Johannah Paola Escote

Here are some notes from our BS 188 class about the similarities and differences of counselors and therapists: Counselors - focus is on current client issues - relatively short-term Psychotherapist - focus is on more holistic & interdependent aspects of client's life - relatively long-term - may require specific licenses or certifications Common Ground - scope of clients - therapeutic goals - role of the counselor/therapist - may be facilitated to individuals & groups Note: both are diff. from a life coach because they aim to help finding solutions, but a life coach actually instructs clients what to do

Just recently finished writing an integration paper about Postpartum Depression for our Developmental Psych class. Here's the conclusion part. If you want to read the articles mentioned, you may refer to the references part. Conclusion Modern times is all about re-examining and reorienting personal beliefs, values, and traditions perpetuated in the society. It is about challenging prevailing systems of beliefs and believing in the tendency of people to go beyond what is dictated by society. Even in the basic unit of the society, people are beginning to accept the changing roles and the multiple roles that one must be able to play in the family. With this, research starts to explore topics including paternal Postpartum Depression. People get to be enlightened that the involvement and emotional investment of the father to his children is as important as the one given by the mother. The studies mentioned in the previous section focuses on the various effects of father-infant bond on the development of an infant. The researchers started by introducing the work of Schaber and his colleagues (2021), which served as a foundation for the fact that father-infant bond is more than quantity, but more on quality. For instance, the duration of paternal leave may have some effect on the emotional bonding, but it is not the sole indicator. The ability of the father to build relationships and communicate, and the psychosocial state of the father have a large impact as well on the infant development. This is proven as well in the next main article featured on the paper, which basically tells the reader how maladaptive behaviors that stemmed from untreated paternal Postpartum Depression can have a detrimental effect on the state of the infant. Some of the aforementioned findings were how fathers with higher anxiety scores tend to be less responsive to the needs of their infants, less sensitive, less warm and affectionate towards their infants and displayed more negative reactions when responding to the needs of their infants compared to non-depressed fathers. Meanwhile, the last main study mentioned all about the predisposition of a child who grew up with a father suffering from untreated depression to psychiatric disorders and how it can generally affect the cognitive development of the child (Eddy et al., 2019). Remember how it was mentioned that the psychosocial development of middle adulthood is all about projecting outwards, hence when the father had been projecting outwards the opposite of the values of trust, share, love, hope, and care that was formed during the previous stages, it will have a detrimental effect on the development of the infant. This is why parents should be able to resolve issues in their own development, so that it will break the cycle. Parents should be careful of what they project, and this is what true generativity means. In conclusion, society should start raising awareness and talking about postpartum depression in both mothers and fathers so both would have the courage to ask for help and to not leave it untreated. References: Eddy, B., Poll, V., Whiting, J., & Clevesy, M. (2019). Forgotten fathers: Postpartum depression in men. Journal of Family Issues, 40(8), 1001-1017. Koch, S., De Pascalis, L., Vivian, F., Renner, A. M., Murray, L., & Arteche, A. (2019). Effects of male postpartum depression on father–infant interaction: The mediating role of face processing. Infant Mental Health Journal, 40(2), 263–276. https://doi.org/10.1002/imhj.21769 Schaber, R., Kopp, M., Zähringer, A., Mack, J. T., Kress, V., & Garthus-Niegel, S. (2021). Paternal Leave and Father-Infant Bonding: Findings From the Population-Based Cohort Study DREAM. Frontiers in psychology, 12, 668028. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.668028

In assessing a client, arriving at a diagnosis, and making a therapy plan, it is essential to know about the 5 P's. What really are the 5P's? 1. Predisposing factors - biological factors that put the client at risk for a developing psychopathology - i.e., biochemical levels, genetics, illnesses, diet 2. Precipitating factors - the specific event/s or activity that triggered the current psychopathology - i.e., failing a test, being bullied before, death in family 3. Perpetuating factors - factors that have maintained the problem once it has been established - i.e., memories of the traumatic event, behavioral reinforcers 4. Present factors - systems that are operating during the time of distress - i.e., global pandemic, failing stock market 5. Protective factors - factors that prevent/lessen the abnormal behaviors - i.e., strong social & parental support

Any idea with what is gaslighting and how it can be possessed by people with personality disorders that includes being too charismatic and manipulative?

