Mick Cooper, Ph.D. Professor of Counselling University of Strathclyde mick.cooper@strath.ac.uk

1. Hierarchy of wants: An integrating framework for person-centred therapy and the field of psycho-social change Mick Cooper, Ph.D. Professor of Counselling University of Strathclyde mick.cooper@strath.ac.uk

2. Aim of presentation To present a presents a contemporary re-formulation of person-centred/humanistic developmental and personality theory, which allows it to act as an integrating basis for a wide variety of psychotherapeutic, and social change, theories and practices

3. Building on ideas developed in: Cooper, M. (2000). Person-centred developmental theory: reflections and revisions. Person-Centred Practice, 8(2), 87-94. Cooper, M. (2006) Socialist Humanism, in Proctor et al. Politicizing the person-centred approach (PCCS Books) Cooper, M. (2010) WAPCEPC Rome presentation Cooper, M. (in press) Intrinsic foundations of extrinsic motivations and goals: Towards a unified humanistic theory of wellbeing and change, Journal of Humanistic Psychology.

4. PCA model of development

5. Conditional positive regard Experiencing organism Experiencing organism Self- construct

6. Humanistic psychology • Similar split between: ‘intrinsic’/authentic/’self-concordant’ motivation and goals vs. ‘extrinsic’/false • Self-determination theory: Deci and Ryan • Self-concordance theory: Sheldon and Kasser

7. But how can we explain why actualising beings come to act in extrinsically-driven, ‘non-actualising’ ways?

8. Introjections: Self vs. Society?

9. But… • Is the human being really so weak and passive that their being is determined by social forces? • Where is the active, agentic, actualising being?

10. ‘If you conclude that the troubles lies in the fact that human beings are so susceptible to influence by their culture, so obedient to orders that they are given, so pliable to their environment, then you are making the most devastating of all judgment…in human beings. In such case we are all sheep, dependent on whoever is the shepherd; and Fred Skinner is right.’ (Rollo May, letter to Carl Rogers on the issue of evil)

11. Actualisation process vs. self-actualisation?

12. But… • For Rogers (1959), there is just one motivating force in the organism, the actualising tendency: ‘There are no homunculi, no other sources of energy or action in the system’ • Why would an actualising organism behave in non-actualising and non-intelligible ways? • Is it really possible/meaningful to differentiate between the need for positive regard, and the need for relatedness? • Introducing a judgement over growthful/not for growth motivations may be inconsistent with PCA values and practices

13. An alternative conceptualisation: A hierarchy of wants

14. ‘Extrinsic’, ‘inauthentic’ motivations emerge from ‘intrinsic’ foundations ‘The human person needs confirmation because man [sic] as man needs it…. Sent forth from the natural domain of species into the hazard of the solitary category, surrounded by the air of chaos which came into being with him, secretly and bashfully he watches for a Yes which allows him to be and which can come to him only from one human person to another. It is from one man to another that the heavenly bread of self-being is passed.’ (Martin Buber)

15. Actualising in multiple ways Conflict

16. conflict

17. Multiple conflicts • Conflict between desire for approval and other desires can be considered just one splits/conflicts/tensions across organismic desires (Cooper, 2001, 2007)

18. Other tensions in actualising process conflict

19. A ‘hierarchy of wants’ • Can conceptualise actualising tendency, and relationship between wants, in hierarchical format • Cf. William Powers: ‘Perceptual Control Theory’ • Multiple highest order wants may exist: e.g., relatedness, competence, autonomy • Lower order wants are means of attaining higher order wants

20. A hierarchy of wants • Both intrinsic and extrinsic wants are means of attaining higher order goals

21. A hierarchy of wants

22. Wants and wellbeing • Psychological wellbeing associated with progress towards, and attainment of, fundamental (i.e., highest order) wants • ‘Intrinsic’ wants are not inherently more salutogenic, but are more likely to be associated with wellbeing because they are: • More direct and effective means of attaining highest order wants: are not dependent on external mediation and contingencies • Less likely to be in conflict with other wants

23. Wants and wellbeing • Psychological wellbeing is dependent on having ways of attaining our wants that are: • Effective • Fitted to our present context • Synergetic

24. Dysergy and synergy between wants

25. Dysergy • A relationship in which, when one entity gets what it wants, it impedes another entity getting what it wants (and vice-versa) • E.g., win-lose, or lose-lose relationship

26. Dysgertic relationship

27. A hierarchy of wants Dysergetic relationship

28. Empirical support • ‘Interference among goals is associated with impairments in subjective well-being’ (Riediger, 2007)

29. Synergy • Syn = together • ‘the combined, or cooperative, effects produced by the relationships among various forces’ (Corning, 2003, p.2) • Synergy = A relationship in which, when one entity gets what it wants, it helps another entity getting what it wants (and vice-versa)

30. Synergetic relationship

31. A hierarchy of wants Synergetic relationship

32. Empirical support • ‘mutual facilitation among goals enhances goal-directed activities’ (Riediger, 2007) – enhanced behavioral involvement in goal pursuit

33. Beyond the self-concept • But dysergies are not only brought about by conflicts with the desire for self-regard: can also emerge across other wants

34. A hierarchy of wants Dysergetic relationship

35. A hierarchy of wants Dysergetic relationship

36. Why do people come to develop dysergetic wants?

37. Aetiology of dysergetic wants • From person-centred/humanistic standpoint, wants are not inherently dysergetic • Natural tendency towards synergising of wants/finding mutually compatible strategies for their attainment = actualising tendency?

38. Aetiology of dysergetic wants • But, under certain (restrictive) social circumstances, we may learn that the actualisation of one want requires the subjugation of another want

39. Unconditionally accepting environment sexuality ‘self’ Actualising process

40. Conditionally accepting environment Conditional positive regard Conditional positive regard ‘self’ sexuality Actualising process

41. A conditionally regarding environment is just one kind of restrictive social contextOther restrictive (and on-going) social contexts (e.g., poverty) may also evoke tensions amongst potentialities

42. Financially supportive environment Creativity Financial security Actualising process

43. Financially restrictive environment Financial limitations Financial limitations financial security creativity Actualising process

44. How can synergies be enhanced?

45. Person-centred therapy • By creating an unconditionally positively regarding context, the client’s desire for positive regard (from others and self) need no longer run against their other desires

46. Conditionally accepting environment Conditional positive regard Conditional positive regard ‘self’ sexuality Actualising process

47. Unconditionally accepting environment ‘self’ sexuality Actualising process

48. Unconditionally accepting environment sexuality ‘self’ Actualising process

49. Social change • If we accept that: ...dysergies can emerge ...between wants …Partly as a consequence of other social restrictions • Then intrapsychic work is only one means of supporting a person towards greater wellbeing

50. Financially restrictive environment Financial limitations Financial limitations financial security creativity Actualising process