance on small samples of words. Words are seen as random replicates of each other and thus individual differences in total vocabulary size are estimated from observed differences on these smaller samples. The Pearson Product Moment Correlation Coefficient (r) compares the degree of covariance between these samples with the variance within samples. As the number of words sampled increases, the correlation of the individual differences within each sample and with those in the total domain increases accordingly.
Estimates of ability based upon Item Response Theory (IRT) take into account parameters of the words themselves (i.e., the difficulty and discriminability of each word) and estimate a single ability parameter for each individual. Although CTT and IRT estimates are highly correlated, CTT statistics are based on decomposing the sources of variance within and between individuals while IRT statistics focus on the precision of an individual estimate without requiring differences between individuals. CTT estimates of reliability of ability measures are assessed across similar items (internal consistency), across alternate forms, and across different forms of assessment as well as over time (stability). Tests are reliable to the extent that differences within individuals are small compared to those between individuals when generalizing across items, forms, or occasions. CTT reliability thus requires between subject variability. IRT estimates, on the other hand, are concerned with the precision of measurement for a particular person in terms of a metric defined by item difficulty.
The test theory developed to account for sampling differences within domains can be generalized to account for differences between domains. Just as different samples of words will yield somewhat different estimates of vocabulary, different cognitive tasks (e.g., vocabulary and arithmetic performance) will yield different estimates of performance. Using multivariate procedures such as Principal Components Analysis or Factor Analysis, it is possible to decompose the total variation into between domain covariance, within domain covariance, and within domain variance. One of the most replicable observations in the study of individual differences is that almost all tests thought to assess cognitive ability have a general factor (g) that is shared with other tests of ability. That is, although each test has specific variance associated with content (e.g., linguistic, spatial), form of administration (e.g., auditory, visual), or operations involved (e.g., perceptual speed, memory storage, memory retrieval, abstract reasoning), there is general variance that is common to all tests of cognitive ability.
Personality and Ability
Although to some the term personality refers to all aspects of a person's individuality, typical usage divides the field into studies of ability and personality. Tests of ability are viewed as maximal performance measures. Ability is construed as the best one can do on a particular measure in a limited time (speed test) or with unlimited time (power test). Personality measures are estimates of average performance and typically include reports of preferences and estimates of what one normally does and how one perceives oneself and is perceived by others.
The same procedures used to clarify the structure of cognitive abilities have been applied to the question of identifying the domains of personality. Many of the early and current personality inventories use self-descriptive questions (e.g., do you like to go to lively parties; are you sometimes nervous) that are rationally or theoretically relevant to some domain of interest for a particular investigator. Although there is substantial consistency across inventories developed this way, some of this agreement could be due to conceptually overlapping item pools. Other researchers have advocated a lexical approach to the taxonomic problem, following the basic assumption that words in the natural language describe all important individual differences. This shifts the taxonomic question from how are individuals similar and different from each other to how are the words used to describe individuals (e.g., lively, talkative, nervous, anxious) similar and different from each other.
Dimensional analyses of tests developed based on lexical, rational, or theoretical bases suggest that a limited number (between three and seven) of higher order trait domains adequately organize the thousands of words that describe individual differences and the logically infinite way that these words can be combined into self or peer report items. The broadest domains are those of introversion-extraversion and emotional stability-neuroticism, with the domains of agreeableness, conscientiousness and intellectual openness or culture close behind. These domains can be seen as asking the questions that one wants to know about a stranger or a potential mate: are they energetic and dominant (extraverted), emotionally stable (low neurotic), trustworthy (conscientious), loveable (agreeable), and interesting (intelligent and open).
Measures of ability and personality reflect observations aggregated across time and occasion and require inferences about stable latent traits thought to account for the variety of observed behaviors. However there are other individual differences that are readily apparent to outside observers and require little or no inference about latent traits. The most obvious of such variables include sex, age, height, and weight. Differences that require some knowledge and inference are differences in ethnicity and social economic status. These obvious group differences are sometimes analyzed in terms of the more subtle measures of personality and ability or of real life outcomes (e.g, sex differences in neuroticism, mathematics ability, or income).
Predictive Validity
Individual differences are important only to the extent that they make a difference. Does knowing that people differ on a trait X help in predicting the likelihood of their doing behavior Y? For many important outcome variables the answer is a resounding yes. In their review of 85 years of selection in personnel psychology, Frank Schmidt and John Hunter (Psychological Bulletin, 1998, 124, 262-274) show how differences in cognitive ability predict differences in job performance with correlations averaging about .50 for mid complexity jobs. These correlations are moderated by job complexity and are much higher for professional-managerial positions than they are for completely unskilled jobs. In terms of applications to personnel psychology, a superior manager (one standard deviation above the mean ability for managers) produces almost 50% more than an average manager. These relationships diminish as a function of years of experience and degree of training. General mental ability (g) also has substantial predictive powers in predicting non-job related outcomes, such as likelihood of completing college, risk for divorce and even risk for criminality.
The non-cognitive measures of individual differences also predict important real life criteria. Extraversion is highly correlated with total sales in dollars among salespeople. Similarly, impulsivity can be used to predict traffic violations. Conscientiousness, when added to g substantially increases the predictability of job performance. Although the size of the correlation is much lower, conscientiousness measured in adolescence predicts premature mortality over the next fifty years.
Sources of individual differences
The taxonomic and predictive studies of individual differences are descriptive organizations of thoughts, feelings, and behaviors that go together and how they relate to other outcomes. But this categorization is descriptive rather than causal and is analogous to grouping rocks in terms of density and hardness rather than atomic or molecular structure. Causal theories of individual differences are being developed but are in a much earlier stage than are the descriptive taxonomies.
Descriptive taxonomies are used to organize the results of studies that examine genetic bases of individual differences. By applying structural modeling techniques to the variances and covariances associated with various family constellations it is possible to decompose phenotypic trait variance into separate sources of genetic and environmental variance. The most common family configurations that are used are comparisons of identical (monozygotic) with fraternal (dizygotic) twins. Additional designs include twins reared together or apart, and biological versus adoptive parents, children and siblings. Conclusions from behavioral genetics for most personality traits tend to be similar: Across different designs, with different samples from different countries, roughly 40-60% of the phenotypic variance seems to be under genetic control with only a very small part of the remaining environmental variance associated with shared family environmental effects. Additional results suggest that genetic sources of individual differences remain important across the lifespan. However, this should not be taken to mean that people do not change as they mature but rather that the paths one takes through life are similar to those taken by genetically similar individuals.
Genes do not code for thoughts, feelings or behavior but rather code for proteins that regulate and modulate biological systems. Although promising work has been done searching for the biological bases of individual differences it is possible to sketch out these bases only in the broadest of terms. Specific neurotransmitters and brain structures can be associated with a broad class of approach behaviors and positive affects while other neurotransmitters and structures can be associated with a similarly broad class of avoidance behaviors and negative affects. Reports relating specific alleles to specific personality traits emphasize that the broad personality traits are most likely under polygenic influence and are moderated by environmental experience.
Subtle differences in neurotransmitter availability and re-uptake vary the sensitivity of individuals to cues about their environment that predict future resource availability and external rewards and punishments. It is the way these cues are detected, atttended to, stored, and integrated with previous experiences that makes each individual unique. Current work on the bases of individual differences is concerned with understanding this delicate interplay of biological propensities with environmental opportunities and constraints as they are ultimately represented in an individual's information processing system. With time we can expect to increase our taxonomic and predictive power by using these causal bio-social theories of individual differences.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
References:
Brody, N. and Ehrlichman, H. (1997) Personality Psychology : Science of Individuality. Prentice Hall Press; A thoughtful introduction to the broad field of personality.
Cooper, C. (1997) Individual Differences: London: Arnold A broad overview of the field that includes a review of measurement methodologies.
Eysenck, H.J. (1994) Personality: Biological foundations. In P.A. Vernon (Ed.) The neuropsychology of individual differences. London: Academic Press.
Eysenck, H.J. and Eysenck, M.W (1985) Personality and individual differences: a natural science approach. Plenum: New York. Although dated, perhaps the best treatment of the scientific method as applied to the study of personality and individual differences.
Hogan, R., Johnson, J. & Briggs, S. (Eds) (1997) Handbook of Personality Psychology. San Diego: Academic Press. The definitive handbook of the field includes chapters on evolutionary, biological, and social bases of individual differences.
Jensen, A.R. (1998) The G Factor : The science of mental ability. Westport, Conn. Praeger Review of the importance of general intelligence for performance on tasks.
Loehlin, J.C. (1992) Genes and environment in personality development. Newbury Park, Ca. Sage. A concise tutorial on genetic modeling and personality taxonomies.
Saklofske, D. H. & Zeidner, M. (1995). International handbook of personality and intelligence. New York: Plenum.
Tuesday, December 18, 2007
INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCE: Psychology Perspective
The science of psychology studies people at three levels of focus captured by the well known quote: “Every man is in certain respects (a) like all other men, (b) like some other men, (c) like no other man" (Murray, H.A. & C. Kluckhohn, 1953).
Individual differences psychology focuses on this second level of study. It is also sometimes called Differential Psychology because researchers in this area study the ways in which individual people differ in their behavior. This is distinguished from other aspects of psychology in that although psychology is ostensibly a study of individuals, modern psychologists often study groups or biological underpinnings of cognition. For example, in evaluating the effectiveness of a new therapy, the mean performance of the therapy in one group might be compared to the mean effectiveness of a placebo (or a well-known therapy) in a second, control group. In this context, differences between individuals in their reaction to the experimental and control manipulations are actually treated as errors rather than as interesting phenomena to study. This is because psychological research depends upon statistical controls that are only defined upon groups of people. Individual difference psychologists usually express their interest in individuals while studying groups by seeking dimensions shared by all individuals but upon which individuals differ.
Contents [hide]
1 Importance of individual differences
2 Areas of study
3 Prominent researchers in individual differences psychology
4 London School of Differential Psychology
Importance of individual differences
The study of individual differences is essential because important variation between individuals can be masked by averaging. For example, a researcher is interested in resting metabolic rate in humans. The researcher gathers a sample of men, women, and children, measures their metabolic rate and gets a single average. The researcher then tells the whole population that they should be eating 1,900 calories a day. What's wrong with this study? The researcher has neglected individual differences in activity level, body size, sex, age, and other factors that influence metabolic rate. The average reported based on the results is masking multiple dimensions that should be used to determine daily caloric intake. Therefore, his or her conclusions are misleading if not outright false. This is an extreme example to make a point, but it illustrates the problems that can arise by averaging across groups.
Areas of study
Individual differences research typically includes personality, motivation, intelligence, ability, and IQ. interests, values, self-concept, self-efficacy, and self-esteem (to name just a few). There are few remaining "differential psychology" programs in the United States, although research in this area is very active. Current researchers are found in a variety of applied and experimental programs, including educational psychology, industrial psychology, personality psychology and social psychology programs.
Prominent researchers in individual differences psychology
Phillip L. Ackerman
Gordon Allport
Anne Anastasi
Camilla Benbow
Alfred Binet
Cyril Burt
John B. Carroll
Raymond Cattell
Lee Cronbach
Francis Galton
Linda Gottfredson
J. P. Guilford
Jan-Eric Gustafsson
John L. Horn
Lloyd Humphreys
Earl Hunt
Arthur Jensen
David F. Lohman
David Lubinski
Richard Lynn
Walter Mischel
Richard Snow
William Stern
Robert J. Sternberg
Robert L. Thorndike
L.L. Thurstone
Leona E. Tyler
London School of Differential Psychology
The London School of Differential Psychology is a particular subset of researchers interested in explaining individual differences. Researchers in this area often (though not necessarily) look toward biology as an explanation. Its members have contributed much by way of their research in psychometrics, behavior genetics, and General intelligence factor. The founding of the School is often accredited to Victorian polymath Francis Galton. Additional members are:
Charles Spearman, creator of the Spearman-Brown prediction formula
Cyril Burt
Hans Eysenck
Philip E. Vernon
Arthur Jensen
Richard Lynn
J. Philippe Rushton
Ian Deary
Chris Brand
Thomas Bouchard
See also
Educational psychology
Intelligence
Personality psychology
Further reading
Introduction to Individual Differences
Buss, D.M., & Greiling, H.(1999). Adaptive Individual Differences. Journal of Personality, 67, 209-243.
Tyler, L.E. (1965). The psychology of human differences. New York: Appleton Century Crofts.
London School Web page
Timeline of researchers and brief biographies
Individual differences psychology focuses on this second level of study. It is also sometimes called Differential Psychology because researchers in this area study the ways in which individual people differ in their behavior. This is distinguished from other aspects of psychology in that although psychology is ostensibly a study of individuals, modern psychologists often study groups or biological underpinnings of cognition. For example, in evaluating the effectiveness of a new therapy, the mean performance of the therapy in one group might be compared to the mean effectiveness of a placebo (or a well-known therapy) in a second, control group. In this context, differences between individuals in their reaction to the experimental and control manipulations are actually treated as errors rather than as interesting phenomena to study. This is because psychological research depends upon statistical controls that are only defined upon groups of people. Individual difference psychologists usually express their interest in individuals while studying groups by seeking dimensions shared by all individuals but upon which individuals differ.
Contents [hide]
1 Importance of individual differences
2 Areas of study
3 Prominent researchers in individual differences psychology
4 London School of Differential Psychology
Importance of individual differences
The study of individual differences is essential because important variation between individuals can be masked by averaging. For example, a researcher is interested in resting metabolic rate in humans. The researcher gathers a sample of men, women, and children, measures their metabolic rate and gets a single average. The researcher then tells the whole population that they should be eating 1,900 calories a day. What's wrong with this study? The researcher has neglected individual differences in activity level, body size, sex, age, and other factors that influence metabolic rate. The average reported based on the results is masking multiple dimensions that should be used to determine daily caloric intake. Therefore, his or her conclusions are misleading if not outright false. This is an extreme example to make a point, but it illustrates the problems that can arise by averaging across groups.
Areas of study
Individual differences research typically includes personality, motivation, intelligence, ability, and IQ. interests, values, self-concept, self-efficacy, and self-esteem (to name just a few). There are few remaining "differential psychology" programs in the United States, although research in this area is very active. Current researchers are found in a variety of applied and experimental programs, including educational psychology, industrial psychology, personality psychology and social psychology programs.
Prominent researchers in individual differences psychology
Phillip L. Ackerman
Gordon Allport
Anne Anastasi
Camilla Benbow
Alfred Binet
Cyril Burt
John B. Carroll
Raymond Cattell
Lee Cronbach
Francis Galton
Linda Gottfredson
J. P. Guilford
Jan-Eric Gustafsson
John L. Horn
Lloyd Humphreys
Earl Hunt
Arthur Jensen
David F. Lohman
David Lubinski
Richard Lynn
Walter Mischel
Richard Snow
William Stern
Robert J. Sternberg
Robert L. Thorndike
L.L. Thurstone
Leona E. Tyler
London School of Differential Psychology
The London School of Differential Psychology is a particular subset of researchers interested in explaining individual differences. Researchers in this area often (though not necessarily) look toward biology as an explanation. Its members have contributed much by way of their research in psychometrics, behavior genetics, and General intelligence factor. The founding of the School is often accredited to Victorian polymath Francis Galton. Additional members are:
Charles Spearman, creator of the Spearman-Brown prediction formula
Cyril Burt
Hans Eysenck
Philip E. Vernon
Arthur Jensen
Richard Lynn
J. Philippe Rushton
Ian Deary
Chris Brand
Thomas Bouchard
See also
Educational psychology
Intelligence
Personality psychology
Further reading
Introduction to Individual Differences
Buss, D.M., & Greiling, H.(1999). Adaptive Individual Differences. Journal of Personality, 67, 209-243.
Tyler, L.E. (1965). The psychology of human differences. New York: Appleton Century Crofts.
