Three Streams in Psychology Week 2
Our class is designed to teach some basic and commonsense principles and tools that may help us to understand ourselves better and also help us operate in our social worlds with more comfort and effectiveness. We are beginning this semester by looking very briefly at the way the field of Psychology looks at the human being and the human experience. Although there are many subdivisions of the American Psychological Association, and even more schools of Psychological thought, I am oversimplifying the river of Psychological Theory down to three major tributaries.
The origins of modern psychotherapy are attributed to Freud and others who developed the theory of Psychodynamics and the practice of Psychoanalysis. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, “Sigmund Freud held that all behavior is influenced by unconscious motivations and conflicts. Personality characteristics are thought to be shaped from earliest childhood experiences. Psychological defenses are seen mainly as unconscious coping responses, the purpose of which is to resolve the conflicts that arise between basic desires and the constraints of external reality.” (quoted from Britannica online) Psychoanalytic therapists will interpret the patient’s words and behavior using the theoretical constructs of this school of thought. The Psychoanalyst is the authority in the treatment relationship and the holder of knowledge. Patients are encouraged to develop self inquiry and to see and resolve internal conflicts.
The second tributary is the Cognitive/Behavioral group of theorists. Psychology Today at it’s website, gives a brief summary of this theoretical perspective. “Cognitive Behavioral therapy emphasizes the role of thinking in how we feel and what we do. CBT stresses the fact that thoughts, rather than people or events, cause our negative feelings. CBT is a structured collaboration between therapist and client and often calls for homework assignments. Brief and time-limited, CBT includes Rational Emotive behavior therapy and Cognitive therapy.” Using this approach, a client learns how to monitor their thinking processes and use techniques like “thought restructuring” to change destructive habits of thought that lead to bad feelings about self and others. A more recent, and currently very popular, addition to this branch of the field is (DBT) Dialectical Behavior Therapy.
The last tributary I will cite is that of Humanistic Theory and Therapy. Again from the Psychology Today website, we get the following information. ”Through this method, which emphasizes the uniqueness of the individual, practitioners help their clients realize their potential. The individual works toward this goal through change and self-directed growth. Also known as Client-Centered psychotherapy, the Humanistic method is an umbrella term for Gestalt and Rogerian approaches, as well as Existential theories of therapy.” In this model, the client is the authority about her/his thoughts, feelings and behaviors. The therapist develops an alliance with the client that helps in the discovery process and supports change.
In England and Europe, Contribution Training (CT) is considered part of the Humanistic stream of psychotherapy. It fits there best, but also contains elements of the other two streams. We will discuss various aspects of this over the course of the term. CT is a bit of a maverick. Like the Cognitive stream, it assumes that we can learn new ways of using our thinking to change how we act and feel. Like the Psychodynamic stream, it assumes that underlying conflicts and early experiences contribute to unconscious reasons for our problems. Looking at its Humanistic face, CT assumes that human growth and potential are the most important goals we have as people. Peter Fleming is the Director of the Pellin Institute and has provided training in CT in Europe and North America for more 40 years. He will be a guest speaker via SKYPE for several of our classes.
As we will explore next week CT is a toolbox approach to change that puts the tools in the hands of the person who wants to change.
The origins of modern psychotherapy are attributed to Freud and others who developed the theory of Psychodynamics and the practice of Psychoanalysis. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, “Sigmund Freud held that all behavior is influenced by unconscious motivations and conflicts. Personality characteristics are thought to be shaped from earliest childhood experiences. Psychological defenses are seen mainly as unconscious coping responses, the purpose of which is to resolve the conflicts that arise between basic desires and the constraints of external reality.” (quoted from Britannica online) Psychoanalytic therapists will interpret the patient’s words and behavior using the theoretical constructs of this school of thought. The Psychoanalyst is the authority in the treatment relationship and the holder of knowledge. Patients are encouraged to develop self inquiry and to see and resolve internal conflicts.
