Mistrust
physiological
being
comforted,
586
teething,
sleeping
toddler /
Willpower & 'law and
safety
parents / bodily 2. Autonomy Self-Control
order'
functions, toilet v Shame &
training,
Doubt
muscular
control, walking
preschool /
3. Initiative
Purpose &
'ideal
belongingness
family /
v Guilt
Direction
prototypes'
& love
exploration and
discovery,
adventure and
play
schoolchild /
4. Industry v Competence
'technological esteem
school, teachers, Inferiority
& Method
elements'
friends,
neighbourhood
/ achievement
and
accomplishment
adolescent /
5. Identity v Fidelity &
'ideological
esteem
peers, groups,
Role
Devotion
perspectives'
influences /
Confusion
resolving
identity and
direction,
becoming a
grown-up
587
young adult /
6. Intimacy
Love &
'patterns of
esteem
lovers, friends,
v Isolation
Affiliation
cooperation
work
and
connections /
competition'
intimate
relationships,
work and social
life
mid-adult /
7.
Care &
'currents of
self-
children,
Generativity Production
education and actualisation
community /
v Stagnation
training'
'giving back',
helping,
contributing
late adult /
8. Integrity v Wisdom &
'wisdom'
self-
society, the
Despair
Renunciation
actualisation
world, life /
meaning and
purpose, life
achievements,
acceptance
N.B. I'm not suggesting a direct fit between Erikson's and Maslow's
models. Rather, this simply puts the two perspectives alongside each
other to show how similar aspects could could inter-relate. Judge for
yourself.
We might also use the Erikson model to help explain what happens in
Maslow's theory when a particular trauma sweeps away a part of
someone's life (perhaps due to redundancy, divorce, social exclusion,
bankruptcy, homelessness), which causes the person to revisit certain
needs and internal conflicts (crises) which were once satisfied earlier
but are no longer met. According to both Erikson's and Maslow's
588
theories, anyone can find themselves revisiting and having to resolve
needs (or crisis feelings or experiences) from earlier years.
Further thoughts and suggestions about correlations between Maslow
and Erikson are welcome.
Erikson's model - maladaptations and malignancies (negative
outcomes)
Later Erikson developed clearer ideas and terminology - notably
'Maladaptations' and 'Malignancies' - to represent the negative
outcomes arising from an unhelpful experience through each of the
crisis stages.
In crude modern terms these negative outcomes might be referred to as
'baggage', which although somewhat unscientific, is actually a very apt
metaphor, since people tend to carry with them through life the
psychological outcomes of previously unhelpful experiences.
Psychoanalysis, the particular therapeutic science from which Erikson
approached these issues, is a way to help people understand where the
baggage came from, and thereby to assist the process of dumping it.
To an extent these negative outcomes can also arise from repeating or
revisiting a crisis, or more realistically the essential aspects of a crisis,
since we don't actually regress to a younger age, instead we revisit the
experiences and feelings associated with earlier life.
This chart is laid out with the crisis in the centre to aid appreciation
that 'maladaptations' develop from tending towards the extreme of the
first ('positive') disposition in each crisis, and 'malignancies' develop
from tending towards the extreme of the second ('negative') disposition
in each crisis.
A maladaptation could be seen as 'too much of a good thing'. A
malignancy could be seen as not enough.
In later writings malignancies were also referred to as 'antipathies'.
589
maladaptations and malignancies
Maladaptation
Crisis
Malignancy
Sensory Distortion
(later Sensory
Trust v Mistrust
Withdrawal
Maladjustment)
Impulsivity
Autonomy v
(later Shameless
Compulsion
Shame/Doubt
Willfulness)
Ruthlessness
Initiative v Guilt
Inhibition
Industry v
Narrow Virtuosity
Inertia
Inferiority
Identity v Role
Fanaticism
Repudiation
Confusion
Promiscuity
Intimacy v Isolation Exclusivity
Generativity v
Overextension
Rejectivity
Stagnation
Presumption
Integrity v Despair
Disdain
590
Erikson was careful to choose words for the maladaptations and
malignancies which convey a lot of meaning and are very symbolic of
the emotional outcomes that are relevant to each stage.
