Apply Psychological Concepts to Facilitate Social Service Practice

Apply Psychological Concepts to Facilitate Social Service Practice
Name:
Institution: Apply Psychological Concepts to Facilitate Social Service Practice
Definition ‘Personality Traits’ and ‘Social Influence’
It is possible to recognize and measure the individual differences in emotions as well as behavior in early human ontogeny by the first few months of life. Therefore, personality traits can be defined as the relatively enduring patterns of thoughts, feelings, as well as behaviors that differentiate individuals from others. Social influence, on the other hand, refers to the shifts in a person’s thoughts, feelings, attitudes and behaviors that may result from interaction with another individual or group. According to many social service professionals and counselors, the power of personality traits is often superior as compared to the power of social influence. However, a social psychologist, Stanley Milgram asserts that social influence sometimes plays a significant role in controlling the outcomes of a person’s behavior.
The Experiment on Obedience by Milgram and the Findings
Milgram’s work on obedience to authority is often regarded as controversial. Milgram reported from various studies conducted at Yale University. Pairs of participants were given the responsibilities of teacher and learner for the simple learning test. According to Milgram, the teacher was to administer electric shocks to the student every time a wrong answer was provided while increasing the intensity each time despite the learner having a heart condition.

Interestingly, the apparatus were arranged in a way that the learner could get shocks. However, the teacher was not aware of that. At 180 volts, the learner yelled due to the pain and at 270 volts the response culminated to an agonized scream. It is important to note that the maximum intensity of the shocks was 450 volts that could prove to be fatal. If the teacher was not willing to administer the shocks, the experimenter requested him to continue.
Milgram found out that everyone asked whether they would be willing to give the maximum 450-volt shock denied that they would not personally do such a thing. Moreover, Milgram established that every single one out of the 110 experts on human behavior, including psychiatrists, predicted that no one could reach the 450-volt level. Milgram conducted many several variations on his basic experiment and determined two main ways that obedience to the authority could be reduced. Firstly, through increasing the obviousness of the learners suffering and to reduce the authority or influence of the experimenter. According to Eysenck (2004), the effect of the first factor was analyzed by comparing obedience in four situations, differing in the extent to which the learner was made aware of the suffering that he or she was made to undergo.
The findings of Milgram are shocking, approximately two-thirds of the participants proceed to the maximum 450-volt electric shock while the experts dispute that no one would do such a thing. Notably, most of the participants who utilized the maximum electric shock accepted but with much reluctance. Moreover, the participants demonstrated clear signs of stress and internal conflict. Notably, it has been contended that the levels of obedience may be reduced in real life situations when groups of people challenge the authority. Ultimately, the experiment by Milgram demonstrated that conformity, as well as obedience, are influenced by many factors and that they are more prevalent than might be imagined. According to Lunt (2009), as the experiment unfolds, it is evident that the participants are involved in a complex situation that may result to the learner being harmed. Consequently a personal value, that of respecting and not harming others comes into play. Therefore, the experiment in general places the participant in a dilemma. If they obey the authority figure, they go against the social norms that sanction is doing no harm to others. On the other hand, if they decline to harm the other person in the experiment then they would be acting against the social norms where good citizens defer to legitimate authority. Stanley Milgram acknowledges that the experiment creates an unusual social situation, an intensification as well as a distillation of everyday occurrence of the dilemmas between respecting authority and pursuing personal inclinations.
Integrity and Ethics Being Compromised at Workplace
It is common for integrity and ethics to be compromised at the workplace. For instance, the management of retail store may make it mandatory for employees to shelve all the products received regardless of whether they are expired or not. If an employee finds an expired product, he or she is faced with the ethical dilemma of deciding whether or not to put the product on the shelves. Notably, the employee may decide to be obedient to the management and put the product on the shelf and then adopt a psychological state in which he will stop defining himself as autonomous. Moreover, the employee may also suspend his agency by neither perceiving himself as morally responsible for the consequences of his action nor the cause of harm that results. Therefore the employee gives himself to the agency and the responsibility of the authority figure which in that case is the management. According to Milgram such a state is known as the “agentic state.” On the other hand, an employee who may decide to be disobedient to the management will be in a psychological of self-consciousness in which he is followed by the dictates of their conscience rather than the requirements of the management.
Contributions of Abraham Maslow and Wilhelm Wundt to Modern Psychology
