u07d2 Specializations Within Psychology

According to Schultz and Schultz, the schools of psychological thought include psychoanalysis, behaviorism,
humanistic psychology, Gestalt psychology, functionalism, structuralism, positive psychology, cognitive psychology,
and evolutionary psychology. Like the evolution of theories and theorists, practitioners decide to become a generalist
or a specialist based on the context of their experiences.
Describe your chosen area of specialization and explain your reasons for choosing the area of practice. Using the
text and two peer-reviewed as references, assess the strengths and weaknesses of the major school of thought in
psychology, as it relates to a population or topic of interest in your specialty area.

Response Guidelines
Respond to at least two other learners. Your responses to other learners are expected to be substantive in nature and
reference the assigned readings, as well as other theoretical, empirical, or professional literature to support your
views and writings.

My chosen specialization is General Psychology with sub-specializations in leadership training

and education. However, my long term career plan is focused more on teaching with an
emphasis on counseling/leadership training. The reason I chose this field of study is because of
my extensive background in counseling, teaching and training in various contexts and cultures.
My long term plan is to dedicate myself to teaching at the collegiate level, writing and a
training/mentorship role in a personal and small group therapy format.
Some of the psychological schools of thought that I fit my professional portfolio so far are
primarily derived from psychoanalysis, cognitive and humanistic psychology. More specifically
my sub-concentrations currently involve: cognitive and developmental theory, Gestalt therapy,
analytical and evolutionary psychology.
The scholar-practitioner often works within and across numerous disciplines and draws from
diverse conceptual, theoretical, philosophical, and psychometric tools to inform scholarly
practice and shape ones leadership identity in professional practice. My basic approach to the
various psychological schools of thought is holistic and synergistic in nature. In my view, a
conceptual understanding and working knowledge of various schools of thought is critical today
in our complex world to avoid a reductionist mode of therapy which risks the misapplication of
assessment strategies resulting in unfulfilled counseling and training outcomes. I prefer a
synergistic/polarity model that avoids isolated theoretical conceptions and emphasizes holistic
and inherently diatectical modalities comprised of psychological conceptions from several
disciplines (Broderick, P. C., & Blewitt, P., 2006). In eastern cultures the contrasts between good
and evil, creation and destruction, inhaling and exhaling, life and death etc. are connected and
bound together. They are polarities of one whole (Watts, 1963).
I also concur with (Rowan, 1998) "that transpersonal psychology investigates a spiritual
dimension which needs to be done justice to if we are to deal with the whole person." I
appreciate the new concept "linking" within the evolving, multi-dimensional Jungian healing
modality that is pioneering intentionality methodologies in therapy through psychic energy
applications of countertransference.

The earlier definitions of this emphasized that it could only be inferred from its surface
manifestations. Recently it has become known that other positive types of countertransference
are possible which allows the therapist to empathetically share an esoteric and subjective
identification, energy transference and archetypal discernment with the client.
The strength of a polarity model in training and therapy is enhanced when it is fully accessible to
the client. In this model we relate to three parallel levels of relationships that exist
simultaneously: the intrapersonal level of one's relationship within oneself, the interpersonal
level of one's relationship with others, and transpersonal level of one's relationship with the
universe. What is essential, particularly in analytical and Gestalt training applications is that the
therapist/trainer is aware of the importance of making the dialectical poles accessible in order to
hasten the spiral healing movement which leads to a new balance (Laub & Weiner, 2007).
One concern in the use of the holistic/polarity model is there is a need in separating the problem
into its parts with clients whose ego strengths are weak. Furthermore, application of this type of
model with individuals suffering from severe psychopathology may intensify comorbidity and
not be suitable. Because their self identity is not stable, neurosis can be aroused in switching
from one part of the psyche to another. In working with people who have experienced serious
insecure attachment status it is important to strengthen the pole of the resources before going
deeply into the problematic pole.
Anthony Rhodes
General Psychology Ph.D.
Reference
Broderick, P.C. & Blewitt, P. (2006). The life span: Human development for helping
professionals (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, OH: Pearson - Merrill Prentice Hall.
Laub, B., & Weiner, N.. (2007). THE PYRAMID MODEL - DIALECTICAL POLARITY IN
THERAPY. Journal of Transpersonal Psychology, 39(2), 199-221. Retrieved February 28, 2010,
from ProQuest Psychology Journals. (Document ID: 1464829601).

Rowan, John. (1998). Linking: Its place in therapy. International Journal of Psychotherapy, 3(3),
245-254. Retrieved February 26, 2010, from ProQuest Psychology Journals. (Document ID:
38518362).

WATTS , A. W. (1963). The two hands of God. The myth of polarity. New York: Collier Books.