Human behaviour undergoes numerous changes during a person’s development. Depending on the context of social environment, human beings tend portray different behavioural perspectives. The variation in such behaviour calls for different strategic implementations because the differences in this behaviour require varied therapy disseminations, (Richardson, 1998, p.51).
Socially, human beings tend to change their behavioural perception depending on the social-structural environment affecting the person. They propose that they are faced with. Propagators of the, “dramaturgical theory of social human interaction”, argues that, the originality of human behaviour is determined by the social environment affecting the person. They propose that, the conflict born in the change of originality of social environment of individuals is made to bring with it new social-behavioural therapies. Human behaviour can be attributed to the nature of pleasures which embody persons or even the consequent pains that may deter persons from happiness (Richardson, 1998, p.53).
Human behavior undergoes a series of developments which are generally attributable to the cognitive theory of development. However, changes in
‘behavioural stimuli’ can alter the normal behavioural equilibrium to make human being develop new behaviour in regard to the changes in the environment. Basically a change in environment brings with it social conflicts which in turn lead to behavioural changes as response stimuli to such conflicts (Ishaq, 1991, pg 48). Due to the conflict, therefore human beings develop stress.
Human interaction in various depths leads to changes of human behaviour, where persons tend to emulate behavioural concepts from their fellow mates. This is most evident from the peers who normally emulate as they do the behavioural characteristics from their friends (Cirillo, Wapner, 1998, p.83).
Behavioral images are determined by several factors such as peer influence, education, social-cultural backgrounds, the media influences and psychological factors like stress. Depending on the nature and course of the behavior different strategies are employed to address different behavioral concepts (Lerner, 1997, p. 43).
Behavioural mismanagement brings with it societal conflict where role players in the society blame one another for each others responsibility in controlling and preventing it. Perhaps, behavioural conflicts between the societies have been the source of societal cohesions in many societies where parents blame professional modelers, professionals blame behaviour victims and behaviour victims blaming either of the parents or their modelers. Such conflict has continued to bring with it societal indifferences (Gray 2004 p. 4).
However, psychologists have proposed of the collaborative strategy of dealing with poor behaviour. They, propose that collaboration between stakeholders in behaviour development should have an active collaboration between one another. Implied here is that, members acting as behaviour modelers should employ a collaborative link between them and their poor behavior victims’ trainees. The trainees should actively engage in a persuasive collaboration with their trainers. Trainers should create a conducive environment that can enable trainees to develop good behaviour. Gray, 2002, states that, “what the professionals need is learning environment which accepts anxiety and uncertainty and promotes thinking and understanding”. Proposers of this strategy argue that trainees should be set into interactive groups which actively act to interchange ideas between one another hence sharing their knowledge at large. This is generally a passive attempt to ensure that a conflict does not develop between indifferences in socio-structural backgrounds that would mean behavioural indifferences between the persons. By formulating an interactive environment between the parties it helps to reduce the personal indifferences that coin their behaviours hence reducing the stress of such social-conflict contribution to behavioral aggressions. Proposers of this theory view it as a good approach to behavioural development because social-culture detriments to behaviour development are side-stepped giving the opportunity of persons of different behavioral perception to interlink and therefore disseminate an overall behaviour support for all the parties. It is argued that personal indifferences between behaviour trainers themselves should also be shared among them. The guiders should also come up into collaborative groups where they share their common personal indifferences in behavioural development. Through such groups they help to share knowledge on how to deal with poor behaviour on whom they overseer to like their guiders. Through this method, the guiders themselves are involved in a similar context to that of students in class. Through this interaction therefore, they help to develop various capabilities and strength like young learners who develop in interactions between their emotions. The trainers/guiders should not feel bad of their trainees, who have bad behaviour, but rather should be able to contain their feeling and try to develop an alternative positive spirit for their trainees. Since a careful trainer acts as good base in helping the learner explore more about his life through a comfortable environment of behaviour support, the trainer should act in assistance to promoting the achievement of this objective. Goals and objectives of a trainee can only be achieved through an active participation in building behavioural support.