Have you heard/read anything about active and passive procrastinators? It turns out there are two types of procrastinators! I am an active procrastinator. I find it easier to do my tasks when the deadline is nearer because I get to think faster and articulate my thoughts better. Here's an interesting article by Zohar, Shimone and Hen (2019) that tackles and investigate the nature of active and passive procrastinators: Zohar, A. H., Shimone, L. P., & Hen, M. (2019). Active and passive procrastination in terms of temperament and character. PeerJ, 7, e6988. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.6988 CARE TO READ IT AND SHARE SOME THOUGHTS ON THE COMMENT SECTION?

Let's review together! The DSM-5 (American Psychiatric Association, 2013) had included the following are some of the mental disorders in the section of obsessive-compulsive related disorders: Which among these intrigues you the most? Care to share something related to the topic? Reference: American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.), 235-236. Arlington, VA.

I think of psychological testing as more quantitative or numerical-related than assessment because its purpose is to evaluate the condition of a person based on a standardized set of tests usually inform of checklists, rating scales, or questionnaires (Koscielski, 2021). These tests were created to evaluate test takers based on a well-researched, usually applicable for all or for the target group, and credible guidelines. Meanwhile, psychological assessments, based on my previous knowledge and on articles, were more qualitative in form for it may include narrative interviews, clinical interpretations, and patient's life history (American Psychological Association, 2013). Assessments like psychological reports were commonly used by psychologists and psychiatrists to come up with a diagnosis and effective treatment plan. From the meaning of the word "to test" and "to assess" we could actually understand the difference between these terms, one is to confirm something using a set guidelines that already gives a specific result, and the latter usually requires an interpretation from a trained professional and his/her clinical discernment. References: American Psychological Association. (2013, November 10). Understanding psychological testing and assessment. http://www.apa.org/topics/testing-assessment-measurement/understanding Koscielski, N. (2021, April 19). Psychological tests and measurements. https://www.lib.sfu.ca/help/research-assistance/subject/psychology/psychological-tests

I am a behavioral science student and we are recently discussing about Introduction to Behavior Change. We discussed about various treatment models and would like ask people here if what treatment models do they prefer and WHY? - Classical Psychoanalysis/Psychoanalytic Therapy - Adlerian Psychotherapy - Object Relations Therapy - Person-Centered Therapy - Existential Therapy - Gestalt Therapy - Behavior Therapy - Rational Emotive Behavior Therapy

Social psychology is defined as "the scientific study of how a person's behavior, thoughts, and feelings are influenced by the real, imagined, or implied presence of others" (Ciccarelli & White, 2012). By this definition, I observed that the involvement of what Bandura calls as different sources of influence when he formulated the Triadic Reciprocal Causation and how these three components interact with each other were all seen from the previous sentence. The statement directly mentioned the term behavior, defined Bandura's the Person by the mention of thoughts and feelings, and the Environment was related to the part the real, imagined, or implied presence of others. It means that this scientific study could be used as a reference and supporting argument for the points I am about to make and mention in the succeeding paragraphs. Covid-19 pandemic is a phenomenon that would forever be remembered in history because of how it greatly impact not only human beings' physical life but also emotional, mental, and social aspects of life. Tons of the events and experiences that happened during this quarantine are more likely to affect each person's life and perspective in many things. It will not only be written in history, but also within the mind of every people and the incoming generations as we developed new behaviors , beliefs, and unique personality characteristics. The span of time we spent at home made an impact to our social life so each of us cope by developing new behaviors and new traditions to suffice for this imbalance. All of us made some kind of adjustment, thus altering and shaping our behavior, our personality, and our environment. What is interesting in this once in a blue moon event is that how people were able to affect and influence each other's life through social media and other online transactions. News about different social movements, new government policies, and new trending hobbies reflect how human beings try to be efficient individually and as a group and how human beings mimic other people's actions by making their own mental representation of it. Political issues and the need for strict regulations made us realize of the importance of having a good leaders with good governance. It is important to note that the next paragraphs would be based on my own observations and experiences during the pandemic and some related news that supports it. The discussion would also focus within pandemic response in the Philippines only. Observational