Free Essay Example: Transitioning from Childhood to Adolescent Self-Concept

Introduction

The development and identification of the concept of self is a cognitive element that instills knowledge of individuals based on personality traits beliefs, values, abilities, physical characteristics, roles, and realization of individual existence in social groups (Zhu & Han, 2008). The complexity of self-concept advances from childhood to adolescence with the transition from an egocentric perspective of ‘me’ to ‘us.’ The complex and abstract self-concept is organized in self-schemas, and diverse cognitive perceptions of self. Self-schemas represent children’s knowledge of appearance, school progress, and sporting skills, along with other personal aspects (Zhu & Han, 2008). Therefore, they are aligned with processing relevant information directly informing the individual.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

A self-concept fused with representation is attained through the fusion of the self-schemas with other people’s schemas. The fusion may result in a crisis as described by Erikson’s psychosocial theory of development if the schemas conflict (Zhu & Han, 2008). Conflict in schemas can result in an identity crisis and a lack of acceptance of self. However, if no conflict occurs, adaptation occurs, allowing the individual to develop new character traits and schemas. On the contrary, self-concept not fused with the representation of others is engrossed in their own self-concept and ideologies without integrating the surrounding schemas or images of others (Zhu & Han, 2008).

The relationship between self-concept and the representation of others may have significant behavioral representations. According to Cervone and Pervin (2019), self-concept reflects the development of particular character traits. High self-concept schemas result in high self-esteem, self-confidence, self-acceptance, and optimism. In contrast, low self-concept schemas result in pessimism, low self-esteem, lack of confidence, and lack of satisfaction in self.

Trait Construct

The Big Five traits can describe cognitive functioning. However, the application and definition of personality traits vary from psychologists and laypersons. According to Jarrett (2019), the perception of laypersons of the personality traits cannot be used to derive the cognitive functioning by psychologists. The definition of personality based on the score of the Big Five traits can be used to determine cognitive functioning. The definition of the Big Five traits in personality science elicits a very different meaning compared to the application of the same traits in daily talks. The concern arises from the perception of the use of the Big Five traits between laypersons and psychologists. According to Jarrett (2019), the studies across different ages on the specific application of the Big Five traits in the description of individuals indicated a significant, consistent level between ordinary use of the Big Five traits and the scientific conception. However, according to Cervone and Pervin (2019), there are vast differences, especially in the definition of some traits. For instance, agreeableness includes trustworthiness in scientific conception but fails to be acknowledged by laypersons. Other contradicting difference is the definition of extraversion and conscientious as kind and compassionate attributes which are scientifically not linked to the traits. The differences between the scientific and lay perception of the personality traits can be challenging in personality research, especially when participants are asked to describe the personality traits of other people.

Laypersons find it useful to use traits as important constructs in defining the personality of individuals as it is easier to observe and connect the character with actions. The commonly perceived traits are also outlined from the repeated citing of particular traits in different dimensions (Jarrett, 2019). However, this can be challenging to extracting relevant information in the scientific study of personality. Based on the lay person’s definition, the key attributes of the study subjects can be misinterpreted. Evaluating the individual perception of self, based on the Big Five traits, provides substantial information that can be used in scientific study. The perception of other people may vary across different participants, which makes it unreliable in explaining the personality traits of other parties.

The Five-factor Model

The Big Five terms are used to describe individual personalities and deriving the distinguishing attributes among individuals. According to Cervone and Pervin (2019), the Five words are universal and are used to describe people in different cross-cultural backgrounds. The traits can influence behavior but are not particularly aligned to a specific character. According to Jarrett (2019), the individual scoring feedback indicates the traits represent a percentage of individual behavior. Even though personalities play a big part in determining behavior, many practices are complicated and cannot be explained in the five words effectively. As cited by Cervone and Pervin (2019), various factors can influence behavior, which limits the influence of the Big Five traits in the determination of behavior. For instance, a person can be welcoming and happy on certain occasions but may not exhibit similar attributes on normal occasions. According to Cervone and Pervin (2019), personalities are often fixed and are permanent, contrary to behavior, which is optional and temporary and easily controllable by an individual.

The use of the Big Five traits can be controversial in describing an individual’s behavior. The use of a particular experience may fail to fully explain the behavior or personality of an individual (Jarrett, 2019). According to Cervone and Pervin (2019), personality traits are a portion of a person’s behavior. The use of specific events and experiences does not define the particular attributes of an individual. In this case, it can be cited as a generalization as the behavior may fluctuate based on events, mood, and environment. At the same time, personality traits are rigid, less likely to be altered. It can be derived that personality is engrossed in behavior, and therefore defining behavior based on the Big Five traits is like circumventing around the same issue.

