Please create 3 Power Point Slides

2504743 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

11 THE HUMANISTIC APPROACH: THEORY, APPLICATION, AND ASSESSMENT

Learning Objectives

Upon completion of this chapter, the reader should be able to:

11.1 Describe the key elements of the humanistic approach to personality.

11.2 Identify Carl Rogers’ contributions to the humanistic approach.

11.3 Identify Abraham Maslow’s contributions to the humanistic approach.

11.4 Describe optimal experience and how it relates to happiness.

11.5 Describe the key features of Rogers’ person-centered approach to psychotherapy.

11.6 Discuss how the Q-Sort technique can be used to measure change during psychotherapy.

11.7 Describe some of the strengths and criticisms of the humanistic approach.

©iStockphoto.com/serts

One of the authors was once involved in a discussion about Jim Morrison, the leader of the 1960s rock group The Doors. For a few years, Morrison was a rock legend who personified counterculture thinking. But he also abused his body with drugs and alcohol and died of an apparent heart attack at age 27. One man in this discussion blamed society for Morrison’s self-destructive behavior and death. He argued Morrison’s alienation from his parents, harassment by police, and pressure from music industry executives pushed the singer to his tragic death. A woman in the group disagreed. She maintained no one forced Jim Morrison to take outrageous doses of dangerous drugs or to go on daily drinking binges. For that matter, no one kept him in the music business. If it was that much hassle, he could easily have gotten out.

Which of these views do you suppose is more “humanistic”? You may be surprised to find the woman who blamed Morrison’s problems on himself is probably more aligned with the view of humanistic psychology than the man who pointed to society and the hassles Morrison faced. This is not to say that humanistic psychologists are heartless or insensitive to the problems society tosses our way. But failure to take personal responsibility for how we react to those problems is completely foreign to the humanistic approach to personality and well-being.

This perspective is easier to understand if we look at the circumstances that gave birth to the humanistic view. By the mid-20th century, two major views of humanity had emerged from the discipline of psychology. One was the Freudian concept. According to this perspective, we are all victims of unconscious sexual and aggressive instincts that constantly influence our behavior. The other view came from the behaviorists (discussed in Chapter 13), who, in the extreme, view humans as little more than large, complex rats. Just as a rat is conditioned to respond to laboratory stimuli, humans are said to respond to stimuli in their living environments over which they have no control. We act the way we do because of the situation we are in or the situations we have been in before—not because of some personal choice or direction.

Many psychologists had difficulty accepting either of these descriptions of human nature. In particular, important aspects of human personality such as free will and human dignity were missing from the Freudians’ and the behaviorists’ descriptions. In response to these concerns, a “third force” was born. The humanistic approach

2504743 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

(sometimes, perhaps incorrectly, referred to as existential or phenomenological psychology) paints a very different picture of our species.

A key distinction between the humanistic approach and other theories of personality is that humanistic psychologists assume people are largely responsible for their actions. Although we sometimes respond automatically to events and may at times be motivated by unconscious impulses, most of the time we have the power to determine our own destiny and to decide our actions. We have free will. Jim Morrison may have found himself under tremendous pressure and difficulties, but how he responded to that situation was his own choice. Had Morrison seen a humanistic therapist, he probably would have been encouraged to accept this responsibility and make choices about his lifestyle consistent with his individuality and personal needs.

The third force in American psychology caught on rapidly with a large number of psychotherapists and personality theorists. The emphasis on individuality and personal expression in the 1960s (which gave rise to the counterculture movement personified by Jim Morrison) provided fertile soil for the growth of humanistic psychology. The election of prominent humanistic psychologist Abraham Maslow to president of the American Psychological Association in 1967 symbolized the acceptance of the humanistic approach as a legitimate alternative perspective.

Humanistic psychology never did overthrow psychoanalysis or behaviorism, but it did manage to make a niche for itself among the major approaches to understanding human personality. Although not as popular as it once was, there remains an active community of humanistic psychologists and a large number of psychotherapists who identify with this perspective.