Learning What separates Bandura's work from the work of Freud, Jung, Skinner, Watson, Thorndike, and Pavlov is that he both gives importance to the ability of humans to learn through observation. For me, he connects Freudian emphasis on internal states of people and psychologists like Skinner's focus on the external world and the stimuli it provides to shape human personality. Bandura's social learning theory mainly revolves around the study of environmental and cognitive factors involved in understanding human behavior (McLeod, 2016). One way on how Bandura was able to explain his theory is by connecting the two factors using the process of observational learning. He points out that not all people must go under the same experiences in order to learn because there is another way of learning through imitating and following models of behavior or people who once went to a certain situation. Especially now that we are currently having a new normal and everything that we do seems like a shot in the dark. It is not practical to learn by trial-and-error nowadays because one mistake may put us at risk, that is why we often rely to learning through observation by listening on how other people develop new hobbies and follow new rules in order to cope with the current situation and be safe from COVID-19. Months of isolation, uncertainty and anxiety made us realize that we are not only battling with keeping our physical health safe, but also the state of our mental health. Several seminars were available wherein the different speakers tell their stories on how they develop new hobbies and how it improve their way of living and mental health. Listening to our inner voice would be very helpful and in this we would be able to know our self better, confront our problems and provide solutions to better our self, but there is a possibility to get drown with all these thoughts and became more of a problem than a solution. Side note, this made me remember about how Carl Jung spent years isolating himself from his other acquaintances, this helped him in a way that he was able to get in touch with his different persona, but this event also made him almost get lost on all of his thoughts that is why he needed to get out again and connect with other people (Feist, Feist, & Roberts, 2018). From this example, we can see that introspection is important, but it is also important to socialize, but we are in a quarantine so most of us developed other defense mechanisms in order to get out of our head. From making TikTok videos, to planting, and to cooking, all of these are few of the skills that we developed in order to cope and most of it were trending that is when we started to try it. Following the trends and imitating it are example of how human beings learn through observational learning and mass media is the key component for its more widespread influence. Of course, we do not follow everything we see online, we have our own standards and considerations to make. Social learning theory highlights the importance of a model that a person looks up to, then the observer would assess the model's characteristics and try to process which behavior to reproduce or not to reproduce, mostly based on whether the behavior was rewarded or not (Bandura, 1986). From the concept of modeling, we can see the concept of social psychology called social influence or how the behavior of one is influenced by the behavior of other people (Ciccarelli & White, 2012). On the next paragraphs in this section, we will be discussing about how Bandura's process of observational learning can be incorporated with the prevalence of social influence during pandemic. Bandura provided and specified the process often involved during observational learning. The first one is attention which involves the selection of a model usually with consideration to proximity of the model to the observer, authority of the model, and credentials of the model. Our attentiveness to a certain model often depends on how persuasive they are and whether their lives are seen by the observer as successful (reward) or not (often related to punishment). During this pandemic most of our attention were focused on the people we live with and the people we see in social media. These two groups prove that we often choose to imitate people near us and popular people because we are more likely to see them and observe them. Next step in observational learning is called as the representation or retention process, which is more related and involved to thought processes in the form of mental representation. Human beings do not simply receive information then copy it exactly as it is because the chosen model behavior is mixed with the observer's own interpretation, beliefs, unique characteristics, and moral standards. Rising of new form of entertainment popularized by so called vloggers were patronized by most of us, especially during the pandemic because most of us spends more than half of the day using social media. It is a new form of entertainment that includes day-to-day lives of the vloggers, them teaching new skills, propagating trends, and other themes. For some it even became a hobby and a source of income, it is like their own journal and way of influencing other people. Vloggers were even called by some people as influencers because they often do tutorials and share their views and opinions about different topics. The viewers as observer often imitate the trends like fashion statement, makeup