Introduction
Numerous approaches have been submitted in pursuit of clarifying people’s personalities. A substantial part of existing theories was presented by persons of similar backgrounds and based on comparable life experiences, particularly White men (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). At the same time, the explanations vary in terms of their general ideas, the essence of human beings, character development, and other elements (Schultz & Schultz, 2017).
Albert Bandura suggested one of the renowned ideas, whose modeling theory (MT) can be placed within the social-learning category because he chose to explore behavior within a social context (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). On the other hand, Karen Horney also examined people’s conduct as social beings. Still, her theory of neurotic needs and trends (TNNT) belongs to the neo-psychoanalytic approach (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). MT and TNNT are similar in suggesting that others impact one’s personality but differ in positions on human nature, change, and development.
Authors
Albert Bandura
To better understand an idea, assessing its author’s background is essential. Schultz and Schultz (2017) state that one’s life events add a subjective component to their explanations of personality, so the story of an individual proposing something should be considered. Albert Bandura was born and raised in a tiny Canadian town (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). At a young age, he was given the choice to be a field worker or pursue an education, and Bandura chose the latter, potentially because his parents valued learning (Schultz & Schultz, 2017).
Upon finishing high school, Bandura took a construction job, where he developed an appreciation for psychopathology by observing his rather diverse colleagues (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). At university, Bandura started to study psychology since the classes were convenient, but he soon became fascinated by the material and pursued the discipline further (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). While a young, unknown specialist, Bandura offered a new approach to psychology based on observational learning (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Albert Bandura was a novel theorist whose ideas seem to have emerged from his interest in watching others.
Karen Horney
Karen Horney’s life experiences and stresses vastly differed from Bandura’s. Horney grew up as the second child in a small German village and was raised by often arguing parents (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). She was always envious of her older brother yet considered herself better than him (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Horney strived to be a compliant model kid to obtain her parents’ fondness and appreciation, but her efforts were useless (Schultz & Schultz, 2017).
As an adult, Horney realized developing hostility during her youth and employed a lack of love in childhood as an element in her future theory (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Horney had complicated, rather unhappy relationships with most people and consulted a therapist to help with her troubles (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). However, the sessions did not benefit Horney, and she turned to self-analysis, which she practiced further throughout the years (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Horney resolved that the commonly used psychoanalysis was insufficient, so she proposed a new approach considering the impact of social forces (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Karen Horney was an unconventional theorist whose views were affected by her struggles.
Main Ideas
Albert Bandura’s Theory
The main ideas of Bandura’s MT focus on observational learning (OL), vicarious reinforcement (VR), and modeling. OL refers to discovering new responses by monitoring others’ conduct, while VR represents acquiring or strengthening a behavior by watching others’ demeanor and consequences (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). In developing his MT, Bandura considered B. F. Skinner’s reinforcement theory views but emphasized a social context with people learning through someone else’s example (Schultz & Schultz, 2017).
For a person, other individuals act as models who can offer a variety of responses in different situations. The initial models are typically parents through whom children grasp a language and socialize but also obtain such behaviors as non-rational fears (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Nonetheless, an individual does not simply imitate the displayed demeanor but instead relies on the cognitive processes to make a conscious decision to adopt conduct (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Bandura’s MT declares that a person does not necessarily need to experience something directly to discover a behavior but can instead learn by observing others and modeling their ways of acting.
Karen Horney’s Theory
Similarly to Bandura, Horney also suggested that one’s personality depends on others, yet her main ideas concentrate on the relationships between parents and children. In generating her theory, Horney examined Sigmund Freud’s psychoanalysis but deviated from her predecessor in believing that social rather than biological factors influence behavior (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). According to Horney, childhood depends on the safety need for security, which parents either furnish or undermine (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). In the latter case, minors must repress hostility toward their caretakers (Schultz & Schultz, 2017).
Consequently, children acquire primary anxiety, which Horney defined as an all-pervading sensation of helplessness and loneliness that induces neurosis (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). As a result, youths utilize specific self-protecting mechanisms that focus on safety and comfort but not pleasure or happiness (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). For example, a kid may resolve to become submissive by complying with others’ wishes, which is representative of Horney’s demeanor during her early years (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Accordingly, Horney’s theory is similar to Bandura’s in suggesting that others influence behavior, but Horney’s ideas emphasize the impact of parents.
