What Determines Young Academics’ Choice of Research Topic? The Role of Values, Beliefs, Self-Actualization, and the Subconscious Mind

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

FEDERAL STATE AUTONOMOUS EDUCATIONAL

INSTITUTION OF TERRITORY EDUCATION

«NATIONAL RESEARCH UNIVERSITY HIGHER SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS»

FACULTY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES

DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY

Master's Program «Applied Social Psychology»

What Determines Young Academics' Choice of Research Topic? The Role of Values, Beliefs, Self-Actualization, and the Subconscious Mind

Master Thesis

Mohammadghasemi Yasin

Moscow, 2020

Abstract

There is a huge variety of research titles on accredited journals such as Scimago Journal & Country Rank, yet almost no research addressed the question why and how such research titles emerge, the following study attempted to understand the psychological factors behind a researcher's choice of research topic. Our hypothesis is that values, beliefs and self-actualization plus unconscious motives (Freudian psychoanalytical thinking) in every researcher shape their choice of topic. 10 students from social psychology master's program of HSE, Moscow were interviewed. The data were interpreted using thematic analysis and three themes were identified: later experiences and challenges in life, personality traits and value, and childhood experiences. Having taken into consideration the roles of values, beliefs, self-actualization and unconscious motives (Freudian psychoanalytical thinking), based on our results it can be contended that values, beliefs, self-actualization shape ones' choice of research topic, however, the classical psychoanalytical line of thinking of Sigmund Freud did not emerge. Also, since we have touched upon psychoanalysis and psychodynamics, it is worthy to mention that our findings are closer to the line of thinking of Erikson (1998) and his stages of psychosocial development (1998). However, his theory of psychosocial developments is rigidly and necessarily linked to a particular stage of life but in accordance to our finding these developments are quite dynamics through different stages of life.

Keywords: values; beliefs; self-actualization; psychoanalysis; choice of research topic; qualitative study

Introduction

Humans can be said to be curious by nature and this trait propels them to investigate their surroundings and gain as much information as possible to benefit their own self-development. This rudimentary tenet is ubiquitous in human lives ranging from watching TV, reading newspaper, doing research, and so forth; all of these activities feed people's desire to know more and to develop their own selves. Along the way, humans adopt values and beliefs which add to their complexity and shape their personal world (Schwartz, 1992, 1994; Holland, 1962, 1973); and even it goes deeper in that humans might be unaware of how these motives are affecting every single decision they make in our study we are working on Freudian psychoanalytical thinking - oedipal and Electra complex (Freud, 1920, 1923).

Moreover, in line with the nature of what is discussed so far, there is the phenomenon of self-actualization. Driven by the afore-mentioned motives, humans are on the way to their “becoming” or in Maslow's term “self- actualization” which in itself encompasses important aspects of human lives such as goal setting, career, and self-expression, to name a few (Maslow, 1970; Kashdan & Silvia, 2012; Kidd & Hayden, 2015). Even, the topic of curiosity-driven learning and self-actualization, in the light of evolutionary psychology, can go as deep as explaining the behavior of infants actively selecting their own experiences; that is, even during the first months of infancy experiences do not simply happen to individuals, humans are somehow actively involved in their experiences (Piaget, 1952; Thelen, 1994). While researchers and thinkers have immensely contributed to investigate curiosity, human values, unconscious mind and self-actualization there is one interesting question that apparently has not been addressed extensively yet: “Which social and psychological factors shape the research agendas of the researcher himself/herself?”

Science is enormously dependent on our researchers. However, there hasn't been enough studies on how researchers are psychologically motivated. Our researchers and scientist will try to shed light on the unknown, but we need to know which part of this unknown researchers want to bring into light. This issue can have important ramifications for the field of social psychology. For example, why psychology professor Philip Zimbardo (1971) came up with the idea of Stanford prison experiment or why psychologist Stanley Milgram (1963) conducted such series social psychology experiments. And last but not least, why a journal such as personality and social psychology review, one of the most accredited journals (Scimago Journal & Country Rank, 2018) is replete with a variety of topics ranging from mortality to survival regarding social psychological dynamics of human societies. To which direction is the field of social psychology going?

That's why understanding the psychological and sociological dynamics of a researcher's choice of topic is imperative. Since the proposed area of research is broad and has not been attended much, this thesis narrows it down to “What determines young academics' choice of research topic?” Therefore, to shed more light on this rather vague area and answer the aforementioned question the current research is going to conduct a qualitative interview study among social psychology master students at Higher School of Economics in Moscow, Russia, to explore the role of values, beliefs, self-actualization, and the unconscious mind in their choice of research topic.

Our hypothesis is that values, beliefs and self-actualization plus subconscious motives (Freudian psychoanalytical thinking) in every researcher shape their choice of topic.