style, dance choreography, and statements popularized by their preferred vloggers, but there were also people who are more careful in what they imitate, either they mimic it in their idea of a better and more respectful version or they call out these influencers if they do something offensive and too much. This action is an example of what Bandura calls as representation or retention stage in observational learning that proves human beings does not always receive and exactly imitate other people's behavior. If the chosen behavior passed through these two stages, it proceeds to behavioral production or where the behavior was given life by reproducing the processed version of the model's behavior. Trends during the pandemic like being a plantito/plantita which promotes being eco-friendly, developing a new hobby like cooking (like the dalgona coffee trend), honing and showcasing talents through TikTok videos were few of the examples of successful trends because it was a behavior that passes the moral standards of most observers. The last stage is called motivational processes which is characterized by the longevity of a behavior because we have a motivation on doing it over again. This processed version of a behavior learned through observation was proven in some way as effective and beneficial for the observer, thus he/she do it again to receive the same reward and satisfaction all over again. During the pandemic, most of us experience unfavorable events like losing a love one, losing a source of income, and losing one's property because of other disasters some of us encountered while in quarantine. As a solution, most of us find an effective way in which we can help other people and one of the most rampant idea is online donation, which most of us have seen in social media and is still popularized because there is this motivating aspect of being able to help other people and be satisfied about it. Other trends like following a dance trend gives the satisfaction of improving one's self and being acknowledged by other people. Most of the trend that involves developing one's skill will forever be embedded in our personality because it gives us motivation because of the good results that comes with it. Self-Efficacy Self-efficacy is often interchanged to self-esteem because of its relatedness and resemblance to it, therefore it is important to define and clarify first what self-efficacy is according to the social cognitive theory. Quoting Bandura's exact definition for self-efficacy "people's beliefs in their capability to exercise some measure of control over their own functioning and over environmental events" (Bandura, 2001 as cited in Feist, Feist, & Roberts, 2018). Through this definition we can see that the self-efficacy is more of a mental state and a cognitive ability. It is anchored to your ability to believe that you are capable of performing the action. People's efficiency are often higher the first time that they do something, but the belief of having the capability to do something again is often dependent on how the people around them reacted during their first performance. The result whether an action would succeed of fail relies on the interaction of the Person's self-efficacy, the Behavior, and the Environment. The role of the environment is to shape and give response to human behavior, and behaviors are often cradled in a society or environment depending on the rewards or punishment connected to it. The reference book taught us about the relation of levels of self-efficacy to the level of responsiveness of the environment and how it reproduce other human behaviors. The first combination is a person with high self-efficacy placed in a responsive environment, making the person more likely to succeed toward his/her goals. Let us take for example, the adjustment of our education system during the pandemic by means of online classes and providing separate modules for those who cannot attend synchronous classes. It is important to note that almost all students have the capability to study, which can be seen during face-to-face classes, but now it is not only a matter of self-efficacy, but also a matter of having a responsive or unresponsive environment. Students with great belief that they can surpass online classes by focusing and complying with the requirements and at the same time has a family that can provide a stable Wi-Fi connection, gadgets, and other other needs that make their study space conducive for them are more likely to be successful of completing his/her goals with a little less effort than students with unresponsive environment. But not all students from well-off or average family are safe from all the adjustments and challenges of the new normal. As a matter of fact, an article about mental health from World Health Organization ([WHO], 2020) says that most people from ages 15-29 are most susceptible to mental health problems and that the second leading cause of death in this age group is related to mental health. There was a shocking rise in numbers of people who uses the mental health hotline from 80 to 400 calls during the pandemic that is why the World Health Organization (WHO) and Department of Health (DOH) put their great effort in emphasizing the importance of promoting holistic mental health (WHO, 2020). It is good that people were starting to know the essence of asking help either as a precautionary or a solution, but the fact that there is an increasing number of calls can