1
CARL ROGERS
WHERE NO PSYCHOLOGIST WENT BEFORE: Never overlook something that
seems to be simple. That's what Murray Levine, one of my professors in graduate school, always
emphasized. I think this mistake is sometimes made concerning Carl Rogers and his work.
Psychotherapeutic concepts such as "empathy," "reflection,""unconditional positive regard," and
"self-actualization" seem so simple, even sugar-coated, that there's a tendency to overlook how
profound they really are. In the hands of a master clinician, these ideas become an art that is as
effective in exploring and healing the psyche as any therapeutic intervention. In fact, relatively
recent approaches in psychoanalysis (e.g., self psychology, object relations theory) that
emphasize the transformative impact of "empathy" and "mirroring" are really not that far from
the humanistic notions about the ingredients necessary for self-actualization. In many respects,
Rogers was a pioneering psychologist. I also like to point out to my students that Rogers plays
an important historical role in the development of psychology and psychotherapy. He was one of
the first, if not THE first, PSYCHOLOGIST to propose a comprehensive theory about
psychotherapy. Prior to Rogers, almost all forms of therapy centered around psychiatry and
psychoanalysis.
CARL ROGERS' THEORY OF PERSONALITY: DAGMAR PESCITELLI: An
Analysis of Carl Rogers' Theory of Personality:
Since the study of personality began,
personality theories have offered a wide variety of explanations for behavior and what
constitutes the person. This essay offers a closer look at the humanistic personality theory of Carl
Rogers. Rogers' theory of personality evolved out of his work as a clinical psychologist and
developed as an offshoot of his theory of client-centered (later called person-centered) therapy
(Rogers, 1959). He was first and foremost a therapist, with an abiding respect for the dignity of
persons and an interest in persons as subjects rather than objects. Rogers approach to the study of
persons is phenomenological and idiographic. His view of human behavior is that it is
"exquisitely rational" (Rogers, 1961, p.194). Furthermore, in his opinion: "the core of man's
nature is essentially positive" (1961, p.73), and he is a "trustworthy organism" (1977, p.7). These
beliefs are reflected in his theory of personality. To examine this theory more closely, a
summary of the key features follows, with subsequent exploration of Rogers' view of self, his
view of the human condition and his rationale for improvement of this condition. A brief overall
assessment will conclude the discussion. While Rogers' humanistic conception of personality has
both strengths and weaknesses, it is a valuable contribution to the study of persons, recognizing
agency, free will and the importance of the self.
Actualizing Tendency : Rogers (1959) maintains that the human "organism" has an
underlying "actualizing tendency", which aims to develop all capacities in ways that maintain or
enhance the organism and move it toward autonomy. This tendency is directional, constructive
and present in all living things. The actualizing tendency can be suppressed but can never be
destroyed without the destruction of the organism (Rogers, 1977). The concept of the actualizing
tendency is the only motive force in the theory. It encompasses all motivations; tension, need, or
drive reductions; and creative as well as pleasure-seeking tendencies (Rogers, 1959). Only the
organism as a whole has this tendency, parts of it (such as the self) do not. Maddi (1996)
describes it as a "biological pressure to fulfill the genetic blueprint" (p106.) Each person thus has
a fundamental mandate to fulfill their potential. Self The human organism's "phenomenal field"
includes all experiences available at a given moment, both conscious and unconscious (Rogers,
2
1959). As development occurs, a portion of this field becomes differentiated and this becomes
the person's "self" (Hall & Lindzey, 1985; Rogers, 1959). The "self" is a central construct in this
theory. It develops through interactions with others and involves awareness of being and
functioning. The self-concept is "the organized set of characteristics that the individual perceives
as peculiar to himself/herself" (Ryckman, 1993, p.106). It is based largely on the social
evaluations he/she has experienced.
Self-Actualizing Tendency : A distinctly psychological form of the actualizing tendency
related to this "self" is the "self-actualizing tendency". It involves the actualization of that portion
of experience symbolized in the self (Rogers, 1959). It can be seen as a push to experience
oneself in a way that is consistent with one's conscious view of what one is (Maddi, 1996).
Connected to the development of the self-concept and self-actualization are secondary needs
(assumed to likely be learned in childhood): the "need for positive regard from others" and "the
need for positive self-regard", an internalized version of the previous. These lead to the favoring
of behavior that is consistent with the person's self-concept (Maddi, 1996).
