Theories_of_Personality 7th Ed Feist

Feist−Feist: Theories of

Personality, Seventh

Edition

II. Psychodynamic

Theories

4. Jung: Analytical
   Psychology

© The McGraw−Hill^137

Companies, 2009

As might be expected, results showed that as a group, the sample was over-
represented by the Thinking (75%), Introversion (57%), and Judging (56%) types
and was almost evenly split on Intuitive-Sensing (51% Sensing). More importantly,
students who withdrew from the course had high scores on the Extraversion and
Feeling scales, with 96% of the dropouts scoring high on at least one of those scales.
Interestingly, personality type was not related to course grades. In addition, Thomas
et al. found that students who were most likely to drop out were exactly the opposite
types of those who were least likely to enter engineering to begin with. This result
supports the congruency or fit theory of persons and organizations, which states that
those who do best in certain professions are those whose personality type matches
closest with those already in the profession (Schneider, 1987).

Critique of Jung

Carl Jung’s writings continue to fascinate students of humanity. Despite its subjec-
tive and philosophical quality, Jungian psychology has attracted a wide audience of
both professional and lay people. His study of religion and mythology may resonate
with some readers but repel others. Jung, however, regarded himself as a scientist
and insisted that his scientific study of religion, mythology, folklore, and philosoph-
ical fantasies did not make him a mystic any more than Freud’s study of sex made
Freud a sexual pervert (Jung, 1975).
Nevertheless, analytical psychology, like any theory, must be evaluated against
the six criteria of a useful theory established in Chapter 1. First, a useful theory must
generate testable hypothesesand descriptive research,and second, it must have the
capacity for either verification or falsification.Unfortunately, Jung’s theory, like
Freud’s, is nearly impossible to either verify or falsify. The collective unconscious,
the core of Jung’s theory, remains a difficult concept to test empirically.
Much of the evidence for the concepts of archetype and the collective uncon-
scious has come from Jung’s own inner experiences, which he admittedly found dif-
ficult to communicate to others, so that acceptance of these concepts rests more on
faith than on empirical evidence. Jung (1961) claimed that “archetypal statements
are based upon instinctive preconditions and have nothing to do with reason; they are
neither rationally grounded nor can they be banished by rational argument” (p. 353).
Such a statement may be acceptable to the artist or the theologian, but it is not likely
to win adherents among scientific researchers faced with the problems of designing
studies and formulating hypotheses.
On the other hand, that part of Jung’s theory concerned with classification and
typology, that is, the functions and attitudes, can be studied and tested and have gen-
erated a moderate amount of research.Because the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator has
yielded a great number of investigations, we give Jung’s theory a moderate rating on
its ability to generate research.
Third, a useful theory should organize observationsinto a meaningful frame-
work. Analytical psychology is unique because it adds a new dimension to personal-
ity theory, namely, the collective unconscious. Those aspects of human personality
dealing with the occult, the mysterious, and the parapsychological are not touched
on by most other personality theories. Even though the collective unconscious is not
the only possible explanation for these phenomena, and other concepts could be

Chapter 4 Jung: Analytical Psychology 131