also mean that the stakes were too high and everyone is not only at risk of having COVID, but also having depression. Depression in relation to self-efficacy can be a possible result of low self-efficacy even in a responsive environment, which is the second possible situation provided by Bandura. Your parents may have the ability or is trying to response to your needs and different agencies were trying to raise awareness, but the fact that you have little or no belief that you can do something is a huge factor in doing task such as complying to requirements in online classes. As mentioned in the preceding paragraphs, mental health of the citizens should also be given importance during these time of pandemic. Most of us, tried our best to educate ourselves and be a better person than we were before. A great time of realization and introspection together with our previous setup (face-to-face classes) and other countries' faster response to COVID-19 makes us believe that we can survive this unfortunate event. As a student and as a citizen with an unresponsive government, it makes us put all our free time not only for doing requirements or studying, but also try to be more involve and to demand for change and support from our environment or government. For an instance, the official start of online classes were never easy because we know the risks, challenges, and problems it raises because of the lack of support and planning of the leaders of the country, that is why we demanded that no student shall be left behind and that the government to provide the support needed by these students. Still, online classes started and unfortunately there were still students left behind, thus some of us demanded for consideration and reevaluation and some of us just held on the belief that we have the capability to finish this school year. We have high level of self-efficacy or high level of belief in our capability to survive and comply, but we have unresponsive environment, so we know that the system is mostly to be blamed for these imbalance. The fourth situation provided in the module was a person with low self-efficacy situated in an unresponsive environment, which then resulted to apathy or feeling of helplessness. Students who chose not to continue studying during this academic year may have taken into consideration their physical and mental health and their family's financial ability to support their education. They may have low self-efficacy or lower belief in their capability to finish this academic year because of unfavorable circumstances. The government's failure to adjust and provide for these students and families forced them to feel helpless and to accept the fact that they were on their own and they needed to support themselves because the environment is unresponsive. Proxy Agency Human beings are also social beings, we may have our own individual agency, but there are things that we want to achieve that are only achievable with the help of other people, this is what Bandura calls as proxy agency. People cannot be in-charge or involve with everything, so things that we cannot have direct control with are often put in the hands of a proxy. Human beings usually put their trust with a proxy that were more likely help them to achieve their goal, usually a person who have the resources needed, has the mastery in the field, and has all the influence and power to assure that everything will be efficient (Bandura, 2001). The first few months of quarantine, no one was allowed to go outside aside from front liners, in return school and work were stopped to avoid the further spreading of the virus. Many Filipinos lost their source of income, making it hard for most families to buy the things they need and to pay for amenities such as electricity, internet connection, and water. As a solution each city governance came up with different ways in which they would be able to support the citizen's needs most of them provided ayuda to each family, started programs like a market on wheels, and limiting the amount of items bought by each buyer to avoid hoarding of necessities such as face mask, alcohol, canned goods, and noodles. This is an example of how proxy agency became very essential, especially nowadays, where we rely on our government to provide the needs that we deserve and we also depend on electronics and online services in order to achieve our goals and satisfy our needs. Due to lack of mobility, citizens started to rely on online services causing hyper eGrowth or the increasing demands in eCommerce, eServices, and eFinances (Cameron, 2020). We put our trust to the people in-charge in these online services to make the outcome that we are expecting. We chose to trust delivery agencies and seller in online markets in order to get the things that we need or want. The disadvantage of proxy agency such as putting our trust on these online services and placing our confidence on the government is that we are taking a risk just because we have no choice and these are the only people that could help us go through these unfortunate happening, therefore we choose to believe in their authority, competence, influence, and power to make things happen for us (Bandura, 2001). Collective Agency Collective agency is somewhat the same with self-efficacy, the difference lie to the number of people involve. If self-efficacy is the belief in one's capability to perform an activity, collective agency's efficacy is the belief that you are