Carl Rogers' person-centered theory compared with Erikson and Piaget

¶ … Carl Rogers' Theory of Personality Compared to Those of Erik Erikson?

Over the past century or so, a number of psychological theorists have provided new ways of understanding human development over the lifespan, including Carl Rogers, Erik Erikson and Jean Piaget. Although these theorists share some common views concerning how people develop over time, they differ in other ways with regards to what forces tend to be the most salient at different periods and how therapists should approach helping others resolve the problems they inevitably encounter along the way. To determine what Rogers, Erikson and Piaget share in common and how they differ, this paper provides a review of the relevant literature concerning these theorists, followed by a personal reflections analysis. A summary of the research and important findings are presented in the conclusion.

Review and Analysis

Carl Rogers

Best known for his person-centered approach to counseling, Carl Rogers was an American psychotherapist whose theory was first set forth in his book, Counseling and Psychotherapy (1942). From Rogers' perspective, everyone viewed the world in different ways based on their own personal experiences. In this regard, Demorest notes that, "What was plain to Rogers was that humanness is defined by one's subjective experience of the world, and that it is this subjective frame of reference that determines an individual's path in life" (2005, p. 2). The phenomenological approach developed by Rogers maintains that "Humans are not helplessly buffeted about by forces beyond their control, whether these forces be from their unconscious minds or from their environments. An essential fact of humanness in the view of theorists from the phenomenological approach is that individual persons have free will to determine their own course in life, and that this course will be based on their own subjective experiences" (Demorest 2005, p. 3). Indeed, Rogers is one of the giants on whose shoulders many counselors stand today. For instance, Kirschenbaum suggests that, "Carl Rogers (1902-2002) was America's most influential counselor and psychotherapist -- and one of its most prominent psychologists" (2004, p. 116). As one of the "grand theorists of psychology," Rogers has also been highly influential in shaping the way counselors have been educated and how they practice. In this regard, Wickman and Campbell note that, "Roger's client-centered counseling later became foundational for many counselor education programs" (2003, p. 15).

Based on his person-centered approach to counseling, Rogers maintained that, "The correct therapeutic response was to trust that the energy or drive towards self-actualization was still present in the client, and [to] encourage this to re-emerge via a particular sort of psychotherapeutic relationship" (Robson 2003, p. 159). Although he acknowledged the basic tenets of psychology advanced by other theorists such as Sigmund Freud in terms of their value in counseling (DeCarvalho 1991), when it was introduced, Rogers's person-centered theory differed from these and other existing psychological theories in some important ways. For instance, Kirschenbaum points out that, "Although other therapies might profess similar belief, Rogers's method of creating the therapeutic psychological atmosphere was radically different from other approaches commonly used" (2004, p. 115).

Recognizing the inherent moral worth of all humans, Rogers also developed a counseling style that embraced active listening as a way to better understand what was troubling his clients in ways that differed from his predecessors. For instance, Kirschenbaum adds that, "Rogers's initial 'nondirective method' totally avoided questions, interpretation, suggestions, advice, or other directive techniques. Rather, it relied exclusively on a process of carefully listening to the client, accepting the client for who he or she is -- no matter how confused or antisocial that might be at the moment -- and skillfully reflecting back the client's feelings" (2004, p. 117). Not all therapists are of a like mind when it comes to Rogers's patient-centered therapy, though. For instance, Comstock, Hammer, Strentzsch, Cannon, Parsons and Salazar Carl point out that, "Rogers received criticism for focusing on the client -- therapist relationship as a primary source of healing in counseling. Such criticism targeted the emphasis Rogers consistently placed on the counselor's ability to communicate a genuine sense of empathy with clients as a key component in promoting positive counseling outcomes" (2008, p. 280). Forging a "genuine sense of empathy" would be clearly beneficial to the therapeutic alliance irrespective of the psychological theory involved, but from Rogers's perspective, this was an essential element in the patient-centered approach.

Erik Erikson

While Rogers clearly stands out amongst 20th century theorists, other authorities maintain that Erik Erikson was the most influential psychological theorist in shaping modern views concerning how humans develop over their lifespan and what counseling approaches are best suited to their needs at any given point during the process. In this regard, Hoare emphasizes that, "The theoretical views about the adult that Erik Erikson spent a great portion of his own adult life developing represent essential knowledge. In the entire twentieth century, he stands alone as the one thinker who changed our minds about what it means to live as a person who has arrived at a chronologically mature position and yet continues to grow, to change, and to develop" (2002, p. 3).

Like Rogers, Erikson viewed Freud's theories as being fundamentally sound but built upon these to formulate his own unique perspective concerning how people grow and change over time. For instance, according to Mook, "Erikson expanded Freud's view and addressed the socio-cultural context and network of social relationships in which people found themselves. His famous eight stages of psycho-social development offered a novel conceptualization, not only of the child but of the whole life-span from infancy to old age. By taking history and the socio-cultural context of childhood into account, Erikson's contribution was unique among traditional developmental psychologists" (2007, p. 158). In fact, while Erikson's theories are typically identified with regards to adolescence and identity, his overall theoretical framework extends to human development throughout the adult years as well. For instance, according to Garrod, "Erikson has differentiated among different phases of adulthood, discussing the unique dimensions to and characteristics of early marriage, early parenting, middle parenting, late parenting, early grandparenting, late grandparenting, and old age" (1992, p. 20).

