The concept of crisis is an enduring issue in academic psychology. In its broad sense,
crisis refers to the individual facing uncertainty and threat in attaining important need or
life goal, being associated with a particular event, long-lasting life circumstances, or
particular developmental period (Freund and Ritter 2009; Herrmann and Brandstaetter
2013; Loughran 2011; Richardson and Loughran 2011; Sternberg 2006). The present
article confronts two perspectives on crises, the first one as embodied in current
resilience research and the second one derived from Erikson’s theory of human
development. In empirical research, both perspectives seem to have little overlap, one
dealing with trauma- and the other with everyday-related experience. We make the
claim that Erikson’s theory, despite its age, might offer us extraordinary insight into the
mechanisms behind individual’s abilities to cope with adversity and misfortune. Following,
we shortly describe the concept of crisis as addressed in Erikson’s theory vs.
the concept of crisis as addressed in resilience research, and provide rational for why
they are likely to be interrelated.
In the 1960s, Erikson (1963, 1968) presented a model of human development which
soon turned to a classical psychological theory. We are not going into details of the
theory because it is well known, but would only like to draw attention to Erikson’s
theoretical account to the concept of crisis. According to Erikson (1963, 1968, 1980),
human development is cast into eight stages.
The concept of crisis is an enduring issue in academic psychology. In its broad sense,crisis refers to the individual facing uncertainty and threat in attaining important need orlife goal, being associated with a particular event, long-lasting life circumstances, orparticular developmental period (Freund and Ritter 2009; Herrmann and Brandstaetter2013; Loughran 2011; Richardson and Loughran 2011; Sternberg 2006). The presentarticle confronts two perspectives on crises, the first one as embodied in currentresilience research and the second one derived from Erikson’s theory of humandevelopment. In empirical research, both perspectives seem to have little overlap, onedealing with trauma- and the other with everyday-related experience. We make theclaim that Erikson’s theory, despite its age, might offer us extraordinary insight into themechanisms behind individual’s abilities to cope with adversity and misfortune. Following,we shortly describe the concept of crisis as addressed in Erikson’s theory vs.the concept of crisis as addressed in resilience research, and provide rational for whythey are likely to be interrelated.In the 1960s, Erikson (1963, 1968) presented a model of human development whichsoon turned to a classical psychological theory. We are not going into details of thetheory because it is well known, but would only like to draw attention to Erikson’stheoretical account to the concept of crisis. According to Erikson (1963, 1968, 1980),human development is cast into eight stages.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..