Discipline-Based Literature Review

PSY 615 Discipline-Based Literature Review

PSY 615 Discipline-Based Literature Review

For this discipline-based literature review, you will research peer-reviewed articles that were published within the last 10 years in the Ashford University Library on the following major perspectives of personality.

Articles are downloaded from school library.

Save your time - order a paper!

Get your paper written from scratch within the tight deadline. Our service is a reliable solution to all your troubles. Place an order on any task and we will take care of it. You won’t have to worry about the quality and deadlines

Order Paper Now
  1. Psychodynamic – article attached below
  2. Behavioral – article attached below
  3. Trait – article attached below
  4. Learning/Social – article attached below
  5. Humanistic – article attached below

You will utilize your researched article to create your literature review. The review should be formatted with the headings and content designated below.

Introduction: PSY 615 Discipline-Based Literature Review

Assess the types of personality measurements and research designs used in in the peer-reviewed articles you researched. Briefly describe the main theoretical models represented within each of the perspectives of personality and explain the commonalities found across all five.

Discussion: PSY 615 Discipline-Based Literature Review

Examine the major theoretical approaches, research methods, and assessment instruments used in the five perspectives of personality. Evaluate and describe the current research in these perspectives using a minimum of one peer-reviewed article for each of the five required perspectives. Present a detailed critique of each of the perspectives by evaluating the standardization, reliability and validity, and cultural considerations present in the most common personality assessments used within each. Support your opinions about each model by substantiating them with scholarly research.  Be sure to include the following:

  1. The theoretical framework(s) for the selected models
  2. The major contributors to those fields
  3. The methods of inquiry and assessment usually associated with those models
  4. An overview of the characteristics, strengths, and weaknesses of the models

Conclusion: PSY 615 Discipline-Based Literature Review

Provide a summary of your evaluation addressing the current use and relevance of these perspectives in explaining personality citing research as appropriate.

Writing the Discipline Based Literature Review

The paper:

  • Must be seven to ten double-spaced pages in length and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.
  • Must include a title page with the following:
    • Title of paper
    • Your name
    • Course name and number
    • Your instructor’s name
    • Date submitted
  • Must begin with an introduction that describes and the main theoretical models represented within each of the perspectives of personality.
  • Must address the topics of the paper with critical thought.
  • Must end with a conclusion that summarizes your evaluation addressing the current use and relevance of these perspectives in explaining personality.
  • Must use at least five peer-reviewed sources from the Ashford University Library.
  • Must document all sources in APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.
  • Must include a separate reference page that is formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.

An Existential-Humanistic-Positive Theory of Human Motivation

Christine N. Winston Women’s Christian College, Chennai

Abraham Maslow proposed a theory of human motivation, which, despite widespread criticism, bears much relevance to the study of human behavior. I examine the criticisms in the light of existing literature, and reconceptualize key concepts in order to make the validity of the theory more apparent. Further, I articulate an integrated theory of human motivation by drawing parallels between Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, Seligman’s approaches to happiness, and Kierkegaard’s types of despair. The theory posits that gratification of one’s needs influences whether an individual will conceptualize the ideal life as a pursuit for pleasure, a quest for engagement, or a search for meaning. Consequently, the theory has implications for formation of identity, basis of morality, and emergence of values.

Keywords: needs, ideal life, Maslow, Seligman, Kierkegaard

Abraham Maslow (1987), the pioneering humanistic psychologist, proposed a theory of human motivation that can be found in any given book on introductory psychology. Nevertheless, similar to Freudian theories, it is only given symbolic significance and is dismissed on the grounds that it is conceptually arbitrary and empirically untestable (Neher, 1991; Wahba & Bridwell, 1976). The purpose of the present article is to make apparent the validity and utility of the hierarchy of needs by addressing major criticisms presented against the theory in the light of existing literature and to articulate an integrated theory of human motivation by drawing parallels between Maslow’s (1987) hierarchy of five needs, Seligman’s (2002) three approaches to happiness, and Kierkegaard’s (1941) three types of despair. The theory also has implications for identity formation, moral development, and the emergence of values.