London School Web page
Timeline of researchers and brief biographies
SELF CONSEPT & SELF ESTEEM
By self, we generally mean the conscious reflection of one's own being or identity, as an object separate from other or from the environment. There are a variety of ways to think about the self. Two of the most widely used terms are self-concept and self-esteem. Self-concept is the cognitive or thinking aspect of self (related to one's self-image) and generally refers to
"the totality of a complex, organized, and dynamic system of learned beliefs, attitudes and opinions that each person holds to be true about his or her personal existence" (Purkey, 1988).
Self-esteem is the affective or emotional aspect of self and generally refers to how we feel about or how we value ourselves (one's self-worth). Self-concept can also refer to the general idea we have of ourselves and self-esteem can refer to particular measures about components of self-concept. Some authors even use the two terms interchangeably.
Franken (1994) states that
"there is a great deal of research which shows that the self-concept is, perhaps, the basis for all motivated behavior. It is the self-concept that gives rise to possible selves, and it is possible selves that create the motivation for behavior" (p. 443).
This supports the idea that one's paradigm or world view and one's relationship to that view provide the boundaries and circumstances within which we develop our vision about possibilities. This is one of the major issues facing children and youth today (Huitt, 2004).
Franken (1994) suggests that self-concept is related to self-esteem in that
"people who have good self-esteem have a clearly differentiated self-concept.... When people know themselves they can maximize outcomes because they know what they can and cannot do" (p. 439).
It would seem, then, that one way to impact self-esteem is to obey the somewhat outworn cliche of "Know thyself."
We develop and maintain our self-concept through the process of taking action and then reflecting on what we have done and what others tell us about what we have done. We reflect on what we have done and can do in comparison to our expectations and the expectations of others and to the characteristics and accomplishments of others (Brigham, 1986; James, 1890). That is, self-concept is not innate, but is developed or constructed by the individual through interaction with the environment and reflecting on that interaction. This dynamic aspect of self-concept (and, by corollary, self-esteem) is important because it indicates that it can be modified or changed. Franken (1994) states
"there is a growing body of research which indicates that it is possible to change the self-concept. Self-change is not something that people can will but rather it depends on the process of self-reflection. Through self-reflection, people often come to view themselves in a new, more powerful way, and it is through this new, more powerful way of viewing the self that people can develop possible selves" (p. 443).
There are a several different components of self-concept: physical, academic, social, and transpersonal. The physical aspect of self-concept relates to that which is concrete: what we look like, our sex, height, weight, etc.; what kind of clothes we wear; what kind of car we drive; what kind of home we live in; and so forth. Our academic self-concept relates to how well we do in school or how well we learn. There are two levels: a general academic self-concept of how good we are overall and a set of specific content-related self-concepts that describe how good we are in math, science, language arts, social science, etc. The social self-concept describes how we relate to other people and the transpersonal self-concept describes how we relate to the supernatural or unknowns.
Marsh (1992) showed that the relationship of self-concept to school achievement is very specific. General self-concept and non-academic aspects of self-concept are not related to academic work; general academic achievement measures are related moderately to academic success. Specific measures of subject-related self-concepts are highly related to success in that content area.
Using linear discriminant analysis, Byrne (1990) showed that academic self-concept was more effective than was academic achievement in differentiating between low-track and high-track students. Hamachek (1995) also asserts that self-concept and school achievement and school achievement are related. The major issue is the direction of the relationship: does self-concept produce achievement or does achievement produce self-concept. Gage and Berliner (1992) state
"the evidence is accumulating, however, to indicate that level of school success, particularly over many years, predicts level of regard of self and one's own ability (Bridgeman & Shipman, 1978; Kifer, 1975); whereas level of self-esteem does not predict level of school achievement. The implication is that teachers need to concentrate on the academic successes and failures of their students. It is the student's history of success and failure that gives them the information with which to assess themselves" (p. 159).
If academic achievement leads to self-concept/self-esteem, but self-concept is a better predictor of being a low-track or high-track student, it would appear that there is some intervening variable. James (1890) states that the intervening variable is personal expectations. His formula is:
Self-esteem = Success / Pretensions.
That is, increasing self-esteem results when success is improved relative to expectations. Bandura (1997) states that one's self-efficacy is one of the best predictions of successful achievement. He also states that one's mastery experiences related to success is the major influence on one's self-efficacy. As self-efficacy and self-esteem are both constructed by one's conscious reflections, it would appear that educators and parents should provide experiences that students can master rather than attempting to boost self-esteem directly through other means.
An interesting corollary to this equation is that success is limited by expectations and self-esteem:
Success = Pretensions * Self-esteem.
This equation states that success, especially the limits of one's success, can be improved by increasing expectations and/or self-esteem. However, as noted by Gage and Berliner (1992), the research on the relationship between self-esteem/self-concept and school achievement suggests that measures of general or even academic self-concept are not significantly related to school achievement. It is at the level of very specific subjects (e.g., reading, mathematics, science) that there is a relationship between self-concept/self-esteem and academic success. Given the above formula, this suggests that success in a particular subject area is not really changing one's self-concept (knowledge of one's self) or even self-esteem (one's subjective evaluation of one's value or worth), but rather is impacting one's expecation about future success based on one's past experience.
Seligman's (1996) work on explanatory style suggests that the intervening variable connecting self-esteem and achievement is the student's level of "optimism" or the tendency to see the world as a benevolent (good things will probably happen) or malevolent (bad things will probably happen).
Some additional "self" terms are self-direction (Smith, 2004) and self-determination (Ryan & Deci, 2000; the extent to which one's aspirations, dreams, and goals are self-selected), self-regulation (Bandura, 1997; Behncke, 2003; one's guidance of one's goal-directed thinking, attitudes, and behavior), and self-transcendence (Polanyi, 1970; Frankl, 1963; going beyond or above the limitations of one's ego; meaningful connections to others, nature, universe, Creator, etc.). My view is that we need to address all of these constructions in a holistic manner if we are to prepare our children and youth for successful adulthood (Huitt, 2004).
References
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
Behncke, L. (2002). Self-regulation: A brief review. Athletic Insight, 14(1). Retrieved November 2004, from http://www.athleticinsight.com/Vol4Iss1/SelfRegulation.htm
Brigham, J. (1986). Social psychology. Boston: Little, Brown & Co.
Byrne, B. (1990). Self-concept and academic achievement: Investigating their importance as discriminators of academic track membership in high school. Canadian Journal of Education, 15(2), 173-182.
Franken, R. (1994). Human motivation (3rd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.
Frankl, V. (1963). (I. Lasch, Trans.). Man's search for meaning: An introduction to logotherapy. New York: Washington Square Press
Gage, N., & Berliner, D. (1992). Educational psychology (5th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Hamachek, D. (1995). Self-concept and school achievement: Interaction dynamics and a tool for assessing the self-concept component. Journal of Counseling & Development, 73(4), 419-425.
Huitt, W. (2004, October 29). Becoming a Brilliant Star: An introduction. Presentation at the Forum for Integrated Education and Educational Reform sponsored by the Council for Global Integrative Education, Santa Cruz, CA. Available on at http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/brilstar/chapters/BrilStarintro.pdf
James, W. (1890). Principles of psychology. New York: Henry Holt.
Marsh, H. (1992 ). The content specificity of relations between academic self-concept and achievement: An extension of the Marsh/Shavelson model. ERIC NO: ED349315.
Polanyi, M. (1970). Transcendence and self-transcendence. Soundings, 53(1), 88-94. Retrieved November 2004, from http://www.compilerpress.atfreeweb.com/Anno%20Polanyi%20Transcendence%201970.htm
Purkey, W. (1988). An overview of self-concept theory for counselors. ERIC Clearinghouse on Counseling and Personnel Services, Ann Arbor, Mich. (An ERIC/CAPS Digest: ED304630)
Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68-78. Retrieved November 2004, from http://psych.rochester.edu/SDT/measures/documents/2000RyanDeciSDT.pdf
Seligman, M. (1996) The optimistic child: How learned optimism protects children from depression. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
Smith, M. (2004). Self-direction. The Encyclopedia of Informal Education. Retrieved November 2004, from http://www.infed.org/biblio/b-selfdr.htm
"the totality of a complex, organized, and dynamic system of learned beliefs, attitudes and opinions that each person holds to be true about his or her personal existence" (Purkey, 1988).
Self-esteem is the affective or emotional aspect of self and generally refers to how we feel about or how we value ourselves (one's self-worth). Self-concept can also refer to the general idea we have of ourselves and self-esteem can refer to particular measures about components of self-concept. Some authors even use the two terms interchangeably.
Franken (1994) states that
"there is a great deal of research which shows that the self-concept is, perhaps, the basis for all motivated behavior. It is the self-concept that gives rise to possible selves, and it is possible selves that create the motivation for behavior" (p. 443).
This supports the idea that one's paradigm or world view and one's relationship to that view provide the boundaries and circumstances within which we develop our vision about possibilities. This is one of the major issues facing children and youth today (Huitt, 2004).
Franken (1994) suggests that self-concept is related to self-esteem in that
"people who have good self-esteem have a clearly differentiated self-concept.... When people know themselves they can maximize outcomes because they know what they can and cannot do" (p. 439).
It would seem, then, that one way to impact self-esteem is to obey the somewhat outworn cliche of "Know thyself."
We develop and maintain our self-concept through the process of taking action and then reflecting on what we have done and what others tell us about what we have done. We reflect on what we have done and can do in comparison to our expectations and the expectations of others and to the characteristics and accomplishments of others (Brigham, 1986; James, 1890). That is, self-concept is not innate, but is developed or constructed by the individual through interaction with the environment and reflecting on that interaction. This dynamic aspect of self-concept (and, by corollary, self-esteem) is important because it indicates that it can be modified or changed. Franken (1994) states
"there is a growing body of research which indicates that it is possible to change the self-concept. Self-change is not something that people can will but rather it depends on the process of self-reflection. Through self-reflection, people often come to view themselves in a new, more powerful way, and it is through this new, more powerful way of viewing the self that people can develop possible selves" (p. 443).
There are a several different components of self-concept: physical, academic, social, and transpersonal. The physical aspect of self-concept relates to that which is concrete: what we look like, our sex, height, weight, etc.; what kind of clothes we wear; what kind of car we drive; what kind of home we live in; and so forth. Our academic self-concept relates to how well we do in school or how well we learn. There are two levels: a general academic self-concept of how good we are overall and a set of specific content-related self-concepts that describe how good we are in math, science, language arts, social science, etc. The social self-concept describes how we relate to other people and the transpersonal self-concept describes how we relate to the supernatural or unknowns.
Marsh (1992) showed that the relationship of self-concept to school achievement is very specific. General self-concept and non-academic aspects of self-concept are not related to academic work; general academic achievement measures are related moderately to academic success. Specific measures of subject-related self-concepts are highly related to success in that content area.
Using linear discriminant analysis, Byrne (1990) showed that academic self-concept was more effective than was academic achievement in differentiating between low-track and high-track students. Hamachek (1995) also asserts that self-concept and school achievement and school achievement are related. The major issue is the direction of the relationship: does self-concept produce achievement or does achievement produce self-concept. Gage and Berliner (1992) state
"the evidence is accumulating, however, to indicate that level of school success, particularly over many years, predicts level of regard of self and one's own ability (Bridgeman & Shipman, 1978; Kifer, 1975); whereas level of self-esteem does not predict level of school achievement. The implication is that teachers need to concentrate on the academic successes and failures of their students. It is the student's history of success and failure that gives them the information with which to assess themselves" (p. 159).
If academic achievement leads to self-concept/self-esteem, but self-concept is a better predictor of being a low-track or high-track student, it would appear that there is some intervening variable. James (1890) states that the intervening variable is personal expectations. His formula is:
Self-esteem = Success / Pretensions.
That is, increasing self-esteem results when success is improved relative to expectations. Bandura (1997) states that one's self-efficacy is one of the best predictions of successful achievement. He also states that one's mastery experiences related to success is the major influence on one's self-efficacy. As self-efficacy and self-esteem are both constructed by one's conscious reflections, it would appear that educators and parents should provide experiences that students can master rather than attempting to boost self-esteem directly through other means.
An interesting corollary to this equation is that success is limited by expectations and self-esteem:
Success = Pretensions * Self-esteem.
This equation states that success, especially the limits of one's success, can be improved by increasing expectations and/or self-esteem. However, as noted by Gage and Berliner (1992), the research on the relationship between self-esteem/self-concept and school achievement suggests that measures of general or even academic self-concept are not significantly related to school achievement. It is at the level of very specific subjects (e.g., reading, mathematics, science) that there is a relationship between self-concept/self-esteem and academic success. Given the above formula, this suggests that success in a particular subject area is not really changing one's self-concept (knowledge of one's self) or even self-esteem (one's subjective evaluation of one's value or worth), but rather is impacting one's expecation about future success based on one's past experience.
Seligman's (1996) work on explanatory style suggests that the intervening variable connecting self-esteem and achievement is the student's level of "optimism" or the tendency to see the world as a benevolent (good things will probably happen) or malevolent (bad things will probably happen).
Some additional "self" terms are self-direction (Smith, 2004) and self-determination (Ryan & Deci, 2000; the extent to which one's aspirations, dreams, and goals are self-selected), self-regulation (Bandura, 1997; Behncke, 2003; one's guidance of one's goal-directed thinking, attitudes, and behavior), and self-transcendence (Polanyi, 1970; Frankl, 1963; going beyond or above the limitations of one's ego; meaningful connections to others, nature, universe, Creator, etc.). My view is that we need to address all of these constructions in a holistic manner if we are to prepare our children and youth for successful adulthood (Huitt, 2004).
References
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
Behncke, L. (2002). Self-regulation: A brief review. Athletic Insight, 14(1). Retrieved November 2004, from http://www.athleticinsight.com/Vol4Iss1/SelfRegulation.htm
Brigham, J. (1986). Social psychology. Boston: Little, Brown & Co.
Byrne, B. (1990). Self-concept and academic achievement: Investigating their importance as discriminators of academic track membership in high school. Canadian Journal of Education, 15(2), 173-182.
Franken, R. (1994). Human motivation (3rd ed.). Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Publishing Co.
Frankl, V. (1963). (I. Lasch, Trans.). Man's search for meaning: An introduction to logotherapy. New York: Washington Square Press
Gage, N., & Berliner, D. (1992). Educational psychology (5th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Hamachek, D. (1995). Self-concept and school achievement: Interaction dynamics and a tool for assessing the self-concept component. Journal of Counseling & Development, 73(4), 419-425.
Huitt, W. (2004, October 29). Becoming a Brilliant Star: An introduction. Presentation at the Forum for Integrated Education and Educational Reform sponsored by the Council for Global Integrative Education, Santa Cruz, CA. Available on at http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/brilstar/chapters/BrilStarintro.pdf
James, W. (1890). Principles of psychology. New York: Henry Holt.
Marsh, H. (1992 ). The content specificity of relations between academic self-concept and achievement: An extension of the Marsh/Shavelson model. ERIC NO: ED349315.
Polanyi, M. (1970). Transcendence and self-transcendence. Soundings, 53(1), 88-94. Retrieved November 2004, from http://www.compilerpress.atfreeweb.com/Anno%20Polanyi%20Transcendence%201970.htm
Purkey, W. (1988). An overview of self-concept theory for counselors. ERIC Clearinghouse on Counseling and Personnel Services, Ann Arbor, Mich. (An ERIC/CAPS Digest: ED304630)
Ryan, R., & Deci, E. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68-78. Retrieved November 2004, from http://psych.rochester.edu/SDT/measures/documents/2000RyanDeciSDT.pdf
Seligman, M. (1996) The optimistic child: How learned optimism protects children from depression. New York: Houghton Mifflin.
