Feist−Feist: Theories of
Personality, Seventh
EditionV. Learning Theories 18. Kelly: Psychology of
Personal Constructs© The McGraw−Hill^565
Companies, 2009or unfair social advantage. A change in events means a change in constructs only if
those constructs are permeable.
Arlene’s personal construct of independence versus dependencewas suffi-
ciently permeable to take in new elements. When, without parental consultation, she
made the decision to buy a used car, the construct of maturity versus childishness
penetrated independence versus dependenceand added a new flavor to it. Previously,
the two constructs had been separated, and Arlene’s notion of independence was lim-
ited to the idea of doing as she chose, whereas dependence was associated with
parental domination. Now she construed independence as meaning mature responsi-
bility and dependence as signifying a childish leaning on parents. In such a manner,
all people modulate or adjust their personal constructs.
Incompatible Constructs
Although Kelly assumed an overall stability or consistency of a person’s construc-
tion system, his fragmentation corollaryallows for the incompatibility of specific
elements. “A person may successively employ a variety of constructive subsystems
which are inferentially incompatible with each other”(Kelly, 1955, p. 83).
At first it may seem as if personal constructs must be compatible, but if we
look to our own behavior and thinking, we can easily see some inconsistencies. In
Chapter 17, we pointed out that Walter Mischel (a student of Kelly) believed that
behavior is usually more inconsistent than trait theorists would have us believe. Chil-
dren are often patient in one situation yet impatient in another. Similarly, a person
may be brave while confronting a vicious dog but cowardly when confronting a boss
or teacher. Although our behaviors often seem inconsistent, Kelly saw underlying
stability in most of our actions. For example, a man might be protective of his wife,
yet encourage her to be more independent. Protection and independence may be in-
compatible with each other on one level, but on a larger level, both are subsumed
under the construct of love. Thus, the man’s actions to protect his wife and to encour-
age her to be more independent are consistent with a larger, superordinate construct.
Superordinate systems may also change, but those changes take place within a
still larger system. In the previous example of the protective husband, for instance,
the man’s love for his wife may gradually shift to hatred, but that change remains
within a larger construct of self-interest. The previous love for his wife and the pres-
ent hatred are both consistent with his view of self-interest. If incompatible con-
structs could not coexist, people would be locked into a fixed construct, which would
make change nearly impossible.
Similarities Among People
Although Kelly’s second supporting corollary assumes that people are different from
each other, his commonality corollaryassumes similarities among people. His
slightly revised commonality corollary reads: “To the extent that one person employs
a construction of experience which is similar to that employed by another, [that per-
son’s] processes are psychologically similar to those of the other person”(Kelly,
1970, p. 20).
Two people need not experience the same event or even similar events for their
processes to be psychologically similar; they must merely construetheir experiences
Chapter 18 Kelly: Psychology of Personal Constructs 559