THE ROOTS OF HUMANISTIC PSYCHOLOGY

LO 11.1 Describe the key elements of the humanistic approach to personality.

Although humanistic psychology evolved from many sources, its roots lie primarily in two areas: existential philosophy, which is decidedly European in flavor, and the work of some American psychologists, most notably Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow.

Existential philosophy addresses many of the questions that later became cornerstones of the humanistic approach. Some of these include the meaning of our existence, the role of free will, and the uniqueness of each human being. Some psychologists align themselves so closely with existential philosophers they have adopted the label existential psychologists. The list of prominent existential psychologists includes Ludwig Binswanger, Medard Boss, Viktor Frankl, R. D. Laing, and Rollo May. Existential psychotherapy frequently focuses on existential anxiety— the feelings of dread and panic that follow the realization that there is no meaning to one’s life. Therapy often emphasizes the freedom to choose and develop a lifestyle that reduces feelings of emptiness, anxiety, and boredom.

At about the time existential philosophy was making its way into conversations among psychologists, two psychologists were writing about their personal transitions from traditional views of personality to a humanistic perspective. Carl Rogers found his early efforts as a psychotherapist were largely unsuccessful. He started to question his ability to understand his clients’ problems and wondered whether he really could help people overcome their problems. “It began to occur to me,” Rogers reflected many years later, “that unless I had a need to demonstrate my own cleverness … I would do better to rely upon the client for direction” (1967, p. 359).

The turning point for Abraham Maslow came while watching a World War II parade. Although the parade was supposed to promote American patriotism and the war effort, it made Maslow aware of the scope of society’s problems and just how little psychology had contributed to bettering the human condition. He became determined “to prove that human beings are capable of something grander than war and prejudice and hatred” (as cited in Hall, 1968, p. 55).

The new ideas promoted by Rogers and Maslow found a receptive audience among psychologists also bothered by the limitations and deficiencies they saw in the dominant approaches to personality at the time. Within a relatively short period, these ideas and contributions from many other psychologists developed into a comprehensive new approach for understanding personality. However, unlike psychoanalysis, there is no single authority we

2504743 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

can point to as the definitive spokesperson for the humanistic perspective and no clearly agreed-upon definition of what constitutes a humanistic personality theory. Nonetheless, we can identify some elements that are central to the humanistic approach.

Key Elements of the Humanistic Approach

The problem of having no agreed-upon definition for humanistic psychology became obvious in the 1960s and early 1970s when it seemed nearly everyone identified themselves as “humanistic” in an effort to capitalize on the popularity of the approach. As a result, humanistic psychology sometimes was associated with faddish therapies that promised to solve problems and provide the key to happiness for the price of a paperback book. Although no clear criteria exist for identifying which approaches to psychotherapy fall into the humanistic category, it is safe to say the following four elements are central to the general viewpoint to which we apply the “humanistic” label: (1) an emphasis on personal responsibility, (2) an emphasis on the “here and now,” (3) a focus on the experience of the individual, and (4) an emphasis on personal growth.

Personal Responsibility

Although we may try to deny it, we are ultimately responsible for what happens to us. This idea, borrowed from existential philosophers, is central to the humanistic approach to personality and is illustrated in the way we commonly use the phrase “I have to.” We say, “I have to go to class,” “I have to meet some friends,” “I have to take care of my children,” and so forth. But the truth is we don’t have to do any of these things. Within limits, there is practically nothing we have to do. Rather, humanistic psychologists argue, virtually all our behaviors represent personal choices. We choose to remain in relationships; we do not have to. We choose to act passively; we could decide to act forcefully. We choose to go to work, call our friends, leave a party, or send a Christmas present. We do not have to do any of these things. The price we pay for making some of these choices can be steep, but they are choices nonetheless.

Unlike the Freudian or behavioral descriptions of people at the mercy of forces they cannot control, humanistic psychologists see people as active shapers of their own lives, with freedom to change limited only by physical constraints. Clients working with humanistic psychotherapists are encouraged to accept that they have the power to change their lives. However, this power can be a two-edged sword. When speaking in the abstract, nearly everyone agrees freedom of choice is a good thing. But when applied at a personal level, accepting that our fate is in our own hands is often quite frightening. Taking responsibility means no more blaming others for your problems and no more feeling sorry for yourself. If things are going to change, it is up to you to do the changing.