Similar to Rogers, Erikson also believed that an objective analysis of the subjective responses that people experience to poignant events in their lives could help illuminate and inform appropriate approaches to counseling. In this regard, Comstock and her associates cite Erikson's concept of homonomy which "refers to children's ability to rearrange and expand their relational circles based on their individual and developmental needs. This Eriksonian construct represents another indicator of the ways that traditional theorists acknowledged the importance of relational factors in fostering people's sense of psychological well-being" (2008, p. 280). The need to respond and adapt to changing circumstances over the lifespan is reflected in Erikson's eight-stage framework in which he suggests that various crises must be resolved in order to fully develop a healthy identity, and these crises tend to change over time as people mature (Schneider-Munoz 2009). By taking into account the life stage that people are currently in, Erikson maintains that it is possible to for therapists to discern what must be accomplished in order to resolve these psychological battles to attain a complete healthy identity (Schneider-Munoz 2009).

Personal Reflections

On the one hand, Erik Erikson makes a good case for his eight-stage life developmental framework. In fact, the eight-stages provide a useful way of understanding what people may be experiencing in their lives depending on how far along the continuum they have advanced regardless of their biological age. Indeed, it would seem reasonable to suggest that even very young people might be able to attain many of the attributes that accrue to the later stages of Erikson's model, while some elderly people may be hopelessly mired in the earlier stages having failed to successfully resolved the crises that Erikson maintains must be settled before moving on to the next stage.

On the other hand, although it would be tempting to rely exclusively on this developmental framework in a counseling environment because it is neat and tidy, people's lives are not so easily pigeonholed into a specific developmental stage. Similarly, Piaget's theory of human development and the stages that people tend to move through as they grow and mature lends itself to this type of analysis, but a strict reliance on stages of development without taking into account the other forces at work in an individual's life may result in some erroneous conclusions about what is really going on. Furthermore, unlike the relatively straightforward approaches offered by Erikson and Rogers, much of Piaget's work is abstruse in the extreme and demands careful reading to gain even a modicum of access to the thinking and rationale behind it. This is not to say, of course, that understanding Piaget is not worth the effort, but it is to say that therapists may be reluctant to embrace a therapeutic approach they may not fully understand or be unsure about in ways that make Erikson and Rogers more accessible theoretical approaches more attractive.

Taken together, it would appear that a Rogerian approach to counseling avoids these potential missteps by focusing on individuals without trying to force them into a particular developmental stage that might overlook some salient issues that would otherwise go unnoticed. In particular, Rogers's emphasis on the need for an empathetic view of patients may require more effort than some clinicians are capable of providing, but it is clear that such a view is a prerequisite to truly understanding another person and to developing the therapeutic rapport that characterizes successful therapeutic interventions. Unfortunately, even a well-managed and thoughtful Rogerian approach, though, will not be appropriate for all people in all settings at all times, suggesting that there is no "one-size-fits-all" approach to counseling, but rather there remains a need to rely on one of the various theoretical approaches that are available according to whichever is most appropriate for an individual's needs.

Based on empirical observations of others for a good many years, it is apparent that there is some utility in all of these theoretical perspectives because they provide a way of better understanding what people might be experiencing from their perspective rather than trying to impose a set of circumstances of the therapist's own making on them. It would be foolhardy and even dangerous to attempt to provide efficacious counseling services based on such an imposition of a therapist's views on a patient, and Rogers emphasizes the need to actively listen to what people are saying in order to gain the insights that are needed to formulate effective treatment interventions. In sum, although empathy requires time and effort and may not come naturally to all therapists, a Rogerian approach to counseling offers a number of benefits that make it worthwhile for use in a wide range of clinical settings. Even here, though, it is important for counselors to keep in mind that even though one theoretical perspective has been effective in the past, and they may be comfortable using such an approach based on accumulated experience and expertise, everyone is unique and requires a careful consideration of what type of therapeutic intervention is most appropriate given their specific circumstances rather than simply relying on the comfort level of the individual clinician concerning what type of treatment approach will be used.

Conclusion

The research showed that Carl Rogers, Erik Erikson and Jean Piaget have consistently been singled out as being among the most influential psychological theorists of the 20th century, and their work remains highly influential today as well. Expanding on the work of Freud and other earlier psychologists, all of these developmental theorists offered a way of helping therapists understand others in some similar ways, but they all were shown to differ in some important ways as well. The stage-developmental aspects of human life posited by Erikson and Piaget can be useful in helping counselors understand what people may be experiencing and what may be required for them to successfully resolve the crises that are adversely affecting their lives, but the research also showed that the person-centered approach developed by Rogers provides a useful way to identify these crises through active listening and empathetic connection with other human beings. In sum, each of these developmental theorists can help inform a therapist's practice by providing valuable tools that can be used according to the specific needs of an individual at a given point in time, but a Rogerian approach can be used in a wide range of settings to get to the root of the problem provided a therapist is willing and able to forge the empathetic bond that is needed in order to do so.