Organismic Valuing and Conditions of Worth : When significant others in the person's
world (usually parents) provide positive regard that is conditional, rather than unconditional, the
person introjects the desired values, making them his/her own, and acquires "conditions of
worth" (Rogers, 1959). The self-concept then becomes based on these standards of value rather
than on organismic evaluation. These conditions of worth disturb the "organismic valuing
process", which is a fluid, ongoing process whereby experiences are accurately symbolized and
valued according to optimal enhancement of the organism and self (Rogers, 1959). The need for
positive self-regard leads to a selective perception of experience in terms of the conditions of
worth that now exist. Those experiences in accordance with these conditions are perceived and
symbolized accurately in awareness, while those that are not are distorted or denied into
awareness. This leads to an "incongruence" between the self as perceived and the actual
experience of the organism, resulting in possible confusion, tension, and maladaptive behavior
(Rogers, 1959). Such estrangement is the common human condition. Experiences can be
perceived as threatening without conscious awareness via "subception", a form of discrimination
without awareness that can result in anxiety.
FULLY FUNCTIONING PERSON AND THE SELF : Theoretically, an individual
may develop optimally and avoid the previously described outcomes if they experience only
"unconditional positive regard" and no conditions of worth develop. The needs for positive
regard from others and positive self-regard would match organismic evaluation and there would
be congruence between self and experience, with full psychological adjustment as a result
(Rogers, 1959). This ideal human condition is embodied in the "fully functioning person" who is
open to experience able to live existentially, is trusting in his/her own organism, expresses
feelings freely, acts independently, is creative and lives a richer life; "the good life" (Rogers,
1961). It should be noted that; "The good life is a process not a state of being. It is a direction,
not a destination (Rogers, 1961, p.186)". For the vast majority of persons who do not have an
optimal childhood there is hope for change and development toward psychological maturity via
therapy, in which the aim is to dissolve the conditions of worth, achieve a self congruent with
experience and restore the organismic valuing process (Rogers, 1959).
In Rogers' view (1959, 1961, 1977) personality change is certainly possible and is further
a necessary part of growth. However, he notes that self-acceptance is a prerequisite (1961).
Rogers originally failed to recognize the importance of "self". When he began his work he had
3
the "settled notion that the "self" was a vague, ambiguous, scientifically meaningless term which
had gone out of the psychologist's vocabulary with the departure of the introspectionists" (1959,
p.200). However, through his work with clients he came to appreciate the importance of self. The
"self" is described as: the organized, consistent, conceptual gestalt composed of perceptions of
the characteristics of the "I" or "me" and the perceptions of the relationships of the "I" or "me" to
others and to various aspects of life, together with the values attached to these perceptions.
(Rogers, 1959, p.200) This gestalt is a fluid and changing process, available to awareness. By
using the term "gestalt", Rogers points to the possibility of change describing it as "a
configuration in which the alteration of one minor aspect could possibly alter the whole picture"
(p.201).
Rogers' conception of self is rather broad. He does describe a variation of self: the "ideal
self" which denotes the self-concept the individual would most like to possess (Rogers, 1959),
but other explicit variations are not offered. Similarly, specific concepts related to identity and
identity development are missing, although the self image is certainly revisable and undergoes
change over the lifespan. Exactly when the differentiation of phenomenal field into self occurs is
also not specified. Rogers concept of self-actualization is specifically related to the self and is
thus different from Goldstein's use of the term (which matches the actualizing tendency) and also
different from Maslow's which appears to incorporate both tendencies in one (Maddi, 1996).
The actualizing tendency is fundamental to this theory. Rogers considers it "the most
profound truth about man" (1965, p.21). He finds strong biological support for this tendency in
many varied organisms. Rogers' conception of an active forward thrust is a huge departure from
the beliefs of Freud and others who posit an aim for tension reduction, equilibrium, or
homeostasis (Krebs & Blackman, 1988; Maddi, 1996). Rogers (1977) notes that sensory
deprivation studies support this concept as the absence of external stimuli leads to a flood of
internal stimuli, not equilibrium.
While the idea of an actualizing tendency makes sense, Rogers never specifies what some
of the inherent capacities that maintain and enhance life might be. Perhaps it is because doing so
might violate Rogers' "intuitive sense of human freedom" (Maddi, 1996, p.104). Maddi further
suggests that the belief in inherent potentialities may lie in this theory's position as an offshoot of
psychotherapy where it is useful for both client and therapist to have a belief in unlimited
possibilities. However, applying this idea to all human beings in a theory of personality sets up
the logical requirement of precision regarding what the potentialities might be (Maddi, 1996).