Smith, M. (2004). Self-direction. The Encyclopedia of Informal Education. Retrieved November 2004, from http://www.infed.org/biblio/b-selfdr.htm
SELF CONSEPT: Assessment
Self-concept is one of the most popular ideas in psychological literature. The ERIC database includes over 6000 entries under the "self-concept" descriptor. Unfortunately, self-concept is also an illusive and often poorly defined construct. Reviews of literature have found at least 15 different "self" terms used by various authors (Strein, 1993). Terms such as "self-concept," "self-esteem," "self-worth," "self-acceptance," and so on are often used interchangeably and inconsistently, when they may relate to different ideas about how people view themselves. Accordingly, definition is the first consideration in the assessment of self-concept. Before attempting to assess self-concept, counseling practitioners or researchers must first clarify for themselves what they mean by "self-concept" and then choose a method or instrument consistent with that definition.
GLOBAL VERSUS DOMAIN-SPECIFIC MODELS
Perhaps the most important distinction that differentiates various conceptualizations is whether self-concept is viewed as an overarching, global characteristic of the person, or as a set of self-evaluations specific to different domains of behavior. The global view, sometimes conceptualized as "self-esteem" or "general self-concept," is the older and probably the more common view among counselors and therapists (Strein, 1993). Items comprising the "Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale" (Rosenberg, 1965) capture the essence of the global self-concept idea, and continue to be used frequently in research. "The Piers-Harris Children's Self-Concept Scale" (Piers, 1984) and the "Tennessee Self Concept Scale" (Fitts, 1991), both commonly used instruments, are also rooted in the global tradition, although each also provides domain-specific scales.
In contrast to the traditional model of global self-concept, multifaceted models stress self-evaluations of specific competencies or attributes, for example, academic self-concept, physical self-concept, and so on. Although some theoretical models are hierarchical, with global self-concept at the apex, most of these models stress the distinctiveness of various self-concept facets. Extensive empirical research in developmental and educational psychology over the past 15 years has strongly supported the multifaceted view. Consistent with research findings, most published self-concept measures now emphasize domain-specific self-concepts. The clearest example of measures based on the multifaceted view is Marsh's (1992) set of scales ("Self-Description Questionnaire I, II, or III") covering ages seven to young adult.
METHODS OF SELF-CONCEPT ASSESSMENT
Self-concept is inherently phenomenological, that is, it refers to the person's own view of him- or herself. In fact, one leading scholar in the field (Wylie, 1974) has argued that comparisons to external events are not particularly relevant in the assessment of self-concept. Accordingly, self-concept is almost always assessed through self-report. Four commonly used self-report methods are described below (Burns, 1979).
"Rating scales" are the most frequently used type of instrument. Most of the currently published instruments are of this type. Rating scales typically are composed of a set of statements to which the respondent expresses a degree of agreement or disagreement. Five- and seven-point Likert scales are common. Typical items might be "I am good at math" or "On the whole, I am satisfied with myself." Responses are then summed to form a score for a specific scale (e.g., math self-concept) or a measure of global self-concept.
"Checklists" involve having respondents check all of the adjectives that they believe apply to themselves. Because the adjectives have been assigned to a category, such as "self-favorability," based on either rational or empirical criteria, the person's choices can be tabulated to form a self-concept measure. Checklists provide interesting qualitative information, but have two shortcomings. First, responses are dichotomous (yes/no); there is no way for the respondent to indicate degree of agreement. Second, the categorization of the adjectives is done by an external party, without knowing what exact meaning the adjective has for the individual.
"Q-sorts" have been used extensively in self-concept research but are seldom used by practicing counselors because they are time-consuming and require considerable commitment from the client. In brief, the Q-sort technique involves having the person sort cards that contain self-descriptors (e.g., "I am strong") into a pre-defined number of piles ranging from "most like me" to "least like me." Typically, 100 or more cards would be used and each pile can contain only a pre-determined number of cards. Both quantitative and qualitative methods can be used to evaluate the results of the sorting task.
In "free-response" methods respondents typically complete partial statements (e.g., I feel best when...). Although some sets of these sentence-completion tasks have been published formally, complete with quantitative scoring schemes, responses more frequently are evaluated qualitatively. Free-response methods are seldom used in self-concept research but have favor with many counselors because the open-ended, qualitative nature of the task lends itself to facilitating discussion with the client. The rather low reliability of such methods, however, argues against interpreting the results as a "measure" of self-concept.
Although most of the self-concept measures compare the person's response against some set of norms, one researcher (Brahm, 1981) successfully used a "criterion-referenced approach" in which the child's self-efficacy beliefs were assessed repeatedly in reference to an external criterion of accuracy. Brahm argues that this assessment approach integrates self-concept with mastery learning more effectively than does the traditional norm-referenced self-concept scale. Although this is a promising idea, it remains undeveloped.
CONSIDERATIONS IN THE ASSESSMENT OF SELF-CONCEPT
Counselors or others who wish to assess self-concept must keep several considerations in mind, including demand characteristics of self-report measure, technical adequacy of the assessment procedure, and whether the assessment is being used for research or clinical purposes. Self-report measures make several requirements of the respondent (Burns, 1979). First, the person must have a sufficient level of self-awareness. Young children may lack confidence but may not be consciously aware of their own perceptions. Second, self-report measures also require substantial verbal competence, a skill that can not be assumed. Third, even children are aware that some responses are more socially acceptable than others. The accuracy of self-reports is often decreased by this "social desirability" response tendency.
Technical quality of self-concept instruments demands serious consideration. Reliability and validity coefficients for personality tests are frequently considerably lower than for performance measures, such as those for cognitive ability. For some of the older self-concept measures internal consistency reliabilities, especially for subscales, are only in the .70 range. Some newer instruments, however, attain internal consistency coefficients in the .90's. To help in choosing a test, prospective test users should consult technical manuals and test reviews carefully before making a final choice.
Finally, most empirically scored self-concept measures were developed more for research than for clinical use. Normative samples are seldom anywhere near as useful as for tests of achievement or ability. Information relating test scores to problem behavior is virtually absent. Counselors should use scores from self-concept measures very cautiously when working with individual clients.
REFERENCES
Brahm, N. (1981). "The assessment of self concepts of educational achievement by a criterion referenced approach." (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 235 184)
Burns, R. B. (1979). "The self-concept in theory, measurement, development and behaviour." London: Longman.
Fitts, W. H. (1991). "Tennessee Self Concept Scale, Manual." Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
Marsh, H. W. (1992). "Self-Description Questionnaire II: Manual." Macarthur, Australia: Publication Unit, Faculty of Education, University of Western Sydney.
Piers, E. V. (1984). "Piers-Harris Children's Self-Concept Scale: Revised Manual." Los Angles, CA: Western Psychological Services.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). "Society and adolescent self-image." Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Strein, W. (1993). Advances in research on academic self-concept: Implications for school psychology. "School Psychology Review," 22, 273-284.
Wylie, R. C. (1974). "The self-concept, Revised edition." Volume 1. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
GLOBAL VERSUS DOMAIN-SPECIFIC MODELS
Perhaps the most important distinction that differentiates various conceptualizations is whether self-concept is viewed as an overarching, global characteristic of the person, or as a set of self-evaluations specific to different domains of behavior. The global view, sometimes conceptualized as "self-esteem" or "general self-concept," is the older and probably the more common view among counselors and therapists (Strein, 1993). Items comprising the "Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale" (Rosenberg, 1965) capture the essence of the global self-concept idea, and continue to be used frequently in research. "The Piers-Harris Children's Self-Concept Scale" (Piers, 1984) and the "Tennessee Self Concept Scale" (Fitts, 1991), both commonly used instruments, are also rooted in the global tradition, although each also provides domain-specific scales.
In contrast to the traditional model of global self-concept, multifaceted models stress self-evaluations of specific competencies or attributes, for example, academic self-concept, physical self-concept, and so on. Although some theoretical models are hierarchical, with global self-concept at the apex, most of these models stress the distinctiveness of various self-concept facets. Extensive empirical research in developmental and educational psychology over the past 15 years has strongly supported the multifaceted view. Consistent with research findings, most published self-concept measures now emphasize domain-specific self-concepts. The clearest example of measures based on the multifaceted view is Marsh's (1992) set of scales ("Self-Description Questionnaire I, II, or III") covering ages seven to young adult.
METHODS OF SELF-CONCEPT ASSESSMENT
Self-concept is inherently phenomenological, that is, it refers to the person's own view of him- or herself. In fact, one leading scholar in the field (Wylie, 1974) has argued that comparisons to external events are not particularly relevant in the assessment of self-concept. Accordingly, self-concept is almost always assessed through self-report. Four commonly used self-report methods are described below (Burns, 1979).
"Rating scales" are the most frequently used type of instrument. Most of the currently published instruments are of this type. Rating scales typically are composed of a set of statements to which the respondent expresses a degree of agreement or disagreement. Five- and seven-point Likert scales are common. Typical items might be "I am good at math" or "On the whole, I am satisfied with myself." Responses are then summed to form a score for a specific scale (e.g., math self-concept) or a measure of global self-concept.
"Checklists" involve having respondents check all of the adjectives that they believe apply to themselves. Because the adjectives have been assigned to a category, such as "self-favorability," based on either rational or empirical criteria, the person's choices can be tabulated to form a self-concept measure. Checklists provide interesting qualitative information, but have two shortcomings. First, responses are dichotomous (yes/no); there is no way for the respondent to indicate degree of agreement. Second, the categorization of the adjectives is done by an external party, without knowing what exact meaning the adjective has for the individual.
"Q-sorts" have been used extensively in self-concept research but are seldom used by practicing counselors because they are time-consuming and require considerable commitment from the client. In brief, the Q-sort technique involves having the person sort cards that contain self-descriptors (e.g., "I am strong") into a pre-defined number of piles ranging from "most like me" to "least like me." Typically, 100 or more cards would be used and each pile can contain only a pre-determined number of cards. Both quantitative and qualitative methods can be used to evaluate the results of the sorting task.
In "free-response" methods respondents typically complete partial statements (e.g., I feel best when...). Although some sets of these sentence-completion tasks have been published formally, complete with quantitative scoring schemes, responses more frequently are evaluated qualitatively. Free-response methods are seldom used in self-concept research but have favor with many counselors because the open-ended, qualitative nature of the task lends itself to facilitating discussion with the client. The rather low reliability of such methods, however, argues against interpreting the results as a "measure" of self-concept.
Although most of the self-concept measures compare the person's response against some set of norms, one researcher (Brahm, 1981) successfully used a "criterion-referenced approach" in which the child's self-efficacy beliefs were assessed repeatedly in reference to an external criterion of accuracy. Brahm argues that this assessment approach integrates self-concept with mastery learning more effectively than does the traditional norm-referenced self-concept scale. Although this is a promising idea, it remains undeveloped.
CONSIDERATIONS IN THE ASSESSMENT OF SELF-CONCEPT
Counselors or others who wish to assess self-concept must keep several considerations in mind, including demand characteristics of self-report measure, technical adequacy of the assessment procedure, and whether the assessment is being used for research or clinical purposes. Self-report measures make several requirements of the respondent (Burns, 1979). First, the person must have a sufficient level of self-awareness. Young children may lack confidence but may not be consciously aware of their own perceptions. Second, self-report measures also require substantial verbal competence, a skill that can not be assumed. Third, even children are aware that some responses are more socially acceptable than others. The accuracy of self-reports is often decreased by this "social desirability" response tendency.
Technical quality of self-concept instruments demands serious consideration. Reliability and validity coefficients for personality tests are frequently considerably lower than for performance measures, such as those for cognitive ability. For some of the older self-concept measures internal consistency reliabilities, especially for subscales, are only in the .70 range. Some newer instruments, however, attain internal consistency coefficients in the .90's. To help in choosing a test, prospective test users should consult technical manuals and test reviews carefully before making a final choice.
Finally, most empirically scored self-concept measures were developed more for research than for clinical use. Normative samples are seldom anywhere near as useful as for tests of achievement or ability. Information relating test scores to problem behavior is virtually absent. Counselors should use scores from self-concept measures very cautiously when working with individual clients.
REFERENCES
Brahm, N. (1981). "The assessment of self concepts of educational achievement by a criterion referenced approach." (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 235 184)
Burns, R. B. (1979). "The self-concept in theory, measurement, development and behaviour." London: Longman.
Fitts, W. H. (1991). "Tennessee Self Concept Scale, Manual." Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services.
Marsh, H. W. (1992). "Self-Description Questionnaire II: Manual." Macarthur, Australia: Publication Unit, Faculty of Education, University of Western Sydney.
Piers, E. V. (1984). "Piers-Harris Children's Self-Concept Scale: Revised Manual." Los Angles, CA: Western Psychological Services.
Rosenberg, M. (1965). "Society and adolescent self-image." Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Strein, W. (1993). Advances in research on academic self-concept: Implications for school psychology. "School Psychology Review," 22, 273-284.
Wylie, R. C. (1974). "The self-concept, Revised edition." Volume 1. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press.
SELF CONSEPT: Basic Comsumption
Many of the successes and failures that people experience in many areas of life are closely related to the ways that they have learned to view themselves and their relationships with others. It is also becoming clear that self-concept has at least three major qualities of interest to counselors: (1) it is learned, (2) it is organized, and (3) it is dynamic. Each of these qualities, with corollaries, follow.
'Self-concept is learned'. As far as we know, no one is born with a self-concept. It gradually emerges in the early months of life and is shaped and reshaped through repeated perceived experiences, particularly with significant others. The fact that self-concept is learned has some important implications:
Because self-concept does not appear to be instinctive, but is a social product developed through experience, it possesses relatively boundless potential for development and actualization.
Because of previous experiences and present perceptions, individuals may perceive themselves in ways different from the ways others see them.
Individuals perceive different aspects of themselves at different times with varying degrees of clarity. Therefore, inner focusing is a valuable tool for counseling.
Any experience which is inconsistent with one's self-concept may be perceived as a threat, and the more of these experiences there are, the more rigidly self-concept is organized to maintain and protect itself. When a person is unable to get rid of perceived inconsistencies, emotional problems arise.
Faulty thinking patterns, such as dichotomous reasoning (dividing everything in terms of opposites or extremes) or overgeneralizing (making sweeping conclusions based on little information) create negative interpretations of oneself.
Self-concept is organized. Most researchers agree that self-concept has a generally stable quality that is characterized by orderliness and harmony. Each person maintains countless perceptions regarding one's personal existence, and each perception is orchestrated with all the others. It is this generally stable and organized quality of self-concept that gives consistency to the personality. This organized quality of self-concept has corollaries.
Self-concept requires consistency, stability, and tends to resist change. If self-concept changed readily, the individual would lack a consistent and dependable personality.
The more central a particular belief is to one's self-concept, the more resistant one is to changing that belief.
At the heart of self-concept is the self-as-doer, the "I," which is distinct from the self-as-object, the various "me's." This allows the person to reflect on past events, analyze present perceptions, and shape future experiences.
Basic perceptions of oneself are quite stable, so change takes time.
Perceived success and failure affect self-concept. Failure in a highly regarded area lowers evaluations in all other areas as well. Success in a prized area raises evaluations in other seemingly unrelated areas.
Self-concept is dynamic. To understand the active nature of self-concept, it helps to imagine it as a gyrocompass: a continuously active system that dependably points to the "true north" of a person's perceived existence. This guidance system not only shapes the ways a person views oneself, others, and the world, but it also serves to direct action and enables each person to take a consistent "stance" in life. Rather than viewing self-concept as the cause of behavior, it is better understood as the gyrocompass of human personality, providing consistency in personality and direction for behavior. The dynamic quality of self-concept also carries corollaries.
The world and the things in it are not just perceived; they are perceived in relation to one's self-concept.
Self-concept development is a continuous process. In the healthy personality there is constant assimilation of new ideas and expulsion of old ideas throughout life.
Individuals strive to behave in ways that are in keeping with their self-concepts, no matter how helpful or hurtful to oneself or others.
Self-concept usually takes precedence over the physical body. Individuals will often sacrifice physical comfort and safety for emotional satisfaction.
Self-concept continuously guards itself against loss of self-esteem, for it is this loss that produces feelings of anxiety.
If self-concept must constantly defend itself from assault, growth opportunities are limited.