The second tributary is the Cognitive/Behavioral group of theorists. Psychology Today at it’s website, gives a brief summary of this theoretical perspective. “Cognitive Behavioral therapy emphasizes the role of thinking in how we feel and what we do. CBT stresses the fact that thoughts, rather than people or events, cause our negative feelings. CBT is a structured collaboration between therapist and client and often calls for homework assignments. Brief and time-limited, CBT includes Rational Emotive behavior therapy and Cognitive therapy.” Using this approach, a client learns how to monitor their thinking processes and use techniques like “thought restructuring” to change destructive habits of thought that lead to bad feelings about self and others. A more recent, and currently very popular, addition to this branch of the field is (DBT) Dialectical Behavior Therapy.
The last tributary I will cite is that of Humanistic Theory and Therapy. Again from the Psychology Today website, we get the following information. ”Through this method, which emphasizes the uniqueness of the individual, practitioners help their clients realize their potential. The individual works toward this goal through change and self-directed growth. Also known as Client-Centered psychotherapy, the Humanistic method is an umbrella term for Gestalt and Rogerian approaches, as well as Existential theories of therapy.” In this model, the client is the authority about her/his thoughts, feelings and behaviors. The therapist develops an alliance with the client that helps in the discovery process and supports change.
In England and Europe, Contribution Training (CT) is considered part of the Humanistic stream of psychotherapy. It fits there best, but also contains elements of the other two streams. We will discuss various aspects of this over the course of the term. CT is a bit of a maverick. Like the Cognitive stream, it assumes that we can learn new ways of using our thinking to change how we act and feel. Like the Psychodynamic stream, it assumes that underlying conflicts and early experiences contribute to unconscious reasons for our problems. Looking at its Humanistic face, CT assumes that human growth and potential are the most important goals we have as people. Peter Fleming is the Director of the Pellin Institute and has provided training in CT in Europe and North America for more 40 years. He will be a guest speaker via SKYPE for several of our classes.
As we will explore next week CT is a toolbox approach to change that puts the tools in the hands of the person who wants to change.
The American Psychological Association
The APA has 56 numbered divisions, 54 of which are currently active:[35]
- Society for General Psychology – the first division formed by the APA, in 1945, concerned with issues across the subdisciplines of psychology[36]
- Society for the Teaching of Psychology – provides free teaching material for students and teachers of psychology and bestows many awards[37]
- Society for Experimental Psychology and Cognitive Science
- Currently vacant – initially the Psychometric Society, which decided against becoming an APA division[38]
- Quantitative and Qualitative Methods – previously named Evaluation, Measurement, and Statistics[39]
- Behavioral Neuroscience and Comparative Psychology
- Developmental Psychology
- Society for Personality and Social Psychology
- Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues (SPSSI)
- Society for the Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts
- Currently vacant – initially Abnormal Psychology and Psychotherapy, which joined division 12 in 1946[38]
- Society of Clinical Psychology – established in 1948 with 482 members, in 1962 it created clinical child psychology as its first section[40]
- Society of Consulting Psychology
- Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology
- Educational Psychology
- School Psychology – originally formed as the Division of School Psychologists in 1945, renamed in 1969[41]
- Society of Counseling Psychology
- Psychologists in Public Service
- Society for Military Psychology
- Adult Development and Aging
- Applied Experimental and Engineering Psychology
- Rehabilitation Psychology
- Society for Consumer Psychology
- Society for Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology
- Behavior Analysis
- Society for the History of Psychology
- Society for Community Research and Action: Division of Community Psychology
- Psychopharmacology and Substance Abuse
- Psychotherapy
- Society of Psychological Hypnosis
- State, Provincial and Territorial Psychological Association Affairs
- Society for Humanistic Psychology
- Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities
- Society for Environmental, Population and Conservation Psychology
- Society for the Psychology of Women
- Society for the Psychology of Religion and Spirituality
- Society for Child and Family Policy and Practice
- Health Psychology
- Psychoanalysis
- Clinical Neuropsychology
- American Psychology-Law Society
- Psychologists in Independent Practice
- Society for Family Psychology
- Society for the Psychological Study of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Issues
- Society for the Psychological Study of Ethnic Minority Issues
- Media Psychology
- Exercise and Sport Psychology
- Society for the Study of Peace, Conflict, and Violence: Peace Psychology Division
- Society of Group Psychology and Group Psychotherapy
- Society of Addiction Psychology
- Society for the Psychological Study of Men and Masculinity
- International Psychology
- Society of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology
- Society of Pediatric Psychology
- American Society for the Advancement of Pharmacotherapy
- Trauma Psychology – addresses issues of trauma with projects, working groups and via collaborations[42
Published on Psychology Today (http://www.psychologytoday.com)
What Is Positive Psychology, and What Is It Not?