The inherent potentialities of the actualizing tendency can suffer distorted expression
when maladjustment occurs, resulting in behavior destructive to oneself and others. The
actualization and self-actualization tendencies can be at cross purposes with each other when
alienation from the true self occurs, so there is organismic movement in one direction and
conscious struggle in another. Rogers (1977) revised his previous thinking concerning this
incongruence, stating that while he earlier saw the rift between self and experience as natural,
while unfortunate, he now believes society, (particularly Western culture), culturally conditions,
rewards and reinforces behaviors that are "perversions of the unitary actualizing tendency
(p.248)." We do not come into the world estranged from ourselves, socialization is behind this
alienation. Rogers (1961) finds the human infant to actually be a model of congruence. He/she is
seen as completely genuine and integrated, unified in experience, awareness and communication.
Distorted perceptions from conditions of worth cause our departure from this integration.
4
There is some empirical support for the hypothesis that congruence between self and
experience leads to better personality adjustment and less defensiveness (Chodorkoff, 1954; cited
in Rogers, 1959). Some research has also tended to support the idea of changes in self-concept
occurring as a result of therapy (Butler & Haigh, 1954; cited in Rogers, 1954). However, Maddi
(1996) raises and interesting point regarding such studies. While it has been found that
self-descriptions move toward ideals after counseling and one would assume the closer a person
is to full functioning the smaller the discrepancy would be, statements of ideals may be
operational representations of conditions of worth, which are socially imposed. Conditions of
worth are to be dissolved rather than moved toward for full functioning in this theory!
While Rogers sees the common human condition as one of incongruence between self
and experience, this does not minimize his ultimate belief in the autonomy of human beings.
Rogers (1977, p15) sees the human being as: "capable of evaluating the outer and inner situation,
understanding herself in its context, making constructive choices as to the next steps in life, and
acting on those choices". This illustrates a belief in agency and free will. While humans behave
rationally, Rogers (1961, p.195) maintains that: "The tragedy for most of us is that our defenses
keep us from being aware of this rationality so that we are consciously moving in one direction,
while organismically we are moving in another." Unlike Freud, Rogers did not see conflict as
inevitable and humans as basically destructive. It is only when "man is less than fully man", not
functioning freely, that he is to be feared (1961, p.105). The human capacity for awareness and
the ability to symbolize gives us enormous power, but this awareness is a double-edged
phenomenon : undistorted awareness can lead to full functioning and a rich life, while distortions
in awareness lead to maladjustment and a multitude of destructive behaviors (Rogers, 1965).
The "maladjusted person" is the polar opposite of the fully functioning individual (who
was introduced early in this essay). The maladjusted individual is defensive, maintains rather
than enhances his/her life, lives according to a preconceived plan, feels manipulated rather than
free, and is common and conforming rather than creative (Maddi, 1996). The fully functioning
person, in contrast, is completely defense-free, open to experience, creative and able to live "the
good life". Empirical support for the fully functioning person is somewhat mixed. The openness
to experience characteristic has been supported (Coan, 1972; cited in Maddi, 1996). However,
some studies have found that openness to experience and organismic trusting did not
intercorrelate, contrary to expectations (Pearson, 1969, 1974; cited in Maddi, 1996). Ryckmann
(1993) notes that some studies have found non-defensive people are more accepting of others
and Maddi (1996) cites numerous studies that indicate self-accepting people also appear to be
more accepting of others.
It is somewhat puzzling given his humanistic emphasis on individuality, that Rogers
describes only two extremes of people. Maddi (1996) suggests these extreme characterizations of
only two types may be due to this personality theory being secondary to a theory of therapy. It is
appropriate for a theory of psychotherapy to concern itself with the two extremes of fullest
functioning and maladjustment. However, when theorizing about all people, two types are
insufficient.
Carl Rogers was most interested in improving the human condition and applying his
ideas. His person-centered therapy may well be his most influential contribution to psychology.
Rogers' pervasive interest in therapy is what clearly differentiates him from Maslow, despite
some similarities in their ideas. The person-centered approach has had impact on domains
outside of therapy such as family life, education, leadership, conflict resolution, politics and
5
community health (Krebs & Blackman, 1988). In my opinion, Rogers greatest contribution may
lie in his encouraging a humane and ethical treatment of persons, approaching psychology as a
human science rather than a natural science.
