The Phenomenological Perspective on the Study of the Self: A Critical Review

  • Seleshi Zeleke

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to give an evaluative judgment on the theoretical and methodological contributions of the phenomenological approach to the study of the self. Because many scholars from different disciplines have adopted the phenomenological approach, and it is difficult to evaluate the contributions of all these as one and the same approach, the writer has chosen Rogers‟ personality theory (sometimes called a self-theory) for examination. For Rogers, unlike empiricists, the self is of paramount importance and deserves to be the center of psychological research. In his theoretical orientation, Rogers, differs from both psychoanalysts and behaviorists. Whereas psychoanalysts emphasize the role of unconscious motives, Rogers places the importance on conscious experience. While behaviorists discard the self as something that could not be objectively studied, Rogers believed that it could be studied using methods other than those adopted by empiricists. Methodologically, Rogers chose to study lived experience and he thought that this is more valuable than laboratory experiments, the results of which have little relevance to real life. Rogerian theory is not without shortcoming, however. Relying solely on self-reports and focusing only on conscious experience are among the limitations of this perspective. This paper concludes that though Rogers has challenged his predecessors and offered an alternative approach to studying the self, the theory is not comprehensive enough to answer all questions.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bischof, L. J. (1970). Interpreting Personality Theories (2nd ed.). New York: Harper & Row. Coopersmith, S. (1967). The Antecedents of Self-esteem. San Francisco: Freeman. Gergen, K. J. (1991). The Saturated Self: Dilemmas of Identity in Contemporary Life. New York: Basic Books. Gurney, P. W. (1988). Self-esteem in Children with Special Educational Needs. New York: Routledge. Markus, H. and Nurius, P. (1986). Possible Selves. American Psychologist, 41, 954–969. Moghaddam, F. M. (1998). Social psychology: Exploring Universals across Cultures. New York: W. H. Freeman.
Morris, B. (1994). Anthropology of the Self: The Individual in Cultural Perspective. London: Pluto Press. Osborne, J. W. (1991). Humanistic Learning and Teaching. In R. H. Short, L. L. Stewin, & S. J. H. McCann (Eds.), Educational Psychology: Canadian Perspectives. Toronto: Copp Clark Pervin, L. A. & John, O. P. (1997). Personality: Theory and Research (7th ed.). New York: John Wiley. Shertzer, B. & Stone, S. C. (1980). Fundamentals of Counseling (3rd ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Smith, M. J. (1998). Social Science in Question. London: Sage. Stainton Rogers, R. (1995). Q Methodology. In J. A. Smith, R. Harre, and L. Van Langenhove (Eds.), Rethinking Methods in Psychology (pp.178-92). London: Sage. Stevens, R. (1996). The Reflexive Self: An Experiential Perspective. In R. Stevens (Ed.), Understanding the Self (pp. 147-218). London: Sage. Vander Zanden, J. W. (1977). Social Psychology. New York: Random House. Wetherell, M. & Maybin, J. (1996). The Distributed Self: A Social Constructionist Perspective. In R. Stevens (Ed.), Understanding the Self (pp. 219-280). London: Sage. Zimbardo, P. G. (1985). Psychology and Life (11th ed.). Glenview, Illinois: Scott Foresman.
Published
2006-05-30
Section
Articles