Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
Personality tests
This statement appears to lament the limitations of personality tests and the weaknesses of the associated personality tests as far as the study of human behavior is concerned. The various types of personality tests that are widely used in the assessment of individuals for purposes of determining their personality type are what the author is describing in this case as “questionable procedures” while the “vague categories” refers to the resulting personality type arrived at (Personality_Lec2 13).
This observation is made by the author having critically reviewed the approaches that are commonly associated with the determination of personality types that the author criticizes; for these reasons the author advocates for a different approach that involves a comprehensive approach towards the measurement of personality traits. Such methods of personality determination are what the author emphasizes to involve the aspect of a “person’s psychological situation” (Personality_Lec2 13). By this, the author means that any such study must take into account the general environment and state of mind of the individual during that point in time. This will imply controlling any factors that might impact the results of such tests.
Differences
By their nature of measurement, these two theories of measuring attitudes are inherently different in one major way; what cognitive dissonance theory does is measure the degree of variability between two “contradictory cognitions” (Attitude_Lec4 7) and explore how that contradiction is resolved.
This is what is being referred to as “dissonance” which in this case can be quantitatively determined depending on how varied the attitude is. In cognitive dissonance therefore the way that the level of attitude is determined in an individual is termed to be quantitative in that it can accurately describe the level of attitude that exists (Larson 199). What this means is that cognitive dissonance theory can be able to measure by how much the level of attitude differs between two individuals using subjective terms such as minor differences, major differences, or even completely different differences. It can even quantify the level of attitude that exists between two different persons in percentage form for instance by concluding that there is a 50% (average) attitude difference between two persons.
This is very different from what balance theory does when measuring attitude between various persons; this is because balance theory tends to measure attitude from two different perspectives; a positive attitude or negative attitude. As such cognitive dissonance can effectively determine by how much attitudes differ among persons while balance theory can only be able to determine if the nature of the resulting attitude is positive or negative without being able to determine the degree of attitude difference that exists between two persons. For this reason, balance theory is described as qualitative because it cannot quantify the negative or positive attitude identified (Larson 199). This different approach in measurement of attitudes between persons is thus the major disparity between these two theories.
Another difference between the two theories is that the balance theory is more or less concerned with the determination of the positive or negative nature of a person’s attitude which it refers to as “balance state” while the cognitive dissonance theory is more concerned with the description of how the process of attitude occurs within a person and how a person adapts to the various “dissonance experiences” that are encountered. Thus, the balance theory will try to address the problems of attitude in an individual by ensuring that a person’s expectations are aligned with their attitude while the cognitive dissonance theory will explore the various ways that attitude is influenced in a person.
Similarities
Consequently, both of these methods are similar in that they both involve measurement of attitude among subjects; ultimately any of them will effectively establish if any form of attitude exists in a subject and its nature. The balance theory for instance measures attitude in an individual by way of determining the “psychological equilibrium” that exists and whether it is positive or negative (Larson 198). In the same way, the cognitive dissonance theory measures attitude in an individual by assessing the nature of dissonance that exist and how a person responds to this dissonance (Larson 199).
Lewin’s field theories
In my case, my behavior is a function of two functions based on the concepts of Lewin’s Field theory i.e. my surrounding environment and my inner state of mind. These two categories of factors are what combines to influence my behavior at this moment and are what Lewin describes as “living space” which are consequently shaped by “various force factors” (Neill). What Lewin describes as force factors that make up the living space is the structural properties elements of the actions/behavior that I am actively undertaking at any given moment while the dynamic properties refer to the constantly changing nature of the “field” depending on the environmental and psychological components that are also constantly shifting.
Thus, to analyze my life space at this specific time I would say I am very optimistic about passing this subject having prepared adequately. Also, I am nervous, feel pressured, and extra careful in how I formulate and write my answers; all these issues that I have mentioned here and others are what would comprise the psychological or personality aspect that makes up the living space. In the same way, my behavior is influenced by the environmental factors that surround me at this moment which in this case are my colleagues at the library and other factors such as the weather and so forth. Both of these functions are what entails the concept of Lewin’s Field theory.
Perception process
Gestalt laws of the perceptual organization describe the mental process of perception that takes place when people perceive or are involved in an exercise of problem-solving; for this reason, they have varied applications in the field of psychology. Perception according to Gestalt has three major components; expectancy, active process that is selective; because of the first component of expectancy Gestalt laws can be applied in the determination of the occurrence of chance events. In the perception of chance events, for instance, Gestalt laws rely on the expectancy and occurrence of past events to predict the occurrence of an event in the future. Thus, in this case, we see that “P(HHH) is less than P(HTH)” meaning that the probability of obtaining ahead on the fourth toss in a row is less likely to happen with each additional trial (Perception_Lec3 15).