REFLECTION TECHNIQUES OF CARL ROGERS: Reflection: S: "I'm very
depressed today, Doctor." D: "You're very depressed, Mr. Smith."S: "Yes. I haven't been this
depressed in a long time." D: "You haven't been this depressed in a long time." S: "I'm so
depressed that I'm thinking about killing myself." D: "You're thinking about killing yourself." S:
"I'd like to kill myself right now." D: "You'd like to kill yourself right now." S: "Yes, I'm so
desperate that I think I'll open this window and jump out." D: "You're thinking of jumping out
that window." S: "I'm gonna do it. See? I'm opening the window.... and I'm gonna jump." D:
"You're going to jump out the window." S: "Bye, doc. Here I go........ aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah"
(splat) D: "Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah, splat." I tell my students this joke to illustrate the opinion
that the basic technique of reflection, by itself, is not sufficient for effective psychotherapy. But
then I go on to emphasize how reflection is deceptively simple. While it may be used in a
clumsy, superficial manner, it can also be applied as a versatile and powerful lens for helping a
client uncover and clarify extremely important intrapsychic issues - as in Rogerian therapy.
To demonstrate this, I set up a chair in front of the room, sit down, and role play a client
for three or four minutes. The class just listens while I talk about my "problem." I may role play
some real person that I know (but whom the students don't), or I just improvise an imaginary
client. When I finish, I ask the students to write down in their notebook what they would reflect
back to the client. It's important that they write down EXACTLY what they would say, word for
word, for their "reflection."
We then go around the room and have each student read what they wrote. It quickly
becomes apparent that even only three or four minutes of a client talking produces an amazing
amount of material. The variety of reflections posed by the students reveal that there are many
different themes that could be reflected - and many important subtleties in how to word those
reflections. What each student chooses to reflect might also reveal something important about the
student.
The bottom line is that reflection is an art. I am a 2nd year doctoral candidate in
Counseling Psychology at Penn State. I have been a TA for an introduction to counseling course
(which looks a lot like your intro to clinical course). I will be teaching the course this fall and
was excited to find your ideas because I am always looking for creative ways to make the
material "come alive."
I have not done this yet but I am thinking about spending the one lecture leading a
discussion about Rogers --- Rogers style --- I envision myself taking a seat in the middle of the
classroom after (possibly) explaining what I am doing. I am hesitant to do this but I think it
would be a powerful, learning experience (and it would make Rogers proud!)
Dr. Hayes, my advisor, developed what I think is an ingenious way to illustrate different
types of reflection. He has a student volunteer to come to the front of the class and talk about his
or her weekend (nothing too personal...) Dr. Hayes, myself, and another 2nd year doctoral
student each take the responsibility for a certain type of reflection: content (the other 2nd year
student), feelings (me), and process (Dr. Hayes). We stop the volunteer with a hand signal and
each reflect our respective parts. Then we had volunteers try to do our parts (we have had a few
brave soles do it and they did fine we had them reflect content of course content was easiest)
6
Another addition to your reflection exercise. Ask students what they think about the
utility of reflection. Invariably you will hear the criticism that "parroting will not be helpful..." take this opportunity to reflect back to them and see how long you can pull it off. Student : "it
just seems like repeating things back to clients would not feel 'real'" me : it wouldn't feel
genuine (reflect) student : yeah, the client will be like why do you keep repeating everything I
say? me : the client will be thinking 'what is this counselor doing... he is just repeating what I
say to him' (reflect)
This summer I went for about 1 minute with a student before he caught on to what I was
doing. It was fun and a powerful way to reinforce the message that reflection can communicate
"I am hearing you" (I also had a good sense that the student would not experience my "trick" as
shaming because I knew him pretty well.) I also encourage students to try reflections with their
friends and talk about it the following class.
ROGERIAN THERAPY: DAGMAR PESCITELLI: Rogerian therapy involves the
therapist's entry into the client's unique phenomenological world. In mirroring this world, the
therapist does not disagree or point out contradictions (Shaffer, 1978). Neither does he/she
attempt to delve into the unconscious. The focus is on immediate conscious experience. Rogers
(1977) describes therapy as a process of freeing a person and removing obstacles so that normal
growth and development can proceed and the client can become independent and self-directed.