Human Nature
Albert Bandura’s View
An essential aspect of personality theories concerns the nature of human beings. Authors of distinct approaches to explaining personality base their argumentations on what constitutes people’s essence, focusing on free will against determinism (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). For instance, a widespread question asks whether individuals can consciously control their actions. Bandura’s position is represented in reciprocal determinism, indicating that behavior is regulated by the person and the environment through cognitive processes and social contexts, respectively (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). According to Bandura, people and their surroundings act interconnectedly within human nature (Schultz & Schultz, 2017).
Karen Horney’s View
In contrast, Horney was more inclined toward free will, suggesting that individuals can consciously shape and change their behaviors despite being influenced by social relationships with parents (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). According to Horney, people can control their lives since human nature is flexible, and even neuroses can be evaded if children are raised in a loving setting (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Consequently, Bandura and Horney’s differences in understanding the essence of human beings signify the underlying distinctions in their theories.
Change
Albert Bandura’s Approach
Bandura’s MT suggests that individuals may experience change through three approaches to behavior modification. First, modeling can be used as the original way of learning conduct and as an alternative method of revising demeanor to, for example, overcome fears and phobias (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Second, guided participation can change behavior by observing a person complete an activity and then engaging in the same exercise (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Third, covert modeling can instill conduct by imagining coping with a challenging situation (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Accordingly, Bandura’s approach to transformation is based on consciously learning new behaviors through examples.
Karen Horney’s Approach
Horney’s theory presents a rather complex explanation of how one may experience change. Like Bandura, Horney believed people can consciously modify their personalities as their intrinsic capabilities grow (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). However, while Bandura did not address underlying unconscious battles, Horney implied that all individuals encounter neurotic conflicts of varying intensity (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Therefore, those categorized as usual are easygoing and can adapt to altering situations, while neurotic persons are inflexible, rigid, and deny their authentic selves (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Nonetheless, childhood and adult experiences matter, indicating hope for transformation (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Consequently, Horney’s theory suggests that people change in different ways.
Personality
Albert Bandura’s Perspective
Developmental stages in Bandura’s theory concentrate on one’s self-efficacy (SE). People have varying degrees of SE, and those with higher SE tend to perform better (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). SE is correlated with vicarious experiences within MT (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Infants generate some SE by learning about the consequences of their abilities in the environment associated with their parents (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). With time, parental influence reduces, giving way to the impact of peers and other adults (Schultz & Schultz, 2017).
The level of SE formed during the early years affects adolescents’ transitional experiences since people have to acquire new competencies (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). As individuals face more challenges in adulthood, they must seek additional opportunities to enhance SE, which is the prevailing factor in determining success (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Developmental stages of SE depict how personality evolves through vicarious observations.
Karen Horney’s Perspective
Horney’s TNNT focuses on the basic tenets of one’s character. Instead of listing developmental stages, TNNT emphasizes the outcomes of relationships between parents and their kids (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). According to Horney, individuals can be portrayed by ten neurotic needs (NNs) and three trends (NTs) associated with childhood self-protecting mechanisms. NNs of affection and dominant partners alongside NT of moving toward others comprise the compliant personality, which seeks protection and guidance (Schultz & Schultz, 2017).
NNs of exploration, prestige, admiration, power, and achievement correlate with NTs of shifting against people, which compose the aggressive character striving for superiority (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). NNs of narrow limits, self-sufficiency, and perfection are correlated with NT, which moves away from others and generates a detached personality that pursues absolute independence (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Horney’s TNNT describes how an individual alters due to relationships with parents enforcing self-protecting mechanisms, NNs, and NTs.
Conclusion
To summarize, MT and TNNT are comparable primarily in suggesting that one’s personality depends on others, but the two theories contrast regarding human nature, change, and development. Horney and Bandura were raised in different settings and had distinct focuses, yet both proposed new approaches to understanding people. While the former theorist grounded her ideas on her search for affection, the latter’s views derived from his interest in observing someone else.
Both Bandura and Horney emphasized the importance of social impact on behavior, but Bandura suggested that personality is formed by watching others, whereas Horney stressed the role of parents. Moreover, the two theorists held distinct positions concerning human nature, with Bandura favoring reciprocal determinism and Horney leaning toward free will. Therefore, the distinctions in the two theorists’ explanations indicate the complexity of fully grasping the essence of people’s personalities.
Reference
Schultz, D. P., & Schultz, S. E. (2017). Theories of personality(11th ed.). Cengage Learning.