The Here and Now

Think about the last time you walked to a class or to a scheduled meeting. Perhaps you spent the time thinking about what you did last weekend or ruminating over an embarrassing incident. Maybe you rehearsed something you wanted to say to someone or thought about how nice it would be just to get through this week. A humanistic psychologist might say what you really did was to lose 10 minutes. You failed to experience fully the 10 minutes life handed you. You could have enjoyed the fresh air, appreciated the blue sky, or learned something from observing or talking with other people.

According to the humanistic perspective, we can’t become fully functioning individuals until we learn to live our lives as they happen. Some reflection on the past or future can be helpful, but most people spend far too much time thinking about events that have already happened or planning those that might. Time spent on these activities is time lost, for you can live life fully only if you live it in the here and now. Of course, potential distractions from living life to its fullest are everywhere. The writer Carl Sandburg once referred to television as “a thief of time.” Were he alive today, one can only imagine what he might say about the countless hours lost to the many mindless diversions available through cell phones and the internet.

A popular poster reminds us, “Today Is the First Day of the Rest of Your Life.” This phrase could well have been coined by a humanistic psychologist. The humanistic view maintains that we need not be victims of our past. Certainly, our past experiences shape and influence who we are and how we behave. But these experiences should not dictate what we can become. People do not need to remain shy and unassertive just because they “have always been that way.” You do not have to remain in an unhappy relationship simply because you don’t know what else to do. Your past has guided you to where you are today, but it is not an anchor.

The Experience of the Individual

2504743 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

No one knows you better than yourself. This observation is a cornerstone of humanistic psychology. Humanistic psychologists argue it’s absurd for therapists to listen to clients, decide what the clients’ problems are, and force clients to accept the therapist’s interpretation of what should be changed and how it should be changed. Instead, humanistic therapists seek to understand what their clients are experiencing and try to provide a therapeutic atmosphere that allows clients to help themselves.

People sometimes find this view of the therapist’s role a bit puzzling. Aren’t clients turning to therapy because they need help understanding and solving their problems? The answer is that, whereas some people may not understand the source of their difficulties at the moment, the therapist also has no access to this information. During the course of successful therapy, clients come to understand themselves and develop an appropriate strategy for dealing with their problems. You might have had a similar experience when facing a personal issue. Well- meaning friends may have provided plenty of advice, but it was only when you considered that advice and came to a decision on your own that you were able to resolve the problem.

Personal Growth

Suppose tomorrow you inherited several million dollars, settled down with someone who will admire and love you always, and were promised a long and healthy life. Would you be happy? Most likely, your answer is “yes,” or perhaps even, “Are you kidding?” No doubt having all these things is better than not having them. But a humanistic psychologist would probably predict your happiness is short-lived. That’s because there is more to life than simply taking care of all our immediate needs. Happiness also requires that we grow in a positive direction. According to the humanistic approach, we are all motivated to progress toward some ultimately satisfying state of being. Carl Rogers referred to this state as becoming a fully functioning individual. Abraham Maslow (1970) used the term self-actualization. People become self- actualized when they become “more what one idiosyncratically is, to become everything that one is capable of becoming” (p. 46).

This growth process is assumed to be the natural manner of human development. That is, we progress toward this satisfying state unless life’s difficulties prevent us from doing so. When obstacles block our personal growth, humanistic psychotherapy can be helpful. However, the therapist does not put clients back on track. Only the client can do that. Rather, the therapist creates a therapeutic atmosphere that allows clients to overcome their problems and continue growing. Rogers describes this ever-unfolding of one’s self as a “process of becoming.”

CARL ROGERS

LO 11.2 Identify Carl Rogers’ contributions to the humanistic approach.

