The humanist approach 16 marker
The humanist approach assumes that we are the masters of our own development and that
we have full conscious control over ourselves and the choices that we make. This is done by
focussing solely on the individual and taking an idiographic approach to understanding
people’s behaviours instead of attempting to formulate general laws, by focussing on the
desire for self-actualisation. Self-actualisation is the innate desire to become the best
version of ourselves. Maslow proposed a hierarchy of needs which you must meet and work
through to better yourself before you reach this point, starting with basic physiological
needs then safety needs then love and belonging before moving on to esteem needs and
finally self-actualisation.
Rogers another huminitic psychologist believed that there must be congruence between
yourself and ideal self for self-actualisation to be possible. However, if there is a large gap
then humanistic client centred therapy can provide an unconditional positive regard which
patients may have not received in childhood due to conditions of worth being imposed on
them. This then allows for the gap to become closer and more congruency can be found by
the patient.
The humanist approach rejects reductionist research which consists of breaking up a
behaviour into its constituent parts to measure and understand it. Which unlike the other
approaches this approach sees the real person not just a machine or a collection of
processes. This adds more internal validity as it means that nothing will be missed when
examining the behaviour of patients and adds more real-world application as it has
successfully been used to treat low self-esteem or depression.
One problem with the humanist approach is the issue of culture bias. This is because its only
applicable to individualist cultures as it presents extremely western ideas of individuality
and self-actualisation and how this is the most important thing strive to achieve. Whereas in
more collectivist cultures there is less emphasis on bettering yourself and more eon
contributing and helping the group to reach its goals. Due to the limited application to only
select cultures the population validity of this approach is very low. As in some cultures
reaching self-actualisation may actually be viewed as something negative and undesirable so
not all behaviours here can be explained by the humanist approach.
The humanistic approach has extremely subjective concepts which in turn makes it
untestable. The lack of empirical evidence means there isn’t a way to measure or
operationalise anything. This leads to individual differences within the research and lack of
universal meaning of the word self-actualisation is up to personal judgement which could
mean an array of things so couldn’t ever be tested. The humanistic approach therefore does
little to improve the credibility of psychology as a science.
The humanist approach assumes that we are the masters of our own development and that
we have full conscious control over ourselves and the choices that we make. This is done by
focussing solely on the individual and taking an idiographic approach to understanding
people’s behaviours instead of attempting to formulate general laws, by focussing on the
desire for self-actualisation. Self-actualisation is the innate desire to become the best
version of ourselves. Maslow proposed a hierarchy of needs which you must meet and work
through to better yourself before you reach this point, starting with basic physiological
needs then safety needs then love and belonging before moving on to esteem needs and
finally self-actualisation.
Rogers another huminitic psychologist believed that there must be congruence between
yourself and ideal self for self-actualisation to be possible. However, if there is a large gap
then humanistic client centred therapy can provide an unconditional positive regard which
patients may have not received in childhood due to conditions of worth being imposed on
them. This then allows for the gap to become closer and more congruency can be found by
the patient.
The humanist approach rejects reductionist research which consists of breaking up a
behaviour into its constituent parts to measure and understand it. Which unlike the other
approaches this approach sees the real person not just a machine or a collection of
processes. This adds more internal validity as it means that nothing will be missed when
examining the behaviour of patients and adds more real-world application as it has
successfully been used to treat low self-esteem or depression.
One problem with the humanist approach is the issue of culture bias. This is because its only
applicable to individualist cultures as it presents extremely western ideas of individuality
and self-actualisation and how this is the most important thing strive to achieve. Whereas in
more collectivist cultures there is less emphasis on bettering yourself and more eon
contributing and helping the group to reach its goals. Due to the limited application to only
select cultures the population validity of this approach is very low. As in some cultures
reaching self-actualisation may actually be viewed as something negative and undesirable so
not all behaviours here can be explained by the humanist approach.
The humanistic approach has extremely subjective concepts which in turn makes it
untestable. The lack of empirical evidence means there isn’t a way to measure or
operationalise anything. This leads to individual differences within the research and lack of
universal meaning of the word self-actualisation is up to personal judgement which could
mean an array of things so couldn’t ever be tested. The humanistic approach therefore does
little to improve the credibility of psychology as a science.