Literature Review and Theoretical Background

Curiosity is a fundamental part of human activity, that in everyday life one has been almost ignorant of it. Consider, just how much time people spend on searching for information, it could be listening to news or music; browsing the Internet; reading books or research or even engaging in activities such as eating, reproducing, and basic survival. The desire for information even drives a large part of the larger economy (Kidd et al., 2015).

William James, philosopher and psychologist, called curiosity ``the impulse towards better cognition,' `which means that you want to understand what you do not "(James, 1899). He stated that it actually drives children to new objects that are ' `bright, vivid, startling.' `This definition of curiosity leads us to a' `higher, more intellectual form''--an urge to more scientific and philosophical knowledge. Psychologist educators G. Stanley Hall and Theodate L. Smith (1903) have led some of the earliest experimental work on curiosity development by collecting questionnaires and child biographies from their mothers on interest and curiosity development. From these data, they describe the progression of children through four stages of development, beginning with' `passive staring' `in the second week of life through ``curiosity proper'' at around the fifth month.'

The history of animal curiosity studies is almost as long as the history of human curiosity study. For example, Ivan Pavlov wrote to novel stimuli (which he called the “what-is-it?” reflex) as a form of curiosity about the spontaneous orienting behavior in dogs (Pavlov, 1929). Exploratory behavior in animals started to fascinate psychologists in the mid-20th century, partly due to the challenges of integrating it into strict behavioral approaches (Tolman, 1948). Some behaviorists considered curiosity as a fundamental drive, effectively relinquishing a direct cause (Pavlov, 1929).

Even as behaviorism declined in popularity, this stratagem proved helpful. Harry Harlow, as an instance, held this view--that infant rhesus monkeys prefer a soft, surrogate mother's company over a bare wire mother. Harlow referred to curiosity as a fundamental drive ' `manipulation motive''--that steers organisms to participate in puzzle-solving behavior that does not involve tangible reward (Harlow & McClearn, 1954).

A common contemporary view of curiosity is that it is a particular form of searching for information distinguished as an internal motivation (Loewenstein, 1994; Oudeyer & Kaplan, 2007). Curiosity is an intrinsic drive from this point of view, while information-seeking is more of a drive that can be intrinsic or extrinsic. An example of an extrinsic type of information-seeking is paying a nominal price to know the result of a gamble to increase possible profit. In other words, contexts where agents seek information for strategic reasons immediately are not considered curiosity. While this definition is logically appealing, it is accompanied by some issues. As an instance, knowing whether a decision-maker is intrinsically or extrinsically motivated is often difficult for an observer. For example, animals and preverbal children cannot tell us why they are doing what they are doing and can work under biased theories about their environment structure or some other unknown cognitive limitations. Consider a child who chooses between a safe and a risky door (Butler, 1953). Should we call her curious or just risk-seeking if the child chooses the risky option? For the moment, therefore, we are favoring the rough and ready formulation of curiosity as an information drive state.

Although information is undefinable, any organism with the ability to make use of it will have a sort of advantage. The benefits can help now or in the future; a learning system is required for further benefits though. Therefore, not surprisingly, motivating learning is the most popular theory about the function of curiosity. George Freud Loewenstein defined curiosity as ``a cognitive induced deprivation that arises from the perception of a gap in knowledge and understanding'' (Loewenstein, 1994). The information gap theory of Loewenstein maintains that curiosity works like other drive states, such as hunger, which more or less motivates eating. Based on this theory, Loewenstein tends to suggest that a small amount of information is used as a dose of priming, which increases curiosity considerably. Information consumption is rewarding, but eventually there is satiation when enough information is received further curiosity will be reduced. A recent study by Kang et al. (2008) supports the idea of Loewenstein.

They found that curiosity about answering a trivia question is a confidence function in U-shaped knowledge of that answer. Decision-makers were less curious when they had no idea and were highly confident about the answer. When they had some idea about the answer, they were most curious but lacked confidence. Under these circumstances, they were so compelled to know the answer that they were even interested in paying for the information even though after the session curiosity could have been satiated for free.

Simple organisms also trade off information for reward. Even though their information-seeking behavior is not typically categorized as curiosity, their neural systems' simplicity renders them to be proper for studies which might help us to understand the foundations of curiosity. For example, C. Elegans is a roundworm with 302 neurons in its nervous system that actively seeks for food, mostly bacteria. It first explores locally (for about 15 minutes) when placed on a new patch, then adjusts strategies abruptly and makes large, directed movements in a new direction (Calhoun, Chalasani, & Sharpee, 2014). This strategy of searching is more advanced and beneficial than just moving towards food scents or guessing where food might be. Instead, since it provides information, it will eventually lead to better long-term reward. While computationally difficult, this behavior is not too difficult for worms.