stronger as a group and as a group you can produce the results you are aiming for. Based on my own understanding, it is the mentality that you can achieve your goals as a team, therefore it is not about the achievement of one, but the achievement of all. Collective efficacy is more complex that self-efficacy because it is not only about believing, it is also about how you work as a group or the transactional dynamics within the group (Bandura, 2001). It is similar with self-efficacy also in a way that an unresponsive environment also makes it more difficult for collective cohesion to occur. Collective efficacy is not only about sharing the same beliefs, intentions, and skills, it is also about the members' contribution and willingness to sacrifice for the group. Bandura collected and compared different studies related to collective agency, and in this he found out that "the stronger the perceived collective efficacy, the higher the groups' aspirations and motivational investment in their undertakings, the stronger their staying in power in the face of impediments and setbacks, the higher their morale and resilience to stressors, and the greater their performance accomplishments" (Bandura, 2001). This statements, observations, and findings by Bandura about collective agency will be incorporated to the efficiency of our government and the collective efficacy of different groups in demanding for change and in fighting for human rights in our country, especially now during the pandemic where most politicians turn a blind eye to the needs of the public. In this section we will be discussing to groups with different views, but are supposed to be at work together in order to give solution to the rising problems in our society in relation to the country's efficiency as a collective. The first group is the government leaders of our country who have shared beliefs to "serve" the people. In the past few months, we're all a witness of our government slow response with regards to issues related to the pandemic and I personally think that our leaders were not working as a huge group, but as different small groups with different intentions and motivations. This previous claim is evident in how every city has different policies, some city officials were effective, some were not. Another thing is that some officials have contradicting statements in terms of implementations and in updating the public about their plans and solutions. There were also government representatives and speakers who feeds false information to the public and were completely insensitive with the needs of the mass. Now, if as a group they failed to prove that they were working toward one goal and one belief, it is also possible to say that they badly work as a group as well. Their lack of direction and lack of cohesiveness brought forth a new movement from a different group. This new collective composed of people with same motivation, shared beliefs, and a different kind of transactional dynamic, were a product of the unresponsive environment they were situated at. They were able to see their fellow citizens lose jobs, lose a loved one, and deprived of human rights, all because of a group, who once promised to put the citizens first before their own interests. These groups definitely face a lot of impediments and set backs, which boosted their morale and prompted them to have a stronger perceived collective efficacy. If most leaders failed to see the woes of the mass, the groups fighting for the rights of the citizens called out these leaders by shaking off these leaders' pedestals, therefore most of them were declared by the government as threat to the society's cohesiveness. Their shared beliefs were undeniable and stronger, but their transactional dynamics are still at work and they needed more manpower, not afraid to fight for the support and protection we all needed amidst the COVID-19 pandemic. Conclusion The COVID-19 pandemic is an enormous challenge not only to every individual, but also to our efficiency as a country. This event was able to put into a test every thing we believe at and the system's response in important matters. Through observational learning, we were able to choose the people to look at and whether they deserve all the accolades we gave them. We also learned on how to survive physically, emotionally, and mentally during this time by hearing and seeing other people's stories, strategies, techniques, and hobbies. This event not only improved our self-efficacy, but also put into hot water our so-called beliefs and resilience. It exposed not only our individual flaws, but our country system's slow response. Truly, we are not only a product of the society, but we also have our own human agency that is why we can think on our own how to survive, which people to trust, and which people to imitate. Aside from all of this, it is still proven that we are capable of being strong individually, but there are times where we need a proxy or people who can help us achieve our own goals, and events where we need collective agency as well. References: Bandura, A. (1989). Social cognitive theory. In R. Vasta (Ed.), Annals of child development. Vol. 6. Six theories of child development (pp. 1-60). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory: An agentic perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 1-26. Cameron, B. (2020, July 15). 14 Trends That Will Define Life in the Philippines During and After Coronavirus. Branding in Asia. Retrieved from https://www.brandinginasia.com/14-trends-that-will-define-life-in-the-philippines-during-and-after-coronavirus/ Ciccarelli, S., & White, J. (2012). Chapter 12 - Social Psychology. Psychology (3rd ed.). Pearson Education. Feist, J., Feist, G., & Roberts, T. (2018). Theories of personality (9th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education McLeod, S. (2016). Albert Badura - Social Learning Theory. SimplyPsychology. Retrieved from https://www.simplypsychology.org/bandura.html World Health Organization. (2020, September 10). DOH and WHO promote holistic mental health wellness in light of World Suicide Prevention Day. Retrieved from https://www.who.int/philippines/news/detail/10-09-2020-doh-and-who-promote-holistic-mental-health-wellness-in-light-of-world-suicide-prevention-day

