Individual Differences and Seminal Theories
Theories on seminal and individual differences have the programmatic and theoretical value when it comes to the interpretation of life experiences. The individual personality is a single step of all humans; however, personality can be categorized together hence allowing for more and general premises. With the help of both modern-day and seminal theories, the inference of personality, as well as how personality accounts of specific differences among people, can be easily and readily understood. Thus, this paper will discuss Roger’s, and Freud’s seminal theory is used to elucidating personal life experiences or events. Additionally, the modern-day theory by Bandura and the self-efficacy theory will also be discussed. The seminal theory of Maslow’s hierarchy of demands will also be critically evaluated. Therefore, I will critically analyze how these theories make sense in life experiences that I have personally faced.
One of the theories that take into account individual differences is Sigmund Freud’s theory of psychodynamic. Freud’s theory is useful when it comes to the explanation of my behaviors more, especially when faced with stressful times and during life crises. For instance, when I experience the loss of my beloved mum, my first reaction was denial, and with the support of Freud’s theory, I have to accept the death of my mother. The distinction of an individual’s initial reactions to stressful times and life crises are well explained by past experiences and encounters (Ainsworth, 2019). Because of Freud’s theory, I came to understand that people are from very different backgrounds, upbringing, and people have different past experiences. Additionally, people have other coping mechanisms and ways of channeling their life experiences.
Self-actualization by Rogers is another example of a seminal theory that explains the distinction between individuals. Rogers, on his theory, suggested that people have a different and varying degree when it comes to motivation. while other people may be in pursuit of meeting their psychical needs, other people may have a higher level and in the pursuit of becoming self-actualized. Peoples’ physical needs are essential for survival, and on the other hand, psychological needs are important when a person needs to optimize his capabilities, search for life novelty, seeking the meaning of life, and equipping one with the already existing and new competencies. Roger’s theory clearly explained why I had to seek for different motivations during my time of stress and crises (Ainsworth, 2019). First, young people seek for encounters that have monetary values and rewards. As a person grows, the level of needs becomes higher of self-esteem, recognition, love, belongingness, and also the fulfillment of job actualization are therefore sought.
These theories on individual differences and personality show two different anchors of the continuum. While Freud on his theory perceives people as driven as irrational beings and conscious driven, Rogers, in his theory, puts more emphasis on the power of a person to accomplish things that are beyond towards realization of self-actualization (Conway et al., 2018). However, these theories explain why peoples have very different and varying motivations and why people differ through the manner they behave, feel, and think.
In an average person, the difference in intellectual determines job competence differences. This is very true when works have to include a retentive mind and higher mental capacity, that are typical and complicated. The ability of the mind, that is, high intellect, directly relates to the ability of a person to make appropriate and effective decisions as well as adjusting to living changes. Such a suggestion justifies why I was able to make adjustments in their jobs and also able to handle complex and complicated tasks in addition to progressing successfully in their jobs. The same theory of cognitive differences among people perfectly connects with students as well. Teachers and professors, for example, offer the same studies to students, the same exam and also the same materials in their course. There are those students who find themselves been expectational on the way they understand the same materials, while other students have to be driven and motivated to learn (Dominic et al., 2017). Apart from a person’s attitude, the difference in cognitive ability, therefore, accounts for the effectiveness and pace through which students respond to stimulus.
Theories on individual variations assert that the intellectual capacity of a person also correlates with the person’s ability to work with his fellow at work and also spearhead the effects of the team. Working teams that have members with higher intellectual capacity have clearly shown more flexibility, and such teams are more agile when responding to different situations. However, as per my experience, appropriateness and the effectiveness of a working team does not merely rely on the cognitive ability of persons. The components of motivations and attitudes are significantly important when it comes to the decisions of the team (Dominic et al., 2017). Often, people with higher intellectual capacities fail because values such as mutuality, influence, and collaboration do lack in many teams. The effectiveness of a working team, therefore, depends on the effective functioning of the team and also the team’s ability to synergize.
Apart from the cognitive and intellectual differences, individuals’ differences can also differ depending on how a person feels. For example, some people are more susceptible to exercising fortitude, being calm, struggling through hardship, self-regard being high, and also been autonomous. Such traits among people, therefore, determines how a person can respond to pressure and crisis. Also, people with the tendency to respond ineffectively to hard times and stress are also found to be less satisfied with their lives, and in general terms, such people do more express their sadness when faced with stress and hard times. Additionally, individuals who respond negatively to stress and hard times may have a life tendency of being less contented with what they have or their jobs (Eby et al., 2007). Such people also face more related stress and are also less flexible to any changes. People with low ability to adjust accordingly with emotions are also found to be sensitive to the way they perceive threats and also possess the tendency to been ineffective when working together with other people.
These theories of personal differences also suggest the essence of a person being well-adjusted emotionally in order to maintain a healthy relationship and work. For instance, as per my experiences, I’m capable of influencing and leading others even when I’m not the most intelligent person among the group members. I come to the realization that effectiveness when being a leader and also dealing with the work will not only entail a person’s intellectual capacity but also an effective leader will need to n be in charge of his emotions (Eby et al., 2007). Earlier on, I experienced difficulties when I had to deal with negative emotions. Currently, I face my difficulties or challenges by clamming up instead of welcome tasks that await me.
However, through coaching from friends and parents, I have developed composure and confidence. My teammates at the community work also influence me to adapt more effectively to people from different backgrounds. Generally, these life experiences have to me enough that effective functioning of individuals’ emotions and leadership are easily learned from other people. Like softy skills, intellectual skills that people have in relation to feeling require a lot of practice. Individual differences and seminal theories effectively give a detailed explanation of why some individuals are found to be in a lesser position to adapt to the time of stress and stress (Eysenck, 2013). This attributes well the difference in people in the degree of neuroticism and how a person can be capable to emotionally be flexible.