Curiosity and Its Ramification for Researchers

Although at the face of its human curiosity is akin to the same phenomenon in primates and even worms in terms of seeking information in light of evolutionary psychology, behavioral patterns are deemed to be more complicated especially when it comes to how curiosity motivates in academia. Researchers are in a way in the frontline of the species, investigating the world around us and trying to amass as much knowledge as possible. Therefore, it is of huge significance to understand how this evolutionary phenomenon called curiosity motivates them in their information-seeking behavior and what are the other factors involved in academia that directs curiosity. An interesting paper, which tries to solve this puzzle, has been published by by Lam (2010). This paper contends that continued discussions of changing work norms due to the interaction between university and industry, and its implications for commercialization needs attention (Smith & Powell, 2001). There is a growing concern about academics being dragged by the ethos of commercialism. Critics of the entrepreneurial paradigm view academics as “promoters and victims” of commercialization (Jacob, 2003) who internalize the `intrinsic value of money' under the system of academic capitalism of knowledge (Slaughter, 2001; Slaughter & Rhoades, 2004).

In their analysis of the 'new school' entrepreneurial scientist, proponents of the entrepreneurial university (Clark, 1998) also emphasize the for-profit motive. Although there is adequate evidence of increased academic involvement in commercial activities such as patenting and spin-off business formation (D'Este & Patel, 2007). It remains undiscovered whether this demonstrates the growth of a uniform general category of business scientists guided by a common motive. This thesis discusses the diversity of the motives of scientists to engage in business activities and how their values and beliefs about the relationship between science and business influence this. It uses an approach to social psychology and underlines the complex mix of personal motives, including social and intrinsic aspects and the underlying business behavior of scientists.

For scientists the aim is to prioritize discovery by firstly communicating an advancement in knowledge in the traditional `Mertonian' world of scientific research (Merton, 1957, 1973). The award of the scientific community is recognition. Peer recognition by way of publications, quotations and awards, namely the `ribbon,' is the simple form of extrinsic (or social) reward in science from which other extrinsic rewards can be deduced, such as career progression, wage increases, and wider access to research resources. In addition to these extrinsic rewards, scientists are also persuaded by the intrinsic fulfillment of doing research by solving the `puzzle,' while creative activity is the reward (Hagstrom, 1965). However, some economists have presumed that scientists are also interested in money, the `gold,' like so many other economic agents (Levin & Stephan, 1991). More recently, many authors claim that the growth of entrepreneurial science has ushered science and business reward mechanisms nearer together, leading to an increased number of academics wanting to `cash in' on their stature by using the `ribbon' to exchange for `gold' (Stephan & Everhart, 1998). This can probably undermine the reputational reward system and compromise one of the scholarly science's fundamental institutional aspects (Bok, 2003).

The aforementioned study on what motivates researchers (Lam, 2013) takes on a wider and psychologically deeper notion of motivation to integrate both its extrinsic and intrinsic aspects. It uses the three notions of `gold' (financial rewards), `ribbon' (reputation and career rewards) and `puzzle' (intrinsic satisfaction) (Stephan & Levin, 1992) to investigate the complex mixture of motives that drive scientists' behavior. The analytical structure is based on motivation theories in social psychology, in particular the theory of self-determination (SDT) (Deci & Ryan, 2000). That considers the behavioral motives of human beings and their reactions to various kinds of rewards are influenced by the degree of commonality between their personal values and those undergirding the activity. Individuals can then be motivated to various degrees extrinsically or intrinsically in pursuing an activity depending on how much they have internalized the associated values and regulatory systems. Self-determination is a critical factor that distinguishes intrinsically motivated from externally regulated behavior, according to social psychologists. This directs attention in the motivational process to the individual agency as actors yearn through deliberate behaviors to attain valued results.

The empirical study presented in the paper includes 36 independent interviews and a survey sample of 735 academic researchers from five leading UK research universities. It concentrates on two main issues. First, what is the relative value of the commercial pursuits of `gold,' `ribbon,' and `puzzle' as motivators of scientists? Second, how varies the relative value of these motivators among scientists based on their attitudes and beliefs about the relationship between science and business? It adopts a mixed-method approach that combines qualitative and quantitative methods related to the same sample as two-thirds of the interviewed responded to the survey as well. This allows the findings to be cross-validated and deepens the study insights.

