Characteristics of Fully Functioning Individuals

Rogerian description: Maslow’s description:

1. Non-defensive individuals that are in
touch with their feelings and open to new
experiences
1. Accepting of their limitations
2. Make every effort to live in the
moment
2. Embrace life and their biological
functioning
3. Make decisions in their best interest 3. Possess a high level of acceptance of
self and others
4. Reject the criticism of their
environment
4. Governed by laws of their character
theme has become clarified through experience, interaction with others, and
research. I smile as I think of the various labels I have given to this theme during the course of my
career -
nondirective counselling, client-centered therapy, student-centered teaching, group-centered
leadership. As
the fields of application have grown in number and variety, the label "person-centered approach"
seems the
most descriptive.
The central hypothesis of this approach can be briefly stated. (See Rogers, 1959, for a complete
statement.)
It is that the individual has within him or herself vast resources for self-understanding, for altering the
selfconcept
basic attitudes, and his or her self-directed behaviour - and that these resources can be tapped if
only a definable climate of facilitative psychological attitudes can be provided.
There are three conditions which constitute this growth - promoting climate, whether we are speaking
of the
relationship between therapist and client, parent and child, leader and group, teacher and student, or
administrator and staff. The conditions apply, in fact, in any situation in which the development of the
person
is a goal. I have described these conditions in previous writings; I present here a brief summary from
the
point of view of psychotherapy, but the description applies to all of the foregoing relationships.
The first element has to do with genuineness, realness, or congruence. The more the therapist is him
or
herself in the relationship, putting up no professional front or personal facade, the greater is the
likelihood
that the client will change and grow in a constructive manner. It means that the therapist is openly
being the
feelings and attitudes that are flowing within at the moment. The term transparent catches the flavour
of this
condition - the therapist makes himself or herself transparent to the client; the client can see right
through
what the therapist is in the relationship; the client experiences a. Clear, unbiased content
b. Concise and simple
c. No leading questions
d. Uniform response scale
5. Level of detail directions required
6. Benefit of pilot testing for clarity and effectiveness
Data Analysis
To conduct quantitative data analysis the researcher utilized the measurements
obtained from surveys. The researcher then computed a correlation coefficient to
determine the degree that the variables are related. The Pearson correlation coefficient
was an appropriate measure of strength between the research variables because there is an
assumed linear experience of error for the student. The documented
procedures are premised on the view that the experience of errors renders
the context/materials/event aversive and elicits negative emotions on the
part of the student. Although there is ample evidence that errors per se do
indeed have adverse effects on the performance of some students, and that
success motivates them, there is also evidence that ‘positive reinforcement’
may actually result in students avoiding intellectual tasks or not persisting
in the face of difficulties (Ames and Ames, 1984; Deci and Ryan, 1985;
Dweck, 2000). Further, extrinsic reward systems are associated with a
decline in interest or liking of academic work, a marked anxiety about
cognitive outcomes and a perception of self as being externally rather than
internally controlled (Ryan et al., 1985). The issue thus turns on whether
the most effective way of overcoming helpless or negative reactions to
failure is to eliminate failure from the students’ experience or to teach
students how to deal with it since simplistic attempts to empower students
can result in their fearing failure, avoiding risks and coping badly with
setbacks (Kamins and Dweck, 1999; Mueller and Dweck, 1998). Moreover,
the literature on the psychological construct of resilience (such as Howard
and Johnson, 2000; Howard et al., 1999; Luthar et al., 2000; Masten, 2001)
suggests that students learn to deal effectively with academic setbacks, stress
and study pressure by receiving specific help with the particular learning
difficulties that they are experiencing, rather than from social and
emotional support/comfort. In other words, the errors that give rise to
academic setbacks, stress and study pressure should not be