During the course of therapy the client moves from rigidly of self-perception to fluidity. Certain
conditions are necessary for this process. A "growth promoting climate"requires the therapist to
be congruent, have unconditional positive regard for the client as well as show empathic
understanding (Rogers, 1961). Congruence on the part of the therapist refers to her/his ability to
be completely genuine whatever the self of the moment. While it is necessary during therapy
h/she is not expected to be a completely congruent person all the time, as such perfection is
impossible (Rogers, 1959). Empathy refers to understanding the client's feelings and personal
meanings as they are experienced and communicating this back to the person. While
unconditional positive regard involves relating from therapist to client not as a scientist to an
object of study, but as a person to a person. He feels this client to be a person of self-worth; of
value no matter what his condition, his behavior or his feelings. He respects him for what he is,
and accepts him as he is, with his potentialities (Rogers, 1965, p.22)
Rogers' strong belief in the positive nature of human beings is based on his many years of
clinical experience, working with a wide variety of individuals (1961, 1965, 1977). The theory of
person-centered therapy suggests any client, no matter what the problem, can improve without
being taught anything specific by the therapist, once he/she accepts and respects themselves
(Shaffer, 1978). The resources all lie within the client. While this may be so, this type of therapy
many not be effective for severe psychopathologies such as schizophrenia (which today is
considered to have strong biological component) or other disorders such as phobias,
obsessive-compulsive disorder or even depression (currently effectively treated with drugs and
cognitive therapy). In one meta-analysis of psychotherapy effectiveness that looked at 400
studies, person-centered therapy was found least effective. In fact, it was no more effective than
the placebo condition (Glass 1983; cited in Krebs & Blackman, 1988).
Rogers is reputed to have been a very gifted clinician. However, it is difficult to know
whether the therapists that follow his model (or use some of the techniques) are truly practicing
Rogerian therapy as it was intended. The concepts of congruence, empathy and unconditional
positive regard allow too much room for interpretation, although Rogers likely possessed these
7
qualities. To Rogers credit, he took the revolutionary step of recording his sessions and opened
up the previously private domain of therapy for empirical study and assessment (Ryckmann,
1993). That few can match his stature is not due to a lack of sharing techniques.
Rogers (1959) himself noted that every theory, including his own, contains "an unknown
(and perhaps at that time unknowable) amount of error and mistaken inference" (p.190). His
belief was that a theory should serve as a stimulus to further creative thinking. I believe he has
succeeded in this intention. This theory has very strong heuristic value and continues to generate
debate and interest (Krebs & Blackman, 1988; Ryckmann, 1993). The theory further focuses on
the whole individual as he/she experiences the world. Agency and free will are not undermined
in this model. It gives considerable attention to the concept of self and the suggestion that we can
all overcome damages inflicted in childhood is very appealing. Full functioning is no the
exclusive domain of a very lucky few. It is, at least theoretically, attainable for many. Rogers
does not assume women are inferior to men and his "sexist" language was corrected in his later
writings. Another strength is that Rogerian theory is grounded in the study of persons (not
pigeons), leading to its strong applied value in many areas of life.
The main problems with this theory of personality are related to the lack of precision and
specificity regarding some of the terms and concepts. Krebs & Blackman (1988) also rate the
logical consistency as only "fair", maintaining that some connections are not completely clear.
While this theory has become increasingly comprehensive over time, a major weakness is that it
does not sufficiently address stages of development (Krebs & Blackman, 1988; Maddi, 1996).
Due to his emphasis on conscious experience, Rogers has also been criticized for a lack of
attention to the unconscious (Hall & Lindzey, 1985; Nietzel, Benstein, Milich, 1994). This
criticism is not entirely justified. He directly acknowledges the unconscious in later writings,
seeing it as "positive" (Rogers, 1977, p.246). Furthermore, the whole idea of
congruence/incongruence and organic wisdom involves the idea of an unconscious and he clearly
posits an organism that has many experiences of which the person is not aware (Hall & Lindzey,
1985). While Rogers contribution in the area of psychotherapy is substantial, clinical
applicability of his therapy may be limited to those segments of the population whose intellectual
and cultural backgrounds are compatible with this therapy (Nietzel et. Al, 1994). This theory's
development from therapeutic practice may be both a blessing a curse. It keeps it practical and
bases it in human experience, yet leads to the extension of concepts that while appropriate to
therapy may not be comprehensive or specific enough to apply to all people.