On the other hand, Gestalt laws can be used to determine the probability of an event occurring based on the subject’s expectancy level of such an event being likely to occur. In the perception of people, Gestalt principles assert that information is central in shaping the perception that one has for others and oneself; this is what Gestalt describes as “social perception” (Perception_Lec3 16). This is because the perception of people is shaped by such issues as an impression, stereotyping, halo effect and self-fulfilling prophesy when the perception is about oneself; because all these issues are governed by Gestalt’s principles it means that by extension they can also apply to study of people.
Predicting human behavior
A major weakness of personality tests is described to be their inability in predicting future behavior and their general inaccuracies in precisely being able to identify the personality type of the subject. More specifically their methodology of determination of personality type has been described as questionable and even doubtful since they rely on the “trait approach” that is restrictive in several ways (Personality_Lec2 9). One, they lack reliable variables that can effectively measure all aspects of interests among subjects, secondly, their variables of measurement and approach are not subjective which means that they cannot be objectively interpreted and finally, they ignore the wider environment that impacts the personality behavior of the subject. Thus, the author concludes “human behavior cannot be predicted based on these types of measures since the specific properties of the situation are ignored” (Personality_Lec2 15).
Construct validity
Construct validity is a measure of whether a test measures what exists in theory (Personality_Lec2_11). It is the extent to which operationalization of a construct, subject matter measure what the theory says they should do.
Construct validity is useful because it determines the extent to which a test, results, or findings of a concept corresponds accurately with the real world. After all, the test process tested the right variables accurately. A statistical relationship is the presence of a true, measurable cause and effect relationship between two variables that can be determined through measurement. The relationship between such two variables should not be spurious and should show the strength of the relationship and the direction either positive or negative of the relationship.
The nature of the relationship
Personality refers to the rather enduring traits of a person; according to social scientists, these traits can be measured and used to predict future behaviors. However, personality tests often fail to accurately measure and predict human behavior because human beings are adaptive and learning systems (Personality_Lec2_12) who can adjust their behavior towards their environment. Human behavior is not static but is dynamic and often changes to fit in the environment; thus personality tests cannot predict accurately future human behavior. For example, a person such as a student will most of the time adjust their behavior to fit what is socially acceptable and what is expected by teachers, parents, peers, and the society at large.
Human being behavior is also influenced strongly by the nature of the relationship that they encounter (Personality_Lec2_12). For example, a person who is classified as a dangerous criminal may relate with some people well if he senses they treat him kindly and respectfully. A good and reserved person may react violently when he or she realizes that his or her rights are being violated. Also, human behavior is strongly influenced by their situation (Personality_Lec2_12); and people behave differently in different situations and as they discharge different roles. A security guard or a policeman certainly is expected to be strict and watchful whereas the same person while on holiday will be relaxed and carefree. Personality tests do not take into consideration the situation and its effects on human behavior.
Explaining Human Behavior
Lewin’s theory called Topological Psych and Field theory seeks to explain human behavior; this theory states that human psychological situation can be represented topologically (Motivation_LewinsTheory_Lec6_14). This can be presented to appear like a rubber sheet with connected shapes. On this topology, there exists a space between an individual’s position and his/her goal. Space between is referred to as the field of activity; according to Lewin’s theory, when there is a positive valence or energy in the field of activity, a force field is created from the individual towards the goal. When the magnitude of the force field increases, the distance between the person and the goal decreases (Motivation_LewinsTheory_Lec6_17). Conversely, when negative valence exists, it creates a force field away from the region and the magnitude reduces. The force field only exists when the person is near the goal otherwise it is minimal (Motivation_LewinsTheory_Lec6_17).
This theory can be used to explain other phenomena like motivation, conflict, attitude change, and self-fulfilling theories. A self-fulfilling theory is a prediction that one makes and thereby make it more probable that it will occur based on that fact alone and can either be positive or negative. According to social scientists, expecting an event means it has a higher probability of occurring. When expectations are formed about something or somebody, communication is unintentionally made regarding those expectations leading people to respond by adjusting themselves resulting in their fulfillment.