The Brain and Psychological Functions

.The concept of functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI)provides a framework for the study of the brain and the underlying psychological functioning (Cervone & Pervin, 2019). Interest in understanding the relationship between the brain and personality can be resolved by studies on the performance of the regions of the brain active during the execution of a specific task. fMRI analyzes the change in blood circulation in different regions of the brain with an increase in blood flow in a certain region, reflecting the involvement of the brain in personality determination (Cervone & Pervin, 2019). The structure of words, description of other people, and description of self trigger different parts of the brain according to fMRI scans. According to Cervone and Pervin (2019), the medial prefrontal cortex is involved in self-judgment than the determination of the structure of words and judgment of others.

The studies indicate the participation of the medial prefrontal cortex in self-judgment but do not ascertain the region is the biological home self-identity. Engaging in complex activities that reflect on the concept of self-trigger the activity of different regions of the brain (Cervone & Pervin, 2019). Therefore, multiple brain regions come into play in self-reflection on diverse mental activities. In this light, it is evident that research in the neuroscience of personality can explain self-concept and personality functioning.

Environmental Influences Based on Skinner

B. F. Skinner was a behaviorist influenced by the work of John Watson on Classical Conditioning. However, Skinner was not satisfied by Watson’s representation of behavior and believed through experimentation; the causes of a particular behavior can be explained. According to Skinner, the behavior is controlled by external forces, which he referred to as rewards or punishments that govern the human actions (Cervone & Pervin, 2019). In this case, Skinner’s argument integrated Thorndike’s Law of Effect in the definition of the influence of the environment on behavior.

In his experiments, Skinner successfully managed to impact on behavior change in rats and pigeons. Therefore, a correlation of environmental factors and behavior can be established from his work. Research on the impact of environmental factors in terms of rewards and punishments can influence learning and unlearning of certain behavior. Skinner introduced the concept of rewards and punishment to explain the evidence of certain behavior. Activities that are aligned with a reward are more likely to be repeated, while those aligned with punishment are unlikely to be repeated (Cervone & Pervin, 2019). The knowledge of human behavior with respect to environmental factors can contribute to the development of scientific psychology, especially in the determination of the origin and causes of certain behavior.

Kelly’s Constructive Alternativism

Based on Kelly’s Constructive alternativism, there is more than one possible explanation that still leads to the same truth. In his claims, he states that there is always more than one perspective, which leads to one reality (Cervone & Pervin, 2019). It is odd to believe that a situation could have more than one interpretation and still be the reality. For an idea or condition to be regarded as accurate, it usually needs to have one precise sound description. And therefore, Kelly’s explanation of Constructive alternativism raises doubt on whether the truth being discussed is true.

Scientific concepts are derived from solid proof and individual pieces of evidence. Therefore, it is impossible to develop any scientific study on people when there is no objective truth. In science, most findings are regarded as the ultimate truth, and further research is conducted to ascertain the accuracy of the answers acquired (Cervone & Pervin, 2019). However, Kelly’s theory cannot support any scientific expeditions since there will not be any particular truth being investigated.

However, Constructive alternativism is capable of initiating an active scientific investigation than any other theory because it supports various perspectives which target the same finding. Since Kelly believes that there is more than one possible explanation to any given reality, this can ensure that a scientific study explores a subject in more than one interpretation (Cervone & Pervin, 2019). With such in mind, researchers are challenged to repeatedly observe an issue to come with more than a single way to make it work. Therefore, this is essential in fostering innovations and accurate scientific findings.

B. F. Skinner Vs. Social Cognitive Theory

Albert Bandura concurred with B.F. Skinner that the development of personality is attained through learning. However, Bandura’s Social cognitive theory disagrees with Skinner’s postulate of a strict behaviorist approach to personality development. According to Nabavi (2012), learning entails thinking and reasoning, which need to be integrated into Skinner’s postulate of personality development. In this light, Bandura presented the social cognitive theory, which advocates for personality development based on cognition and learning.

Cognitive processes are experiences previously learned which contribute to the expectancies. Social cognitive theory entails the influence of the three in the determination of personality, while Skinner’s behaviorism advocates for strictly behavioral influ...