'Self-concept is learned'. As far as we know, no one is born with a self-concept. It gradually emerges in the early months of life and is shaped and reshaped through repeated perceived experiences, particularly with significant others. The fact that self-concept is learned has some important implications:
Because self-concept does not appear to be instinctive, but is a social product developed through experience, it possesses relatively boundless potential for development and actualization.
Because of previous experiences and present perceptions, individuals may perceive themselves in ways different from the ways others see them.
Individuals perceive different aspects of themselves at different times with varying degrees of clarity. Therefore, inner focusing is a valuable tool for counseling.
Any experience which is inconsistent with one's self-concept may be perceived as a threat, and the more of these experiences there are, the more rigidly self-concept is organized to maintain and protect itself. When a person is unable to get rid of perceived inconsistencies, emotional problems arise.
Faulty thinking patterns, such as dichotomous reasoning (dividing everything in terms of opposites or extremes) or overgeneralizing (making sweeping conclusions based on little information) create negative interpretations of oneself.
Self-concept is organized. Most researchers agree that self-concept has a generally stable quality that is characterized by orderliness and harmony. Each person maintains countless perceptions regarding one's personal existence, and each perception is orchestrated with all the others. It is this generally stable and organized quality of self-concept that gives consistency to the personality. This organized quality of self-concept has corollaries.
Self-concept requires consistency, stability, and tends to resist change. If self-concept changed readily, the individual would lack a consistent and dependable personality.
The more central a particular belief is to one's self-concept, the more resistant one is to changing that belief.
At the heart of self-concept is the self-as-doer, the "I," which is distinct from the self-as-object, the various "me's." This allows the person to reflect on past events, analyze present perceptions, and shape future experiences.
Basic perceptions of oneself are quite stable, so change takes time.
Perceived success and failure affect self-concept. Failure in a highly regarded area lowers evaluations in all other areas as well. Success in a prized area raises evaluations in other seemingly unrelated areas.
Self-concept is dynamic. To understand the active nature of self-concept, it helps to imagine it as a gyrocompass: a continuously active system that dependably points to the "true north" of a person's perceived existence. This guidance system not only shapes the ways a person views oneself, others, and the world, but it also serves to direct action and enables each person to take a consistent "stance" in life. Rather than viewing self-concept as the cause of behavior, it is better understood as the gyrocompass of human personality, providing consistency in personality and direction for behavior. The dynamic quality of self-concept also carries corollaries.
The world and the things in it are not just perceived; they are perceived in relation to one's self-concept.
Self-concept development is a continuous process. In the healthy personality there is constant assimilation of new ideas and expulsion of old ideas throughout life.
Individuals strive to behave in ways that are in keeping with their self-concepts, no matter how helpful or hurtful to oneself or others.
Self-concept usually takes precedence over the physical body. Individuals will often sacrifice physical comfort and safety for emotional satisfaction.
Self-concept continuously guards itself against loss of self-esteem, for it is this loss that produces feelings of anxiety.
If self-concept must constantly defend itself from assault, growth opportunities are limited.
Sunday, December 16, 2007
SELF-CONCEPT: HISTORY
History
A milestone in human reflection about the non-physical inner self came in 1644, when René Descartes wrote Principles of Philosophy. Descartes proposed that doubt was a principal tool of disciplined inquiry, yet he could not doubt that he doubted. He reasoned that if he doubted, he was thinking, and therefore he must exist. Thus existence depended upon perception.
A second milestone in the development of self-concept theory was the writing of Sigmund Freud (1900) who gave us new understanding of the importance of internal mental processes. While Freud and many of his followers hesitated to make self-concept a primary psychological unit in their theories, Freud's daughter Anna (1946) gave central importance to ego development and self-interpretation.
Self-concept theory has always had a strong influence on the emerging profession of counseling. Prescott Lecky (1945) contributed the notion that self-consistency is a primary motivating force in human behavior. Raimy (1948) introduced measures of self-concept in counseling interviews and argued that psychotherapy is basically a process of altering the ways that individuals see themselves.
By far the most influential and eloquent voice in self-concept theory was that of Carl Rogers (1947) who introduced an entire system of helping built around the importance of the self. In Rogers' view, the self is the central ingredient in human personality and personal adjustment. Rogers described the self as a social product, developing out of interpersonal relationships and striving for consistency. He maintained that there is a basic human need for positive regard both from others and from oneself. He also believed that in every person there is a tendency towards self-actualization and development so long as this is permitted and encouraged by an inviting environment (Purkey & Schmidt, 1987).
While most self-concept theorists continued to write and conduct research during the 1970s and 1980s, general interest in self-concept declined. In a recent article explaining the likely causes for the decline of "humanistic" education, Patterson (1987) presents reasons for the decline of interest in self-concept as well. He offers four likely causes:
* A cornucopia of contrived games, gimmicks, and techniques that were introduced and controlled by unprepared professionals.
* A national mood of "back to basics" in education prevailed where concern for the emotional needs of students was viewed as inimical to academic excellence.
* Poor judgment by counselors and teachers in selecting suitable materials for values clarification programs resulted in public opposition to any attempt to introduce values in school.
* Strong opposition by those who objected to any consideration of personal development of students because they believed it to be secular humanism and, therefore, an effort to undermine religion.
Fortunately, there is a new awareness on the part of both the public and professionals that self-concept cannot be ignored if we are to successfully address such nagging problems as drug and alcohol abuse, drop-out rates, dysfunctional families, and other concerns. In addition to this growing awareness, new ways are being developed to strengthen self-concepts. For example, research by cognitive theorists (McAdam, 1986; Ryan, Short & Weed, 1986) are demonstrating that negative self-talk leads to irrational thinking regarding oneself and the world
A milestone in human reflection about the non-physical inner self came in 1644, when René Descartes wrote Principles of Philosophy. Descartes proposed that doubt was a principal tool of disciplined inquiry, yet he could not doubt that he doubted. He reasoned that if he doubted, he was thinking, and therefore he must exist. Thus existence depended upon perception.
A second milestone in the development of self-concept theory was the writing of Sigmund Freud (1900) who gave us new understanding of the importance of internal mental processes. While Freud and many of his followers hesitated to make self-concept a primary psychological unit in their theories, Freud's daughter Anna (1946) gave central importance to ego development and self-interpretation.
Self-concept theory has always had a strong influence on the emerging profession of counseling. Prescott Lecky (1945) contributed the notion that self-consistency is a primary motivating force in human behavior. Raimy (1948) introduced measures of self-concept in counseling interviews and argued that psychotherapy is basically a process of altering the ways that individuals see themselves.
By far the most influential and eloquent voice in self-concept theory was that of Carl Rogers (1947) who introduced an entire system of helping built around the importance of the self. In Rogers' view, the self is the central ingredient in human personality and personal adjustment. Rogers described the self as a social product, developing out of interpersonal relationships and striving for consistency. He maintained that there is a basic human need for positive regard both from others and from oneself. He also believed that in every person there is a tendency towards self-actualization and development so long as this is permitted and encouraged by an inviting environment (Purkey & Schmidt, 1987).
While most self-concept theorists continued to write and conduct research during the 1970s and 1980s, general interest in self-concept declined. In a recent article explaining the likely causes for the decline of "humanistic" education, Patterson (1987) presents reasons for the decline of interest in self-concept as well. He offers four likely causes:
* A cornucopia of contrived games, gimmicks, and techniques that were introduced and controlled by unprepared professionals.
* A national mood of "back to basics" in education prevailed where concern for the emotional needs of students was viewed as inimical to academic excellence.
* Poor judgment by counselors and teachers in selecting suitable materials for values clarification programs resulted in public opposition to any attempt to introduce values in school.
* Strong opposition by those who objected to any consideration of personal development of students because they believed it to be secular humanism and, therefore, an effort to undermine religion.
Fortunately, there is a new awareness on the part of both the public and professionals that self-concept cannot be ignored if we are to successfully address such nagging problems as drug and alcohol abuse, drop-out rates, dysfunctional families, and other concerns. In addition to this growing awareness, new ways are being developed to strengthen self-concepts. For example, research by cognitive theorists (McAdam, 1986; Ryan, Short & Weed, 1986) are demonstrating that negative self-talk leads to irrational thinking regarding oneself and the world
SELF-CONCEPT
Self-concept or self identity is the mental and conceptual understanding and persistent regard that sentient beings hold for their own existence. In other words, it is the sum total of a being's knowledge and understanding of his or her self. The self-concept is different from self-consciousness, which is an awareness or preoccupation with one's self. Components of the self-concept include physical, psychological, and social attributes, which can be influenced by the individual's attitudes, habits, beliefs and ideas. These components and attributes can not be condensed to the general concepts of self-image and the self-esteem.
Friday, October 5, 2007
MOTIVATION THEORIES
Drive Reduction Theories
There are a number of drive theories. The Drive Reduction Theory grows out of the concept that we have certain biological needs, such as hunger. As time passes the strength of the drive increases as it is not satisfied. Then as we satisfy that drive by fulfilling its desire, such as eating, the drive's strength is reduced. It is based on the theories of Freud and the idea of feedback control systems, such as a thermostat.
There are several problems, however, that leave the validity of the Drive Reduction Theory open for debate. The first problem is that it does not explain how Secondary Reinforcers reduce drive. For example, money does not satisfy any biological or psychological need but reduces drive on a regular basis through a pay check second-order conditioning. Secondly, if the drive reduction theory held true we would not be able to explain how a hungry human being can prepare a meal without eating the food before they finished cooking it.
However, when comparing this to a real life situation such as preparing food, one does get hungrier as the food is being made (drive increases), and after the food has been consumed the drive decreases. The only reason the food does not get eaten before is the human element of restraint and has nothing to do with drive theory. Also, the food will either be nicer after it is cooked, or it wont be edible at all before it is cooked.
Cognitive dissonance theory
Main article: Cognitive dissonance
Suggested by Leon Festinger, this occurs when an individual experiences some degree of mental discomfort resulting from an incompatibility between two cognitions. For example, a consumer may seek to reassure himself regarding a purchase, feeling that another decision may have been, in retrospect, preferable.
Another example of cognitive dissonance is when a belief and a behavior are in conflict. A person may believe smoking is bad for one's health and yet continues to smoke.
Affective-Arousal Theories
Need Achievement Theory
Main article: David McClelland
David McClelland’s achievement motivation theory envisages that a person has need for three things but people differ in degree in which the various needs influence their behavior: Need for achievement, Need for power, and Need for affiliation
Interests Theory
Main article: Holland Codes
Holland Codes are used in the assessment of interests as in Vocational Preference Inventory (VPI; Holland, 1985). One way to look at interests is that if a person has a very strong interest in one of the 6 Holland areas, then obtaining outcomes in that area will be very strongly reinforcing relative to obtaining outcomes in areas of weak interest.
Need Theories
Need Hierarchy Theory
Main article: Hierarchy of needs
Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of human needs theory is the most widely discussed theory of motivation.
The theory can be summarized as thus:
Human beings have wants and desires which influence their behaviour; only unsatisfied needs can influence behavior, satisfied needs cannot.
Since needs are many, they are arranged in order of importance, from the basic to the complex.
The person advances to the next level of needs only after the lower level need is at least minimally satisfied.
The further the progress up the hierarchy, the more individuality, humanness and psychological health a person will show.
The needs, listed from basic (lowest, earliest) to most complex (highest, latest) are as follows:
Physiological
Safety and security
Social
Self esteem
Self actualization
Herzberg’s two factor theory
Main article: Frederick Herzberg
Frederick Herzberg's two factor theory, concludes that certain factors in the workplace result in job satisfaction, while others do not, but if absent lead to dissatisfaction.
He distinguished between:
Motivators; (e.g. challenging work, recognition, responsibility) which give positive satisfaction, and
Hygiene factors; (e.g. status, job security, salary and fringe benefits) which do not motivate if present, but if absent will result in demotivation.
The name Hygiene factors is used because, like hygiene, the presence will not make you healthier, but absence can cause health deterioration.
The theory is sometimes called the "Motivator-Hygiene Theory."
From a practical point of view (vs academic) Herzberg's two factor theory has proven more powerful than Maslow since its concepts are simpler to understand. Steve Bicknell did considerable research into Employee Engagement Data, in particular the analysis of verbatim comments over 50 companies found there was a common theme between low hygiene - high motivator and low Employee Engagement. Employees consistently recorded low scores against management/leadership - Employees were optimisitic about success but happy to complain about leadership since their hygiene factors had not been addressed. Message - sort the hygiene, then drive the motivation.
Alderfer’s ERG theory
Main article: Clayton Alderfer
Created by Clayton Alderfer, Maslow's hierarchy of needs was expanded, leading to his ERG theory (existence, relatedness and growth). Physiological and safety, the lower order needs, are placed in the existence category, Love and self esteem needs in the relatedness category. The growth category contained the self actualization and self esteem needs.
Self-determination theory
Self-determination theory, developed by Edward Deci and Richard Ryan, focuses on the importance of intrinsic motivation in driving human behavior. Like Maslow's hierarchical theory and others that built on it, SDT posits a natural tendency toward growth and development. Unlike these other theories, however, SDT does not include any sort of "autopilot" for achievement, but instead requires active encouragement from the environment. The primary factors that encourage motivation and development are autonomy, competence feedback, and relatedness.[2] 643890-89-
Cognitive theories
Goal-setting theory
Goal-setting theory is based on the notion that individuals sometimes have a drive to reach a clearly defined end state. Often, this end state is a reward in itself. A goal's efficiency is affected by three features; proximity, difficulty and specificity. An ideal goal should present a situation where the time between the initiation of behavior and the end state is close in time. This explains why some children are more motivated to learn how to ride a bike than mastering algebra. A goal should be moderate, not too hard or too easy to complete. In both cases, most people are not optimally motivated, as many want a challenge (which assumes some kind of insecurity of success). At the same time people want to feel that there is a substantial probability that they will succeed. Specificity concerns the description of the goal. The goal should be objectively defined and intelligible for the individual. A classic example of a poorly specified goal is to get the highest possible grade. Most children have no idea how much effort they need to reach that goal. For further reading, see Locke and Latham (2002)
There are a number of drive theories. The Drive Reduction Theory grows out of the concept that we have certain biological needs, such as hunger. As time passes the strength of the drive increases as it is not satisfied. Then as we satisfy that drive by fulfilling its desire, such as eating, the drive's strength is reduced. It is based on the theories of Freud and the idea of feedback control systems, such as a thermostat.
There are several problems, however, that leave the validity of the Drive Reduction Theory open for debate. The first problem is that it does not explain how Secondary Reinforcers reduce drive. For example, money does not satisfy any biological or psychological need but reduces drive on a regular basis through a pay check second-order conditioning. Secondly, if the drive reduction theory held true we would not be able to explain how a hungry human being can prepare a meal without eating the food before they finished cooking it.
However, when comparing this to a real life situation such as preparing food, one does get hungrier as the food is being made (drive increases), and after the food has been consumed the drive decreases. The only reason the food does not get eaten before is the human element of restraint and has nothing to do with drive theory. Also, the food will either be nicer after it is cooked, or it wont be edible at all before it is cooked.
Cognitive dissonance theory
Main article: Cognitive dissonance
Suggested by Leon Festinger, this occurs when an individual experiences some degree of mental discomfort resulting from an incompatibility between two cognitions. For example, a consumer may seek to reassure himself regarding a purchase, feeling that another decision may have been, in retrospect, preferable.
Another example of cognitive dissonance is when a belief and a behavior are in conflict. A person may believe smoking is bad for one's health and yet continues to smoke.
Affective-Arousal Theories
Need Achievement Theory
Main article: David McClelland
David McClelland’s achievement motivation theory envisages that a person has need for three things but people differ in degree in which the various needs influence their behavior: Need for achievement, Need for power, and Need for affiliation
Interests Theory
Main article: Holland Codes
Holland Codes are used in the assessment of interests as in Vocational Preference Inventory (VPI; Holland, 1985). One way to look at interests is that if a person has a very strong interest in one of the 6 Holland areas, then obtaining outcomes in that area will be very strongly reinforcing relative to obtaining outcomes in areas of weak interest.