Humanistic psychology could ask for no better example of how to live life fully than the career of Carl Rogers. Rogers pioneered humanistic psychotherapy. He was the first to popularize a “person-centered” approach to treating clients (Rogers, 1951) and was an early advocate of using groups as a form of therapy (Rogers, 1970). He eventually expanded his ideas from his work with clients into a general theory of personality (Rogers, 1961). Late in his career, Rogers applied the humanistic approach to social issues such as education and world peace (Rogers, 1969, 1977, 1982).

Carl Rogers

1902–1987

2504743 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

©Getty Image/Bettman/Contributor

Like the inevitable unfolding of one’s true self that he promoted, Carl Rogers’ interest in science and his concern for people carried him from Midwest farm boy to leader of the humanistic movement in psychology. Carl was a shy but very intelligent boy growing up in Illinois. He had a particular fondness for science, and by the time he was 13 had developed a reputation as the local expert on biology and agriculture.

Ironically, the Rogers household was anything but warm and affectionate. Openly expressing emotions, later a key feature of Rogerian therapy, was not allowed. As a result, like two of his siblings, Carl developed an ulcer by age 15.

Rogers went to his mother and father’s alma mater, the University of Wisconsin, in 1919 to study agriculture. He had planned a career in farming but soon lost his enthusiasm. He tried a correspondence course in psychology one summer and found it boring. Finally, he settled on religious studies. In 1924, Carl moved with his new wife, Helen, to New York City to attend Union Theological Seminary as he prepared himself for a career as a minister.

But two developments in New York led to a change in plans. First, studying theology caused Carl to question his religious beliefs. “It would be a horrible thing to have to profess to a set of beliefs in order to remain in one’s profession,” he observed. “I wanted to find a field in which I could be sure my freedom of thought would not be limited” (cited in Kirschenbaum, 1979, pp. 51–52). A career in theology promised Rogers an opportunity to help people, but his faith continued to wane. The second development was a renewed introduction to psychology. While at the seminary, Rogers and several classmates took psychology courses across the street at Columbia University. These

2504743 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

classmates included Theodore Newcomb and Ernest Hilgard, who also went on to become important figures in psychology. Much to his parents’ dismay, Rogers eventually left the church to pursue graduate study in psychology at Columbia.

After graduation, Rogers worked at a child guidance clinic in Rochester, New York. Later he joined the faculty at Ohio State University and the University of Chicago before returning to the University of Wisconsin in 1957. Throughout this time, Rogers battled with the well-established Freudian approach to psychotherapy and the dominant behavioral influence in academia. But in time he began to win many of these battles. When the American Psychological Association handed out its first annual award for distinguished scientific contribution in 1956, Carl Rogers was the recipient.

In 1963 Rogers moved to La Jolla, California, where he founded the Center for Studies of the Person. He devoted the last 15 years of his life to the issues of social conflict and world peace. Even in his 80s, he led workshops and communication groups in such places as the Soviet Union and South Africa. Rogers continued to write extensively and to shape the discipline of psychology until his death in February 1987.

The Fully Functioning Person

Like other humanistic theorists, Rogers maintained that each of us naturally strives to reach an optimal sense of satisfaction with our lives. He called people who reach this goal fully functioning. What are fully functioning people like? Rogers identified several characteristics. Fully functioning people are open to new experiences. Rather than falling into familiar patterns, they look to see what opportunities life might throw their way. Fully functioning people try to live each moment as it comes. The idea is to experience life, not just pass through.

Fully functioning individuals also learn to trust their feelings. If something feels right, they’re likely to try it. They are sensitive to the needs of others, but they aren’t overly concerned with meeting the standards society sets for them. If a fully functioning person wants to wear their hair a certain way or quit their job, they probably won’t stop themselves just because others might not approve. It’s not that fully functioning people are rebellious. They may follow the traditional path of college, job, marriage, and family, but only if each of these choices is consistent with their own interests, values, and needs.