Abraham Maslow’s theories made a significant contribution to modern particularly in the field of humanistic psychology. While his predecessor focused on the mentally ill and emotionally disturbed, Maslow focused on the ways in which optimal human performance could be achieved. Maslow contribution to modern psychology is the art of self-actualization which can be seen through his hierarchy of needs theory. The theory posits the view that there are the most necessary needs that have to be met before the highest human potential is achieved. At the lower level of the hierarchy is basic physiological needs which include food, air, temperature and shelters; these are needs that one need to survive. Secondly, there are the safety needs which can be met by avoiding pain and insecurity. Further, Maslow also proposed another category which is the need for low and a sense of belonging. The fourth category of the hierarchy of needs is the self-esteem needs which arise from a feeling of success and self-worth. Lastly, Maslow also advanced the self-actualization needs which are realized after all the other needs have been realized (Kalat, 2010). Indeed, Maslow’s contribution is important to modern psychology as it is applied in organizations and other institutions. In organizations, the theory is applied in determining the ways in which employees can be motivated. In educational institutions, the theory can be used to provide students with a proper learning environment.
Wilhelm Wundt is considered by many as the founding father of modern psychology. Wundt was the founder of psychology as a formal academic discipline. Additionally, he established the first laboratory and edited he first psychology journal. Further, Wundt began experimental psychology as a science. Through his studies, Wundt made significant contributions to areas such as sensation and perception, attention, feeling, reaction time and association. According to Schutlz and Schutlz (2015), Wundt’s contribution to modern psychology stems not so much from any unique scientific discovery, but from his ideas about systematic experimentation. Through his various experiments, Wundt conceptualized the theory of structuralism. According to Kalat (2010), Wundt’s structuralism theory was his attempt to describe the structures that compose the mind, particularly regarding feelings and images.
Comparison of Structuralism and Hierarchy of Needs
A comparison of Maslow’s and Wundt’s theories reveals interesting findings. Firstly, Maslow’s theory focused on the needs of human beings that make them realize their potential. Wundt, on the other hand, focused mainly on the human mind. Secondly, Wundt’s theory was developed out of the systematic experiment, but Maslow’s theory was a result of psychological concepts. Moreover, both the concepts of structuralism and the hierarchy of needs, look at the aspect of human feelings. Maslow’s theory looks at human feeling in need of sense of belonging and self-esteem while Wundt also looked at how mental experiences are created through feelings. The other difference in between the theories was that Wundt believes that the main question of psychology was the nature of mental experiences, but Maslow did not bring out any role of the mental experiences in his theory.
Criticisms of the Theories
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and Wundt’s structuralism theory have been criticized by other psychologists in various ways. Firstly, Maslow’s theory has been criticized for not being scientific because he decided who self-actualizes were and studied their stories in retrospect. For example, people can pretend to have achieved self-actualization even when lower needs have not been met. The other criticisms of the theory are that some basic needs are not necessary for survival. For example, there are people who still live in forests where they do not have clothes, but somehow they have managed to survive and procreate for generations. According to Kalat (2010), Maslow’s theory has also been criticizing for not taking into account the fact goals differ across each culture, and that some people will tend to achieve their goals without necessarily meeting all needs. For example, one may decide that by obtaining a higher education degree, they have achieved their full potential or have actualized.
One of the strongest criticisms of structuralism was that it was narrow, artificial and pointless which was a view advanced by William James. Further, the theory has been criticized for its focus on introspection as the main basis used by Wundt to understand mental experiences (Hergenhahn, 2013). According to Kalat (2010), some of the questions that Wundt advanced through his theory are unanswerable. These questions do not meet the scientific criteria that a good question should be interesting and answerable. It is for these reasons that Wundt’s theory has not been developed much by other psychologists.
Conclusion
Conclusively, Abraham Maslow and Wilhelm Wundt made significant contributions to modern psychology. While Abraham Maslow proposed the hierarchy of needs theory, Wilhelm Wundt provided a pathway for future psychologists through his publications and the labs. A comparison of the theories developed by Maslow and Wundt reveals that they do not have any similarities, but have differences that strike them apart. However, Wundt’s theory has received criticism for not being practical while Maslow’s theory has been criticized for not being scientific. In essence, each of these theories has both its weaknesses and strengths.

References
Eysenck, M. W. (2004). Psychology: An international perspective. Taylor & Francis.
Hergenhahn, B. R. (2013). An introduction to the history of psychology. Cengage Learning.
Kalat, J. W. (2010). Introduction to psychology. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
Lunt, P. (2009). Stanley Milgram: Understanding obedience and its implications. Palgrave Macmillan.
Schultz, D. P., & Schultz, S. E. (2015). A history of modern psychology. Cengage Learning.