By Christopher Peterson, Ph.D.
Created May 16 2008 - 12:20pm
In less than a decade, positive psychology has caught the attention not only of the academic community but also the general public. I just did a google search for "positive psychology' and found 419,000+ hits. That is obviously impressive, although keeping all of us positive psychologists humble is that my searches for the "Olsen twins" and "Britney Spears" produced 6,390,000+ and 113,000,000+ hits, respectively.
It is still good that larger world is interested in positive psychology, and probably even better that this interest does not entail morbid curiosity and the wish to witness a train wreck.
Regardless, the downside of whatever popularity positive psychology enjoys is the temptation for those of us associated with this new field to run ahead of what we know in pursuit of further popularity. So let me slow down and explain what positive psychology actually is and what we actually know.
Positive psychology is the scientific study of what makes life most worth living. It is a call for psychological science and practice to be as concerned with strength as with weakness; as interested in building the best things in life as in repairing the worst; and as concerned with making the lives of normal people fulfilling as with healing pathology.
Nowhere does this definition say or imply that psychology should ignore or dismiss the very real problems that people experience. Nowhere does it say or imply that the rest of psychology needs to be discarded or replaced. The value of positive psychology is to complement and extend the problem-focused psychology that has been dominant for many decades.
Several truisms underpin positive psychology. First, what is good in life is as genuine as what is bad--not derivative, secondary, epiphenomenal, illusory, or otherwise suspect. Second, what is good in life is not simply the absence of what is problematic. We all know the difference between not being depressed and bounding out of bed in the morning with enthusiasm for the day ahead. And third, the good life requires its own explanation, not simply a theory of disorder stood sideways or flipped on its head.
Positive psychology is psychology--psychology is science--and science require checking theories against evidence. Accordingly, positive psychology is not to be confused with untested self-help, footless affirmation, or secular religion-no matter how good these may make us feel. Positive psychology is neither a recycled version of the power of positive thinking nor a sequel to the secret.
Positive psychology will rise or fall on the science on which it is based. So far, the science is impressive. Consider what has been learned in recent years about the psychological good life, none of which was mentioned in any of the psychology courses I took a few decades ago:
• Most people are happy.
• Happiness is a cause of good things in life and not simply along for the happy ride. People who are satisfied with life eventually have even more reason to be satisfied, because happiness leads to desirable outcomes at school and work, to fulfilling social relationships, and even to good health and long life.
• Most people are resilient.
• Happiness, strengths of character, and good social relationships are buffers against the damaging effects of disappointments and setbacks.
• Crisis reveals character.
• Other people matter mightily if we want to understand what makes like most worth living.
• Religion matters.
• And work matters as well if it engages the worker and provides meaning and purpose.
• Money makes an ever-diminishing contribution to well-being, but money can buy happiness if it is spent on other people.
• As a route to a satisfying life, eudaimonia trumps hedonism.
• The "heart" matters more than the "head." Schools explicitly teach critical thinking; they should also teach unconditional caring.
• Good days have common features: feeling autonomous, competent, and connected to others.
• The good life can be taught.
This latter point is especially important because it means that happiness is not simply the result of a fortunate spin of the genetic roulette wheel. There are things that people can do to lead better lives, although I hasten to say that all require that we live (behave) differently ... permanently. The good life is hard work, and there are no shortcuts to sustained happiness.