According to Lewin’s theory, a positive expectation caused by a positive self-fulfilling prophecy creates a substantial positive valence in the psychological field of the activity described above thereby shortening the distance between the person and the goal. An example of a self-fulfilling prophecy that is towards a positive region of activity is a teacher who tells the students that they are capable pupils from whom he/she expects excellent performance from them; this results in students loving the subject, paying more attention, and being more diligent on the subject. This is likely to result in better results because of the positive statements of the teachers result in positive results by the students. On the other hand, a negative valence in the psychological field caused by a negative self-fulfilling prophecy makes the distance to increase and the energy to be very low. This leads to the so-called self-fulfilling prophecy to come true. An example of a self-fulfilling prophecy that is toward the negative region of activity is when a supervisor thinks that his/her junior employee is incapable of doing an assignment well, which may lead the junior to believe that he/she is not able and subsequently the outcome or performance is poor. But the same worker can perform well under a different superior who has a different opinion of the employee.
Decision making
Decision making is the process of identifying alternatives and choosing a solution that leads to a desirable result. Organizations and individuals prefer to appear rational in their decision-making process (DecisionMaking_Lec7_3). Rationality is where decisions are based on reason rather than emotions. The rational decision model is where an optimal solution arrives after a thorough consideration of all alternatives (DecisionMaking_Lec7_3). In the rational decision-making model, the first step is to identify the problem, then alternative solutions are generated, the best solution is selected amongst the generated solutions, the solution is then implemented monitored, and evaluated. An example of an individual rational decision process is where purchases are made only when they are needed when the most economic option is selected.
In reality, however, it is not possible to be rational in decision making due to various constraints. Two theories explain how individuals and groups decide in reality; these are Simon’s model and the Garbage can model. Simon’s model of subjective rationality explains that individual decision making is not always rational due to limited information, this leads to the use of the rule of the thumb and satisfying (DecisionMaking_Lec7_5). For example, an individual who wants to buy a house will depend on the limited information they possess, may make the final decision between two options using irrational methods and the final decision may not be optimal but just good enough.
According to the Garbage can model, the process can be sloppy and haphazard therefore can lack rationality (DecisionMaking_Lec7_10); because of this, they are called organized anarchies. Lack of rationality is caused by differences in preferences by members which are seen in the way that the use of unclear technologies whose outcome is uncontrolled and fluidity of membership whereby participants vary from time to time (DecisionMaking_Lec7_10).
The similarity between these two models is that the aim of both is to achieve an optimal solution within the constraint of time and resources. The difference between the two is that whereas individual decision-making involves only one viewpoint, group decision-making is more superior because they have more knowledge, it’s a platform for communication, and they achieve a higher level of acceptance than individual decisions. However, unlike individual decisions, they can be slow and inefficient and are not necessarily optimal since they may compromise decisions
The idea of a unit of analysis
The idea of a unit of analysis represents the focus of attention of any given theory that seeks to understand and explain the concept of organizations (DifferentApproachtoOrganisations_Lec1_6). It is the variable that is considered, studied, and evaluated by each of the individual theories. It is that part of an entity that is the focus of the study; the observational unit enables the researcher to understand better the organization. In the system’s theory, for instance, the unit of analysis is the series of events that an organization engages in; the contingency theory analyses how an organization is affected by changes in variables such as technology and the environment.
Human relations theories focus on individuals, small groups, and organizations’ behavior and dynamics. Bureaucracy theories use offices, procedures within an organization as their unit of study. Scientific theories such as Fredrick Taylor’s theories of management analyze the steps and time required to perform a specific task, or time and motion studies. Organizations are often classified or defined based on their characteristics and nature of activities. Thus it is common to hear organizations being classified as multinational, high-tech companies, and financial institutions amongst others. Organizations are sometimes viewed as setups that exist to achieve a common goal; however, the realization of the multiple goals and objectives that exist in the organization makes that definition inappropriate.
In any case, employees, management, shareholders of an organization have diverse goals; thus, it is better to view the organization as a set of constraints with the resulting patterns of behavior. This is because by nature they are established by human beings who are constrained by their abilities. Organizations are affected by both the internal and external environment in which they operate. For example, the size of financial and specialized human resources present in an organization can determine the effectiveness of the organization in achieving its goals. Similarly, the laws and regulations that govern its operations can determine the extent to which it can achieve its goals. The diverse goals and interests represented by the organization’s stakeholders present the management with challenges in how they discharge responsibility on behalf of shareholders diligently while satisfying all other stakeholders such as employees, partners, and management.
