2.4 Development of the Self
2.4.1 Role of Significant Others
20
that due to its difference to what is considered the norm, such behaviour is often considered deviant (Bartol & Bartol, 2008:3; Williams & McShane, 2010:79). Much like Rogers’
concept of the real and ideal self, Merton illustrates the role of society in prescribing to its inhabitants that which is considered good or ideal as well as the behavioural implications associated with the inability to achieve this ideal state.
Now that the general personality structure as purported by Rogers has been outlined and placed into the context of the current study, it becomes important to consider how this structure develops from birth and continuously develops throughout the lifetime of the individual.
21
Some experiences are ignored due to their irrelevance to the self-concept and others denied or distorted due to their conflicting nature with the self (Rogers, 1951:504). The most significant criteria for experiences to become internalised is derived from the source of the experience as well as its compatibility with the individuals’ current self-concept. Experiences involving physiological processes as well as those who are closely connected to the individual, known as significant others, tend to be more influential in the process of self-concept development (Rogers, 1951:499). The role of these significant others in influencing criminal behaviour has also been widely recognised and will be integrated in the discussion to follow.
2.4.1.1 The Parent-Child Relationships
During infancy and early childhood the role of the significant other tends to be dominated by the parents or primary caregivers and it is at this primary level that the individual learns about societal norms and values through the process of socialisation. It is here where the infant begins to learn what is considered attractive and socially appealing in terms of societal goals and aspirations (Haralambos & Holborn, 2004:ix). However, the adoption of these norms and values as guides for appropriate behaviour may have an inverse effect and lead to the expression of behaviour deemed deviant or criminal by the law. This seemingly contradictory perspective is found in the writings of Thorsten Sellin in reference to the culture conflict perspective originally drawn from the Chicago School. Sellin purported that the cultural backgrounds of the primary caregivers influence the norms and values taught during the socialisation process and may thereby vary between different cultures (Williams & McShane, 2010:53). The “conduct norms” of the dominant culture are what determine appropriate behaviour within the given society and influence law. Therefore, the differences in norms and values between individuals of different cultures living in the same space can lead to conflict and the interpretation of culturally ‘normal’ behaviour as criminal (Williams & McShane, 2010:53).
Returning to Rogers’ perspective, it is said that at this early stage of life the organisms or individuals have not yet developed a sense of self and thus do not differentiate between themselves and their phenomenal field. It is only once infants begin to identify and experience certain needs and the satisfaction of those needs such as hunger or pain and the reception of food or comfort that they begin to differentiate between themselves and their environment (Meyer et al., 1997:475). The reception of love from the primary caregivers is
22
essential in later development for children to view themselves as lovable and worthy of affection. As these experiences increase, children become aware of the reactions of others to their behaviour, which may or may not correlate with their feelings. If children’s evaluations about their actions differ from the evaluations of the significant others, the children must change the way they perceive the behaviour in order to maintain the positive relationship with the significant others whilst also striving to preserve a state of congruence (Rogers, 1951:500). Walter Reckless also highlights this early stage of life as the time when individuals develop their self-concept and with it their ability to overcome negative external influences (Williams & McShane, 2010:152). This ability, along with Rogers’ state of congruence has further behavioural consequences that will be discussed later.
In addition to other personality theorists, Freud and Erikson also place emphasis on the importance of the primary care givers in the early developmental phases. Freud found the role of parents to be important on an overall level in the development of personality. However, Freud highlights this role in the development of the superego, the part of our personality linked to societal morals, values and ideals, as it is purported to be directly influenced by individual’s level of identification with their primary caregivers (Larsen & Buss, 2005:297).
Erikson on the other hand pays specific attention to the role of the mother. It is said that mothers play an important part in the regulation of children’s needs as well as the development of autonomy and responsible behaviour. To Erikson, the concepts of “hope” and
“time perspective” play an important role in the behaviour of an individual later in life and purports that if these factors are not well developed the individual could develop a tendency toward erratic behaviour, increasing their chance of criminality (Peacock, 2006:33). In a related perspective, Walter Miller mentioned the effect of absent fathers in single mother households in lower class communities on children’s behaviour. The tendency of mothers from this economic stratum to engage in multiple short term relationships with men deprives (specifically male) children the opportunity to witness and learn appropriate forms of masculine behaviour. This missing source of appropriate masculine behaviour is then seen to be replaced by involvement in street gangs that often thrive on extreme aggressive masculinity that increases the individual’s propensity for deviance (Brown, Esbensen, &
Geis, 1998:321; Williams & McShane, 2010:100).