Unlike some depictions of them, fully functioning people aren’t simply mellow folks who take everything in stride. On the contrary, they experience emotions—both positive and negative— more deeply and more intensely than most people. Fully functioning people accept and express their anger. To do otherwise would be to cut themselves off from some of their feelings. Because of these intense emotions, Rogers maintained that fully functioning people lead richer lives than most of us.

Anxiety and Defense

If we all have an innate desire to be fully functioning individuals, why is there so much unhappiness in the world? Why doesn’t everyone get the maximum enjoyment out of life? Rogers was well aware that the world is full of disappointments and difficulties, all of which are potential sources of anxiety. Becoming a fully functioning person doesn’t eliminate all our problems. But it does mean we acknowledge and deal with these problems directly rather than rely on psychological defenses to avoid them.

Rogers maintained that anxiety often results from encountering information that is inconsistent with the way we think of ourselves. You may believe you are a good tennis player, a kind person, a good student, or a pleasant conversationalist, but occasionally you receive information that contradicts this self-concept. For example, suppose you think of yourself as the kind of person everybody likes, but one day you overhear someone say what a jerk you are. How do you react? If you were fully functioning, you would accept the information. You might acknowledge to yourself that, although you are a fine person, not everyone is going to find you pleasant and wonderful. Unfortunately, most of us are not capable of such a well-adjusted reaction. For those of us who fall short of being fully functioning, hearing information that threatens our self-concept leads to anxiety. And if that information is excessively threatening, the anxiety will be difficult to manage.

This is where Rogers’s theory takes on a slight Freudian flavor. Rogers proposed that we initially process this threatening information at a level somewhere below consciousness, a process he called subception. As in Freud’s theory, we often rely on defenses to keep the information from entering awareness. Rogers called our most common defense distortion. Returning to the example, you might convince yourself the person who called you a jerk was in

2504743 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

a bad mood or is just a rude person. However, in more extreme cases, you might resort to outright denial. No, you might convince yourself, that person wasn’t really talking about me but about someone else with a name that sounds like mine.

People who think of themselves as undesirable also turn to distortion and denial when they encounter information to the contrary. If they hear someone is attracted to them, they might tell themselves the admirer is just being polite or perhaps is scheming to get something from them. We also use defenses when making observations about ourselves. Each of us on occasion acts in ways that fall short of our personal standards. Perhaps you have cheated a friend out of money or said some hurtful things to a loved one. Rather than acknowledge your shortcomings and trying to learn from your mistake, you may have distorted the situation (“Mary often overreacts to innocent comments”) or denied the facts (“I didn’t know the money was Raul’s”).

Distortion and denial often succeed in the short run by reducing anxiety. But this relief comes at a price. Each use takes us further away from experiencing life fully. In severe cases, people replace reality with fantasy. A man may think of himself as the world’s most desirable romantic partner when in fact there are no objective reasons to draw this conclusion. A woman student with poor grades might convince herself that she is a genius whose ideas are simply too sophisticated for her instructors to appreciate. However, at some point the gap between self- concept and reality may become so large even our defenses are inadequate. In this case, people experience what Rogers called a state of disorganization. The protective barrier against threatening information collapses, and the result is extreme anxiety.

Conditions of Worth and Unconditional Positive Regard

Why is it so difficult to face facts and incorporate relevant information as we develop a sense of who we are? Rogers’ answer is that most of us grow up in an atmosphere of conditional positive regard. As children, our parents and caregivers provide love and support. However, they rarely do this unconditionally. Rather, most parents communicate affection for their children as long as the children do what is expected of them. When parents disapprove of their children’s behavior, they withhold their admiration and love. The children get the message they are loved, but only when they do what their parents want. The positive regard children need and want is conditional upon their behavior.

2504743 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

Is the child bad, or has the child merely done a bad thing? Rogers argues that parents should provide children with unconditional positive regard. Although the child may have done something her parentsdid not like, she is still loved and prized by them.