In each case the maladaptation or malignancy corresponds to an
extreme extension of the relevant crisis disposition (for example,
'Withdrawal' results from an extreme extension of 'Mistrust'). Thinking
about this helps to understand what these outcomes entail, and
interestingly helps to identify the traits in people - or oneself - when
you encounter the behavioural tendency concerned.
Malignancies and maladaptations can manifest in various ways. Here
are examples, using more modern and common language, to help
understand and interpret the meaning and possible attitudes,
tendencies, behaviours, etc., within the various malignancies and
malapdations. In each case the examples can manifest as more extreme
mental difficulties, in which case the terms would be more extreme too.
These examples are open to additional interpretation and are intended
to be a guide, not scientific certainties. Neither do these examples
suggest that anyone experiencing any of these behavioural tendencies
is suffering from mental problems. Erikson never established any
absolute measurement of emotional difficulty or tendency as to be
defined as a malignancy or maladaptation.
In truth each of us is subject to emotional feelings and and extremes of
various sorts, and it is always a matter of opinion as to what actually
constitutes a problem. All people possess a degree of maladaptation or
malignancy from each crisis experience. Not to do so would not be
human, since none of us is perfect. It's always a question of degree. It's
also a matter of understanding our weaknesses, maybe understanding
where they come from too, and thereby better understanding how we
might become stronger, more productive and happier.
maladaptations and malignancies - examples and interpretations
examples
Maladap-
crisis
Malign-
examples
591
tation
nancy
unrealistic,
Sensory
Trust v
With-
neurotic,
spoilt, deluded
Distortion
Mistrust
drawal
depressive, afraid
reckless,
Impuls-
Autonomy v Compulsi anal, constrained,
inconsiderate,
Shame/
on
self-limiting
thoughtless
ivity
Doubt
exploitative,
Ruthless-
Initiative v
Inhi-
risk-averse,
uncaring,
Guilt
bition
unadventurous
dispassionate
ness
workaholic,
Narrow
Industry v
lazy, apathetic,
obsessive
Inertia
Virtuosity
Inferiority
purposeless
specialist
Identity v
socially
self-important,
Fana-
Repudiati
Role
disconnected,
extremist
ticism
on
Confusion
cut-off
sexually needy, Promis-
Intimacy v
Exclu-
loner, cold, self-
vulnerable
cuity
Isolation
sivity
contained
do-gooder,
Over-
Genera-
Reject-
disinterested,
busy-body,
tivity
ivity
cynical
meddling
extension
v Stagnation
592
conceited,
Presump-
miserable,
Integrity v
pompous,
Disdain
unfulfilled,
Despair
arrogant
tion
blaming
Erikson's terminology
This section explains how some of the model's terminology altered as
Erikson developed his theory, and is not crucial to understanding the
model at a simple level.
Erikson was continually refining and re-evaluating his psychosocial
theory, and he encouraged his readers and followers to do likewise.
This developmental approach enabled the useful extension of the
model to its current format. Some of what is summarised here did not
initially appear clearly in Childhood and Society in 1950, which marked
the establishment of the basic theory, not its completion. Several
aspects of Erikson's theory were clarified in subsequent books decades
later, including work focusing on old age by Joan Erikson, Erik's wife
and collaborator, notably in the 1996 revised edition of The Life Cycle
Completed: A Review.
The Eriksons' refinements also involved alterations - some would say
complications - to the terminology, which (although presumably aiming
for scientific precision) do not necessarily aid understanding, especially
at a basic working level.
For clarity therefore this page sticks mostly with Erikson's original
1950 and other commonly used terminology. Basic Trust v Basic
Mistrust (1950) is however shortened here to Trust v Mistrust, and Ego
Integrity (1950) is shortened to Integrity, because these seem to be
more consistent Erikson preferences. The terms used on this page are
perfectly adequate, and perhaps easier too, for grasping what the
theory means and making use of it.
593
Here are the main examples of alternative terminology that Erikson
used in later works to describe the crisis stages and other aspects,
which will help you recognise and understand their meaning if you see
them elsewhere.