My goals for the blog entries that will follow are two-fold. First, I plan to discuss recent research findings about the psychological good life. And second, I plan to discuss the most promising applications based on these findings. I hope you find what I say interesting, and I invite your reactions, positive or negative. But let's try and base the discourse on what the evidence shows. As the saying goes, the plural of anecdote is not data.
Source URL: http://www.psychologytoday.com/node/720
What Is Positive Psychology, and What Is It Not?
By Christopher Peterson, Ph.D.
Created May 16 2008 - 12:20pm
In less than a decade, positive psychology has caught the attention not only of the academic community but also the general public. I just did a google search for "positive psychology' and found 419,000+ hits. That is obviously impressive, although keeping all of us positive psychologists humble is that my searches for the "Olsen twins" and "Britney Spears" produced 6,390,000+ and 113,000,000+ hits, respectively.
It is still good that larger world is interested in positive psychology, and probably even better that this interest does not entail morbid curiosity and the wish to witness a train wreck.
Regardless, the downside of whatever popularity positive psychology enjoys is the temptation for those of us associated with this new field to run ahead of what we know in pursuit of further popularity. So let me slow down and explain what positive psychology actually is and what we actually know.
Positive psychology is the scientific study of what makes life most worth living. It is a call for psychological science and practice to be as concerned with strength as with weakness; as interested in building the best things in life as in repairing the worst; and as concerned with making the lives of normal people fulfilling as with healing pathology.
Nowhere does this definition say or imply that psychology should ignore or dismiss the very real problems that people experience. Nowhere does it say or imply that the rest of psychology needs to be discarded or replaced. The value of positive psychology is to complement and extend the problem-focused psychology that has been dominant for many decades.
Several truisms underpin positive psychology. First, what is good in life is as genuine as what is bad--not derivative, secondary, epiphenomenal, illusory, or otherwise suspect. Second, what is good in life is not simply the absence of what is problematic. We all know the difference between not being depressed and bounding out of bed in the morning with enthusiasm for the day ahead. And third, the good life requires its own explanation, not simply a theory of disorder stood sideways or flipped on its head.
Positive psychology is psychology--psychology is science--and science require checking theories against evidence. Accordingly, positive psychology is not to be confused with untested self-help, footless affirmation, or secular religion-no matter how good these may make us feel. Positive psychology is neither a recycled version of the power of positive thinking nor a sequel to the secret.
Positive psychology will rise or fall on the science on which it is based. So far, the science is impressive. Consider what has been learned in recent years about the psychological good life, none of which was mentioned in any of the psychology courses I took a few decades ago:
• Most people are happy.
• Happiness is a cause of good things in life and not simply along for the happy ride. People who are satisfied with life eventually have even more reason to be satisfied, because happiness leads to desirable outcomes at school and work, to fulfilling social relationships, and even to good health and long life.
• Most people are resilient.
• Happiness, strengths of character, and good social relationships are buffers against the damaging effects of disappointments and setbacks.
• Crisis reveals character.
• Other people matter mightily if we want to understand what makes like most worth living.
• Religion matters.
• And work matters as well if it engages the worker and provides meaning and purpose.
• Money makes an ever-diminishing contribution to well-being, but money can buy happiness if it is spent on other people.
• As a route to a satisfying life, eudaimonia trumps hedonism.
• The "heart" matters more than the "head." Schools explicitly teach critical thinking; they should also teach unconditional caring.
• Good days have common features: feeling autonomous, competent, and connected to others.
• The good life can be taught.
This latter point is especially important because it means that happiness is not simply the result of a fortunate spin of the genetic roulette wheel. There are things that people can do to lead better lives, although I hasten to say that all require that we live (behave) differently ... permanently. The good life is hard work, and there are no shortcuts to sustained happiness.
My goals for the blog entries that will follow are two-fold. First, I plan to discuss recent research findings about the psychological good life. And second, I plan to discuss the most promising applications based on these findings. I hope you find what I say interesting, and I invite your reactions, positive or negative. But let's try and base the discourse on what the evidence shows. As the saying goes, the plural of anecdote is not data.
Source URL: http://www.psychologytoday.com/node/720