Psych 150 Journal

I have always wondered on what my personality is. Now that I have finished Psych 150, I'll try my best to apply what I learned and see what my personality really is!

Psychoanalytic:

Me being shocked

Even though I've already read about Freud, it was still shocking to read some of his concepts being published, as George Kelly said. Things like the psychosexual stages of development are those that I highly disagree with. I also agree that we use defense mechanisms but I do not agree if they are used because of our hidden impulses since some of Freud's analysis are very absurd like how we can create an accident simply because we have a hidden desire to hurt someone. However, some of the things Freud said I can actually relate with. I too believe that some things in the unconscious can reveal things about our personality that we don't notice. For instance, I believe that our dreams can show us what we unconsciously are. This is because what I dream about are mostly about things that really do trouble me. Like based on my dreams, I can say that I am probably very worrysome because I think about exams a lot and how to talk to my crush. So I guess, even if it is hard to verify empirically, that dreams can be used to determine personalities.

Neo-Freudian:

I'm so clingy I'm gonna dieeeeeeee!

I don't quite agree with Carl Jung here since I don't really think that archetypes reveal anything about our personality, even on an unconscious level. I, however, agree with Karen Horneye about people using the neurotic strategies. This is because I think I use the "moving towards people" strategy a lot. I notice that whenever I am anxious, I would tell a lot of people about it, especially during exams or when talking to my crush (these really bother me a lot. . .). My friends even joke about how it is obvious when I look stressed out and stuff and how I have to tell EVERYONE about it. I also think I'm a very clingy person, which is maybe why I've been single since birth.

Traits:

THE OOOOOOOCEAAAAN

I don't really have much to say about the trait approach because I think it's pretty much straightforward in that you have traits, and that's your personality. That being said, I really like the OCEAN model because it's very interesting to look at your personality like that and it's really fun taking some tests. So according to pip-neo test, I'm average in openness which means "You enjoy tradition but are willing to try new things. m thinking is neither simple nor complex. To others you appear to be a well-educated person but not an intellectual." I think this is a little accurate, though I think I am less than average here since I don't really take risks. It also says that I am average in consciousness meaning means "you are reasonably reliable, organized, and self-controlled." I think/hope that this is pretty accurate. Apparently, I am also average in extraversion which says "you are neither a subdued loner nor a jovial chatterbox. You enjoy time with others but also time alone."I also agree with this since I've always wondered whether I was an extravert or introvert so it makes sense I'm average. I'm also strong in agreeableness which indicates "a strong interest in others' needs and well-being. You are pleasant, sympathetic, and cooperative." I think this is very accurate since I always wonder if people like me or not and I like it when people agree with me so I make myself easier to agree with. I also scored high in neuroticism meaning "you are easily upset, even by what most people consider the normal demands of living. People consider you to be sensitive and emotional." I think this is a little correct because I'm easily stressed, even when it;s just a small thing, probably because I always like it when things go my way, so yeah, I am a very stressed person at all times.

Again, the OCEAN model really is a good model because I tend to agree to what it said about my personality, but still though, I don't see how this can be any help to people with mental disorders.

Biological:

It's your fault I'm socially awkward!

I don't really agree with most of the concepts we learned in this approach. Like for instance, I don't really agree with stimulation levels and introversion/extraversion. I don't think that introverts are much more sensitive to stimulation and such, I think those things are completely different. But still, I think that we can still use the evolutionary theory in personality. I think this is true, even in my case, because I feel very anxious when I'm alone or if l'm rejected  by my peers. It really shows how important it is to have company. But other than that, I think this approach is a dud for me.

Humanistic:

SO GLORIOUS

I really really love this approach! I think that it's really good for once that Psychology focused on positivity and trying to become a better person and stuff. I agree that I think that people strive to become a fully-functioning person. This is because when I feel that I'm not doing our best, I feel really bad inside. I still think that I am still far from a fully-functioning person though, but of course I try my best to learn from my mistake and just do the best I can. I can also relate to what Rogers said in that if things don't match my self-concept, I feel disappointed in myself since I feel I can always do better. I also agree that unconditional positive regard is really important in bringing up people. Regarding Maslow's hierarchy of needs though, I kinda don't really agree with it that much. Still, the humanistic approach is my favorite of all, mostly due to it being positive.

Behavioral:

Awwww cute baby

I think the behavioral approach has some valid points. It is true that I, as other people, do some things because of reward and I think that you can condition some children's behavior and personality using rewards and punishments. I also like Bandura's social learning theory. I think we learn a lot by observing other people, and his steps in doing this I think really happens in real life, like it does for me. I also like how his theory says that the environment and internal states affect behavior as well and vice versa.

What I don't like though is that besides these, this approach makes it seem that humans are one-dimensional since it shows we are mostly reactive only, which is clearly false.

Cognitive:

Meh.

I agree with Kelly that people differ in how we process information. I also agree about the research about aggressiveness and it is really applicable in life, though I like violent video games, I am not an aggressive person though since I don't even know how to punch correctly. I also agree with the researches about depression since I myself notice that it really is easy to think of sad thoughts when you are sad and happy thoughts when you are happy. I guess it is true when they say that if you are down, you really are down. But that is all I can say about this personality approach though since I myself am not sure of how my construct systems or schemas look so I really don't know how to look at my personality using this approach. Also, I am not sure if I can say I am a depressed person since even though I think about sad thoughts a lot, I also think about good things a lot as well.

Sikolohiyang Pilipino:

Mabuhay!

For SP, I am not really sure how I can look at my personality using this. I am Filipino and all and I see how the surface values, pivot and core are really seen in Filipinos, but I feel that research is still lacking since I think that there are much more values that Filipinos value more and I also believe that Kapwa is the real main core of Filipino values since I know that some languages do not even have a word for it. So for now, I can't really use SP in looking at my personality, even if I am Filipino.

Overall:

YAAAAAY

Based on these, I can really see why personality really is eclectic since I used all theories to look at my personality. But even then, I am still not sure about my personality. Maybe because I need to take therapy to have more tests and find out more about my personality, or maybe because personality, although mostly stable, can still change even at this age. I have some characteristics that I know that show me who I am, as I have mentioned some already, but I still feel that I can still learn more about my personality. That being said, I really liked this course and I think I learned a lot. I wish we could have dwelled more in each theory, especially humanistic, but we can only use so much time. With that, I would like to end by saying it was a good sem and course and I wish to still learn more about personality in the future. :)