Some human conditions, such as psychopathy, do not make much sense according to this
theory. The psychopath apparently feels no guilt, discomfort or remorse for his/her actions.
There is no anxiety. Incongruence is not apparent, although the theory suggests it would be
substantial indeed. I also wonder about those human beings that have limited potentialities in the
first place. Is one "fully functioning" if one has fulfilled all potential, even though there is an
extremely limited amount in the first place? The capacity for creativity and free expression might
not exist in such a case. Despite my questions and criticism, this theory's value is substantial and
should not be minimized. It offers a reasonable alternative to dominant theories that would have
us objectify and control human beings. It also recognizes persons as the most important focus in
the study of personality.
CLIENT-CENTERED THERAPY OF CARL ROGERS: MATTHEW RYAN: This
is a short description of Client-Centered Therapy from my perspective as a student therapist,
followed by links to local and remote resources on the subject. -- Matthew Ryan Client-Centered
8
Therapy (CCT) was developed by Carl Rogers in the 40's and 50's. It is a non-directive approach
to therapy, "directive" meaning any therapist behavior that deliberately steers the client in some
way. Directive behaviors include asking questions, offering treatments, and making
interpretations and diagnoses. Virtually all forms of therapy practiced in the US are directive. A
non-directive approach is very appealing on the face of it to many clients, because they get to
keep control over the content and pace of the therapy. It is intended to serve them, after all. The
therapist isn't evaluating them in any way or trying to "figure them out".
But what is in CCT, one may ask, if the therapist isn't interjecting their own stuff? The
answer is, whatever the client brings to it. And that is, honestly, a very good answer. The
foundational belief of CCT is that people tend to move toward growth and healing, and have the
capacity to find their own answers. This tendency is helped along by an accepting and
understanding climate, which the CC therapist seeks to provide above all else.
So, this is what CC therapists do: Listen and try to understand how things are from the
client's point of view. Check that understanding with the client if unsure. Treat the client with
the utmost respect and regard. There is also a mandate for the therapist to be "congruent", or
"transparent" - which means being self-aware, self-accepting, and having no mask between
oneself and the client. The therapist knows themselves and is willing to be known.
CCT may sound simple or limited, because there is no particular structure that the
therapist is trying to apply. But when I watch CCT in action I see a very rich and complicated
process. People unravel their own stuff. They discover new things, take brave steps, and don't
have to cope with a therapist who is doing things to them in the meantime. The therapist strives
to understand and accept the client's stuff, which is no simple feat. Over time, the client
increasingly seeks to understand and accept their stuff too.
That CCT is effective has been amply demonstrated by decades of research. Furthermore,
recent research has shown that the most significant variables in the effectiveness of therapy are
aspects of the relationship and the therapist's personal development - not the particular discipline
they practice or techniques they employ. C-C therapists focus more attention on these variables
than therapists in any other discipline. Remarkable as it may seem, research has never shown
that it is more effective to address specific problems with specific therapy techniques. Amazing,
yes? Without this result, there is no justification for a therapist to make diagnoses in the first
place. I am working on obtaining permission to put papers about Client-Centered Therapy on
the web. Here's what I have so far. Come back in a few weeks and I may have more. (that I've
made available)
Carl Rogers resources on the web: Summary of Rogers' personality theory An outline
structure of Rogers' theory (an unfriendly view from outside the discipline) Something about
Carl Rogers in French (can anyone identify it for me?) Long eulogy for Carl Rogers by John
Vasconcellos How to recognize a healthy group (Rogerian perspective) Short descriptions of
books by Carl Rogers: On Becoming A Person A Way of Being
Client-centered institutions: (this list is woefully incomplete -- I hope to flesh it out
when I arrange better access than I currently have. Perhaps somebody in their impatience will
take over the job?) The Centre for Counselling Studies (U of East Anglia) British Association
for the Person Centered Approach London, WC1N 3XX
Exists to promote and develop all
applications of the person-centered approach in Great Britain. (Current President: Irene
Fairhurst, Secretary: Mike Farrell). Publishes a newsletter and a twice-yearly Journal: Person
Centered Practice (Editor: Tony Merry).
Association for the Development of the Person
9
Centered Approach (ADPCA) P.O. Box 396, Orange, MA 0136 Or email Nat Raskin
<[email protected]>
CORE OF PERSONALITY: CARL ROGERS (1902-1987):
Core of Personality:
I. Core Tendency: The tendency to actualize one's inherent potentialities. This potential exists in
all living organisms, even plants. Humans possess an additional form - the attempt to actualize
the self - called self-actualization.