Either, behavioural support can be supported by the post-attachment strategy. Developers of this argument state that child behaviour development can be attributed to the parent influence attachment will at young age. Although psychologists argue that different parental behaviour influence tend to change as one grows, there are however accidental cases where a mature person behaviour is carried forward by their parental or guardians influence. Such behavioural concept tends to make an individual to have a passive attractions or the contrast to their parents, guardians or first modelers. Such attractive or repulsive behaviour components tend to model the behavioural output of these persons. They tend to make a person to behave in accordance to some operational stimuli brought about by kinship alignment. To change such behavioural rigidities involves a close study of a person’s behaviour and match it with any possible kinship influences. Psychologists, commend on developing behaviour repulsive absorbers that involve gradual reshaping of the person to gain new behavioural developments. However, the problem lies in the fact that, it may be difficult to relate a person’s behavior to a string of Kinship.
Psychologists argue that ones behaviour can be coined by his belief. Basing on the understanding, they propose on the rational behaviour strategy. They try to focus on the individual perception about the other in regard to the environment in which they are acting in and considers only rational or irrational believes that influence such perception. They argue that, different behavioural aspects can be attributed to asset of social-cultural believes that tend to influence this behavioral aspect. Therefore, to develop an individual behaviour may call for understanding their cultural believes that renders a compromise to shaping an individual behaviour. This is termed as the rational emotional behaviour therapy approach (Gray, 2002). Due to the difference in belief orientations, person’s belief issues vary differently which implies that different responses about the same issue are different. Such cultural believes may be highly shaped by the behavioural understanding and image between the people. Therefore, behaviour developers should employ a diverse understanding between multi-personal believes that shapes behaviour personalities between individuals. There been a number of persons who determine the shape others behaviour, an individual should understand a person’s parent belief status in your passive intention of modeling this persons behaviour. The role of every one in developing a person’s behaviour should never be overlooked. Training individuals on behaviour development involves understanding their cultural believes. Such behaviour developments should be extended in regard to difference in belief understanding. Normally, persons of different belief outlooks perceive issues differently due to the relative cultural norm orientations. There is normally a different in understanding issues and phenomena by different cultural groups. Example, a certain problems/issue may be a norm to one cultural community while not to the other community. Such cultural belief indifference leads to a difference in the behavioural approaches in regard to way in which the people’s perception form these two communities (Schoen, 1930, p. 31).
A behavioural equilibrium can only be achieved by striking on understanding between the set of these people. It involves first appreciating each others behavioural difference due to the difference in cultural believes. To develop such behaviour, involves a gradual change of behaviour as dictated by their cultural believes.
General behaviour development can be done through motivational interviewing involving a convectional dialogue between persons. For trainers and guiders of behavioural development such motivational dialogue helps the trainees develop a feeling of self esteem and personality. It helps the behaviour trainee to developing a good behaviour. This is normally applied to persons whom by nature feel that they have no problem. Motivational dialogue therefore helps to develop a good behaviour through self understanding (Vygotsky, 1978).
Personal interrelationship with persons of different behavioural concepts can lead to a change in ones behaviour. Barriers to behaviour development can serve as the most important aspect for one to understand in an attempt to model another person’s behaviour because behaviour development will vary differently with regard to the source or contributor of the behaviour on model (Doob, 1952, p.73).
References
- Ishaq, W. (1991) The Human Behaviour in Today’s World. New York: Praeger Publisher
- Richardson, K. (1998). The Models of Cognitive Development. Hore, England: Psychology Press.
- Gray, P. (2002) Working with Emotions. Responding to the challenge of difficult pupil behaviour. Routledge Publishers: London
- Sorense, A: Sherrod, L. & Weinert, F. (1986). THE HUMAN DEVELOPMENT A LIFE COURSE: Multidisplinary Perspectives, Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
- Cirillo, L. & Wapner, S. (1986) Value Presuppositions in Theories of Human Development; Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Lerner, R. (1997) Concepts of Theories of Human Development Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Association.
- Kagan, J. (1978) The Growth of the Child: Reflections on human Development. New York: W.W.Norton.
- Senyo, B. & Adjibolosoo. S. (1999) RETHINKNG DEVELOPMENT THEITYAND POLICY. WestPort, CT: Praeger Publishers
- Schoem, M. (1930) A FIRST BOOKIN PSYCHOLIGY. New York: Harper and Brathers.
- Doob, L. (1952) AN ANALYSIS OF HUMAN BEHAVIUOR. New York: Henry Holt