The result of the study indicates that the vast majority of scientists are motivated by the `ribbon'-type traditional rewards, using commercialization assets in order to collect resources for their research. Personal monetary gain, while not insignificant, is regarded by a much smaller number of scientists as important. More importantly, as in puzzle solving, the intrinsic satisfaction derived from business engagement itself emerges as a central motivation prevalent among many scientists. Further than this, and according to their value systems, the analysis discovers considerable variation in the motives among scientists. The `traditional' scientists fervently adhering to the Mertonian norms are principally extrinsically motivated, using commercialization as a tool to support their desire for ribbon. By stark contrast, the `entrepreneurial' scientists identifying closely with the commercial ethos are intrinsically motivated in their commercial endeavors, whilst at the same time being motivated to gain monetary gain, the `gold.' Commercial engagement is a voluntary activity for these scientists from which they gain personal enjoyment and the gold is an essential part of their entrepreneurial accomplishment. Approximately half of the scientists involved in commercial activities can be characterized as `hybrids' between these two different extremes that preserve a strong commitment to fundamental core scientific values but also recognize the perks of commercial engagement for their career plans. In addition to the ribbon's extrinsic rewards, these scientists are also ardently intrinsically motivated in their commercial endeavors that seem to personally fulfill their intellectual curiosity and their willingness to do something good, socially speaking.

Despite the fact this study promises to look at the psychological factors behind the motives of a researcher, it did not go any deeper than the attitudes of researchers towards “gold”, “ribbon” and “puzzle”. The question therefore remains. What is behind these motives for “gold”, “ribbon” and “puzzle”. However, what we can use from this study to go further is mentioning personal values and beliefs. To enter this realm and better understand the value systems we possess it is helpful to explore the Holland Codes or the Holland Occupational Themes (RIASEC) and Schwartz basic human values.

Holland Codes or the Holland Occupational Themes (RIASEC) and Schwartz Basic Human Values.

The Holland Codes or the Holland Occupational Themes (RIASEC) pertains to a career and vocational choice theory, based on personality types, created first by American psychologist John L. Holland. Holland contends that career choice is a way of self-expression also he believes that his six-category scheme does not necessarily mean that there are only six personality types out there, however, if we consider that each person bears resemblance to each of these categories provides us with possibility of having 720 different personality patterns (Nauta, 2010). This theory provides us with the following categories which will be explained in details: Realistic (Doers), Investigative (Thinkers), Artistic (Creators), Social (Helpers), Enterprising (Persuaders), and Conventional (Organizers). RIASEC Personality types (Chris, J., 2016)

Realistic

They are also called doers who like to work with machinery, tools and animals. They are therefore well skilled to use and work with tools and equipment. They see themselves as being mechanical and practical as well. They see themselves as being mechanical and practical as well. A realistic is not a sociable and a person of the people. They often try to avoid social activities, such as speaking before a large crowd or teaching students.

Investigative

Investigative type likes the challenge of dealing with science or math rather than selling, marketing, or leading individuals. They have outstanding skills and knowledge of figuring out problems, which leads to their ability to find resolutions. They consider their love for science to be intellectual, accurate and scientific. They are also deemed thinkers because they love tasks that require research, observation, adventure, thinking, and medicine or academia.

Artistic

People with artistic personality, because of their desire to create, are also called creators. They often participate in theatre, dance, music, creative writing, art, crafts and other tasks which are either novel or non-structured. They have good creative skills and value. They often consider themselves to be expressive, independent and original.

Social

Social personality is also known as helpers as a realistic antithesis. Instead of working with animals or machines, they prefer to help people to achieve a particular goal. They are excellent in providing information, health care, teaching or guidance. If investigative types tend to tackle problems in mathematics and science, social personalities love to find solutions to social problems. Generally speaking, they are trustworthy, helpful and friendly.

Enterprising

Individuals with an entrepreneurial character are also called persuaders because they like to lead people and convince them. They excel in selling their ideas and things, but they tend to be not that good at analytical and scientific activities, as well as other tasks that require careful observation. They succeed in business, politics, or leadership roles because they are sociable, ambitious, and energetic.

Conventional

People with conventional personality, also regarded as organizers, are conservative and conscientious. They like working with numbers, machines, and records, as long as they are organized. They try to avoid vague and unstructured activities. In following a plan, conventional personality sees itself as orderly, organized and prepared. They hold great value for business success.

The existence of RIASEC types among a broad range of individuals, such as high school students (Holland, 1962), university students (Edwards & Whitney, 1972), as well as working adults (Rachman, Amernic & Aranya, 1981) has been supported from research. Holland (1973) believes that the types are broadly applicable, but recognized the effect of factors such as gender, race or ethnicity, age, and social class on career development. In accordance with the concept, research suggested some distinction among demographic groups in RIASEC score levels, with gender being the main differences (Betz & Gwilliam, 2002; Fouad, 2002). Men are more likely to score higher than women are on realistic-type measures, and women tend to score higher than men do on social-type measures (Fouad, 2002). Effect sizes for age, race and ethnicity differences tend to be fairly small, except that Asian Americans tend to score higher on investigative metrics than other Americans.

