Outline the psychodynamic approach. Compare with the humanistic approach
(16 marks)
The psychodynamic approach explains behaviour as being a result of unconscious forces.
Freud believes that the unconscious mind is split into three parts, known as the tripartite
personality. This consists of the Id, ego and superego. The id is based on the pleasure
principle and demands instant gratification. The ego is based on the reality principle and
is the mediator between the id and the superego. The superego is based on the morality
principle which is our sense of right and wrong and will punish the ego through guilt. As a
child goes from birth to adulthood, they go through the five stages of psychosexual
development - oral, anal, phallic, latency and genital. At each stage there is a focus of
satisfaction, for example, at the oral stage the focus is on the mouth. If the required
amount of satisfaction is not achieved - due to conflict between the elements of
personality - this unresolved conflict (a fixation) is stored in the unconscious mind. These
unresolved conflicts shape and influence adult behaviour. For example, conflict at the
oral stage can lead to smoking. When an adult experiences anxiety, it is often a sign of
unresolved conflicts in the unconscious mind. The ego uses defence mechanisms to
reduce anxiety and protect the conscious mind. For example denial, which is refusing to
accept reality, repression, which is pushing a distressing memory out of the conscious
into the unconscious mind and displacement, which is moving feelings from the source
onto a neutral object.
One way in which the psychodynamic approach differs from the humanistic approach is
in relation to the free will vs determinism debate. The psychodynamic approach believes
that our behaviour is controlled by unconscious drives which we rationalise in our
conscious mind and is therefore an example of psychic determinism. The humanistic
approach on the other hand believes that humans have free will and can actively
determine their own behaviour. Therefore, it is humans' own decisions that will lead or
not lead them to self-actualisation.
However, interestingly, there are similarities between the approaches in relation to the
nature/nurture debate. Both approaches believe that we have an innate drive - the
psychodynamic approach would argue that the innate drive is unconscious, whilst the
humanistic approach would argue that we all have an innate drive to self-actualise.
Consequently, both are influenced by nature. It can also be argued that in both
approaches, behaviour is influenced by childhood experiences, particularly parents. In
the psychodynamic approach, parents are influencing experiences during the
psychosexual stages of development. In the humanistic approach, parents are
influencing whether we have congruence or incongruence between our actual self and
ideal self, through unconditional positive regard or imposing conditions of worth. These
are examples of nurture.
An additional similarity between the approaches is that they are both unscientific. Both
approaches involve subjectivity. The humanistic approach particularly values subjective
experience, and rejects general theory. The psychodynamic approach is subjective in
Freud’s interpretations of case studies. Both approaches involve untestable concepts. For
example, the psychodynamic approach includes defence mechanisms and the overall
concept of the unconscious. The humanistic approach involves vague concepts such as
self-actualisation. As a result, elements of both approaches are very difficult to test, and
therefore if they can’t be proven to be right or wrong, they are unfalsifiable.
Nevertheless, both approaches have made practical contributions through their different
therapies. Freud’s psychoanalysis, which aims to access unconscious thoughts in order to
resolve conflicts, was revolutionary as it laid the foundation for talking therapies. Carl
Rogers development of person-centred counselling, based on the humanistic approach,
aims to reduce congruence and is a widely used and effective form of counselling today.
Consequently, both approaches have been able to benefit society by improving people’s
quality of life.
(16 marks)
The psychodynamic approach explains behaviour as being a result of unconscious forces.
Freud believes that the unconscious mind is split into three parts, known as the tripartite
personality. This consists of the Id, ego and superego. The id is based on the pleasure
principle and demands instant gratification. The ego is based on the reality principle and
is the mediator between the id and the superego. The superego is based on the morality
principle which is our sense of right and wrong and will punish the ego through guilt. As a
child goes from birth to adulthood, they go through the five stages of psychosexual
development - oral, anal, phallic, latency and genital. At each stage there is a focus of
satisfaction, for example, at the oral stage the focus is on the mouth. If the required
amount of satisfaction is not achieved - due to conflict between the elements of
personality - this unresolved conflict (a fixation) is stored in the unconscious mind. These
unresolved conflicts shape and influence adult behaviour. For example, conflict at the
oral stage can lead to smoking. When an adult experiences anxiety, it is often a sign of
unresolved conflicts in the unconscious mind. The ego uses defence mechanisms to
reduce anxiety and protect the conscious mind. For example denial, which is refusing to
accept reality, repression, which is pushing a distressing memory out of the conscious
into the unconscious mind and displacement, which is moving feelings from the source
onto a neutral object.
One way in which the psychodynamic approach differs from the humanistic approach is
in relation to the free will vs determinism debate. The psychodynamic approach believes
that our behaviour is controlled by unconscious drives which we rationalise in our
conscious mind and is therefore an example of psychic determinism. The humanistic
approach on the other hand believes that humans have free will and can actively
determine their own behaviour. Therefore, it is humans' own decisions that will lead or
not lead them to self-actualisation.
However, interestingly, there are similarities between the approaches in relation to the
nature/nurture debate. Both approaches believe that we have an innate drive - the
psychodynamic approach would argue that the innate drive is unconscious, whilst the
humanistic approach would argue that we all have an innate drive to self-actualise.
Consequently, both are influenced by nature. It can also be argued that in both
approaches, behaviour is influenced by childhood experiences, particularly parents. In
the psychodynamic approach, parents are influencing experiences during the
psychosexual stages of development. In the humanistic approach, parents are
influencing whether we have congruence or incongruence between our actual self and
ideal self, through unconditional positive regard or imposing conditions of worth. These
are examples of nurture.
An additional similarity between the approaches is that they are both unscientific. Both
approaches involve subjectivity. The humanistic approach particularly values subjective
experience, and rejects general theory. The psychodynamic approach is subjective in
Freud’s interpretations of case studies. Both approaches involve untestable concepts. For
example, the psychodynamic approach includes defence mechanisms and the overall
concept of the unconscious. The humanistic approach involves vague concepts such as
self-actualisation. As a result, elements of both approaches are very difficult to test, and
therefore if they can’t be proven to be right or wrong, they are unfalsifiable.
Nevertheless, both approaches have made practical contributions through their different
therapies. Freud’s psychoanalysis, which aims to access unconscious thoughts in order to
resolve conflicts, was revolutionary as it laid the foundation for talking therapies. Carl
Rogers development of person-centred counselling, based on the humanistic approach,
aims to reduce congruence and is a widely used and effective form of counselling today.
Consequently, both approaches have been able to benefit society by improving people’s
quality of life.