Need Theories
Need Hierarchy Theory
Main article: Hierarchy of needs
Abraham Maslow's hierarchy of human needs theory is the most widely discussed theory of motivation.
The theory can be summarized as thus:
Human beings have wants and desires which influence their behaviour; only unsatisfied needs can influence behavior, satisfied needs cannot.
Since needs are many, they are arranged in order of importance, from the basic to the complex.
The person advances to the next level of needs only after the lower level need is at least minimally satisfied.
The further the progress up the hierarchy, the more individuality, humanness and psychological health a person will show.
The needs, listed from basic (lowest, earliest) to most complex (highest, latest) are as follows:
Physiological
Safety and security
Social
Self esteem
Self actualization
Herzberg’s two factor theory
Main article: Frederick Herzberg
Frederick Herzberg's two factor theory, concludes that certain factors in the workplace result in job satisfaction, while others do not, but if absent lead to dissatisfaction.
He distinguished between:
Motivators; (e.g. challenging work, recognition, responsibility) which give positive satisfaction, and
Hygiene factors; (e.g. status, job security, salary and fringe benefits) which do not motivate if present, but if absent will result in demotivation.
The name Hygiene factors is used because, like hygiene, the presence will not make you healthier, but absence can cause health deterioration.
The theory is sometimes called the "Motivator-Hygiene Theory."
From a practical point of view (vs academic) Herzberg's two factor theory has proven more powerful than Maslow since its concepts are simpler to understand. Steve Bicknell did considerable research into Employee Engagement Data, in particular the analysis of verbatim comments over 50 companies found there was a common theme between low hygiene - high motivator and low Employee Engagement. Employees consistently recorded low scores against management/leadership - Employees were optimisitic about success but happy to complain about leadership since their hygiene factors had not been addressed. Message - sort the hygiene, then drive the motivation.
Alderfer’s ERG theory
Main article: Clayton Alderfer
Created by Clayton Alderfer, Maslow's hierarchy of needs was expanded, leading to his ERG theory (existence, relatedness and growth). Physiological and safety, the lower order needs, are placed in the existence category, Love and self esteem needs in the relatedness category. The growth category contained the self actualization and self esteem needs.
Self-determination theory
Self-determination theory, developed by Edward Deci and Richard Ryan, focuses on the importance of intrinsic motivation in driving human behavior. Like Maslow's hierarchical theory and others that built on it, SDT posits a natural tendency toward growth and development. Unlike these other theories, however, SDT does not include any sort of "autopilot" for achievement, but instead requires active encouragement from the environment. The primary factors that encourage motivation and development are autonomy, competence feedback, and relatedness.[2] 643890-89-
Cognitive theories
Goal-setting theory
Goal-setting theory is based on the notion that individuals sometimes have a drive to reach a clearly defined end state. Often, this end state is a reward in itself. A goal's efficiency is affected by three features; proximity, difficulty and specificity. An ideal goal should present a situation where the time between the initiation of behavior and the end state is close in time. This explains why some children are more motivated to learn how to ride a bike than mastering algebra. A goal should be moderate, not too hard or too easy to complete. In both cases, most people are not optimally motivated, as many want a challenge (which assumes some kind of insecurity of success). At the same time people want to feel that there is a substantial probability that they will succeed. Specificity concerns the description of the goal. The goal should be objectively defined and intelligible for the individual. A classic example of a poorly specified goal is to get the highest possible grade. Most children have no idea how much effort they need to reach that goal. For further reading, see Locke and Latham (2002)
Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation
Intrinsic motivation is evident when people engage in an activity for its own sake, without some obvious external incentive present. A hobby is a typical example.
Intrinsic motivation has been intensely studied by educational psychologists since the 1970s, and numerous studies have found it to be associated with high educational achievement and enjoyment by students.
There is currently no "grand unified theory" to explain the origin or elements of intrinsic motivation. Most explanations combine elements of Bernard Weiner's attribution theory, Bandura's work on self-efficacy and other studies relating to locus of control and goal orientation. Thus it is thought that students are more likely to experience intrinsic motivation if they:
Attribute their educational results to internal factors that they can control (eg. the amount of effort they put in, not 'fixed ability').
Believe they can be effective agents in reaching desired goals (eg. the results are not determined by dumb luck.)
Are motivated towards deep 'mastery' of a topic, instead of just rote-learning 'performance' to get good grades.
Note that the idea of reward for achievement is absent from this model of intrinsic motivation, since rewards are an extrinsic factor.
In knowledge-sharing communities and organizations, people often cite altruistic reasons for their participation, including contributing to a common good, a moral obligation to the group, mentorship or 'giving back'. This model of intrinsic motivation has emerged from three decades of research by hundreds of educationalists and is still evolving. (See also Goal Theory.)
In work environments, money is typically viewed as an important goal (having food, clothes etc.) may well be more powerful than the direct motivation provided by an enjoyable workplace.
Coercion
The most obvious form of motivation is coercion, where the avoidance of pain or other negative consequences has an immediate effect. Extreme use of coercion is considered slavery. While coercion is considered morally reprehensible in many philosophies, it is widely practiced on prisoners, students in mandatory schooling, within the nuclear family unit (on children), and in the form of conscription. Critics of modern capitalism charge that without social safety networks, wage slavery is inevitable. However, many capitalists such as Ayn Rand have been very vocal against coercion[citation needed]. Successful coercion sometimes can take priority over other types of motivation. Self-coercion is rarely substantially negative (typically only negative in the sense that it avoids a positive, such as undergoing an expensive dinner or a period of relaxation), however it is interesting in that it illustrates how lower levels of motivation may be sometimes tweaked to satisfy higher ones.
Self control
The self-control of motivation is increasingly understood as a subset of emotional intelligence; a person may be highly intelligent according to a more conservative definition (as measured by many intelligence tests), yet unmotivated to dedicate this intelligence to certain tasks. Yale School of Management professor Victor Vroom's "expectancy theory" provides an account of when people will decide whether to exert self control to pursue a particular goal.
Drives and desires can be described as a deficiency or need that activates behaviour that is aimed at a goal or an incentive. These are thought to originate within the individual and may not require external stimuli to encourage the behaviour. Basic drives could be sparked by deficiencies such as hunger, which motivates a person to seek food; whereas more subtle drives might be the desire for praise and approval, which motivates a person to behave in a manner pleasing to others.
By contrast, the role of extrinsic rewards and stimuli can be seen in the example of training animals by giving them treats when they perform a trick correctly. The treat motivates the animals to perform the trick consistently, even later when the treat is removed from the process.
Intrinsic motivation is evident when people engage in an activity for its own sake, without some obvious external incentive present. A hobby is a typical example.
Intrinsic motivation has been intensely studied by educational psychologists since the 1970s, and numerous studies have found it to be associated with high educational achievement and enjoyment by students.
There is currently no "grand unified theory" to explain the origin or elements of intrinsic motivation. Most explanations combine elements of Bernard Weiner's attribution theory, Bandura's work on self-efficacy and other studies relating to locus of control and goal orientation. Thus it is thought that students are more likely to experience intrinsic motivation if they:
Attribute their educational results to internal factors that they can control (eg. the amount of effort they put in, not 'fixed ability').
Believe they can be effective agents in reaching desired goals (eg. the results are not determined by dumb luck.)
Are motivated towards deep 'mastery' of a topic, instead of just rote-learning 'performance' to get good grades.
Note that the idea of reward for achievement is absent from this model of intrinsic motivation, since rewards are an extrinsic factor.
In knowledge-sharing communities and organizations, people often cite altruistic reasons for their participation, including contributing to a common good, a moral obligation to the group, mentorship or 'giving back'. This model of intrinsic motivation has emerged from three decades of research by hundreds of educationalists and is still evolving. (See also Goal Theory.)
In work environments, money is typically viewed as an important goal (having food, clothes etc.) may well be more powerful than the direct motivation provided by an enjoyable workplace.
Coercion
The most obvious form of motivation is coercion, where the avoidance of pain or other negative consequences has an immediate effect. Extreme use of coercion is considered slavery. While coercion is considered morally reprehensible in many philosophies, it is widely practiced on prisoners, students in mandatory schooling, within the nuclear family unit (on children), and in the form of conscription. Critics of modern capitalism charge that without social safety networks, wage slavery is inevitable. However, many capitalists such as Ayn Rand have been very vocal against coercion[citation needed]. Successful coercion sometimes can take priority over other types of motivation. Self-coercion is rarely substantially negative (typically only negative in the sense that it avoids a positive, such as undergoing an expensive dinner or a period of relaxation), however it is interesting in that it illustrates how lower levels of motivation may be sometimes tweaked to satisfy higher ones.
Self control
The self-control of motivation is increasingly understood as a subset of emotional intelligence; a person may be highly intelligent according to a more conservative definition (as measured by many intelligence tests), yet unmotivated to dedicate this intelligence to certain tasks. Yale School of Management professor Victor Vroom's "expectancy theory" provides an account of when people will decide whether to exert self control to pursue a particular goal.
Drives and desires can be described as a deficiency or need that activates behaviour that is aimed at a goal or an incentive. These are thought to originate within the individual and may not require external stimuli to encourage the behaviour. Basic drives could be sparked by deficiencies such as hunger, which motivates a person to seek food; whereas more subtle drives might be the desire for praise and approval, which motivates a person to behave in a manner pleasing to others.
By contrast, the role of extrinsic rewards and stimuli can be seen in the example of training animals by giving them treats when they perform a trick correctly. The treat motivates the animals to perform the trick consistently, even later when the treat is removed from the process.
Motivation: Concepts
Reward and Reinforcement
A reward is that which follows an occurrence of a specific behavior with the intention of acknowledging the behavior in a positive way. A reward often has the intent of encouraging the behavior to happen again.
There are two kinds of rewards, extrinsic and intrinsic. Extrinsic rewards are external to, or outside of, the individual; for example, praise or money. Intrinsic rewards are internal to, or within, the individual; for example, satisfaction or accomplishment.
Some authors distinguish between two forms of intrinsic motivation: one based on enjoyment, the other on obligation. In this context, obligation refers to motivation based on what an individual thinks ought to be done. For instance, a feeling of responsibility for a mission may lead to helping others beyond what is easily observable, rewarded, or fun.
A reinforcer is different from reward, in that reinforcement is intended to create a measured increase in the rate of a desirable behavior following the addition of something to the environment.
Reward and Reinforcement
A reward is that which follows an occurrence of a specific behavior with the intention of acknowledging the behavior in a positive way. A reward often has the intent of encouraging the behavior to happen again.
There are two kinds of rewards, extrinsic and intrinsic. Extrinsic rewards are external to, or outside of, the individual; for example, praise or money. Intrinsic rewards are internal to, or within, the individual; for example, satisfaction or accomplishment.
Some authors distinguish between two forms of intrinsic motivation: one based on enjoyment, the other on obligation. In this context, obligation refers to motivation based on what an individual thinks ought to be done. For instance, a feeling of responsibility for a mission may lead to helping others beyond what is easily observable, rewarded, or fun.
A reinforcer is different from reward, in that reinforcement is intended to create a measured increase in the rate of a desirable behavior following the addition of something to the environment.
Sunday, September 16, 2007
EDUCATION PSYCHOLOGY:HISTORY
Educational psychology cannot claim priority in the systematic analysis of educational processes. Philosophers of education such as Democritus, Quintilian, Vives and Comenius, had examined, classified and judged the methods of education centuries before the beginnings of psychology in the late 1800s. Instead, aspirations of the new discipline rested on the application of the scientific methods of observation and experimentation to educational problems. Even in the earliest years of the discipline, educational psychologists recognized the limitations of this new approach. In his famous series of lectures Talks to Teachers on Psychology, published in 1899 and now regarded as the first educational psychology textbook, the pioneering American psychologist William James commented that:
Psychology is a science, and teaching is an art; and sciences never generate arts directly out of themselves. An intermediate inventive mind must make that application, by using its originality.[38]
According to Berliner[39] educational psychology theorists' attitude to the world of educational practice has shifted from initial interest to disdain, and eventually to respect.
* Charles Hubbard Judd
In 1912, Thorndike, who developed the theory of instrumental conditioning, presaged later work on programmed instruction, mastery learning and computer-based learning:
If, by a miracle of mechanical ingenuity, a book could be so arranged that only to him who had done what was directed on page one would page two become visible, and so on, much that now requires personal instruction could be managed by print.[40]
[edit] Influential educational psychologists and theorists
The following persons were selected and featured in a recent biographical history of educational psychology[41] as having made significant contributions to the field:
* Albert Bandura 1925-
* Alfred Binet 1857-1911
* Benjamin Bloom 1913-1999
* Ann Brown 1943-1999
* Jerome Bruner 1915-
* Lee Cronbach 1916-2001
* John Dewey 1859-1952
* Nathaniel Gage 1917-
* Robert Gagné 1916-2002
* William James 1842-1910
* Maria Montessori 1870-1952
* Jean Piaget 1896-1980
* Herbert Simon 1916–2001
* Burrhus Frederic Skinner 1904-1990
* Charles Spearman 1863-1945
* Lewis Terman 1877-1956
* Edward L. Thorndike 1874-1949
* Lev Semenovich Vygotsky 1896-1934
Psychology is a science, and teaching is an art; and sciences never generate arts directly out of themselves. An intermediate inventive mind must make that application, by using its originality.[38]
According to Berliner[39] educational psychology theorists' attitude to the world of educational practice has shifted from initial interest to disdain, and eventually to respect.
* Charles Hubbard Judd
In 1912, Thorndike, who developed the theory of instrumental conditioning, presaged later work on programmed instruction, mastery learning and computer-based learning:
If, by a miracle of mechanical ingenuity, a book could be so arranged that only to him who had done what was directed on page one would page two become visible, and so on, much that now requires personal instruction could be managed by print.[40]
[edit] Influential educational psychologists and theorists
The following persons were selected and featured in a recent biographical history of educational psychology[41] as having made significant contributions to the field:
* Albert Bandura 1925-
* Alfred Binet 1857-1911
* Benjamin Bloom 1913-1999
* Ann Brown 1943-1999
* Jerome Bruner 1915-
* Lee Cronbach 1916-2001
* John Dewey 1859-1952
* Nathaniel Gage 1917-
* Robert Gagné 1916-2002
* William James 1842-1910
* Maria Montessori 1870-1952
* Jean Piaget 1896-1980
* Herbert Simon 1916–2001
* Burrhus Frederic Skinner 1904-1990
* Charles Spearman 1863-1945
* Lewis Terman 1877-1956
* Edward L. Thorndike 1874-1949
* Lev Semenovich Vygotsky 1896-1934
EDUCATION PSYCHOLOGY:APPLICATION
Applications in instructional design and technology
Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives: categories in the cognitive domain
Instructional design, the systematic design of materials, activities and interactive environments for learning, is broadly informed by educational psychology theories and research. For example, in defining learning goals or objectives, instructional designers often use a taxonomy of educational objectives created by Benjamin Bloom and colleagues.[33] Bloom also researched mastery learning, an instructional strategy in which learners only advance to a new learning objective after they have mastered its prerequisite objectives. Bloom[34] discovered that a combination of mastery learning with one-to-one tutoring is highly effective, producing learning outcomes far exceeding those normally achieved in classroom instruction. Gagné, another psychologist, had earlier developed an influential method of task analysis in which a terminal learning goal is expanded into a hierarchy of learning objectives[35] connected by prerequisite relations.
* Intelligent tutoring system
* Educational technology
* John R. Anderson
* Cognitive tutor
* Cooperative learning
* Collaborative learning
* problem-based learning
* Computer supported collaborative learning
* William Winn
Applications in teaching
A class size experiment in the United States found that attending small classes for 3 or more years in the early grades increased high school graduation of students from low income families.