The enormous majority of new research on the theory of Holland (Armstrong, Rounds, & Hubert, 2008; Elosua, 2007; Gupta, Tracey, & Gore, 2008) concentrated examining possible matches of the RIASEC model for various groups. Much of these studies, but not all of them obviously, has shown that the circumplex structure of RIASEC is generally true as far as gender (Armstrong, P. I., Hubert, L., & Rounds, J. 2003; Darcy & Tracey, 2007), racial or ethnic (Armstrong et al., 2003; Darcy et al., 2007) and socio-economic status are concerned (Ryan, J. M., Tracey, T. J. G., & Rounds, J., 1996).

Generally, research documenting the existence of the RIASEC types does not necessarily mean that this is the only structure that characterizes people and environments. However, there is compelling evidence that congruence predicts choices made by individuals (Betz, 2008; Spokane & CruzaGuet, 2005) and persistence or stability in college majors and occupations (Donohue, 2006). Moreover, people who change jobs often try to switch to the career paths that are more in line with their personalities (Oleski & Subich, 1996). Meta - analysis studies have also confirmed that greater personal - environmental compatibility with RIASEC types is associated with positive outcomes, including job satisfaction (Spokane, Meir, & Catalano, 2000; Tsabari, Tziner, & Meir, 2005).

Therefore, the discussed studies on the Holland Codes or the Holland Occupational Themes (RIASEC), can have serious implications for research agendas of a researcher and that how the direction of his/her research are in congruent with his/her personality. Moreover, in order to broaden our prospective in this study, it is also helpful to discuss basic human values of Schwartz.

There are two core elements to the theory of basic human values (Schwartz, 1992, 1994). Firstly, it originally established 10 motivationally distinct types of value preferences that are assumed to be recognized by members of most societies, and embrace the different types of values that guide them. Secondly, the theory designates the dynamic relationship between these 10 forms of values. In other words, it designates which values are congruent and mutually supportive and which are opposed to one another and are likely to be in conflict. This theory describes values as desirable, trans-situational objectives that differ in importance as guiding principles in the lives of individuals (Kluckhohn, 1951; Rokeach, 1973).

The following reasoning was used to elicit a typology of the different features of values: in order to meet the challenges inherent in human existence, groups and individuals convert the needs and demands they encounter into concepts they can communicate and express them via the language of values. Values are, as a form of conscious goals, reactions to three universal criteria that must be met by all individuals and societies: the needs of individuals as biological organisms, the regulations for harmonious social interaction, and the requirements for proper functioning and survival of the group.

These three universal requirements resulted in ten motivationally subtypes of values (Schwartz, 1992). List 1 mentions these forms of values, classifying each in terms of its central objective and mentioning specific single values that chiefly represent it. The key to classifying the value relations structure is the presumption that actions taken in pursuit of each type of value have psychological, practical, and social ramifications that may conflict or be congruent with pursuing other types of value. Examining conflicts and compatibilities are likely to happen when people seek these types of values simultaneously suggest a potentially universal set of relationships between values. For example, the pursuit of values of achievement usually contradicts with the pursuit of values of benevolence; one's effort to gain personal success is likely to hinder actions targeted at strengthening the well-being of others who are in need of help.

The pursuit of benevolence and conformity values, on the other hand, is compatible; both involve behavior in a sort of way approved by one's group. And it is also congruent with pursuit of security and power, both emphasize uncertainty avoidance by way of controlling relationships and resources. (Table 1): The Basic Human Values Theory recognizes ten universal values that can be arranged into four higher-order groups. Each of the ten universal values (Table 2) has a central objective that is the motivator underlying it.

Table 1: Four Higher-Order Value Types

Table 2: Ten Universal Values of Schwartz

Figure (a) shows the overall pattern of conflict relationships and compatibility of value priorities proposed to structure value systems. Competing value types derive from the middle in opposing directions: compatible types go around the circle in close vicinity. The location of tradition outside of conformity indicates that these two types of values share one motivational goal-subordination on self, favoring imposed social standards. As demonstrated in Figure (a).

The structure of the total value is arranged into two sets of opposing higher-order value types. Positioned in two bipolar dimensions. Using these higher-order types, basic values are linked to work values. The first dimension-openness to change versus conservation-opposes values that highlights independent thinking and action and emphasize change (self-direction and stimulation) as opposed to values that underline self-restriction, preservation of tradition, stability, security, subordination. Self-transcendence versus self-enhancement, located in the second dimension, opposes values that underline the understanding and acceptance of others as equals and require concern for their welfare (universalism and benevolence) in contrast to values that reinforce the pursuit of one's success and dominance over others (power and achievement).

