A single personality theory that best explains my personality, as well as my life choices, is Erik Erickson's theory of human Psychosocial Development. Erik Erickson, who was born in Germany in 1902, is remembered as one of the most prominent psychoanalysts of the 20th Century. The theory of psychoanalytic development under question was first published by Erickson in a book titled “Childhood and Society” in 1950 (Patel, 2016). An analysis of the theory shows that it goes a long way to describe not only the personalities but also the life choices of people in the different stages of their lives. It establishes a platform for individuals in contemporary societies to understand the most important facets of their personal development and their relationship with experiences of life.
Part I: Theory Description
A look at the theory shows that it describes eight sequential stages in the course of an individual’s life from childhood to maturity. The theory describes the nature of life span identity and manifestations of identity crises. The theorized eight stages of psychosocial development may well be observed as a new model of the human life cycle. Erikson communicated that the personalities of people are not manifested as outcomes of their childhood experiences particularly as it had been suggested by notable psychoanalysts before him such as Freud. His model not only explains the entire life span of persons but also demonstrates the belief that people’s lives are established by them moving through different stages in life over time; a lifelong process of development (Cherry, 2018). He further hypothesized that people are always intrinsically motivated to achieve certain levels of competencies in different areas in the various stages of their lives. As such, the eight stages of development involve different tasks to be accomplished or crises to be resolved in order to achieve desired development and competency.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
According to Erickson, the first stage of human development is that of Trust vs. Mistrust. According to Erickson, this stage occurs in the first year of a human being’s life (Patel, 2016). Therein, the child fully relies on parents or caregivers for its survival needs. As the parents or caregivers offer the young child provisions to meet the needs continuously, the child begins to develop trust towards them. The child sees the environment as a safe and befitting place owing to the attention offered by the parents or caregivers. On the other hand, if there are no provisions or care, the child develops mistrust (Cherry, 2018). The mistrust is consequentially accompanied by fear and anxiety coupled with feelings that the environment is unpredictable.
Erickson describes the second stage as that of Autonomy vs. Shame. This stage occurs from ages one to three. During the time, the child begins to explore the environment through play. At this stage, the child faces a crisis of a need to establish a sense of independence though it lacks the needed capacity to solve (Cherry, 2018). Children in this stage realize they have control over their actions, bodies and even emotions. They exhibit patterns of choice over matters such as food and clothing at the same time as they begin walking and training on the use of the toilet. Denial of independence at this stage makes children question and doubt their capabilities, which has the potential of affecting their self-esteem be the development of feelings of fear and anxiety.
The third stage of development is Initiative vs. Guilt at ages three to six. In this stage, the children begin schooling and they enjoy meaningful levels of control over their social lives and other activities of life in general on a routine basis. For purposes of resolving the crisis of Initiative vs. Guilt, a child needs to learn ways of achieving set goals and establish significant social interactions and relationships with others. A keen analysis of this stage shows that children are in a position of learning character traits of responsibility, leadership, and ambition; the influence of parents and caregivers is crucial at this time. Parents or caregivers also need to give the children some sense of space to allow them to explore the environment around them and make choices over some matters of their lives. It is at this stage that the inner strengths, weaknesses, interests, likes, and dislikes of a child can be determined. There is a manifestation of a sense of purpose as well as self-confidence.
The fourth stage is Industry vs. Inferiority. It manifests in children as they get engaged in elementary school, between ages six and twelve. Therein, there is learning about solving problems or issues in life, satisfaction (for achievements), sadness, and happiness. The children also tend to compare themselves with their peers to see if they hit the mark (Syed, & McLean, 2016). A weak sense of self may be established in this stage if the children miss making a search for their identity or if they are forced to conform to the ideas of their parents regarding the same. Not solving this problem will lead to confusion in future.
The fifth stage is that of Identity vs. Role Confusion and occurs in the ages of 12 to 18. The children become teenagers in this stage. A focus for them is in establishing a sense of self. Those who resolve this crisis well build a strong sense of their identity in the years to come (Syed, & McLean, 2016).
The sixth stage is that of Intimacy vs. Isolation for people in their 20s through to their 40s. In this stage, which is also known as early adulthood, people learn how to form deep interactions with others in society. They also strive for opportunities to express themselves in the context of ‘who they are’ in society.
The seventh stage is Generativity vs. Stagnation. This stage occurs for people aged between 40 and 60; it is also called middle adulthood (Cherry, 2018). Herein, people now learn about giving back to society after finding their life’s work. Focus is on family and community building. The eighth and final stage is Integrity vs. Despair for people aged 60 to end of life. The stage is also known as late adulthood. Persons in this stage look back into their lives and observe as a sense of either success or failure. A point to note is that there are both positive and negative experiences in all of the stages. Such implies that people might fail at some stages and succeed at some others.