A class size experiment in the United States found that attending small classes for 3 or more years in the early grades increased high school graduation of students from low income families.[36]
Research on classroom management and pedagogy is conducted to guide teaching practice and form a foundation for teacher education programs. The goals of classroom management are to create an environment conducive to learning and to develop students' self-management skills. More specifically, classroom management strives to create positive teacher-student and peer relationships, manage student groups to sustain on-task behavior, and use counselling and other psychological methods to aid students who present persistent psychosocial problems.[37]
Introductory educational psychology is a commonly required area of study in most North American teacher education programs. When taught in that context, its content varies, but it typically emphasizes learning theories (especially cognitively oriented ones), issues about motivation, assessment of students' learning, and classroom management. A developing Wikibook about educational psychology gives more detail about the educational psychology topics that are typically presented in preservice teacher education.
* Special education
* Lesson plan
* More about applications to classroom teaching
Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives: categories in the cognitive domain
Instructional design, the systematic design of materials, activities and interactive environments for learning, is broadly informed by educational psychology theories and research. For example, in defining learning goals or objectives, instructional designers often use a taxonomy of educational objectives created by Benjamin Bloom and colleagues.[33] Bloom also researched mastery learning, an instructional strategy in which learners only advance to a new learning objective after they have mastered its prerequisite objectives. Bloom[34] discovered that a combination of mastery learning with one-to-one tutoring is highly effective, producing learning outcomes far exceeding those normally achieved in classroom instruction. Gagné, another psychologist, had earlier developed an influential method of task analysis in which a terminal learning goal is expanded into a hierarchy of learning objectives[35] connected by prerequisite relations.
* Intelligent tutoring system
* Educational technology
* John R. Anderson
* Cognitive tutor
* Cooperative learning
* Collaborative learning
* problem-based learning
* Computer supported collaborative learning
* William Winn
Applications in teaching
A class size experiment in the United States found that attending small classes for 3 or more years in the early grades increased high school graduation of students from low income families.
A class size experiment in the United States found that attending small classes for 3 or more years in the early grades increased high school graduation of students from low income families.[36]
Research on classroom management and pedagogy is conducted to guide teaching practice and form a foundation for teacher education programs. The goals of classroom management are to create an environment conducive to learning and to develop students' self-management skills. More specifically, classroom management strives to create positive teacher-student and peer relationships, manage student groups to sustain on-task behavior, and use counselling and other psychological methods to aid students who present persistent psychosocial problems.[37]
Introductory educational psychology is a commonly required area of study in most North American teacher education programs. When taught in that context, its content varies, but it typically emphasizes learning theories (especially cognitively oriented ones), issues about motivation, assessment of students' learning, and classroom management. A developing Wikibook about educational psychology gives more detail about the educational psychology topics that are typically presented in preservice teacher education.
* Special education
* Lesson plan
* More about applications to classroom teaching
EDUCATION PSYCHOLOGY: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
The research methods used in educational psychology tend to be drawn from psychology and other social sciences. There is also a history of significant methodological innovation by educational psychologists, and psychologists investigating educational problems. Research methods address problems in both research design and data analysis. Research design informs the planning of experiments and observational studies to ensure that their results have internal, external and ecological validity. Data analysis encompasses methods for processing both quantitive (numerical) and qualitative (non-numerical) research data. Although, historically, the use of quantitative methods was often considered an essential mark of scholarship, modern educational psychology research uses both quantitative and qualitative methods.
Quantitative methods
Test scores and other educational variables often approximate a normal distribution.
Test scores and other educational variables often approximate a normal distribution.
Perhaps first among the important methodological innovations of educational psychology was the development and application of factor analysis by Charles Spearman. Factor analysis is mentioned here as one example of the many multivariate statistical methods used by educational psychologists. Factor analysis is used to summarize relationships among a large set of variables or test questions, develop theories about mental constructs such as self-efficacy or anxiety, and assess the reliability and validity of test scores.[26] Over one hundred years after its introduction by Spearman, factor analysis has become a research staple figuring prominently in educational psychology journals.
Because educational assessment is fundamental to most quantitative research in the field, educational psychologists have made significant contributions to the field of psychometrics. For example, alpha, the widely used measure of test reliability was developed by educational psychologist Lee Cronbach. The reliability of assessments are routinely reported in quantitative educational research. Although, originally, educational measurement methods were built on classical test theory, item response theory and Rasch models are now used extensively in educational measurement worldwide. These models afford advantages over classical test theory, including the capacity to produce standard errors of measurement for each score or pattern of scores on assessments and the capacity to handle missing responses.
Meta-analysis, the combination of individual research results to produce a quantitative literature review, is another methodological innovation with a close association to educational psychology. In a meta-analysis, effect sizes that represent, for example, the differences between treatment groups in a set of similar experiments, are averaged to obtain a single aggregate value representing the best estimate of the effect of treatment.[27] Several decades after Pearson's work with early versions of meta-analysis, Glass[28] published the first application of modern meta-analytic techniques and triggered their broad application across the social and biomedical sciences. Today, meta-analysis is among the most common types of literature review found in educational psychology research.
Qualitative methods
Qualitative methods are used in educational studies whose purpose is to describe events, processes and situations of theoretical significance. The qualitative methods used in educational psychology often derive from anthropology, sociology or sociolinguistics. For example, the anthropological method of ethnography has been used to describe teaching and learning in classrooms. In studies of this type, the researcher may gather detailed field notes as a participant observer or passive observer. Later, the notes and other data may be categorized and interpreted by methods such as grounded theory. Triangulation, the practice of cross-checking findings with multiple data sources, is highly valued in qualitative research.
Case studies are forms of qualitative research focusing on a single person, organization, event, or other entity. In one case study,[29] researchers conducted a 150-minute, semi-structured interview with a 20-year old woman who had a history of suicidal thinking between the ages of 14 to 18. They analyzed an audio-recording of the interview to understand the roles of cognitive development, identity formation and social attachment in ending her suicidal thinking.
Qualitative analysis is most often applied to verbal data from sources such as conversations, interviews, focus groups, and personal journals. Qualitative methods are thus, typically, approaches to gathering, processing and reporting verbal data. One of the most commonly used methods for qualitative research in educational psychology is protocol analysis.[30] In this method the research participant is asked to think aloud while performing a task, such as solving a math problem. In protocol analysis the verbal data is thought to indicate which information the subject is attending to, but is explicitly not interpreted as an explanation or justification for behavior. In contrast, the method of verbal analysis[31] does admit learners' explanations as a way to reveal their mental model or misconceptions (e.g., of the laws of motion). The most fundamental operations in both protocol and verbal analysis are segmenting (isolating) and categorizing sections of verbal data. Conversation analysis and discourse analysis, sociolinguistic methods that focus more specifically on the structure of conversational interchange (e.g., between a teacher and student), have been used to assess the process of conceptual change in science learning.[32] Qualitative methods are also used to analyse information in a variety of media, such as students' drawings and concept maps, video-recorded interactions, and computer log records.
Quantitative methods
Test scores and other educational variables often approximate a normal distribution.
Test scores and other educational variables often approximate a normal distribution.
Perhaps first among the important methodological innovations of educational psychology was the development and application of factor analysis by Charles Spearman. Factor analysis is mentioned here as one example of the many multivariate statistical methods used by educational psychologists. Factor analysis is used to summarize relationships among a large set of variables or test questions, develop theories about mental constructs such as self-efficacy or anxiety, and assess the reliability and validity of test scores.[26] Over one hundred years after its introduction by Spearman, factor analysis has become a research staple figuring prominently in educational psychology journals.
Because educational assessment is fundamental to most quantitative research in the field, educational psychologists have made significant contributions to the field of psychometrics. For example, alpha, the widely used measure of test reliability was developed by educational psychologist Lee Cronbach. The reliability of assessments are routinely reported in quantitative educational research. Although, originally, educational measurement methods were built on classical test theory, item response theory and Rasch models are now used extensively in educational measurement worldwide. These models afford advantages over classical test theory, including the capacity to produce standard errors of measurement for each score or pattern of scores on assessments and the capacity to handle missing responses.
Meta-analysis, the combination of individual research results to produce a quantitative literature review, is another methodological innovation with a close association to educational psychology. In a meta-analysis, effect sizes that represent, for example, the differences between treatment groups in a set of similar experiments, are averaged to obtain a single aggregate value representing the best estimate of the effect of treatment.[27] Several decades after Pearson's work with early versions of meta-analysis, Glass[28] published the first application of modern meta-analytic techniques and triggered their broad application across the social and biomedical sciences. Today, meta-analysis is among the most common types of literature review found in educational psychology research.
Qualitative methods
Qualitative methods are used in educational studies whose purpose is to describe events, processes and situations of theoretical significance. The qualitative methods used in educational psychology often derive from anthropology, sociology or sociolinguistics. For example, the anthropological method of ethnography has been used to describe teaching and learning in classrooms. In studies of this type, the researcher may gather detailed field notes as a participant observer or passive observer. Later, the notes and other data may be categorized and interpreted by methods such as grounded theory. Triangulation, the practice of cross-checking findings with multiple data sources, is highly valued in qualitative research.
Case studies are forms of qualitative research focusing on a single person, organization, event, or other entity. In one case study,[29] researchers conducted a 150-minute, semi-structured interview with a 20-year old woman who had a history of suicidal thinking between the ages of 14 to 18. They analyzed an audio-recording of the interview to understand the roles of cognitive development, identity formation and social attachment in ending her suicidal thinking.
Qualitative analysis is most often applied to verbal data from sources such as conversations, interviews, focus groups, and personal journals. Qualitative methods are thus, typically, approaches to gathering, processing and reporting verbal data. One of the most commonly used methods for qualitative research in educational psychology is protocol analysis.[30] In this method the research participant is asked to think aloud while performing a task, such as solving a math problem. In protocol analysis the verbal data is thought to indicate which information the subject is attending to, but is explicitly not interpreted as an explanation or justification for behavior. In contrast, the method of verbal analysis[31] does admit learners' explanations as a way to reveal their mental model or misconceptions (e.g., of the laws of motion). The most fundamental operations in both protocol and verbal analysis are segmenting (isolating) and categorizing sections of verbal data. Conversation analysis and discourse analysis, sociolinguistic methods that focus more specifically on the structure of conversational interchange (e.g., between a teacher and student), have been used to assess the process of conceptual change in science learning.[32] Qualitative methods are also used to analyse information in a variety of media, such as students' drawings and concept maps, video-recorded interactions, and computer log records.
EDUCATION PSYCHOLOGY:MOTIVATION
Motivation is an internal state that activates, guides and sustains behavior. Educational psychology research on motivation is concerned with the volition or will that students bring to a task, their level of interest and intrinsic motivation, the personally held goals that guide their behavior, and their belief about the causes of their success or failure.
A form of attribution theory developed by Bernard Weiner[24] describes how students' beliefs about the causes of academic success or failure affect their emotions and motivations. For example, when students attribute failure to lack of ability, and ability is perceived as uncontrollable, they experience the emotions of shame and embarrassment and consequently decrease effort and show poorer performance. In contrast, when students attribute failure to lack of effort, and effort is perceived as controllable, they experience the emotion of guilt and consequently increase effort and show improved performance.
Motivational theories also explain how learners' goals affect the way that they engage with academic tasks.[25] Those who have mastery goals strive to increase their ability and knowledge. Those who have performance approach goals strive for high grades and seek opportunities to demonstrate their abilities. Those who have performance avoidance goals are driven by fear of failure and avoid situations where their abilities are exposed. Research has found that mastery goals are associated with many positive outcomes such as persistence in the face of failure, preference for challenging tasks, creativity and intrinsic motivation. Performance avoidance goals are associated with negative outcomes such as poor concentration while studying, disorganized studying, less self-regulation, shallow information processing and test anxiety. Performance approach goals are associated with positive outcomes, and some negative outcomes such as an unwillingness to seek help and shallow information processing.
A form of attribution theory developed by Bernard Weiner[24] describes how students' beliefs about the causes of academic success or failure affect their emotions and motivations. For example, when students attribute failure to lack of ability, and ability is perceived as uncontrollable, they experience the emotions of shame and embarrassment and consequently decrease effort and show poorer performance. In contrast, when students attribute failure to lack of effort, and effort is perceived as controllable, they experience the emotion of guilt and consequently increase effort and show improved performance.
Motivational theories also explain how learners' goals affect the way that they engage with academic tasks.[25] Those who have mastery goals strive to increase their ability and knowledge. Those who have performance approach goals strive for high grades and seek opportunities to demonstrate their abilities. Those who have performance avoidance goals are driven by fear of failure and avoid situations where their abilities are exposed. Research has found that mastery goals are associated with many positive outcomes such as persistence in the face of failure, preference for challenging tasks, creativity and intrinsic motivation. Performance avoidance goals are associated with negative outcomes such as poor concentration while studying, disorganized studying, less self-regulation, shallow information processing and test anxiety. Performance approach goals are associated with positive outcomes, and some negative outcomes such as an unwillingness to seek help and shallow information processing.
EDUCATION PSYCHOLOGY:MOTIVATION
Motivation is an internal state that activates, guides and sustains behavior. Educational psychology research on motivation is concerned with the volition or will that students bring to a task, their level of interest and intrinsic motivation, the personally held goals that guide their behavior, and their belief about the causes of their success or failure.
A form of attribution theory developed by Bernard Weiner[24] describes how students' beliefs about the causes of academic success or failure affect their emotions and motivations. For example, when students attribute failure to lack of ability, and ability is perceived as uncontrollable, they experience the emotions of shame and embarrassment and consequently decrease effort and show poorer performance. In contrast, when students attribute failure to lack of effort, and effort is perceived as controllable, they experience the emotion of guilt and consequently increase effort and show improved performance.
Motivational theories also explain how learners' goals affect the way that they engage with academic tasks.[25] Those who have mastery goals strive to increase their ability and knowledge. Those who have performance approach goals strive for high grades and seek opportunities to demonstrate their abilities. Those who have performance avoidance goals are driven by fear of failure and avoid situations where their abilities are exposed. Research has found that mastery goals are associated with many positive outcomes such as persistence in the face of failure, preference for challenging tasks, creativity and intrinsic motivation. Performance avoidance goals are associated with negative outcomes such as poor concentration while studying, disorganized studying, less self-regulation, shallow information processing and test anxiety. Performance approach goals are associated with positive outcomes, and some negative outcomes such as an unwillingness to seek help and shallow information processing.
A form of attribution theory developed by Bernard Weiner[24] describes how students' beliefs about the causes of academic success or failure affect their emotions and motivations. For example, when students attribute failure to lack of ability, and ability is perceived as uncontrollable, they experience the emotions of shame and embarrassment and consequently decrease effort and show poorer performance. In contrast, when students attribute failure to lack of effort, and effort is perceived as controllable, they experience the emotion of guilt and consequently increase effort and show improved performance.
Motivational theories also explain how learners' goals affect the way that they engage with academic tasks.[25] Those who have mastery goals strive to increase their ability and knowledge. Those who have performance approach goals strive for high grades and seek opportunities to demonstrate their abilities. Those who have performance avoidance goals are driven by fear of failure and avoid situations where their abilities are exposed. Research has found that mastery goals are associated with many positive outcomes such as persistence in the face of failure, preference for challenging tasks, creativity and intrinsic motivation. Performance avoidance goals are associated with negative outcomes such as poor concentration while studying, disorganized studying, less self-regulation, shallow information processing and test anxiety. Performance approach goals are associated with positive outcomes, and some negative outcomes such as an unwillingness to seek help and shallow information processing.