Figure (a)

Analyses of the responses to a questionnaire designed to evaluate the 10 value types in 155 samples from 55 countries lend significant support to the value theory axioms (Schwartz, 1994; Schwartz & Sagiv, 1995). The results of separate analyses of the congruence between the observed and theorized content and value framework in each sample imply that in the overwhelming majority of cultures, all 10 of the proposed value types are recognized. In addition, in the pattern of oppositions and compatibilities depicted in Figure 1, the value types are usually related to one another, positioned in two bipolar sizes, they organize values in almost all societies under study.

That means self-enhancing values are opposed to those of self-transcendence. Values highlighting openness to change are opposed to those of preservation of the status quo as well. These analyses also gave way to the conceptual meaning of each value within each sample to be assessed. The results demonstrate that 45 values have connotations that are cross-culturally congruent. These values can be used to structure indexes for the relevance of each of the 10 value types for individuals, to be used in group comparisons. This discusses the common issue of comparison of values whose meanings are not the identical among groups, an issue that many other values research does not actually address directly. Therefore, considering Schwartz basic human values, having taken into account its universalism can be a great asset for the present study to better understand how researchers are affected by these values.

Moreover, in the present study, it shall also be considered how the mentioned values and their interaction with the psyche of our researchers are in line with their becoming. That means to what extent the researchers see these values close to their vision of who they are and who they want to become. This concept, “becoming,” is better addressed by psychologist Abraham Maslow's theory of “self-actualization” (Maslow, 1934).

Abraham Maslow's theory of “self-actualization”

Psychologists argue that individuals are persuaded to actualize their potential in life. Self - actualization is normally debated in conjunction with Maslow's hierarchy of needs, which postulates that self - actualization is above four "lower" needs at the top of a hierarchy. During the mid-20th century, the theories of psychoanalysis and behaviorism were almost dominant in the field of psychology. These two perspectives, though principally very different, shared a common assumption that people are propelled by forces beyond their control. In response to this assumption, a different perspective emerged, humanistic psychology. The humanists tried to offer a more optimistic, agent-oriented perspective regarding human motivation. From this humanistic perspective, the self-actualization theory arose. Humanistic psychologists assert that people are driven by higher needs, especially the desire for self-actualization, that means to become what they are meant to be in accordance with their potentials. Unlike psychoanalysts and behaviorists who concentrated on psychological problems, Maslow developed his theory by investigating psychologically healthy individuals (Maslow, 1970; Compton; 2018; McAdams, 2018).

Within a hierarchy of needs, Maslow developed his self-actualization theory. The hierarchy is organized based on five needs from the lowest to the highest, as follows, (Maslow, 1934; Mcleod, 2018).

1. Physiological needs: needs for survival e.g. food, water, shelter, warmth, and sleep.

2. Safety needs: needs for safety e.g. security, stability, and assurance.

3. Love and belongingness needs: needs to belong socially, relationships with friends and family.

4. Esteem needs: needs to feel both (a) self-esteem because of one's own achievements and skills and (b) recognition and respect from others.

5. Self-actualization needs: needs to fulfill one's unique potentials.

"This tendency could be phrased as the desire to become more and more what one is, to become all that one is capable of becoming," Maslow said. Naturally, we all hold different values, desires, and capacities. "This tendency might be phrased as the desire to become more and more what one is, to become everything that one is capable of becoming," Maslow said. Naturally, we all adopt different values, desires, and capacities. As a result, in each individual, self-actualization is a unique process. Through artistic expression, one person can self-actualize while another will do so by becoming a parent and yet another by inventing new technologies. That is why individuals will have different paths in their life. One might become an artist, an engineer or an athlete and so forth. Maslow believed that due to the challenges of meeting the four lower needs, little number of people would be successfully self-actualized or they might be able to do so, but in a limited capacity. He suggested that individuals who can effectively self-actualize share certain characteristics. In his own terms, these people are called self-actualizers. Self-actualizers share the capability to attain peak experiences, or moments of joy and transcendence, according to Maslow. While anyone can experience such peak, these are more prevalent among self-actualizers. Furthermore, Maslow stated that self-actualizers are often quite creative, independent, objective, sympathetic, and are willing to acknowledge both themselves and others.

Maslow argued that some individuals are simply not motivated enough to self-actualize. To explain further, he distinguishes between deficiency needs, or D-needs, which constitute the four lower needs in his hierarchy, and being needs, called B-needs. Maslow argued D-needs come are related to external sources, while B-needs come from inside the person. Therefore, Self-actualizers are more motivated in comparison with non-self-actualizers to achieve B-needs (Maslow, 1934, 1970).