MBTI is popular nowadays, to the point that it is seemingly now being used more often than zodiac signs to start a conversation with someone you just met. It is a good conversation starter indeed! But, it is important to know the repercussions on too much reliance on MBTI to understand one's self and other people. 1. What misgivings does the academic community's have regarding MBTI? Myer-Briggs Inventory Test's immense popularity in different organization is a reflection of human's curiosity and endless search for the self. From personality theorists using the psychodynamic perspective to personal theorists using trait-biological approach, all of them were interested in understanding the self and the reasons why we act and think like we do. Most of us have taken personality tests whether the one approved by most academics like the Five Factor theory to the one popularized in the internet basically for fun like the BuzzFeed. MBTI is also one of these tests patronized by most of us and in fact it is known globally to the point that the company, Consulting Psychologists Press (CPP) who has the publication rights, has numerous lawyers distributed from different parts of the world just to make sure that there is no plagiarism happening. The test instrument is not renowned in different organizations and companies, it was also given a thumbs up by the public. In the last line of this set of judges lies the academic psychological community, and the two articles by Cunningham and Pittenger summarizes the overall concerns and criticisms of the scientific field regarding the warmly welcomed test instrument by millions of people around the globe. Like what most psychologists discussed in the previous modules, human has this tendency to examine their whole life and to see whether they are living it to the fullest and most of them were more likely to take any self-improvement advices and theories on how to be the best version of themselves. Thousands of questions boggle the human minds and these includes queries related to their personality and whether they are doing things accordingly to their personality. We find security and affirmation whenever we were described positively by other people or, in this case, by a personality test instrument which provides a description of you based on your personality type results. The MBTI framework classifies the personality types along 4 pairs of categories with two choices each, one being a more dominant trait than the other. Adherents of the test instrument believes that every person fits one of the 16 possible combinations, and the scientific community find this troubling because of different reasons that were often implied by most of them, but not outspoken by these academics in the fear of offending their fellow colleagues. The first article by Cunningham (2012) about the history of MBTI, the proponents, and the business model behind that pushed the test instrument to be popular closely resembles the findings and criticisms of Pittenger (2005) in his more formal research about the misgivings of the academic community regarding the MBTI and about the need to be more analytical and cautious in applying the results of the said test instrument in a social setting. The difference between the two readings is in their focus and method in showing the disadvantages of using the test instrument without taking into consideration the background and the scientific studies performed in lieu of the test instrument. Both articles were interesting and eye-opening, the Cunningham's work is more of an informative essay consists of most statements by the people involved and her insights about the instrument, meanwhile Pittenger's review was more of like a formal research composed of different research papers that warns us about the possible problems when administering MBTI in a workplace and other institutions. The common tone in Cunningham's work is related to the aggressive marketing approach of the people behind the Myers-Briggs Inventory. It started as a revolution in promoting women's rights to have a job and experiences, which most women does not have during Isabel Myers' time, is a huge mountain that Isabel Myers and Katherine Briggs' MBTI was able to overcome. Unfortunately, as times pass by, the instrument still has its merits, but it mostly served capitalism by the people behind making billion dollars just by using a single test instrument that lacks empirical evidence and is not warmly welcomed by the academics. Adam Grant, a professor at University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School, provided his insights and observations and most of his statements was included