Erikson used the terms 'syntonic' and 'dystonic' to describe the
contrary dispositions and effects within each crisis stage - 'syntonic'
being the 'positive' first-listed factor (e.g., Trust) and 'dystonic' being
the 'negative' second-listed word (e.g., Mistrust). Again realise that a
balance between syntonic and dystonic tendencies is required for
healthy outcomes. Extreme tendency in either direction is not helpful.
Syntonic extremes equate to maladaptations. Dystonic extremes
equate to malignancies. The words syntonic and dystonic outside of
Erikson's theory have quite specific scientific medical meanings
which are not easy to equate to Erikson's essential ideas. Syntonic
conventionally refers to a high degree of emotional response to one's
environment; dystonic conventionally refers to abnormal muscular
responsiveness. See what I mean?.. neither literal definition
particularly aids understanding of Erikson's theory and as such they
are not very helpful in using the model.
Erikson later used 'Adaptive Strength' as a firm description of the
first disposition in each crisis, e.g., Trust, Autonomy, Initiative. He
used the description loosely early in his work but seems to have
settled on it as a firm heading in later work, (notably in Vital
Involvement in Old Age, 1986).
'Basic Virtues' Erikson also called 'Basic Strengths' (the word 'basic'
generally identified the single main virtue or strength that potentially
arose from each crisis, which would be accompanied by various other
related strengths).
Erikson (or maybe Joan Erikson) later used the term 'Antipathy' as an
alternative for 'Malignancy' (being the negative tendency towards the
second resulting from unsuccessful experience during a crisis stage).
594
'Sensory Distortion' was later referred to as 'Sensory Maladjustment',
being the maladaptive tendency arising at stage one (Trust v
Mistrust).
'Impulsivity' he later changed to 'Shameless Willfulness', being the
maladaptive tendency arising at stage two (Autonomy v Shame &
Doubt)
Erikson generally used the simpler 'Trust v Mistrust' instead of 'Basic
Trust v Basic Mistrust' which first appeared in the 1950 model.
Erikson later refined 'Industry' to 'Industriousness'.
Erikson later referred to 'Role Confusion' as 'Identity Diffusion' and
'Identity Confusion'.
He later referred to 'Intimacy' also as 'Intimacy and Distantiation'.
(Distantiation means the ability to bring objectivity - emotional
detachment - to personal decision-making.)
'Ego Integrity' he also simplified at times to simply 'Integrity'.
'Stagnation' was later shown alternatively as 'Self-Absorption', and
later still reverted to 'Stagnation'.
At times he extended 'Despair' to 'Despair and Disgust' (Disgust here
being a sort of 'sour grapes' reaction or rejective denial).
In conclusion
Erikson's psychosocial theory very powerful for self-awareness and
improvement, and for teaching and helping others.
While Erikson's model emphasises the sequential significance of the
eight character-forming crisis stages, the concept also asserts that
humans continue to change and develop throughout their lives, and
that personality is not exclusively formed during early childhood years.
This is a helpful and optimistic idea, and many believe it is realistic too.
It is certainly a view that greatly assists encouraging oneself and others
to see the future as an opportunity for positive change and
development, instead of looking back with blame and regret.
595
The better that people come through each crisis, the better they will
tend to deal with what lies ahead, but this is not to say that all is lost
and never to be recovered if a person has had a negative experience
during any particular crisis stage. Lessons can be revisited successfully
when they recur, if we recognise and welcome them.
Everyone can change and grow, no matter what has gone before. And as
ever, understanding why we are like we are - gaining meaningful self-
awareness - is always a useful and important step forward. Erikson's
theory, along with many other concepts featured on this website, helps
to enable this meaningful understanding and personal growth.
Erikson's psychosocial theory should be taught to everyone - especially
to school children, teachers and parents - it's certainly accessible
enough, and would greatly assist all people of all ages to understand the
connections between life experiences and human behaviour - and
particularly how grown-ups can help rather than hinder children's
development into rounded emotionally mature people.
Erikson was keen to improve the way children and young people are
taught and nurtured, and it would be appropriate for his ideas to be
more widely known and used in day-to-day life, beyond the clinical and
counselling professions.
Hopefully this page explains Erikson's psychosocial theory in
reasonable simple terms. I'm always open to suggestions of
improvements, especially for a challenging and potent area like this
one.