©iStockphoto.com/kumikomini

As a result of this conditioned esteem, children learn to accept only the parts of themselves their parents deem appropriate. They deny or distort their weaknesses and faults and become less and less aware of who they really are. Unfortunately, this process continues when the child becomes an adult. We often incorporate into our self-concept only those characteristics that are likely to win the approval of significant people in our lives. Instead of acknowledging and expressing aspects of ourselves that others might not approve of, we simply deny that we possess these unflattering characteristics. And as we lose touch with our real self, we become less and less fully functioning.

The antidote for this self-defeating sequence is unconditional positive regard. When we experience unconditional positive regard, we know we will be accepted and loved no matter what we say or do. Rogers advised parents to communicate to their children that although they don’t approve of a specific behavior, they will always love and accept the child. Under these conditions, children no longer feel a need to deny thoughts and feelings that might lead their parents to withdraw affection. They are free to incorporate faults and weaknesses into their self-concepts and thereby are better able to experience life.

Fortunately, parents are not the only source of unconditional positive regard, and growing up in a family without this acceptance does not condemn a person to a less-than-full life. Adult relationships with friends and romantic partners can also be based on unconditional positive regard. Perhaps you are fortunate enough to have a close friend in whom you can confide anything without fear of losing that friendship. Psychologists can also create an atmosphere of

2504743 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

unconditional positive regard during psychotherapy. In fact, Rogers maintained this type of accepting environment is a requirement for effective treatment. We’ll examine more of Rogers’ ideas about psychotherapy later in this chapter.

ABRAHAM MASLOW

LO 11.3 Identify Abraham Maslow’s contributions to the humanistic approach.

Abraham Maslow spent most of his career filling in the gaps he found in other approaches to personality. At a time when the field was largely concerned with psychological disorders, Maslow wondered what psychology could do for the happy, healthy side of personality. “Freud supplied to us the sick half of psychology,” he wrote, “and we must now fill it out with the healthy half” (1968, p. 5). Maslow replaced Freud’s pessimistic and dismal view of human nature with an optimistic and uplifting portrayal. Although he acknowledged the existence of unconscious motives, Maslow focused his work on conscious aspects of personality.

Abraham H. Maslow

1908–1970

Credit: Bettmann/Contributor

The evolution of Abraham Maslow’s personal and professional life resembles in many ways the personal growth he described in his writings. Although generally regarded as a

2504743 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

warm and gregarious adult, Maslow had a cold and lonely childhood. “I was the little Jewish boy in the non-Jewish neighborhood,” he recalled. “I was isolated and unhappy. I grew up in libraries and among books, without friends” (cited in Hall, 1968, p. 37).

His professional career also started on a path far from his eventual position as one of the fathers of humanistic psychology. His parents, uneducated Russian immigrants, encouraged Maslow to go to law school. He went to City College of New York with a law career in mind, but he found law uninteresting and dropped out during the first year. Maslow later went to Cornell and then to the University of Wisconsin to study psychology. Ironically, he was attracted to psychology by behaviorism, particularly the works of John B. Watson. “I was so excited about Watson’s program,” he said. “I was confident that here was a real road to travel, solving one problem after another and changing the world” (cited in Hall, 1968, p. 37). Although his enthusiasm for behaviorism would eventually wane, Maslow’s desire to solve the world’s problems through psychology never diminished.

Maslow stayed at Wisconsin to finish his PhD in 1934. He remained a loyal behaviorist throughout this period, working closely with Harry Harlow in his animal lab. After graduation, Maslow went to Columbia University to work with the famous learning theorist E. L. Thorndike. But with the birth of his first daughter, Maslow went through a mystical experience similar to the peak experiences he later studied. Looking at his newborn child, Maslow realized that behaviorism was incapable of providing the understanding of human behavior he now needed. “I looked at this tiny, mysterious thing and felt so stupid,” he said. “I was stunned by the mystery and by the sense of not really being in control.… Anyone who had a baby couldn’t be a behaviorist” (cited in Hall, 1968, p. 56).