Individual differences and seminal theories present the ideas why some people variants in their social life. Personality theory by Briggs and Myers explains the realms through which a person can be influenced to socialize with other individuals. Personality theory clearly asserts that people differ over the extraversion-introversion continuum. This, therefore, provide a justification where an individual derives energy from. Extraverted individuals are found to be more lively, assertive, sociable, and also talkative. On the other hand, introverted people are calmer, reserved, and they are also averse in public gatherings. Thus, the first explanation of personal theory clearly depicts why is I first experience challenges when leading and dealing with my team (Eysenck, 2013). I was an introvert person on my first days in university; however, I have improved and evolved after I developed more and new friendships, I can easily pass commands at my workplace, and I can also easily take pleasure from other organizations and companies hence forming a relationship that is more meaningful along with others.
After understanding personality theory, I have come to the realization that people naturally match to work that needs the presence of amusing people, being part of the party life, and also constantly chatting with others. They’re also individuals who become better when they are by themselves, deriving their energy from the surroundings and within as well as being introspecting (Eysenck, 2013). If such people are then matched with jobs that they don’t fit in in comparison with a natural predisposition, then such people can easily develop the tendency of been pressures, and also, they underperform in return. Extraverts people easily develop the tendency to lead teams and projects, they collaborative in all activities undertaken, and they do work better in such contexts.
In relation to personality theory, a study conducted by Matthews & Amelang (1993) asserted the most useful predictor of job attendance is rule-oriented and compulsive personality. Another study conducted by Thompson (2008) found that people with lower extroversion and high conscientiousness are less likely to be absent from work thus if more studies and research point, such as the relationship between absenteeism and personality characteristics, then a better and appropriate exist for profiling individuals who are more inclined to be absent from their work.
Empirical research and studies on seminal and individual differences also point out the importance of personal differences when describing how a person can be motivated and how the personality of a person affects motivation. I’m a conscientious person, and I’m not comfortable when is fail to accomplish what I’m supposed to do. That’s the reason why most of the time, I try my best to keep up to the expected standards of works (Thompson, 2008). I have also developed a tendency that enables me to please others. Therefore, the personality trait that I have developed because of seminal and individual difference theories translates to my personal preferences in the manner that I feel, believe, and respond.
Such theories also explain that some people are more predisposed to become more satisfied with their lives and their jobs than others. For instance, some people are normally more encouraged and satisfied with whatever they do or undertake and the jobs they have. Therefore, this description of individual differences makes a lot of sense of life experiences. Sometimes, I meet people who possess a natural knack in accomplishing their tasks well, and everything does appear to smoothly run when such people are around (Reivich et al., 2011). On the other hand, people who have the tendency to complain and are pessimistic, they are unaware of how things have to run smoothly.
With respect to the recognition of job satisfaction under any circumstance, I have come to gain more insight into why I should be predisposed so as to be enthusiastic and have positive ideas about anything that happens in my entire life. I have experienced critical events that seem to have negative impacts at first glance. Such critical events include the loss of beloved ones and also failing to achieve my life objectives. Now even when I am faced with such critical events, my first instinct is to find people who can support me and pick up positive learning I can gain from such experiences (Reivich et al., 2011). My family member and my friend, most of the time, have commented positively on my resilience trait, and I do perceive this personality trait as something that is inherent to me.
This paper has critically analyzed the usefulness of individual differences and seminal theories as well as studies that describe why the personal difference is prominent among people. These, therefore, have more insight and helped me to understand the reasons why people can change their personal traits from the influence of others, how cognitive ability of a person influences a person’s traits and how people connect with each other. More than the mentioned insight above, seminal and individual difference theories have helped introspect my personality, my life predisposition, and my preferences as a person. Such theories make a lot of sense in the identification of where, when, and how I effectively form long-lasting relationships with others. Insight of seminal and individual difference theories thus presents a better step a person can utilize for self-mastery. Only after having a clear understanding of yourself, an individual will have a better understanding of others, lead and manage others well and be able to accomplish an essential task. Analysis of such theories will thus provide more meaning and makes sense in life and performance of duties.
References
Ainsworth, F. (2019). The hope circuit. A psychologist’s journey from helplessness to optimism. Sydney. Handbook of hope for people, 44(01), 52. https://doi.org/10.1017/cha.2019.1
Conway, J., Catmur, C., & Bird, G. (2018). Understanding individual differences in theory of mind via the representation of minds, not mental states; Conway, Catmur & Bird. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/dxpvq
Dominic, D., Nicole, N., Ryan, S., & Woodfield, R. (2017). Motivation: A Critical Consideration of Freud and Rogers’ Seminal Conceptualisations. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 49-59. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6351-029-5_5
Eby, L. T., Meade, A. W., Parisi, A. G., & Douthitt, S. S. (2007). The development of an individual-level teamwork expectations measure and the application of a within-group agreement statistic to assess shared expectations for teamwork. Organizational Research Methods, 2(4), 366-394. https://doi.org/10.1177/109442819924003
Eysenck, H. (2013). Theory of personality and individual differences: Factors, systems, and processes. Personality and Individual Differences, 4(6), 719. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(83)90136-8
Matthews, G., & Amelang, M. (1993). Extraversion, arousal theory, and performance: A study of individual differences in the eeg. Personality and Individual Differences, 14(2), 347-363. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(93)90133-n
Reivich, K., Gillham, J. E., Chaplin, T. M., & Seligman, M. E. (2011). From helplessness to optimism. Handbook of Resilience in People, 223-237. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-48572-9_14
Thompson, M. (2008). Individual Difference Theory and Research: Application to Multinational Coalition Teamwork. https://doi.org/10.2172/211602