The self-actualization theory has been the target of criticism due to lack of empirical support and its assumption that one has to fulfill lower needs before self-actualization is possible. In the year 1976, having reviewed a number of studies exploring different aspects of the theory, Wahba and Bridwell investigated these criticisms. They were only able to find inconsistent scientific support for the theory, or limited support for the suggested progress via Maslow's hierarchy. Though, their research has backed the notion that people are more motivated by B-needs than D-needs, actually giving increased evidence that some individuals, in essence, may be more motivated to self-actualize than others.

Moreover, Tay and Diener's (2011) study examined the satisfaction of needs in 123 countries that hardly fit those in Maslow's hierarchy. They actually found that the needs were principally universal, but not reliant on fulfilling another's needs. For instance, an individual can benefit from self-actualization even if they have not fully met their belonging needs. Though, the study revealed that when the majority of citizens in a given society can fulfill their basic needs, they have a better chance to go after a rewarding and meaningful life. To sum up, the results posit that self-actualization can be achieved before all the other four needs are fulfilled, but evidently having satisfied one's most basic needs actually makes self-actualization so much more likely. The proof for the theory of Maslow is not conclusive, after all. Further research on self-actualization is needed to shed more light on this topic. The theory of self-actualization, however, considering its significance in the history of psychology, will retain its place in the realm of classical psychological theories. All in all, what we can actually harvest from Maslow's theory for our study, is that there might be a better version for individuals if they fulfill certain needs. And for this ultimate self to be fully actualized there is an interaction between the self and values one holds. To discuss further what motives are behind human behavior in contemporary psychology one of the most dominant figures is Sigmund Freud. Therefore, in the next section a closer look at his view on human behavior will be provided.

Sigmund Freud and Psychoanalytical Thinking

In Sigmund Freud's human behavior theories, unconscious motivation has a pivotal role. Most human behavior, according to Freud and his followers, is the result of impulses, desires, and memories that have been repressed into an unconscious state, which tremendously affect your behavior. Freud claimed that the human mind basically consists of a relatively small, conscious part used for direct observation and a significantly larger subconscious part that enormously dictates our behavior (Hilgard, Atkinson, Atkinson, & Smith, 1985; Freud, 1923, 1920) Retrieved from https://psychology.jrank.org/pages/642/Unconscious-Motivation.html

Moreover two important definitions proposed by Freud (1923, 1920) must be added “Oedipus complex, a term used by Sigmund Freud in his theory of psychosexual stages of development to explain a child's feelings of desire for his or her opposite-sex parent and jealousy and anger toward his or her same-sex parent,” and the later, The Electra complex is a psychoanalytic term used to explain a girl's sense of competition with her mother for the affections of her father. In this psychosexual development, girl is attached to her mother first. When she learns that she does not have a penis, she becomes attached to her father and begins to resent her mother who she blames for her castration." Hence, Freud believed that the girl then begins to identify with and copy her mother due to fear of losing her love. Dealing with the Electra complex leads to identification with the same-sex parent.

The term "Freudian slip" refers to these unconscious impulses being manifested. For instance, a person who says "I don't care if you smoke" and then immediately correcting himself saying "I mean, I don't mind if you smoke" might reveal his true feelings about you smoking the case of these two contradicting sentences is called a tongue slip; it is an expression of the unconscious feelings of dislike of the person. Freud also argued that the roots of most mental disorders are repressed memories and desires. Psychoanalysis, therefore, was developed as a technique to help patients become aware of their unconscious. This understanding of the causes of behavior and emotions would consequently help the patient alter the unintended behavioral aspects. (Stafford-Clark, 1997). In addition, the most enduring and important idea of Freud may have been that the human psyche (personality) has more than one component. Freud (1923) defined three parts for the psyche, Id, ego, and superego, all evolving at different phases of our lives (Mcleod, 2016; also check Freud, 1920).

The Id is the personality's primitive and instinctive component. The Id is the personality's primitive and instinctive component. It comprises of all the hereditary biological components, including the instinct of sex (life)-Eros (which contains libido) and aggressive (death) instinct-Thanatos. The Id is our psyche's impulsive (and unconscious) part that directly and immediately responds to our instincts. The newborn child's personality is all I d and it develops ego and superego later. The Id desires immediate gratification and we experience pleasure when this occurs, we experience `unpleasure' or pain when it is rejected. Reality, logic or the normal everyday world do have no influence on Id. Id works in accordance with the principle of pleasure (Freud ,1920), a drive which demands that every wishful impulse should be instantly satisfied, regardless of the consequences. The Id indulges in primary process thinking, primitively illogical, irrational, and fanciful.