After Columbia, Maslow taught at Brooklyn College for 14 years, where he came into contact with Karen Horney and Alfred Adler. Most important, he met Max Wertheimer, one of the founders of Gestalt psychology, and Ruth Benedict, a cultural anthropologist. It was his desire to better understand these two individuals, whom he called “the most remarkable human beings,” who led him to his exploration of self-actualized people (Maslow, 1970). Maslow moved to Brandeis University in 1951 and remained there until shortly before his death in 1970. He hoped to leave a new movement in psychology as his legacy. “I like to be the first runner in the relay race,” he once said. “Then I like to pass on the baton to the next man” (cited in Hall, 1968, p. 56).

Motivation and the Hierarchy of Needs

Consider for a moment some of the concerns of typical middle-class Americans. Many fret about their personal relationships and their standing in the social community. Some are eager to make a contribution with their lives, finding satisfaction by working in service projects and for charitable organizations. Others want to expand their horizons. They read good literature, get involved with social causes, or take classes to develop their appreciation for the arts. But life is very different for many less affluent Americans and for many people living in other parts of the world today. In war-torn and impoverished regions, feeding oneself and one’s family is a dominant concern, as are finding shelter and protecting oneself from danger. The point is that spending time contemplating the direction of one’s life and experimenting with various avenues to express one’s potential are luxuries reserved for those who do not have to worry about day- to-day existence.

This example illustrates a key aspect of Maslow’s theory of personality; that is, which needs affect our behavior depends on the circumstances in our lives. Maslow described two types of motives. Deficiency motives result from a lack of some needed object. Basic needs such as hunger and thirst fall into this category. Once we obtain the needed object, deficiency motives are satisfied and, for a period of time, stop directing our behavior. In contrast, growth needs are not satisfied simply by finding the object we desire. Rather, growth needs are satisfied by expressing the motive, such as unselfishly giving love to another person and taking steps to develop your unique potential. Satisfying a growth need may even lead to an increase rather than a decrease in motivation.

Maslow identified five basic categories of needs—both deficiency and growth—and placed them in his well-known hierarchy of needs. As shown in Figure 11.1, he arranged the five kinds of needs in order of prominence. That is, some needs demand our attention more than others. Although there are exceptions, we typically attend to needs at the lower levels before turning to higher level needs. If you are hungry, your attention will be focused on obtaining food. Until this need is met, you won’t be very concerned about making new friends or developing a romantic relationship. Of course, once satisfied, the lower need may return, causing you to divert your

2504743 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

attention again. But over the course of a lifetime, most of us generally progress up the hierarchy. Let’s go through that hierarchy one step at a time.

Description

Figure 11.1 Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

Physiological Needs

Physiological needs, including hunger, thirst, air, and sleep, are the most demanding in that they typically must be satisfied before we can move to higher level needs. In many places today— and throughout much of human history—too many people’s lives are focused on meeting these basic needs. Finding enough food and water for survival takes priority over concerns like gaining the respect of peers or developing your potential as an artist.

Safety Needs

When physiological needs are met, we become increasingly motivated by our safety needs. These include the need for security, stability, protection, structure, order, and freedom from fear or chaos. These needs are likely to dominate our thoughts and actions when the future is unpredictable or when living in an area where political or social order is unstable. People motivated by safety needs may become obsessed about saving money for an uncertain future. They might settle for a job with a lot of security rather than pursue a more interesting but less certain career or accept an unhappy marriage if the arrangement provides stability and a sense of security.

Belongingness and Love Needs

For most middle-class American adults, the need for food and water and the need for security and stability are fairly well satisfied. Most have jobs, homes, and food on the table. But satisfaction of these lower level needs does not guarantee happiness. Soon the need for friendship and love is likely to make itself known. “Now the person will feel keenly, as never before, the absence of friends, or a sweetheart, or a wife, or children,” Maslow wrote. “He will hunger for affectionate relations with people … for a place in his group or family” (1970, p. 43). Although some adults remain shackled to their safety needs and devote most of their energy to their careers, others find their job unsatisfying if it requires them to sacrifice time spent with friends and loved ones.