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs

According to Maslow (1987), human needs can be presented as a hierarchy of five clusters of needs, namely, physiological needs, safety needs, love and belongingness needs, esteem needs, and the need for self-actualization. The first four needs are referred to as deficit or deficiency needs (D-needs) and the need for self-actualization is referred to as growth or being needs (B-needs). Deficit needs are qualitatively different from the

Christine N. Winston, Department of Psychology, Women’s Christian College, Chennai. Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Christine N. Winston, 25 (Old

Original Paper

Psychopathology 2014;47:185–193 DOI: 10.1159/000355062

Assessment of Personality Functioning: Validity of the Operationalized Psychodynamic Diagnosis Axis IV (Structure)

Stephan Doering a Markus Burgmer b Gereon Heuft b Dina Menke c

Brigitta Bäumer e Margit Lübking d Marcus Feldmann f Gudrun Schneider b

a Department of Psychoanalysis and Psychotherapy, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna , Austria; b Department of Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy, University of Münster, c Private Practice, and d Alexianer Krankenhaus Münster, Münster , e Private Practice, Senden , and f St. Vinzenz Hospital Rhede, Rhede , Germany


Current psychiatric diagnostics focuses more and more on domains beyond symptoms. Especially person- ality functioning has been accepted as highly important for indication and treatment planning. The new revisions of the two international classification systems, i.e. the Di- agnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders (DSM-5) and the upcoming International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11), both include severity measures for the diagnosis of personality disorders. ICD-11 will focus mainly on interpersonal functioning that will cover 4 or 5 levels from no personality disorder to severe personal- ity disorder [1] . DSM-5 contains a Personality Function- ing Scale with 2 domains and 4 subdomains [2–4] . The domain ‘self’ comprises the subdomains ‘identity’ and ‘self-direction’, the domain ‘interpersonal’ the subdo- mains ‘empathy’ and ‘intimacy’. The subdomains are op- erationalized on 5 levels, and 1 single global rating is made on a 5-point scale from healthy functioning (0) to extreme impairment (4). Since these approaches have been newly developed, corresponding reliability and va- lidity studies for the assessment of severity and personal- ity functioning have not yet been published.

From a clinical point of view, these changes represent a considerable step towards a more sophisticated diagno-

Key Words Personality functioning · Personality disorder · Severity of personality disturbance · Operationalized Psychodynamic Diagnosis · Reliability · Validity

Abstract Background: The assessment of personality functioning has recently become a focus of psychiatric diagnostics. The in- terview-based Operationalized Psychodynamic Diagnosis (OPD-2) provides a ‘structure axis’ for the assessment of per- sonality functioning. Methods: One hundred twenty-four psychiatric patients were diagnosed by means of the Struc- tured Clinical Interviews for DSM-IV (SCID-I and SCID-II), un- derwent OPD-2 interviews, and completed 9 questionnaires. Results: The OPD-2 structure axis shows good interrater reli- ability (intraclass correlation = 0.793). Correlations between the OPD-2 structure axis domains and a priori selected ques- tionnaire scales were of medium size and significant. Pa- tients with a personality disorder (PD) showed significantly worse personality functioning than those without. In cluster B PD, personality functioning was more severely impaired than in cluster C PD. Discussion: The OPD-2 structure axis shows good reliability as well as concurrent and discriminant validity and can be recommended for clinical use and re- search purposes. © 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel


The aim of this paper is to explain how and why individual differences emerge despite accounting for biological and socio-cultural differences, why people behave differently in the same context, and how behavior becomes stable and consistent. We review the experimental work on variability and stereotypy. In animal research, in contrast to expectations, there is interindividual variability in behavior under extreme environmental control. In addition, intraindividual consist- ency (stereotypy) is detected in animals whose behavior is not fully adjusted to the contingencies. The differences in what is learned (the kind of contingency relations) among laboratory animals can be explained by: a) the differences between effective contingencies and programmed contingencies, and b) the relationship between exploration and rate of reinforce- ment. In experimental studies in humans, learning differences in identical environments depend, further to the above, on what was previously learned by the individual (experience and education) and the thoroughness and internal consistency of task instructions. From these concepts, we propose a psychological theory of personality that explains: (a) how we learn different relationships from the same experience; (b) how behavioral individual differences emerge (variability); and (c) why each individual’s behavior becomes stable and consistent.

Key words: Effective Contingencies; Programmed Contingencies; Exploration; Consistency; Variability; Individual Dif- ferences; Personality.


Social Learning Across Psychological Distance

David A. Kalkstein New York University

Tali Kleiman Hebrew University

Cheryl J. Wakslak University of Southern California

Nira Liberman Tel Aviv University

Yaacov Trope New York University

While those we learn from are often close to us, more and more our learning environments are shifting to include more distant and dissimilar others. The question we examine in 5 studies is how whom we learn from influences what we learn and how what we learn influences from whom we choose to learn it. In Study 1, we show that social learning, in and of itself, promotes higher level (more abstract) learning than does learning based on one’s own direct experience. In Studies 2 and 3, we show that when people learn from and emulate others, they tend to do so at a higher level when learning from a distant model than from a near model. Studies 4 and 5 show that thinking about learning at a higher (compared to a lower) level leads individuals to expand the range of others that they will consider learning from. Study 6 shows that when given an actual choice, people prefer to learn low-level information from near sources and high-level information from distant sources. These results demonstrate a basic link between level of learning and psychological distance in social learning processes.

Keywords: social learning, psychological distance, construal level theory

On January 25, 2011, Egyptians protested in the streets of Cairo and Alexandria, seeking to overthrow President Hosni Mubarak. These massive demonstrations quickly gave way to full-scale revolution, leading to the ousting and arrest of Mubarak 18 days after the riots began. This was part of a larger movement toward democracy that swept across Northern Africa and the Middle East, toppling leaders in Yemen, Libya, and Tunisia, in what became known as the Arab Spring (Al Jazeera, 2011). The Egyptian uprising and the Arab Spring was unlike any previous widespread social movement in its unprecedented use of the Internet and social media. Through their use of the Internet, demonstrators were able to transcend traditional barriers presented by geographic and tem- poral distance and learn from a broader array of sources than was previously possible in historical revolutions. For example, through

social media communication with their counterparts involved in the then recent and nearby revolution in Tunisia, Egyptian protesters learned about specific strategies and tactics for engaging in civil actions such as using vinegar or onions to combat the negative effects of tear gas. Using online resources to access the writings and ideas of more distant sources such as the American social theorist Gene Sharp (author of the book From Dictatorship to Democracy; Sharp, 2010) and the distant revolutionary Group Optor! (a revolutionary group from Serbia in the late 1990s), leaders of the revolution were also able to access and learn about more general ideals and principles of civil action (Kirkpatrick & Sanger, 2011). From these diverse sources, both proximal to the uprisings and more distant, protesters learned different lessons critical to their cause.

Although anecdotal, the above example points to larger devel- opments in the landscape of our social worlds. While those we learn from are often close to us, more and more our learning environments are shifting to include more distant and dissimilar others. The rise of social media and the proliferation of the Internet, along with the corresponding increase in global intercon- nectedness, have broadened the scope and diversity of social interaction. As a result, it is now more likely than ever that we learn from people from different cultural and ethnic backgrounds (e.g., protesters from different ethnic groups or international aid workers), who live hundreds of miles away (e.g., professors for online courses or speakers at national conferences), or who are from the past (e.g., authors of older articles or books).