All these conflicting interests influence organizational decision-making processes and have to be considered to achieve consensus amongst all organization’s stakeholders. Organizational behavior theories evolve in an attempt to explain and resolve the organization problem; furthermore, organizations exist to resolve human problems either for a profit or nonprofit. Out of these challenges or constraints, specific behavior develops whose aim is to counter these constraints. For example, the emergency department of a hospital will develop a particular set of behavior that develops and evolve in response to the nature and pressure of their work in receiving patients in life-threatening circumstances for instance. This behavior is specific to an organization and is referred to as the organization’s behavior. Therefore it is better to view organizations as a set of constraints with a resulting pattern of behavior.
Similarities
Kelly’s ideology on personality types is well articulated in his concept of what he refers to as “personal construct” by which he is implying the ability of persons to “interpret and predict the events that affect them” (Allpsych.com). And it is in the first principle of Kelly’s theory that states “that our processes are psychologically directed by our anticipation of events” that we find the similarity between Kelly and Lewin’s theories. This is because both of them recognize that a person’s behavior is influenced by a combination of factors which Kelly is referring to as constructs but which Lewin is referring to as living space.
Thus, according to Kelly, “personal construct” in a person is made up of such factors as our perception abilities, unique interpretation abilities, and understanding; these are the factors that Kelly attributes to the type of personality in an individual (Allpsych.com). In the same way, Lewin has come up with a set of factors that he attributes to the type of personality in an individual which is what he calls life space. In this case life space “describes that person’s motives, values, needs, moods, goals, anxieties, and ideals” which he categorizes into two categories of external and internal stimuli (Neill). Both sets of factors that are categorized by these two theories are essentially similar and in essence implies that a person’s behavior is shaped by his perception, attitudes, motives, interests, and the kind of people interacting with them
Secondly, both of these theories appear to agree on how the process of human behavior among subjects is shaped; thus, Kelly explains that human behavior is influenced by the varied interpretations of events and how we understand them. This is what he attributes to the resulting personality type that we develop eventually which he rather concisely concludes “a person’s processes are psychologically channelized… by how he anticipates events” (Allpsych.com). In the same way, Lewin describes how a person’s behavior is shaped but in this case by the external and internal factors which we have listed and discussed above. Therefore, both these theories provide albeit similar factors and describe a similar process of behavior change that they identify to be occurring among persons.
Differences
The major difference between these theories is found in their central premises; Lewin’s theory categorizes the various forms of factors that influence human behavior into two, personality factors and environmental factors while Kelly categorizes them in what he calls “constructs”. In this particular regard, these two theories become fundamentally different and are consequently named differently. Thus, we see that Lewin concludes that “one’s behavior is related both to one’s characteristics and to the social situation in which one finds oneself”; this statement aptly summarizes the central concept of Lewin’s theory and highlights the major way in which it differs with Kelly’s theory of personality as far as specific functions of personality are concerned (Neill). But for Kelly the specific elements that shape behavior are summarized in what he refers to as the “eleven Corollaries” (Allpsych.com).
The other difference is in the content itself; Lewin’s behavioral shaping factors are the personality state of the person and the external environment factors which he identifies as the only ones that are concerned in shaping the behavior of a person. On the other hand, Kelly identifies and summarizes a list that encompasses varied factors which we have seen to be what he is referring to as the “eleven Corollaries” which he identifies as shaping our ability to predict events and interpret them. Thus, in conclusion, these two theories though having essentially similar factors that are identified as causing personality behavior change goes on to list specific factors that are drastically different.
The learning process in the organization
March and Olson’s model describes the process of learning within an organization to be a function of two factors; cognition and the aspect of organizational intelligence. Generally, this model attempts to explain how the process of learning in an organization is driven by the employee’s diversity and ability to respond to what is referred to as environmental ambiguity.
- Incomplete study cycle 1: Role Constrained Learning: an employee may believe that conservation of energy and organization resources is good for the company and the environment but may not always use resources prudently.
- Incomplete study cycle 2: Audience Learning: an individual’s hard work may be different from the organization’s culture. The organization’s general performance may be sloppy.
- Incomplete study cycle 3: Superstitious Learning: a new revolutionary product introduced by the organization may be poorly received by society.
- Incomplete study cycle 4: Learning under Ambiguity: alcohol and cigarettes demand and consumption may steadily increase despite awareness of their negative health impact.
Works Cited
Allpsych. “The Beginning of Cognitivism. 2003. Web.
Larson, U. “Persuasion: Reception & Responsibility.” Washington, Lyn Uhl. Print.
Neill, J. “Field Theory: Kurt Lewin, 2009.” Web.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.