in Cunningham's article. He was also able to enumerate few of the problematic issues related to MBTI. The first one is its questionable lack of supporters in the scientific community even though many academics were working for the CCP as board members and as consultants. For Grant, it seems like most people were too devoted to this test instrument, for several reasons like it was these people's source of income or because of MBTI's ability to empower and enlighten people. This almost "cultlike devotion" as described by Grant, is quite alarming because it seems like other people fails to acknowledge the disadvantages and flaws of the said material. They failed to question the fact that even the three prominent board members of CCP hasn't published any research about the validity of the test. Other reasons stated in Cunningham's article are related to the process on how MBTI was formulated, including its setting which is at the home of Isabel Myer's that implies its lack of any in-depth scientific research before creating the framework of MBTI. It is also just based on Carl Jung's personality researchers about introversion and extraversion, which compared to the Five Factor Theory of Costa & McCrae, is definitely a simplified and theoretical version. The MBTI was not directly supported by any scientifically published journals, but there was like a kind of a secret rule not to go against it because it is widely accepted by the public and it is the bread-and-butter of most academics as well. Even Dr. Brian Little, which was part of our discussion in the first module, also mentioned that no one tries to aggressively raise question about the test's reliability because it is like also going against the public opinion. The public does not want to be proven wrong or negative, that is one of the reasons why the Five Factor Theory fell behind the popularity of the MBTI. Though according to academics MBTI is "...about belief much more than scientific evidence" (Cunningham, 2012). The biggest problem is its connection with business, just to make more money out of it, the company created over 800 products and services, trained leadership coaches, most of them does not even have a medical license or a formal education in psychology. Pittenger's research also posits almost the same concerns with the work of Cunningham. He focused on the fact that the appeal of the MBTI in the public was being more emphasized than the fact that it lacks empirical evidences and it does not promise as much as enthusiasts and promoters said so. For Pittenger, using MBTI as a component of employee selection process is understandable, but it is important to be careful in using it as basis and it should not be the only factor in accepting and rejecting employees. Pittenger was also able to cite other scientific research papers that was able to see inconsistencies between the claims of the promoters and the actual data gathered. He even questioned the connection between where the framework was said to be based because he find little to no connection between Carl Jung's theory and the MBTI's framework. He also tried to prove that the scoring procedure and the results should not be a determinant in judging a person's personality. We should be careful about using the results of the tests because it may cause short-term to long-term effects on the taker of the test, on the company who administered the test and on the credibility of the scientific community. For him the most problematic part is the dichotomous scoring procedure because it sends the message that a people could only be one of the two choices in the four different categories. Pettinger even cited other researches such as the work of Gardner and Martinko (1996). In their work, they concluded that their is a little connection between the MBTI and work-related behaviors, but they also stated that there were also inconsistent findings and that the methodology in administering MBTI has flaws and limitations. Bjork and Druckman (1991) followed by the work of Boyle (1995) also mentioned the problem stated by Cunningham, the lack of related studies and literature about the validity of the test results of MBTI and whether it is proper to use it as a counseling tool because they also found the methodologies insufficient. MBTI may promote equality among all types and it promotes the acceptance of individual differences, but as most personality theories and tests it is also susceptible to boxing people into a set of categories, and worse without any empirical evidence and without any well-researched framework. References: Bjork, R. A., & Druckman, D. (1991). In the mind’s eye: Enhancing human performance. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Boyle, G. J. (1995). Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI): Some psychometric limitations. Australian Psychologist, 30, 71–74. Cunningham, L. (2012, December 14). Myers-Briggs: Does it pay to know your type? Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/on-leadership/myers-briggs-does-it-pay-to-know-your-type/2012/12/14/eaed51ae-3fcc-11e2-bca3-aadc9b7e29c5_story.html Pittenger, D. J. (2005). Cautionary comments regarding the Myers-Briggs type indicator. Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research, 57(3), 210. Gardner, W. L., & Martinko, M. J. (1996). Using the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator to study managers: A literature review and research agenda. Journal of Management, 22, 45– 83.