Part II: My Personality
The provisions of the theory of personality by Erickson go a long way to enable me to describe my personal psychosocial development in life. By analyzing the theory, I realized that humans are always facing constant but divergent forms of crises that they need to resolve at different stages of their lives (Friedman, & Schustack, 2016, p. 3). I have always struggled to fit in society since I was a little child. Little did I know that it was all about an intrinsic endeavor to resolve a crisis of my psychosocial development. Owing to my experiences over the years, I find that the theory by Erickson and the specific stages described therein represent a truth of life and psychosocial development.
Beginning with the first stage of the model by Erickson, I gather that I have a very strong sense of trust for my parents. As a toddler, I was frequently in the company of a babysitter but as I grew, I noticed that I had a trait of always waiting for my parents to get home from work. I learnt later in life that my mother had to stay out of work during the early years of my life for her to take care of me personally. By analysis of the theory, I learnt that the high levels of trust I have for my parents were instilled in me in the first stage of the theory. I believe I was given great attention, safety, and provisions by my parents in my first year of life, which made me carry a success of the stage to the second stage. By further analyzing this stage and my development, nonetheless, I gather that there is need of striking a balance between trust and doubt in order to acquire a sense of hope in life.
I also have a strong sense of autonomy implying that I had the success of being able to resolve the crisis in the second stage of autonomy vs. shame. Since my parents and our home, in general, thrived in an economically sound situation, I must have had an abundance of interesting items to explore in my environment as a toddler. The theory also explains my personality and life choices by the crisis of stage 3- Initiative vs. Guilt. I believe I performed averagely in this stage. I am not so much of an outgoing person and sometimes face challenges of interacting with others and forming meaningful social bonds. From time to time, I find myself in situations of guilt for things I thought I should have done but I disregarded. I believe such implies I was unable to attain a strong sense of self that would have enabled me to achieve some missed set goals. During the stage, however, my life was a little complicated since my parents were both engaged in fulltime work and I saw less of them. My experiences of the third stage moved on to me to the fourth stage albeit much did not change in both my home and school environments. Continued encouragement from my parents and teachers as well helped me to solve the crisis of inferiority and doubting my abilities and strengths.
My experience at the fifth stage of the development model was quite interesting and enlightening as well. I had a serious struggle with aspects of identity vs. role confusion. The theory nonetheless explains my personality in that I managed to develop my sense of self in this stage. I kept on asking myself questions such as “Who am I?” to determine what it is I wanted to do in life. By the influences of the earlier stages, I constantly compared myself to my peers in school. I must confess also that the influence of my friends in school on my life was significant. In discovering my adult self, I became more sociable and was not bothered by the inferiority that I would not resolve earlier. At home, however, things did not seem to go so well with my parents as they started having fights from time to time. I believe such impacted negatively on me in my quest to solve the crisis of role confusion. I, however, concluded that it was a normal thing to occur in marriage. Overall, however, I believe I was successful in this stage since I developed a strong sense of identity. As for the sixth stage, where I am currently, I am hopeful I will be able to resolve the crisis since I have so far managed to establish meaningful connections concerning intimacy.
Part III: Theory Limitations
Analysis of Erik Erickson theory shows that it has limitations since it only aims to explain human psychotic development because of sequential age groups. A deep analysis shows that the parameters used by Erickson to explain the development are not exclusive to the assigned age groups. Indeed, the dynamics of life in relation to human development hardly correlate with age groups as a main underlying factor. In other words, the crises that Erickson assigns to the different age groups are not outcomes that are preset to be associated with them (timeframes). Some of the crises in the earlier stages are experienced by persons in the later stages; the vice versa is also true.
Then again, the theory does not touch on the divergent capacities or abilities of persons to solve crises in life differently. While one person may be able to solve a certain crisis quickly and efficiently, another may be unable to solve and move past the same crisis for many years. For instance, in my case, I was highly apathetic in my fifth stage (Identity vs. Role confusion). I experienced high levels of difficulty in establishing my sense of identity for the whole period of the stage. Even so, I managed to resolve that crisis quickly and effortlessly as soon as I was in the sixth stage. I also faced challenges in establishing meaningful relations and trusting others (as a function of personality) in the fifth stage. The situation changed very quickly in the sixth stage as I found myself to be a very sociable and outgoing individual. A look at Erickson’s explanations reveal claims that crisis of one stage may well be resolved in the other stages. Undeniably, such makes one ponder about the cases of persons who may be facing a crisis of the seventh stage of Generativity vs. Stagnation while they are still young or middle-aged. Clearly, the theory has some evident limitations.
References
Cherry, K. (2018). Erik erikson's stages of psychosocial development. Retrieved Juny , 5 , 2018. Retrieved Online from http://www.cbsd.org/cms/lib010/PA01916442/Centricity/Domain/1851/Erik%20Erikson%20Article%20from%20Aboutcom.docx
Friedman, H. S., & Schustack, M. W. (2016). Personality: Classic theories and modern research . Pearson.
Patel, A. (2016). Person of the Month: Erik Erikson (1902-1994). The International Journal of Indian Psychology, Volume 4, Issue 1,(No. 79) , 3 (4), 1.
Syed, M., & McLean, K. C. (2016). Understanding identity integration: Theoretical, methodological, and applied issues. Journal of adolescence , 47 , 109-118.