Maslow identified two kinds of love. D-love, like hunger, is based on a deficiency. We need this love to satisfy the emptiness we experience without it. It is a selfish love, concerned with taking, not giving. But it is a necessary step in the development of the second type of love. B-

2504743 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

love is a nonpossessive, unselfish love based on a growth need rather than a deficiency. B-love is not satisfied once a relationship is established. Rather, B-love is experienced and grows as a result of being in the relationship.

Esteem Needs

Although poets and songwriters might disagree, there is more to life than love. Satisfying our belongingness and love needs is likely to direct our attention to the esteem needs. Maslow divided these needs into two basic types: the need to perceive oneself as competent and achieving and the need for admiration and respect. These two needs often go hand-in-hand. It is difficult for others to admire you if you don’t feel good about yourself, and knowing you have earned the respect of people who are important to you most likely will contribute to your sense of personal esteem.

Need for Self-Actualization

Nearly every culture has a story about someone who, by virtue of a magic lamp or contact with a supernatural being, receives everything they wish. But inevitably, the lucky individual discovers that acquiring wealth, love, and power is not enough to guarantee happiness. As Maslow explained, when all our lower level needs are satisfied, a new source of discontent often surfaces. We turn our attention inward and ask ourselves what we want out of life, where our lives are headed, and what we want to accomplish. The need for self-actualization is satisfied when we identify our true self and reach our full potential. “A musician must make music,” Maslow wrote. “An artist must paint, a poet must write, if he is to be ultimately at peace with himself. What a man can be, he must be. He must be true to his own nature” (1970, p. 46). Gain insight into your level of self-actualization by taking Self-Assessment 11.1 at the end of this chapter.

Misconceptions About Maslow’s Need Hierarchy

Maslow was quick to acknowledge the five-level hierarchy is an oversimplification. Although the arrangement makes sense most of the time, there are some noteworthy exceptions. Some people have to satisfy their needs for self-esteem and respect before they can enter a romantic relationship. Occasionally artists become so intent on expressing their creative desires they forego a few basic needs. And then there are martyrs who may sacrifice life itself for an ideal.

People first encountering Maslow’s need hierarchy sometimes assume that lower needs must be satisfied 100% before we turn to higher needs. But that was never Maslow’s intent. He maintained that at any given moment our behavior is potentially influenced by needs from all five levels. Moreover, we rarely satisfy any of the five levels of need for very long. Maslow estimated for the average person in our culture, 85% of physiological needs, 70% of safety needs, 50% of belongingness and love needs, 40% of esteem needs, and 10% of self- actualization needs are satisfied.

Another oversimplification of Maslow’s theory is that any given behavior is motivated by a single need. Maslow maintained that most behavior is the result of multiple motivations. He used the example of sexual activity. It is easy to see that physiological needs are satisfied through sexual behavior. But that behavior can also be motivated by a desire to express affection, a need to feel masterful and competent, or a desire to act masculine or feminine. People engage in sexual activity to satisfy one or any combination of these needs.

The Study of Psychologically Healthy People

As a rule, psychotherapists are concerned with psychological disorders and helping people work through personal issues. But Maslow’s research took him in the opposite direction. Instead of studying people who suffer from experiences and disorders, Maslow turned his attention to psychologically healthy individuals. By learning what self-actualized people are like, he reasoned, we can better understand how individuals can reach their true potential. To this end, Maslow interviewed people he knew who appeared to have satisfied their need for self- actualization. He also turned to records and documents to learn about historic figures who seemed to have lived a self-actualized life. That list included Thomas Jefferson, Albert Einstein, Eleanor Roosevelt, and Albert Schweitzer. By his own admission, Maslow’s methods were far from scientifically rigorous. Rather than using statistical analyses, he relied on what he called “holistic analysis.” He considered all the information he collected about an individual and arrived at his own general impressions of that person. From these impressions, he created a list of characteristics common to psychologically healthy people.

What are self-actualized people like? Not surprisingly, they sound a lot like the fully functioning individuals Rogers described. To begin, self-actualized people tend to accept themselves for

2504743 - SAGE Publications, Inc. (US) ©

what they are. They admit to personal weaknesses, and they work to improve themselves where they can. However, they don’t spend a lot of tim