Describe how Adler’s theory of psychological birth order (the family constellation) shapes the family member.
Adler’s theory of psychological birth order: PCN 500 Grand Canyon Week 2 Discussion 1
According to Adler, what is the difference between biological and psychological birth order? Describe how Adler’s theory of psychological birth order (the family constellation) shapes the family member.
Read the “Case Study Analysis.”
Select one of the following theories that you feel best applies to treating the client in the case study:
3- Individual Psychology
Write a 750-1,000-word analysis of the case study using the theory you chose. Include the following in your analysis.
1- What concepts of the theory make it the most appropriate for the client in the case study?
2- Why did you choose this theory over the others?
3- What will be the goals of counseling and what intervention strategies are used to accomplish those goals?Adler’s theory of psychological birth order PCN 500 Grand Canyon Week 2 Discussion 1
Adler’s theory of psychological birth order PCN 500 Grand Canyon Week 2 Discussion 1
4- Is the theory designed for short- or long-term counseling?
5- What will be the counselor’s role with this client?
6- What is the client’s role in counseling?
7- For what population(s) is this theory most appropriate? How does this theory address the social and cultural needs of the client?
8- What additional information might be helpful to know about this case?
9- What may be a risk in using this approach?
Besides the course textbook, include at least three scholarly references in your paper.
Each response to the assignment prompts should be addressed under a separate heading in your paper. Refer to “APA Headings and Seriation,” located on the Purdue Owl website for help in formatting the headings.
Prepare this assignment according to the APA guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.
Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: Adler’s theory of psychological birth order: PCN 500 Grand Canyon Week 2 Discussion 1
PCN 500 Grand Canyon Week 2 Discussion 2
While there are many neoanalytic writers, they can be divided into two general categories. Some are objective positivist thinkers while others are relativistic/constructivist thinkers. Philosophically, what is the difference among objective positivist neoanalytic writers and relativistic/constructivist neoanalytic writers?
PCN 500 Grand Canyon Week 2 Assignment 2
Write a 75- to 100-word response to each of the following questions:
1- Why are counseling theories important to professional counselors?
2- What characteristics must an effective counselor possess?
3- How has psychoanalytic theory influenced professional counseling today?
4- How has neoanalytic theory influenced professional counseling today?
APA format is required for essays only. Solid academic writing is always expected. For all assignment delivery options, documentation of sources should be presented using APA formatting guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.
Alfred Adler “was the first to create a comprehensive theory of personality, psychological diseases, and psychotherapy as an alternative to Sigmund Freud’s views” (Adler, 1964, p. ix–x).
The impact of birth order for youth outcomes is one part of his broad body of studies.
According to Adlerian Theory, a child’s potential is influenced by birth order and the number of siblings.
Adler emphasized the significance of comprehending the “Family Constellation”:
“Imagining that children from the same family grow up in the same surroundings is a widespread mistake.
Of course, much is the same for all children in the same household, but each child’s psychic state is unique and differs from that of others due to the order in which they were born” (Adler, 1964, p. 96).
Individual results are influenced by both psychological and physical birth order, according to researchers.
“While academics have looked at the impacts of birth order on IQ, success, and personality,” they write, “many of these studies have insurmountable faults, and even the best work has produced poor or inconsistent results” (Freese & Powell, 1998, p. 57).
“Methodological challenges, the likelihood of very tiny effect sizes (if any), and the ambiguous theoretical status of birth position” are among the issues that arise (Stagner, 1986, p. 377).
In contrast to these findings, more recent research supports the importance of birth order as a factor related with various outcomes, particularly for first-born individuals.
Sulloway (1996), for example, looked into research that looked into why some people—for him, revolutionary scientists—rebel and produce remarkable advancements in their disciplines (i.e., Darwin).
He built a strong theoretical approach in his work on how birth order affects children’s outcomes within households.
According to Sulloway (1996), birth order has been unfairly criticized due to methodological difficulties.
To support the conclusion that “siblings raised together are practically as varied in their personalities as people from separate families,” he considers family characteristics such as age, gender, class, and wealth (p. xiii).
Sulloway then develops a complicated narrative that ties together biological and social sciences to demonstrate how family and birth order affect children’s results.
Other scholars, on the other hand, have stated that variation between siblings may be higher than variance across families in many outcomes, implying that much more research is needed to fully comprehend the complex family dynamics that do influence individual life outcomes (Conley, 2004).
Furthermore, Freese, Powell, and Steelman (1999) contend that birth order impacts on social attitudes that go beyond personal characteristics are minor.
“While we find no evidence supporting Sulloway’s theoretical assumptions, our findings cannot be seen as an indictment of evolutionary perspectives,” they write (Freese, Powell, & Steelman (1999), p. 236).
The impact of real birth order on numerous variables are examined in this research.
We acknowledge that Adler proposed that psychological birth order is crucial to understanding a subject’s assessment of their circumstances in a given context (such as the family) (Adler, 1937).
Understanding psychological birth order has been shown to be beneficial in studies; for example, one study looked at 134 school-aged children using the White-Campbell Psychological Birth Order Inventory instrument and found evidence that psychological birth order influences coping skills (Pilkington, White, & Matheny, 1997).
The White-Campbell Psychological Birth Order Inventory Instrument’s validity has also been noted in order to further observe that psychological birth order effects may overcome real birth order (Stewart & Campbell, 1998).
Other recent studies with college students have looked at family atmosphere and personality (Stewart, Stewart, & Campbell, 2001); lifestyle difficulties (Gfroerer, Gfroerer, Curlette, White, & Kern, 2003); and multidemensional perfectionism (Gfroerer, Gfroerer, Curlette, White, & Kern, 2003). (Ashby, LoCicero, & Kenny, 2003).
However, studies have consistently demonstrated that looking at a person’s true birth order provides useful information.
Eckstein (1998) reported statistically significant birth order research (but not psychological birth-order studies) in his evaluation of birth order articles from 1960 to 1999, and he offers some evidence for works that look at actual birth order.
According to his review, research has revealed personality variations among individuals in four primary categories: oldest, middle, youngest, and single (p. 482).
Individuals in families encounter different settings within the same family, as Adler proposed, and some of those variations can be attributable to birth-order variances (Sullivan & Schwebel, 1996).
In a study of ninety-three never-married firstborn, middle-born, and last-born undergraduate students, Sullivan & Schwebel discovered that their relationship-cognitions were consistent with Adler’s thesis (1996, p. 60).
Another study examined the effects of birth order on internal and external attributions in 154 students at a large southern university, finding that attributions differed by birth order for positive attributions (Phillips & Phillips, 1998).
In one study, 900 undergraduates were asked to find their birth order, their parents’ birth order, and their best friend’s birth order.
This study found that those with the same birth order were more likely to be romantically linked or have close ties with other people with the same birth order (Hartshorne, Salem-Hartshorne, & Hartshorne, 2009).