What is inconsistent self concept?

What if a person’s characteristic ways of thinking and behaving cause significant distress to the self or others? What if the person can’t change this way of relating to the world and is unhappy? We might consider this person to have a personality disorder. Unlike many of the disorders, personality disorders are chronic; they do not come and go but originate in childhood and continue throughout adulthood.Because these chronic problems affect personality, they pervade every aspect of a person’s life. For example, if a person is overly suspicious, this trait will affect almost everything he or she does, including their employment (they may change jobs often if they believes coworkers conspire against them), their relationships (they may not be able to sustain a lasting relationship if they can’t trust anyone) and even where they lives, specifically in the case of women (they may move often if they suspects their landlords out to get them). Most of us are sometimes suspicious of others and a little paranoid, overly dramatic, too self–involved, or reclusive. Fortunately these characteristics do not last long or are not overly intense; they haven’t significantly impaired how we live and work.People with personality Disorders, however, display problem characteristics great emotional pain for themselves, others, or both. Their difficulty, then, can be seen as one of the degree rather than kind. The distinction between problems of degree and problems of kind is usually described in terms of dimensions instead of categories.The issue that continues to be debated in the field is whether personality disorders are extreme versions of otherwise normal personality variations (dimensions) or ways of relating that are different from psychologically healthy behavior (categories) (Widiger & Trull, 2007). You can see the difference between dimensions and categories in everyday life. For example, we tend to look at gender categorically. Our society views us as being in one category- “female”- or the other- “male”. Yet we also look at gender in terms of dimensions. For example, we know that “maleness” and “femaleness” are partly determined by hormones. We could identify people along testosterone, estrogen or both dimensions and rate them on a continuum of maleness and femaleness rather than in the absolute categories of male or female. We also often label people’s size categorically, as tall, average, or short. But height, too, can be viewed dimensionally, in inches or centimeters.

Although no general consensus exists about what the basic personality dimensions might be, there are several contenders (south et al, 2011). One of the more widely accepted is called the 5 factor model, or the “Big five” and is taken from work on normal personality (Hopwood & Thomas, 2013; Mccrae & Costa Jr., 2008).

In this model people can be rated on a series of personality dimensions, and the combination of five components describes why people are so different. The Major 5 factors or dimensions of the personality are Extroversion (talkative, assertive and active versus silent, passive and reserved); Agreeableness kind, trusting and warm versus hostile, selfish and mistrustful); Conscientiousness (organized thorough and reliable versus careless, negligent and unreliable); Neuroticism (even-tempered versus nervous, moody, and temperamental); and openness to experience (imaginative, curious and creative versus shallow and imperceptive) (McCrae & Costa Jr, 2008). On each dimension people are rated high, low or somewhere between.Here is the question how to conceptualized personality and functioning and its prediction of aggressive and antisocial behavior?Individuals with antisocial personality disorder tend to have long histories of violating the rights of others (Hare et al., 2012). They are often described as being aggressive because they take what they want, indifferent to the concerns of other people. Lying and cheating seem to be second nature to them, and often they appear unable to tell the difference between the truth and the lies they make up to further their own goals. They show no remorse or concern over the sometimes devastating effects of their actions. Substance abuse like use of alcohol, tobacco, drugs etc. Occurring in 60% of people with aggressive and antisocial behavior and it appears to be lifelong pattern among these individuals.Antisocial Personality behavior have had a number of names over the years. It includes moral insanity, Egopathy, Sociopathy and Psychopathy. The most researched personality traits are aggressive and antisocial and psychopathy.In the study of almost 1,000 children (White, Moffitt, and Silva, 1989), beginning at the age 5, to see what predicted antisocial behavior at age 15. They found that of the 5 year-olds determined to be at higher risk for later delinquent behavior, 16% did indeed have run-ins with the law by the age of15 and 84% did not. What distinguished these two groups? In general, the at risk children with lower IQs were the ones who got in trouble. This suggests that having a higher IQ may help protect some people from developing more serious problems, or may at least prevent them from getting caught. Some aggressive or antisocial function quite successfully in certain segments of society, for example, politics, business, and in entertainment.

In summary, the overall results in this study highlights the assessment of behavioral emotional and cognitive dysregulation when attempting to understand the underlying factors of aggressive and antisocial behavior in detained youth. The structure of personality in detained children and youth may best be conceptualized in a hierarchical way, where there one large higher order factor of behavioral, cognitive and emotional dysregulation. Further these three second order factors may break into Big five personality traits.

After more than a decade of relative neglect, self-concept is enjoying renewed popularity and attention by both researchers and practitioners. There is growing awareness that of all the perceptions we experience in the course of living, none has more profound significance than the perceptions we hold regarding our own personal existence “our concept of who we are and how we fit into the world.

Self-concept may be defined as 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. Self-concept is different from self-esteem (feelings of personal worth and level of satisfaction regarding one’s self) or self-report (what a person is willing and able to disclose). Fromm (1956) was as beautifully clear as anyone when he described self-concept as “life being aware of itself.”

Brief history of self-concept theory
A milestone in human reflection about the non-physical inner self came in 1644, when Rene 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 1970’s and 1980–s, 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:

1. A cornucopia of contrived games, gimmicks, and techniques that were introduced and controlled by unprepared professionals.

2. 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.

3. 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.

4. 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 and Weed, 1986) are demonstrating that negative self-talk leads to irrational thinking regarding oneself and the world.

Some basic assumptions regarding self-concept
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. Rome was not built in a day, and neither is self-concept.

• Perceived success and failure impact on 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.

Summary This brief overview of self-concept theory has focused on describing the ways people organize and interpret their inner world of personal existence. The beginnings of self-concept theory and its recent history have been discussed. Three major qualities of self-concept “that it is: (1) learned, (2) organized, and (3) dynamic “have been presented. Individuals have within themselves relatively boundless potential for developing a positive and realistic self-concept. This potential can be realized by people, places, policies, programs, and processes that are intentionally designed to invite the realization of this potential.

References

Freud, S. (1900). The interpretation of dreams. In the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud. London. The Hogarth Press, 1962.

Fromm, E. (1956). The art of loving. New York. Harper and Row.

Hamachek, D. E. (1978). Encounters with the self (2nd ed.). New York. Holt Rinehart and Winston.

Jourard, S. (1971). Self-disclosure: An experimental analysis of the transparent self. New York. Wiley-Interscience.

Lecky, P. (1945). Self-consistency: A theory of personality. New York. Island Press.

McAdam, E. K. (1986). Cognitive behavior therapy and its application with adolescents. Journal of Adolescence, 9. pp. 1-15.

Patterson, C. H. (1961). The self in recent Rogerian theory. Journal of Individual Psychology, 17. pp.5-11.

Purkey, W. W., & Schmidt, J. (1987). The inviting relationship: An expanded perspective for professional counseling. Englewood Cliffs, NJ. Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Raimy, V. C. (1948). Self-reference in counseling interviews. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 12. pp. 153-163.

Rogers, C. R. (1947). Some observations on the organization of personality. American Psychologist, 2. pp. 358-368.

Ryan, E. B., Short, E. J. and Weed, K. A. (1986). The role of cognitive strategy training in improving the academic performance of learning disabled children. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 19. pp. 521-529.

This feature is an ERIC Digest and is in the public domain