I recommend for more detail you see the wonderful materials created
by Professor George Boeree of the Shippensburg (Pennsylvania)
University Psychology Department, and specifically George Boeree's
Erikson theory explanation.
Or read any of Erikson's books - they are very accessible and rich in
ideas, and they do have a strong resonance with much of what we face
in modern life.
Sources:
596
WWW.BAREFOOTGUIDE.ORG
The Art of Counselling / De Kunst van het Counselen
© Copyright Owner:
Academy for Counselling and Coaching - The
Netherlands - Paul van Schaik
http://www.businessballs.com/erik_erikson_psychosocial_theory.htm
See www.businessballs.com/aboutus.htm for more details about the
use of this material. See for the separate terms and conditions for the
Businessballs Community. Please retain this notice on all copies. ©
alan chapman 1995-2012
597
3.24 THE DRAMA TRIANGLE
The Drama Triangle is a model of dysfunctional social interaction,
created by psychotherapist Stephen Karpman. Each point on the
triangle represents a common and ineffective response to conflict, one
more likely to prolong disharmony than to end it.
Rescuer Persecutor
Victim
Participants in a drama triangle create misery for themselves and
others. The goal is to transform this lose-lose situation and create a
more positive outcome for everyone.
Each player in this particular mind game begins by assuming one of
three archetypical roles: Victim, Rescuer, or Persecutor.
• Victims are helpless and hopeless. They deny responsibility for their
negative circumstances, and deny possession of the power to change
them. They do less than 50%, won’t take a stand, act “super-sensitive”,
wanting kid glove treatment, and pretend impotence and
incompetence.
598
• Rescuers are constantly applying short-term repairs to a Victim’s
problems, while neglecting their own needs. They are always working
hard to “help” other people. They are harried, tired, and often have
physical complaints. They are usually angry underneath and may be a
loud or quiet martyr in style. They use guilt to get their way.
• Persecutors blame the Victims and criticize the enabling behavior of
Rescuers, without providing guidance, assistance or a solution to the
underlying problem. They are critical and unpleasant and good at
finding fault. They often feel inadequate underneath. They control with
threats, order, and rigidity. They can be loud or quiet in style and
sometimes be a bully.
Players sometimes alternate or “switch” roles during the course of a
game. For example, a Rescuer pushed too far by a Persecutor will
switch to the role of Victim or counter-Persecutor. Victims depend on a
savior, Rescuers yearn for a basket case and Persecutors need a
scapegoat.
While a healthy person will perform in each of these roles occasionally,
pathological role-players actively avoid leaving the familiar and
comfortable environment of the game. Thus, if no recent misfortune has
befallen them or their loved ones, they will often create one. In each
case, the drama triangle is an instrument of destruction. The only way
to “escape” the Drama Triangle is to function as an “adult” and not
participate in the game.
How the game is played
A good example of the game could be this fictitious argument between
John and Mary, a married couple. Sometimes the Rescuer’s point seems
calm and even reasonable. If the words placate, soothe, calm, explain or
justify, it can be considered a Rescuer response--it is an attempt to
move the other person from their position.
John: I can't believe you burnt dinner! That's the third time this month!
(P)
599
Mary: Well, little Johnny fell and skinned his knee, it burned while I was
busy getting him a bandage. (R)
John: You baby that boy too much! (P)
Mary: You wouldn't want him to get an infection, would you? I'd end up
having to take care of him while he was sick. (V)
John: He's big enough to get his own bandage. (R)
Mary: I just didn't want him bleeding all over the carpet. (R)
John: You know, that's the problem with these kids! They expect you to
do everything! (R)
Mary: That's only natural, honey, they are just young. (R)
John: I work like a dog all day at a job I hate... (V)
Mary: Yes, you do work very hard, dear. (R)
John: And I can't even sit down to a good dinner! (V)
Mary: I can cook something else, it won't take too long. (R)
John: A waste of an expensive steak! (P)
Mary: Well maybe if you could have hauled your ass out of your chair
for a minute while I was busy, it wouldn't have gotten burned! (P)
John: You didn't say anything! How was I supposed to know? (P)
Mary: As if you couldn't hear Johnny crying? You always ignore the
kids! (P)
John: I do not, I just need time to sit and relax and un