EDUCATION PSYCHOLOGY: PERSPECTIVES
BEHAVIOURAL perspective
Applied behavior analysis, a set of techniques based on the behavioral principles of operant conditioning, is effective in a range of educational settings.[10] For example, teachers can improve student behavior by systematically rewarding students who follow classroom rules with praise, stars, or tokens exchangeable for sundry items.[11][12] Despite the demonstrated efficacy of awards in changing behavior, their use in education has been criticized by proponents of self-determination theory, who claim that praise and other rewards undermine intrinsic motivation. There is evidence that tangible rewards decrease intrinsic motivation in specific situations, such as when the student already has a high level of intrinsic motivation to perform the goal behavior.[13] But the results showing detrimental effects are counterbalanced by evidence that, in other situations, such as when rewards are given for attaining a gradually increasing standard of performance, rewards enhance intrinsic motivation.[14]
COGNITIVE perspective
Among current educational psychologists, the cognitive perspective is more widely held than the behavioral perspective perhaps because it flexibly admits causally related mental constructs such as traits, beliefs, memories, motivations and emotions. Cognitive theories posit memory structures that are thought to determine how information is perceived, processed, stored, retrieved and forgotten. Among the memory structures theorized by cognitive psychologists are separate but linked visual and verbal systems described by Allan Paivio's dual coding theory. Educational psychologists have used dual coding theory and cognitive load theory to explain how people learn from multimedia presentations.[15]
Three experiments reported by Krug, Davis and Glover demonstrated the advantage of delaying a 2nd reading of a text passage by one week (distributed) compared with no delay between readings (massed).
Three experiments reported by Krug, Davis and Glover[16] demonstrated the advantage of delaying a 2nd reading of a text passage by one week (distributed) compared with no delay between readings (massed).
The spaced learning effect, a cognitive phenomenon strongly supported by psychological research, has broad applicability within education.[17] For example, students have been found to perform better on a test of knowledge about a text passage when a second reading of the passage is delayed rather than immediate (see figure).[16] Educational psychology research has confirmed the applicability to education of other findings from cognitive psychology, such as the benefits of using mnemonics for immediate and delayed retention of information.[18]
Problem solving, regarded by many cognitive psychologists as fundamental to learning, is an important research topic in educational psychology. A student is thought to interpret a problem by assigning it to a schema retrieved from long term memory. When the problem is assigned to the wrong schema, the student's attention is subsequently directed away from features of the problem that are inconsistent with the assigned schema.[19] The critical step of finding a mapping between the problem and a pre-existing schema is often cited as supporting the centrality of analogical thinking to problem solving.
SOCIAL COGNITIVE perspective
Social cognitive theory is a highly influential fusion of behavioral, cognitive and social elements that was initially developed by educational psychologist Albert Bandura. In its earlier, neo-behavioral incarnation called social learning theory, Bandura emphasized the process of observational learning in which a learner's behavior changes as a result of observing others' behavior and its consequences. The theory identified several factors that determine whether observing a model will affect behavioral or cognitive change. These factors include the learner's developmental status, the perceived prestige and competence of the model, the consequences received by the model, the relevance of the model's behaviors and consequences to the learner's goals, and the learner's self-efficacy. The concept of self-efficacy, which played an important role in later developments of the theory, refers to the learner's belief in his or her ability to perform the modeled behavior.
An experiment by Schunk and Hanson,[20] that studied grade 2 students who had previously experienced difficulty in learning subtraction, illustrates the type of research stimulated by social learning theory. One group of students observed a subtraction demonstration by a teacher and then participated in an instructional program on subtraction. A second group observed other grade 2 students performing the same subtraction procedures and then participated in the same instructional program. The students who observed peer models scored higher on a subtraction post-test and also reported greater confidence in their subtraction ability. The results were interpreted as supporting the hypothesis that perceived similarity of the model to the learner increases self-efficacy, leading to more effective learning of modeled behavior. It is supposed that peer modeling is particularly effective for students who have low self-efficacy.
Over the last decade, much research activity in educational psychology has focused on developing theories of self-regulated learning (SRL) and metacognition. These theories work from the central premise that effective learners are active agents who construct knowledge by setting goals, analysing tasks, planning strategies and monitoring their understanding. Research has indicated that learners' who are better at goal setting and self-monitoring tend to have greater intrinsic task interest and self-efficacy;[21] and that teaching learning strategies can increase academic achievement.[22]
CONSTRUCTIVIST perspective
Main article: Constructivism (learning theory)
Main article: Social Constructivism (Learning Theory)
Constructivism refers to a category of learning theories in which emphasis is placed on the agency and prior knowledge of the learner, and often on the social and cultural determinants of the learning process. Educational psychologists distinguish individual (or psychological) constructivism, identified with Piaget's learning theory, from social constructivism. A dominant influence on the latter type is Lev Vygotsky's work on sociocultural learning, describing how interactions with adults, more capable peers, and cognitive tools are internalized to form mental constructs. Elaborating on Vygotsky's theory, Jerome Bruner and other educational psychologists developed the important concept of instructional scaffolding, in which the social or information environment offers supports for learning that are gradually withdrawn as they become internalized.
Vygotsky's version of constructivist theory has led to the view that behavior, skills, attitudes and beliefs are inherently situated, that is, bound to a specific sociocultural setting. According to this view, the learner is enculturated through social interactions within a community of practice. The social constructivist view of learning has spawned approaches to teaching and learning such as cognitive apprenticeship, in which the tacit components of a complex skill are made explicit through conversational interactions occurring between expert and novice in the setting in which the skill is embedded.[23]
Applied behavior analysis, a set of techniques based on the behavioral principles of operant conditioning, is effective in a range of educational settings.[10] For example, teachers can improve student behavior by systematically rewarding students who follow classroom rules with praise, stars, or tokens exchangeable for sundry items.[11][12] Despite the demonstrated efficacy of awards in changing behavior, their use in education has been criticized by proponents of self-determination theory, who claim that praise and other rewards undermine intrinsic motivation. There is evidence that tangible rewards decrease intrinsic motivation in specific situations, such as when the student already has a high level of intrinsic motivation to perform the goal behavior.[13] But the results showing detrimental effects are counterbalanced by evidence that, in other situations, such as when rewards are given for attaining a gradually increasing standard of performance, rewards enhance intrinsic motivation.[14]
COGNITIVE perspective
Among current educational psychologists, the cognitive perspective is more widely held than the behavioral perspective perhaps because it flexibly admits causally related mental constructs such as traits, beliefs, memories, motivations and emotions. Cognitive theories posit memory structures that are thought to determine how information is perceived, processed, stored, retrieved and forgotten. Among the memory structures theorized by cognitive psychologists are separate but linked visual and verbal systems described by Allan Paivio's dual coding theory. Educational psychologists have used dual coding theory and cognitive load theory to explain how people learn from multimedia presentations.[15]
Three experiments reported by Krug, Davis and Glover demonstrated the advantage of delaying a 2nd reading of a text passage by one week (distributed) compared with no delay between readings (massed).
Three experiments reported by Krug, Davis and Glover[16] demonstrated the advantage of delaying a 2nd reading of a text passage by one week (distributed) compared with no delay between readings (massed).
The spaced learning effect, a cognitive phenomenon strongly supported by psychological research, has broad applicability within education.[17] For example, students have been found to perform better on a test of knowledge about a text passage when a second reading of the passage is delayed rather than immediate (see figure).[16] Educational psychology research has confirmed the applicability to education of other findings from cognitive psychology, such as the benefits of using mnemonics for immediate and delayed retention of information.[18]
Problem solving, regarded by many cognitive psychologists as fundamental to learning, is an important research topic in educational psychology. A student is thought to interpret a problem by assigning it to a schema retrieved from long term memory. When the problem is assigned to the wrong schema, the student's attention is subsequently directed away from features of the problem that are inconsistent with the assigned schema.[19] The critical step of finding a mapping between the problem and a pre-existing schema is often cited as supporting the centrality of analogical thinking to problem solving.
SOCIAL COGNITIVE perspective
Social cognitive theory is a highly influential fusion of behavioral, cognitive and social elements that was initially developed by educational psychologist Albert Bandura. In its earlier, neo-behavioral incarnation called social learning theory, Bandura emphasized the process of observational learning in which a learner's behavior changes as a result of observing others' behavior and its consequences. The theory identified several factors that determine whether observing a model will affect behavioral or cognitive change. These factors include the learner's developmental status, the perceived prestige and competence of the model, the consequences received by the model, the relevance of the model's behaviors and consequences to the learner's goals, and the learner's self-efficacy. The concept of self-efficacy, which played an important role in later developments of the theory, refers to the learner's belief in his or her ability to perform the modeled behavior.
An experiment by Schunk and Hanson,[20] that studied grade 2 students who had previously experienced difficulty in learning subtraction, illustrates the type of research stimulated by social learning theory. One group of students observed a subtraction demonstration by a teacher and then participated in an instructional program on subtraction. A second group observed other grade 2 students performing the same subtraction procedures and then participated in the same instructional program. The students who observed peer models scored higher on a subtraction post-test and also reported greater confidence in their subtraction ability. The results were interpreted as supporting the hypothesis that perceived similarity of the model to the learner increases self-efficacy, leading to more effective learning of modeled behavior. It is supposed that peer modeling is particularly effective for students who have low self-efficacy.
Over the last decade, much research activity in educational psychology has focused on developing theories of self-regulated learning (SRL) and metacognition. These theories work from the central premise that effective learners are active agents who construct knowledge by setting goals, analysing tasks, planning strategies and monitoring their understanding. Research has indicated that learners' who are better at goal setting and self-monitoring tend to have greater intrinsic task interest and self-efficacy;[21] and that teaching learning strategies can increase academic achievement.[22]
CONSTRUCTIVIST perspective
Main article: Constructivism (learning theory)
Main article: Social Constructivism (Learning Theory)
Constructivism refers to a category of learning theories in which emphasis is placed on the agency and prior knowledge of the learner, and often on the social and cultural determinants of the learning process. Educational psychologists distinguish individual (or psychological) constructivism, identified with Piaget's learning theory, from social constructivism. A dominant influence on the latter type is Lev Vygotsky's work on sociocultural learning, describing how interactions with adults, more capable peers, and cognitive tools are internalized to form mental constructs. Elaborating on Vygotsky's theory, Jerome Bruner and other educational psychologists developed the important concept of instructional scaffolding, in which the social or information environment offers supports for learning that are gradually withdrawn as they become internalized.
Vygotsky's version of constructivist theory has led to the view that behavior, skills, attitudes and beliefs are inherently situated, that is, bound to a specific sociocultural setting. According to this view, the learner is enculturated through social interactions within a community of practice. The social constructivist view of learning has spawned approaches to teaching and learning such as cognitive apprenticeship, in which the tacit components of a complex skill are made explicit through conversational interactions occurring between expert and novice in the setting in which the skill is embedded.[23]
EDUCATION PSYCHOLOGY: INTRODUCTION
Social, moral and cognitive development
An abacus provides concrete experiences for learning abstract concepts.
To understand the characteristics of learners in childhood, adolescence, adulthood, and old age, educational psychology develops and applies theories of human development. Often cast as stages through which people pass as they mature, developmental theories describe changes in mental abilities (cognition), social roles, moral reasoning, and beliefs about the nature of knowledge.
For example, educational psychologists have researched the instructional applicability of Jean Piaget's theory of development, according to which children mature through four stages of cognitive capability. Piaget hypothesized that children are not capable of abstract logical thought until they are older than about 11 years, and therefore younger children need to be taught using concrete objects and examples. Researchers have found that transitions, such as from concrete to abstract logical thought, do not occur at the same time in all domains. A child may be able to think abstractly about mathematics, but remain limited to concrete thought when reasoning about human relationships. Perhaps Piaget's most enduring contribution is his insight that people actively construct their understanding through a self-regulatory process.[2]
Piaget proposed a developmental theory of moral reasoning in which children progress from a naive understanding of morality based on behavior and outcomes to a more advanced understanding based on intentions. Piaget's views of moral development were elaborated by Kohlberg into a stage theory of moral development. There is evidence that the moral reasoning described in stage theories is not sufficient to account for moral behavior. For example, other factors such as modeling (as described by the social cognitive theory of morality) are required to explain bullying.
Developmental theories are sometimes presented not as shifts between qualitatively different stages, but as gradual increments on separate dimensions. Development of epistemological beliefs (beliefs about knowledge) have been described in terms of gradual changes in people's belief in: certainty and permanence of knowledge, fixedness of ability, and credibility of authorities such as teachers and experts. People develop more sophisticated beliefs about knowledge as they gain in education and maturity.[3]
Individual differences and disabilities
An example of an item from a cognitive abilities test.
Each person has an individual profile of characteristics, abilities and challenges that result from learning and development. These manifest as individual differences in intelligence, creativity, cognitive style, motivation, and the capacity to process information, communicate, and relate to others. The most prevalent disabilities found among school age children are attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), learning disability, dyslexia, and speech disorder. Less common disabilities include mental retardation, hearing impairment, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, and blindness.
Although theories of intelligence have been discussed by philosophers since Plato, intelligence testing is an invention of educational psychology, and is coincident with the development of that discipline. Continuing debates about the nature of intelligence revolve on whether intelligence can be characterized by a single, scalar factor (Spearman's general intelligence), multiple factors (as in Sternberg's triarchic theory of intelligence and Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences), or whether it can be measured at all. In practice, standardized instruments such as the Stanford-Binet IQ test and the WISC are widely used in economically developed countries to identify children in need of individualized educational treatment. Children classified as gifted are often provided with accelerated or enriched programs. Children with identified deficits may be provided with enhanced education in specific skills such as phonological awareness.
Learning and cognition
Two fundamental assumptions that underlie formal education systems are that students (a) retain knowledge and skills they acquire in school, and (b) can apply them in situations outside the classroom. But are these assumptions accurate? Research has found that, even when students report not using the knowledge acquired in school, a considerable portion is retained for many years and long term retention is strongly dependent on the initial level of mastery.[4] One study found that university students who took a child development course and attained high grades showed, when tested 10 years later, average retention scores of about 30%, whereas those who obtained moderate or lower grades showed average retention scores of about 20%.[5] There is much less consensus on the crucial question of how much knowledge acquired in school transfers to tasks encountered outside formal educational settings, and how such transfer occurs.[6] Some psychologists claim that research evidence for this type of far transfer is scarce,[7][8] while others claim there is abundant evidence of far transfer in specific domains.[9] Several perspectives have been established within which the theories of learning used in educational psychology are formed and contested. These include Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Social Cognitivism, and Constructivism. This section summarizes how educational psychology has researched and applied theories within each of these perspectives.
An abacus provides concrete experiences for learning abstract concepts.
To understand the characteristics of learners in childhood, adolescence, adulthood, and old age, educational psychology develops and applies theories of human development. Often cast as stages through which people pass as they mature, developmental theories describe changes in mental abilities (cognition), social roles, moral reasoning, and beliefs about the nature of knowledge.
For example, educational psychologists have researched the instructional applicability of Jean Piaget's theory of development, according to which children mature through four stages of cognitive capability. Piaget hypothesized that children are not capable of abstract logical thought until they are older than about 11 years, and therefore younger children need to be taught using concrete objects and examples. Researchers have found that transitions, such as from concrete to abstract logical thought, do not occur at the same time in all domains. A child may be able to think abstractly about mathematics, but remain limited to concrete thought when reasoning about human relationships. Perhaps Piaget's most enduring contribution is his insight that people actively construct their understanding through a self-regulatory process.[2]
Piaget proposed a developmental theory of moral reasoning in which children progress from a naive understanding of morality based on behavior and outcomes to a more advanced understanding based on intentions. Piaget's views of moral development were elaborated by Kohlberg into a stage theory of moral development. There is evidence that the moral reasoning described in stage theories is not sufficient to account for moral behavior. For example, other factors such as modeling (as described by the social cognitive theory of morality) are required to explain bullying.
Developmental theories are sometimes presented not as shifts between qualitatively different stages, but as gradual increments on separate dimensions. Development of epistemological beliefs (beliefs about knowledge) have been described in terms of gradual changes in people's belief in: certainty and permanence of knowledge, fixedness of ability, and credibility of authorities such as teachers and experts. People develop more sophisticated beliefs about knowledge as they gain in education and maturity.[3]
Individual differences and disabilities
An example of an item from a cognitive abilities test.