II. Core Characteristics:
A. Self: The person's conscious sense of who and what you are. Is available to awareness,
although not always in awareness.
1. Gradually emerges through experiences with verbal labels such as "I" or "Me".
2. Phenomenological Reality: A person's private perception of reality (whether or not it agrees
with objective reality). Experience is the highest authority. If you think you are not good-looking
or smart, this is part of your self concept regardless of reality.
B. Need for Positive Regard: the universal need for acceptance, love, and approval from others.
Particularly important during infancy.
C. Need for Positive Self-Regard: When acceptance and approval come from within the
individual and forms part of the self-concept.
Development: Rogers does not specify any developmental stages, but does make some
comments. Of basic importance is the fact that one's inherent potentialities are genetically
determined, while the self-concept is socially determined. Thus, there is the possibility of a
difference between the two. The important influences are:
I. Conditional Positive Regard: The granting of love and approval only when behaving in
accordance with parent's wishes, or when parents withdraw love if the child misbehaves. This
leads to:
II. Conditions of Worth (similar to superego): the individual's belief that he/she is worthy of
affection only when expressing desirable behaviors.
III. Incongruence: When there is a split between organismic experience and self-concept.
A. Prevents self-actualization.
B. Leads to defensive behavior.
Major defenses:
1. Denial (repression)
2. Distortion
IV. Unconditional Positive Regard: The granting of love and approval regardless of individual's
behavior. Does not mean lack of restraint. If a child runs out in front of a truck, stop him and tell
him it is dangerous, but don't spank him and tell him he is a bad, evil boy. (Rogers is against
punishment as a means of controlling behavior).
V. Congruence: When the self concept is in agreement with inherent potentialities and there are
minimal conditions of worth. Leads to openness to experience and a fulling functioning person.
Periphery of Personality: Rogers discussed only two broad types: one where the
self-actualizing tendency is vigorously functioning and one where it is not.
I. Fully Functioning Person: The ideal - has received unconditional positive regard, has few
conditions of worth, and has congruence between self & potentialities. Characteristics:
A. Openness to Experience - opposite of defensiveness. Is reflective and much emotional depth
(for both pleasure and pain).
10
B. Existential Living: Living fully in each and every moment. The absence of rigidity, is flexible,
adaptable, and spontaneous.
C. Organismic Trusting:
1. Intuitive living: the ability to accept information from all bases.
2. Experience is the highest authority. If it feels right, it probably is (better than conscious
thought - very different from Freud).
D. Experiential Freedom - the freedom to choose among alternatives.
E. Creativity: The ability to produce new and effective ideas and things.
II. Maladjusted Person: Has received conditional positive regard and developed conditions of
worth. There is incongruence between self and potentialities. Characteristics:
A. Defensive Living - Not open to experience
B. Live According to preconceived plan - generally laid down by parents.
C. Disregards organism - not intuitive
D. Feels manipulated - not free to choose
E. Common and conforming III. Other comments:
A. Comparison of ideals. There is a certain amount of selfishness in Roger's theory. One critic
has called Humanistic Psychology "the narcissism of our culture" - that we are so lost in self love
that we fail to relate to outside reality. For example, compare the following ideal adjectives for
Adler and Rogers:
1. Adler - responsible, capable, committed, effective, adaptable to social realities, social interest.
2. Rogers - experiential richness, flexibility, range of living, immediacy, change spontaneity.
B. Four characteristics of successful therapists. Rogers believed that these characteristics of the
person doing therapy were more important than the therapist's philosophy or technique.
Incidently, research supports this position.
1. Congruence: Good therapists can't be phoney; they must be able to relate to others honestly
and sincerely. They don't have to be perfect, but can't be defensive when relating to others. Can't
play games with clients.
2. Empathy: Must be able to put yourself in your client's shoes. Must be accurate empathy - not
just "Yeah, I know what you are feeling, because I...".
3. Learn from Client: Good therapists can shut up and listen. Therapy is a two-way street, and the
therapist should benefit from therapy also. Rogers always did 12 - 20 hrs. of therapy/ week.
4. Unconditional Positive Regard: You must genuinely like the client. You do not have to
approve of his behavior, but must be able to separate the sins from the sinner. (Incidently, in
seeking out a therapist, make sure you get this feeling).