The Ego is "that part of the Id that has been modified by the external world's direct influence" (Freud, 1923). The ego's task is to mediate between irrational, unrealistic Id and realistic the external world. It is the decision-making part of personality. Most often the ego works by reason while the Id is turbulent and totally unreasonable. The ego operates in accordance with the reality principle, working our realistic ways to gratify the Id, normally compromising or delaying satisfaction to prevent negative social outcomes. In deciding how to behave, the ego sees social realities and standards, etiquette and rules. Very much like the Id, the ego seeks pleasure and tries to avoid pain but, unlike the Id, the ego formulates a realistic strategy for gaining pleasure. The ego is often weak compared with unruly Id, and all that ego can do is to stay on, directing the I d towards the right path, and claim some credit at the end as though the actions were its own. The ego does not know right from wrong; something is good just when it attains its goal of satisfaction without harming itself or the Id. It indulges in secondary process thinking, rational, realistic, and problem-solving oriented.

The Superego is made up of two mechanisms: the conscience and the ideal self. Consciousness can penalize the ego by making it feel guilty. For instance, if the ego surrenders to Id desires, the superego can make the person feel bad through guilt. The ideal self is only a vision of how you should be, and represents career ambitions, how others should be treated and how to behave in society. The superego integrates society's values and morals learned from one's parents and others. The function of the superego is to regulate the impulses of the Id, particularly those forbidden by society, such as sex and aggression. It also persuades the ego to be observant of moral goals instead of just realistic ones and it strives for perfection as well. The superego can also reward us by making us feel proud through the ideal self when we act `properly'. The superego can reward us as well if meet the standards of the ideal self. If the ideal self has standards that are too hard to be met, then whatever the person does will be deemed as a failure. The ideal self and conscience are primarily based on parental values in childhood and how you have been brought up.

Also, another important topic to mention from Sigmund Freud's theories (1894, 1896) is defense mechanisms. Freud's daughter Anna (1936) formed and expounded on these ideas, adding extra ten of her own. Other psychoanalysts have also developed additional types of ego defenses. Defense mechanism are psychological tactics unconsciously used to protect a person from anxiety stemming from inexcusable thoughts or feelings.

We use defense mechanisms to protect ourselves against feelings of anxiety or guilt that emerge because we feel intimidated or our Id or superego becomes too imposing. They are not under our control of consciousness and are non-voluntary. Ego-defense mechanisms are deemed to be natural and normal. However, neuroses such as anxiety states, phobias, obsessions can develop when these mechanisms are overly active (Mcleod, 2017). Now the question is why we need defense mechanism. According to Freud life in itself is a challenge. The ego is at the center of some very powerful forces: reality; society as recognized by the superego; biological needs as demanded by the Id. When these are making contradicting demands on the ego, obviously you feel threatened, frustrated, as though it were about to crushed under the weight of everything. This situation might lead to a feeling known as anxiety, and its task is to send a signal to the ego that its survival, and with it the entire organism's survival, is in danger. Freud asserted that the ego utilizes a range of defense mechanisms to cope with conflict and life issues. Defense mechanisms function at an unconscious level and help prevent unpleasant feelings (i.e., anxiety) or make the individual feel better about good things.

Repression

This was Freud's first discovered defense mechanism, and possibly the most important one. Repression is deemed as an unconscious mechanism used by the ego to keep disturbing or menacing thoughts to become conscious. Often repressed thoughts are those that would result in the feelings of guilt rising from the superego. For instance, aggressive thoughts about the same sex parents are repressed as it is defined in the Oedipus complex. This cannot be a successful long-term defense because it necessitates forcing disturbing desires, thoughts or memories into the unconscious, where they develop anxiety, though hidden.

Projection

This entails that individuals attributing their own thoughts, feelings, and motives to some other person (A. Freud, 1936). Most prevalently projected thoughts on someone else are those that would cause guilt like aggressive and sexual fantasies or thoughts. You may hate somebody, for example, but your superego convinces you that this kind of hate is abhorrent. By believing they despise you, you can resolve the problem.

Displacement

This mechanism is the reallocation of an impulse (typically aggression) to a helpless substitute target (A. Freud, 1936). The target may be an individual or even an object that can serve as a symbolic substitute. Someone who feels unease at sexual desire for a person may replace it with a fetish. Someone dismayed by his or her superiors can go back home and beat a member of the family.

Sublimation

This is akin to displacement but occurs when we prosper in transforming our feelings into a constructive rather than harmful activity (A. Freud, 1936). Let's consider arts for example. Many brilliant artists and musicians had difficult lives and used music to express their emotions. Fixation at the oral stage of development, as an instance, can later lead to seeking oral pleasure as an adult by nail biting, or smoking cigarette. Fixation at anal stage can also lead a person to sublimate their urges with a pleasure in pottery, for example. Sublimation for in Freud's opinion is the core component of civilized life, all sublimated sexuality are the arts and science.