Each person has an individual profile of characteristics, abilities and challenges that result from learning and development. These manifest as individual differences in intelligence, creativity, cognitive style, motivation, and the capacity to process information, communicate, and relate to others. The most prevalent disabilities found among school age children are attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), learning disability, dyslexia, and speech disorder. Less common disabilities include mental retardation, hearing impairment, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, and blindness.
Although theories of intelligence have been discussed by philosophers since Plato, intelligence testing is an invention of educational psychology, and is coincident with the development of that discipline. Continuing debates about the nature of intelligence revolve on whether intelligence can be characterized by a single, scalar factor (Spearman's general intelligence), multiple factors (as in Sternberg's triarchic theory of intelligence and Gardner's theory of multiple intelligences), or whether it can be measured at all. In practice, standardized instruments such as the Stanford-Binet IQ test and the WISC are widely used in economically developed countries to identify children in need of individualized educational treatment. Children classified as gifted are often provided with accelerated or enriched programs. Children with identified deficits may be provided with enhanced education in specific skills such as phonological awareness.
Learning and cognition
Two fundamental assumptions that underlie formal education systems are that students (a) retain knowledge and skills they acquire in school, and (b) can apply them in situations outside the classroom. But are these assumptions accurate? Research has found that, even when students report not using the knowledge acquired in school, a considerable portion is retained for many years and long term retention is strongly dependent on the initial level of mastery.[4] One study found that university students who took a child development course and attained high grades showed, when tested 10 years later, average retention scores of about 30%, whereas those who obtained moderate or lower grades showed average retention scores of about 20%.[5] There is much less consensus on the crucial question of how much knowledge acquired in school transfers to tasks encountered outside formal educational settings, and how such transfer occurs.[6] Some psychologists claim that research evidence for this type of far transfer is scarce,[7][8] while others claim there is abundant evidence of far transfer in specific domains.[9] Several perspectives have been established within which the theories of learning used in educational psychology are formed and contested. These include Behaviorism, Cognitivism, Social Cognitivism, and Constructivism. This section summarizes how educational psychology has researched and applied theories within each of these perspectives.
EDUCATION PSYCHOLOGY
Educational psychology is the study of how humans learn in educational settings, the effectiveness of educational interventions, the psychology of teaching, and the social psychology of schools as organizations. Although the terms "educational psychology" and "school psychology" are often used interchangeably, researchers and theorists are likely to be identified as educational psychologists, whereas practitioners in schools or school-related settings are identified as school psychologists. Educational psychology is concerned with the processes of educational attainment among the general population and sub-populations such as gifted children and those subject to specific disabilities.
Educational psychology can in part be understood through its relationship with other disciplines. It is informed primarily by psychology, bearing a relationship to that discipline analogous to the relationship between medicine and biology and also between Engineering and Physics. Educational psychology in turn informs a wide range of specialities within educational studies, including instructional design, educational technology, curriculum development, organizational learning, special education and classroom management. Educational psychology both draws from and contributes to cognitive science and the learning sciences. In universities, departments of educational psychology are usually housed within faculties of education, possibly accounting for the lack of representation of educational psychology content in introductory psychology textbooks.[1]
Educational psychology can in part be understood through its relationship with other disciplines. It is informed primarily by psychology, bearing a relationship to that discipline analogous to the relationship between medicine and biology and also between Engineering and Physics. Educational psychology in turn informs a wide range of specialities within educational studies, including instructional design, educational technology, curriculum development, organizational learning, special education and classroom management. Educational psychology both draws from and contributes to cognitive science and the learning sciences. In universities, departments of educational psychology are usually housed within faculties of education, possibly accounting for the lack of representation of educational psychology content in introductory psychology textbooks.[1]
Friday, August 24, 2007
HUMAN NATURE : Some Issues & Debates
1. Nature Versus Nurture in the IQ Debate
Evidence suggests that family environmental factors may have an effect upon childhood IQ, accounting for up to a quarter of the variance. On the other hand, by late adolescence this correlation disappears, such that adoptive siblings are no more similar in IQ than strangers.[8] Moreover, adoption studies indicate that, by adulthood, adoptive siblings are no more similar in IQ than strangers (IQ correlation near zero), while full siblings show an IQ correlation of 0.6. Twin studies reinforce this pattern: monozygotic (identical) twins raised separately are highly similar in IQ (0.86), more so than dizygotic (fraternal) twins raised together (0.6) and much more than adoptive siblings (~0.0). [9] Consequently, in the context of the "nature versus nurture" debate, the "nature" component appears to be much more important than the "nurture" component in explaining IQ variance in the general adult population of the United States.
2. Nature versus Nurture in Personality Traits
Personality is a frequently cited example of a heritable trait that has been studied in twins and adoptions. Identical twins reared apart are far more similar in personality than randomly selected pairs of people. Likewise, identical twins are more similar than fraternal twins. Also, biological siblings are more similar in personality than adoptive siblings. Each observation suggests that personality is heritable to a certain extent. However, these same study designs allow for the examination of environment as well as genes. Adoption studies also directly measure the strength of shared family effects. Adopted siblings share only family environment. Unexpectedly, some adoption studies indicate that by adulthood the personalities of adopted siblings are no more similar than random pairs of strangers. This would mean that shared family effects on personality are zero by adulthood. As is the case with personality, non-shared environmental effects are often found to out-weigh shared environmental effects. That is, environmental effects that are typically thought to be life-shaping (such as family life) may have less of an impact than non-shared effects, which are harder to identify. One possible source of non-shared effects is the environment of pre-natal development. Random variations in the genetic program of development may be a substantial source of non-shared environment. These results suggest that "nurture" may not be the predominant factor in "environment".
3. Advanced techniques
The power of quantitative studies of heritable traits has been expanded by the development of new techniques. Developmental genetic analysis examines the effects of genes over the course of a human lifespan. For example, early studies of intelligence, which mostly examined young children, found heritability measures of 40 to 50 percent. Subsequent developmental genetic analyses have found that genetic contribution to intelligence increases over a lifespan,[10][11][12] reaching a heritability of 80 percent in adulthood.
Another advanced technique, multivariate genetic analysis, examines the genetic contribution to several traits that vary together. For example, multivariate genetic analysis has demonstrated that the genetic determinants of all specific cognitive abilities (e.g., memory, spatial reasoning, processing speed) overlap greatly, such that the genes associated with any specific cognitive ability will affect all others. Similarly, multivariate genetic analysis has found that genes that affect scholastic achievement completely overlap with the genes that affect cognitive ability.
Extremes analysis, examines the link between normal and pathological traits. For example, it is hypothesized that a given behavioral disorder may represent an extreme of a continuous distribution of a normal behavior and hence an extreme of a continuous distribution of genetic and environmental variation. Depression, phobias, and reading disabilities have been examined in this context.
For highly heritable traits, it is now possible to search for individual genes that contribute to variation in that trait. For example, several research groups have identified genetic loci that contribute to schizophrenia (Harrison and Owen, 2003).
4. Moral difficulties: eugenics, etc.
Some observers believe that modern science tends to give too much weight to the nature side of the argument, in part because of social consciousness. Historically, much of this debate has had undertones of racist and eugenicist policies — the notion of race as a scientific truth has often been assumed as a prerequisite in various incarnations of the nature versus nurture debate. In the past, heredity was often used as "scientific" justification for various forms of discrimination and oppression along racial and class lines. Works published in the United States since the 1960s that argue for the primacy of "nature" over "nurture" in determining certain characteristics, such as The Bell Curve, have been greeted with considerable controversy and scorn.
A critique of moral arguments against the nature side of the argument could be that they cross the is-ought gap. That is, they apply values to facts.
5. Philosophical difficulties: are the traits real?
It is sometimes a question whether the "trait" being measured is even a real thing. Much energy has been devoted to calculating the heritability of intelligence (usually the I.Q., or intelligence quotient), but there is still some disagreement as to what exactly "intelligence" is.
6. Philosophical difficulties: Biological determinism
If genes do contribute substantially to the development of personal characteristics such as intelligence and personality, then many wonder if this implies that genes determine who we are. Biological determinism is the thesis that genes determine who we are. Few if any scientists would make such a claim[citation needed]; however, many are accused of doing so. Defining the words "who" and "am" also present philosophical difficulties.
Others have pointed out that the premise of the "nature versus nurture" debate seems to negate the significance of free will[citation needed]. More specifically, if all our traits are determined by our genes, by our environment, by chance, or by some combination of these acting together, then there seems to be little room for free will. In any case, this line of reasoning suggests that the "nature versus nurture" debate tends to exaggerate the degree to which individual human behavior can be predicted based on knowledge of genetics and the environment. It should also be pointed out that biology may determine our abilities, but free will still determines what we do with our abilities.
7. Philosophical difficulties: is the problem real?
Many scientists feel that the very question opposing nature to nurture is a fallacy. Already in 1951, Calvin Hall in his seminal chapter[13] remarked that the discussion opposing nature and nurture was fruitless. If an environment is changed fundamentally, then the heritability of a character changes, too. Conversely, if the genetic composition of a population changes, then heritability will also change. As an example, we may use phenylketonuria (PKU), which causes brain damage and progressive mental retardation. PKU can be treated by the elimination of phenylalanine from the diet. Hence, a character (PKU) that used to have a virtually perfect heritability is not heritable any more if modern medicine is available. Similarly, within, say, an inbred strain of mice, no genetic variation is present and every character will have a zero heritability. If the complications of gene-environment interactions and correlations (see above) are added, then it appears to many that heritability, the epitome of the nature-nurture opposition, is "a station passed"[14]
8. Myths about identity
Within the debates surrounding cloning, for example, is the far-fetched contention that a Jesus or a Hitler could be "re-created" through genetic cloning. Current thinking finds this largely inaccurate, and discounts the possibility that the clone of anyone would grow up to be the same individual due to environmental variation. For example, like clones, identical twins are genetically identical, and unlike the hypothetical clones share the same family environment, yet they are not identical in personality and other traits.
Evidence suggests that family environmental factors may have an effect upon childhood IQ, accounting for up to a quarter of the variance. On the other hand, by late adolescence this correlation disappears, such that adoptive siblings are no more similar in IQ than strangers.[8] Moreover, adoption studies indicate that, by adulthood, adoptive siblings are no more similar in IQ than strangers (IQ correlation near zero), while full siblings show an IQ correlation of 0.6. Twin studies reinforce this pattern: monozygotic (identical) twins raised separately are highly similar in IQ (0.86), more so than dizygotic (fraternal) twins raised together (0.6) and much more than adoptive siblings (~0.0). [9] Consequently, in the context of the "nature versus nurture" debate, the "nature" component appears to be much more important than the "nurture" component in explaining IQ variance in the general adult population of the United States.
2. Nature versus Nurture in Personality Traits
Personality is a frequently cited example of a heritable trait that has been studied in twins and adoptions. Identical twins reared apart are far more similar in personality than randomly selected pairs of people. Likewise, identical twins are more similar than fraternal twins. Also, biological siblings are more similar in personality than adoptive siblings. Each observation suggests that personality is heritable to a certain extent. However, these same study designs allow for the examination of environment as well as genes. Adoption studies also directly measure the strength of shared family effects. Adopted siblings share only family environment. Unexpectedly, some adoption studies indicate that by adulthood the personalities of adopted siblings are no more similar than random pairs of strangers. This would mean that shared family effects on personality are zero by adulthood. As is the case with personality, non-shared environmental effects are often found to out-weigh shared environmental effects. That is, environmental effects that are typically thought to be life-shaping (such as family life) may have less of an impact than non-shared effects, which are harder to identify. One possible source of non-shared effects is the environment of pre-natal development. Random variations in the genetic program of development may be a substantial source of non-shared environment. These results suggest that "nurture" may not be the predominant factor in "environment".
3. Advanced techniques
The power of quantitative studies of heritable traits has been expanded by the development of new techniques. Developmental genetic analysis examines the effects of genes over the course of a human lifespan. For example, early studies of intelligence, which mostly examined young children, found heritability measures of 40 to 50 percent. Subsequent developmental genetic analyses have found that genetic contribution to intelligence increases over a lifespan,[10][11][12] reaching a heritability of 80 percent in adulthood.
Another advanced technique, multivariate genetic analysis, examines the genetic contribution to several traits that vary together. For example, multivariate genetic analysis has demonstrated that the genetic determinants of all specific cognitive abilities (e.g., memory, spatial reasoning, processing speed) overlap greatly, such that the genes associated with any specific cognitive ability will affect all others. Similarly, multivariate genetic analysis has found that genes that affect scholastic achievement completely overlap with the genes that affect cognitive ability.
Extremes analysis, examines the link between normal and pathological traits. For example, it is hypothesized that a given behavioral disorder may represent an extreme of a continuous distribution of a normal behavior and hence an extreme of a continuous distribution of genetic and environmental variation. Depression, phobias, and reading disabilities have been examined in this context.
For highly heritable traits, it is now possible to search for individual genes that contribute to variation in that trait. For example, several research groups have identified genetic loci that contribute to schizophrenia (Harrison and Owen, 2003).
4. Moral difficulties: eugenics, etc.
Some observers believe that modern science tends to give too much weight to the nature side of the argument, in part because of social consciousness. Historically, much of this debate has had undertones of racist and eugenicist policies — the notion of race as a scientific truth has often been assumed as a prerequisite in various incarnations of the nature versus nurture debate. In the past, heredity was often used as "scientific" justification for various forms of discrimination and oppression along racial and class lines. Works published in the United States since the 1960s that argue for the primacy of "nature" over "nurture" in determining certain characteristics, such as The Bell Curve, have been greeted with considerable controversy and scorn.
A critique of moral arguments against the nature side of the argument could be that they cross the is-ought gap. That is, they apply values to facts.
5. Philosophical difficulties: are the traits real?
It is sometimes a question whether the "trait" being measured is even a real thing. Much energy has been devoted to calculating the heritability of intelligence (usually the I.Q., or intelligence quotient), but there is still some disagreement as to what exactly "intelligence" is.
6. Philosophical difficulties: Biological determinism
If genes do contribute substantially to the development of personal characteristics such as intelligence and personality, then many wonder if this implies that genes determine who we are. Biological determinism is the thesis that genes determine who we are. Few if any scientists would make such a claim[citation needed]; however, many are accused of doing so. Defining the words "who" and "am" also present philosophical difficulties.
Others have pointed out that the premise of the "nature versus nurture" debate seems to negate the significance of free will[citation needed]. More specifically, if all our traits are determined by our genes, by our environment, by chance, or by some combination of these acting together, then there seems to be little room for free will. In any case, this line of reasoning suggests that the "nature versus nurture" debate tends to exaggerate the degree to which individual human behavior can be predicted based on knowledge of genetics and the environment. It should also be pointed out that biology may determine our abilities, but free will still determines what we do with our abilities.
7. Philosophical difficulties: is the problem real?
Many scientists feel that the very question opposing nature to nurture is a fallacy. Already in 1951, Calvin Hall in his seminal chapter[13] remarked that the discussion opposing nature and nurture was fruitless. If an environment is changed fundamentally, then the heritability of a character changes, too. Conversely, if the genetic composition of a population changes, then heritability will also change. As an example, we may use phenylketonuria (PKU), which causes brain damage and progressive mental retardation. PKU can be treated by the elimination of phenylalanine from the diet. Hence, a character (PKU) that used to have a virtually perfect heritability is not heritable any more if modern medicine is available. Similarly, within, say, an inbred strain of mice, no genetic variation is present and every character will have a zero heritability. If the complications of gene-environment interactions and correlations (see above) are added, then it appears to many that heritability, the epitome of the nature-nurture opposition, is "a station passed"[14]
8. Myths about identity
Within the debates surrounding cloning, for example, is the far-fetched contention that a Jesus or a Hitler could be "re-created" through genetic cloning. Current thinking finds this largely inaccurate, and discounts the possibility that the clone of anyone would grow up to be the same individual due to environmental variation. For example, like clones, identical twins are genetically identical, and unlike the hypothetical clones share the same family environment, yet they are not identical in personality and other traits.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)