23 2.4.1.2 Societal and Peer Group Influence
As the individual grows older and begins to interact socially in a more independent manner and develop new relationships the frame of reference shifts from the parents to friends, siblings, co-workers and partners, all of which come with varying degrees of difference in terms of what personal characteristics are deemed attractive or appealing (Cervone & Pervin, 2008:187).
In Rogers’ theory interaction with the environment continually facilitates the development of perceptions of the self, the environment and the relationship between the self and the environment. These experiences and need satisfactions are closely correlated to the development of an internal valuing system that can be said to be highly important when considering behavioural understanding throughout the lifetime (Rogers, 1951:498). The evaluations of certain situations and individuals in the phenomenal field as positive or negative for the maintenance and enhancement of the self also shapes one’s own sense of self. Likewise, the evaluation of the self by others, which is also evident from an early stage of development, plays an important part of the individuals’ perceptual field (Rogers, 1951:499).
The significance of the peer group as a reference point for personal development has been highlighted in the idea of “chumship” purported by Harry Stack Sullivan. Sullivan is of the opinion that preadolescent individuals develop their sense of self or identity through a process of continuous comparison with their peers. Inspired by George Herbert Mead’s concept of the “social self”, Sullivan furthermore claimed that individuals develop a number of different personalities to suit different social situations and that individuals therefore behave according to how they believe society expects them to (Friedman & Schustack, 2012:321-322). This indicates that the evaluative process is present from an early age and becomes more complex throughout the lifetime as the focus shifts solely from the individual to include others in society.
The increasing complexity of the evaluative process as individual’s age can be likened to the process aspects of the cognitive development theories, more particularly those of Jean Piaget and Lawrence Kohlberg. Piaget’s focus was on the process of how children acquire knowledge and how that knowledge develops and becomes more complex over the lifespan.
24
Knowledge of the world is said to be broken up into schema which are defined as the building blocks of intelligence and consist of basic patterns of behaviour and thought that allow individuals to adapt to their environment. As individuals gain more experience these schemas can either be assimilated if the experience bears similarity to a past experience or accommodated if the experience is new (Bernstein, Penner, Clarke-Stewart, & Roy, 2006:460; Friedman & Schustack, 2012:219). Hence on a more advanced level of development, individuals are able to differentiate between different contexts and behave in manners appropriate for each. Kohlberg focused more on the development of moral reasoning characterised by the increasing capacity to incorporate and comprehend abstract ideas of goodness and justice (Bernstein et al., 2006:491). Both theorists purport that cognitive development occurs in stages with the early stages being characterised by egocentric and sensory motivations, similar to the early years of personality development purported by Rogers. Kohlbergs’ stages are however not as strictly linked to age as Piaget’s stages and are not always completed. As the individual in Piaget’s perspective ages and schema develop and become more complex, the individual begins to develop abstract thought, logical understanding and the capacity to reflect and evaluate ideas. Kohlberg specifically highlights the development of an awareness of others, their experiences in relation to the self as well as their evaluations of the self. Offending behaviour can thus be linked to stagnation in the development of moral reasoning, where behavioural motivators are not advanced enough to include utilitarian concepts of universality and collective good but are rather defined by a comparatively primitive dependence on social approval and hedonistic motivators (Andrews
& Bonta, 2010:235; Bernstein et al., 2006:460).
Although the source or conditions of the approval may change, Rogers purports that in order to become actualised humans need approval, both from their significant others as well as themselves. This need for approval often forms part of explanations of problematic behaviour in a number of criminological theories due to the negative impact on behaviour when the need for approval from others is allowed to super cede the need for personal approval. This perspective is supported by Erikson’s concept of identity diffusion mentioned earlier in the chapter.
25