Erikson published his psychosocial theories as a development on Freud's
psychosexual theory which Erikson felt
placed too much emphasis on sexuality (Ruch, 1984). Psychosocial
theory is basically a revision and expansion on psychosexual theory. So it is
not surprising that although many perpendiculars do exist between them, there
are just as many parallels. This essay will investigate both the differences
and similarities of the two theories with respect to three main categories.
These being stability vs. change,
biological pre-disposition (nature) vs. social/environmental conditioning
(nurture) and continuity vs. dis-continuity.
Common ground.
Both theories are developmental stage theories. They assume that human
development occurs in a fixed sequence of stages following a relative continuum
with each developmental stage building on from the last to the next involving increasingly more complex and more
adult like behavioral patterns (Ruch, 1984).
The sequence is fixed in that people move through each stage in the
same order and stages generally aren't skipped, however this is not to say that
all people reach each stage at the same time or even that all people complete
all the stages (Weiten, 1992).
Stability vs. Change.
Freud suggests that the essence
of our personality is established by our fifth birth day. This view of a fairly
monolithic personality can be seen reflected in the fact that his development
theories only refer to individuals up to the end of puberty (Weiten, 1992).
·
Oral Stage (birth-1 year)
·
Anal Stage (1-3 years)
·
Phallic Stage (3-6 years)
·
Latency Period (6-puberty)
·
Genital Stage (puberty and
onwards). (Weiten, 1992)
It is suggested that we will carry basic personality traits with us
throughout our lives. This is not to say that Freud saw the personality to be rigidly fixed, if this were the case he
would never have bothered with any of his psychoanalytical therapies, what
would the point be if you couldn't rectify the problem. What is implied however
is that what happens to us when we are young has a great impact on who we
become later in life. Only minor changes occur throughout life mostly through
our delayed solving of an unresolved stages (Ruch,
1984).
The first five of Erikson's eight psychosocial stages correspond
relatively neatly to Freud's psychosexual stages in that they have similar
goals.
Trust
vs Mistrust \ Oral Stage
(birth-1 year)
Concerned
with the satisfaction of basic needs (suckling, affection)
Autonomy
vs Doubt \ Anal Stage
(1-3
years)
Child develops a sense of self sufficiency.
Initiative
vs Guilt \ Phallic Stage
(3-6
years)
Oedipal
conflict & Initiative development both grapple with the individual coming
to grips with the self.
Industry
vs Inferiority \ Latency Period
(6-puberty)
Child
develops same sex relationships \ learns to cope with peer group.
Identity
vs Confusion \ Genital Stage
(puberty and onwards)
Role
and identity within society is realised.
Erikson's theory
covers more ground than Freud's in that
his remaining three stages span well into later life and don't come to an
abrupt end during one's 20s as do Freud's (Weiten,
1992).
Intimacy
vs Isolation
(20-40
years)
vs Self-absorption
(40-65
years)
Integrity
vs Despair
(65-death)
Psychosocial theory sees the
personality to be in a continual evolving state never reaching a final point were it could be considered
developed.
Nature vs. Nurture.
Freud's theories focus on the emotionally based aspects of personality
and assume that we follow a biologically predetermined cycle of five stages (Kruger, 1984). It is through these stages that the individual
learns to channel his libido which is seen by Freud to be the primary driving
energy of us all but is unfocused in infancy (Ruch,
1984). This
sexual energy becomes more directed as one progresses through Freud's stages,
hence the term psychosexual. Reproduction of the species is seen to be the
primary goal of the organism and this needs to be ensured by focusing sexual
drives (Kruger, 1984).
Each stage is signified by some physical action (sucking, controlling
of the bowl...). These actions were seen by Freud to be sexually gratifying in
that they result in physical pleasure . e.g. Suckling is sexually satisfying as
well as nourishing to a child in its oral stage (Weiten,
1992).
Anything preventing this satisfaction results in frustration (Weiten, 1992). It is through this satisfaction\frustration
relationship that we learn to focus our libido and ultimately cannel it outward
towards possible sexual partners (we learn to repeat what feels good) (Ruch,
1984).
If over gratification\frustration occurs one may
become fixated on one particular stage preventing the moving on to the next.
This desire to satisfy physical urges reinforces the nature basis of Freud's
argument (Weiten, 1992).
The physical nature of the above
illustrates the strong case of biological determinisim (nature)
presented by this theory in that much of it is concerned with physical
predisposed urges but room is still left for outside influence. External
factors can play a vital role (nurture). e.g. a parents constant reprimanding
of a child sucking his thumb could cause frustration leading to a fixation on
the oral stage (Weiten, 1992).
From this, one can see the dialectic relationship between nature and
nurture in psychosexual theory. i.e. The
stages are biological predisposed but the outcome is subject to environmental
factors too. We are born with the sexual drives but it is the development of
the ego within its social context that teaches us when it is appropriate to
follow them through (Ruch, 1984). How we cope with
our biological drives (nature) is dependent on the socially/environmental
constructed restraints (nurture) in which we experience them.
To Erikson the determining factor in personality development lay in the
manner in which we handled certain situations presented to us during our
individual social set interactions. (Weiten, 1992) Erikson
termed these personal vs. social conflicts, crisis and saw that it was our ability to work through
these crisis and the repercussions that they had on us that ultimately would
form our personality. Each stage (crisis) is seen to have two possible out
comes (e.g,. trust vs mistrust). How
successful we are in navigating through them predicts the out come (Weiten, 1992).
Therefor Nature plays a far smaller role in psychosocial theory than it
does in psychosexual theory we are shaped by our reaction to our environment.
i.e. We aren't subject to some biological cycle but we are forced to learn to
function within our own society and it is in learning to do so that we our
selves develop.
Continuity vs. Dis-continuity.
In psychosexual theory it is possible under certain stressful
circumstances for an individual to regress back to a previous stage so that
people can seem to be in a stage that they had apparently already come through (Ruch,
1984). This together with the
possibility of an individual becoming fixated on one particular stage points to the independent nature of each
psychosexual stage (Ruch, 1984). Each being a
separate entity to the previous and next. However the stages do follow on from
each other in a specific order and no
stage is ever skipped, so even though there seems to be some form bidirectional
continuity no true continuum actually exists.(Ruch,
1984)
Erikson's stages assume that
every individual confronts each social crisis in a universally common order and
in eight stages (Weiten, 1992). There is no suggestion of
regression and it is clear that we move from stage to stage taking with us any
complication of the last into the next so that the psychosocial stages form a
neat continuum. However problems unresolved during previous stages are carried
forward to the next stage (Weiten, 1992). These problems
are not permanent burdens and can be resolved at a later stage implying that
Erikson's theory is not perfectly linear in that a certain degree of overlap
exists between his stages.
Thus is has been shown that the two theorists have as much in common as
they they do differ and that though neither of the two theorists subscribe to a
100% nature\nurture, continuum\dis-continuum or stability\change theory they are still useful in assessing them.
Reference
list
Kruger, D. (1984). A first encounter
with Psychology. RSA: Academica.
Morris, D. (1971). The Human Zoo.
UK: World Books.
Ruch, J. (1984). Psychology: The
Personal Science. USA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Weiten, W. (1992). Psychology: Themes
& Variations. (2nd ED.) California: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
