George Kelly - Personal Construct Theory

George Kelly; Background

• Born in 1905, in Perth, Kansas

• Only child, son of Presbyterian Minister

• Education

  • BA at University of Edinburgh, Scotland

    • Engineering —> education

  • PhD at University of Iowa

    • Public speaking, drama —> psychology

    • Got PhD in 9 months!

• Professor

  • Small College in Western Kansas

    • Set up college counseling services and provided rural psychological services

  • University of Maryland (1 year)

  • Ohio State

    • Took Carl Rogers’ former position

    • Wrote famous, “The Psychology of Personal Constructs”

  • Brandeis University

    • Accepted invitation from Abraham Maslow, and worked 1 year before . . .

• Died in 1967

“Jackass Theory”

• Focuses on the individual’s personality, emphasizing the individual’s thoughts (but not to the exclusion of people’s emotions)

  • The theory concerns the “nature of the animal” itself

• Doesn’t focus on influence of environment that push (“pitchfork theories”) or pull (“carrot theories”) the individual

People have “personal constructs”

• Personal constructs help people predict what will happen (based on situation, people present, etc.)

• “. . . Present interpretations of the world are subject to revision”

  • Called this “constructive alternativism”

1 Fundamental Postulate (11 corollaries)

• “A person’s processes are psychologically channelized by the way in which he anticipates events.”

  • i.e., We prepare for the events that we anticipate

  • Following an exam:

    • Anticipating good grade

    • Anticipating bad grade

      • Accurate (validation) or inaccurate (revision of constructs?)

Like a scientist…

Hypothesis Testing…

• Observations

  • “I can swim in water (pools, bathtub, etc.).”

• Question

  • “I wonder how much water I need in order to swim?”

• Hypothesis

  • “I can swim in any any amount of water.”

• Prediction

  • “I can swim in a bowl . . .”

Not like a scientist…

• People are biased

  • Optimists versus pessimists

    • We tend to think of our capacities more highly than we should!

• People tend to view/seek confirmation

  • Definitely NOT like a scientist (sensitive to counter-factual data)

Construction Corollary

• People anticipate confirmation of their constructs

• Need not be conscious/cognitive (called a “preverbal construct”)

  • i.e., people may have “butterflies” in a certain situation (anxiety), and the outcome can either confirm their constructs or, perhaps, their constructs may require adaptation.

Experience Corollary

• People change with experience; their constructs change

  • Is the school bus really that bad?

• But . . . There are not universal stages of development (Freud, Erikson).

Choice Corollary

• Who are you? Daring to do something different!

• People try to extend themselves in ways that are mostly consistent with their own self-view . . .

• Steps aren’t too large, or else the person feels “threat”.

  • If threat gets too great, the person goes back to the way they previously acted, a process called “sedimentation”.

Modulation Corollary

• “The variation in a person’s construction system is limited by the permeability of the constructs within whose ranges of convenience the variants lie.”

• Permeable Construct

  • Are Disney characters real? “Good news Daddy . . .”

• “The variation in a person’s construction system is limited by the permeability of the constructs within whose ranges of convenience the variants lie.”

• Concrete Construct

  • Can pools be indoors? No!

The structure of constructs

• The Dichotomy Corollary

  • A person’s construction system is composed of a finite number of dichotomous constructs

• People differ on constructs

  • May be logical (happy versus sad) or illogical (ambitious versus happy)

• Typical end is called the “likeness end” whereas unusual end is called “contrast end”

• People’s constructs often change in response to stress; this is called slot movement.

  • Nice —> mean!

Organization Corollary

• Superordinate constructs

  • e.g., if a person is “happy,” they must also be X, Y, and Z (nice, giving, and empathic)

  • If mammal (X), must have hair (Y) and mammary glands (Z)

• Subordinate constructs

  • E.g., break down larger concept to have better anticipation

  • Have horns (H); (introverted, extroverted)

Fragmentation Corollary

• People act differently in different situations

  • Fierce competitor versus loving friend

  • At funeral or party

• Observers may err if they sample from a limited number of situations

Range Corollary

• A construct is convenient for the anticipation of a finite range of events

• Do constructs help if we learn the world will end in 1 hour?

• How Eddie will behave on the front lines of a war?

  • Extreme examples, but the point is the same

Individuality Corollary

• People differ from one another in their construction of events (important individual difference research):

  • Different constructs are important to them

  • They assume different perspectives

    • Like how BIS/BAS influences perceiving neutral emotions

Commonality Corollary

• To the degree that people construct experience the same way, they are similar

• Wow!

  • Use same constructs

  • View people/situations similarly

  • Have same hypotheses . . .

  • . . . and therefore act similarly!

Sociality Corollary

• To the degree that one person understands the construction processes of another, he/she may play a role in the social processes of that person

  • Bilateral: Understanding between two friends

  • Unilateral: e.g., therapist-client relationship

Role Construct Repertory (REP) Test

• List people the person (client) knows including, perhaps, the person himself

• 3 people are identified by the researcher/therapist

• Subject is instructed to identify 1 way in which 1 person is different from the other 2

  • Can be cognitive (“intelligent” versus “not intelligent”) or emotional (“empathic” versus “insensitive”)

• The words used are termed “constructs,” with dichotomous poles (rational or not)

• All people are then rated on all constructs

Cognitive Complexity

• The number of different constructs used

  • The greater the number, the more flexibility the person has . . . s/he can see more dimensions in a person

    • E.g., freshmen with greater cognitive complexity adjust to school more easily

Personality Change

• Can occur . . .

  • Quickly, as in PTSD

  • More slowly, as in development or therapy

• Use REP Test to see how individuals change over time (looking at “real self” and “ideal self”)

  • Change can be threatening, even if the change is desirable (e.g., a prisoner’s self constructs could change dramatically upon release)

“Constructivist” Therapy

• Understand the client’s constructs

  • “Understand the client in the client’s own terms”

• Exploring constructs

  • Identify superordinate and subordinate constructs

• Changing constructs by “tightening” them:

  • Time binding: “That happened long ago, not recently.”

  • Word binding: “That’s exploitation, not love.”

Fixed Role Therapy

• Client experiments with new self-constructs via role-playing

• Sometimes roles are reversed, with the therapist playing the “new,” experimental client

  • Often, this is not just about changing poles on the current constructs, but by identifying new constructs (i.e., increasing cognitive complexity).