Personality Theories In Psychology: Albert Ellis

A serious kidney problem diverted his attention from sports to books, and dissension in his family (his parents divorced when he was 12) led him to work on understanding others.

At Ellis Institute He focused his attention on becoming the Great American Novelist He considered studying accounting in college; in making enough money to retire at 30 and write without the pressure of financial need. The American Great Depression put an end to his desire, but he managed to reach university in 1934, graduating in business administration from the City University of New York. His first adventurous foray into the business world was running a pants patch business with his brother. Together they looked in dress stores for all those pants that needed trim to also adapt their clients’ coats. In 1938, Albert rose to the position of personnel director of a new firm.

Ellis spent most of his free time on write short stories, plays, novels, comic poetry, essays and non-fiction books. By the time he reached the age of 28, he had already finished at least two dozen complete manuscripts, but had not yet gotten them published. He then realized that his future would not rest on fiction writing, so he dedicated himself exclusively to non-fiction, promoting what he would call “sexual-family revolution.”

As Ellis collected more and more material for a treatise called “The Case for Sexual Liberty,” many of his friends began to regard him as something of an expert on the subject. They frequently asked him for advice, and Ellis discovered that he loved the advice as much as he loved writing. In 1942 he returned to college and enrolled in a clinical psychology program at Columbia University. He started his part-time clinical practice for families and as a sexual counselor almost immediately after receiving his master’s degree in 1943.

By the time Columbia University awarded him his doctorate in 1947, Ellis became convinced that Psychoanalysis was the deepest and most effective form of therapy He then decided to enlist in didactic analysis and became “a brilliant analyst in the following years.” At the time, the psychoanalytic institute refused to train non-medical psychoanalysts, but this did not prevent Ellis from finding an analyst willing to carry out his training within Karen Horney’s group. Ellis completed his analysis and began practicing classical psychoanalysis under the direction of his teacher.

By the late 1940s he was teaching at Rutgers and New York University and was head of clinical psychology at the New Jersey Diagnostic Center and later at the New Jersey Department of Institutions and Agencies.

But Ellis’s faith in psychoanalysis quickly crumbled. He discovered that when he saw his clients only once a week or even every two weeks, they made the same progress as when he saw them daily. He began to take a more active role, combining advice and direct interpretation in the same way he did when advising families or sexual problems. His patients seemed improve more quickly than when using passive psychoanalytic procedures And this without forgetting that before being in analysis, he had already worked on many of his own problems through reading and practicing the philosophies of Epictetus, Marcus Aurelius, Spinoza and Bertrand Russell, teaching his clients the same principles that had earned him him.

In 1955 Ellis had completely abandoned psychoanalysis, replacing the technique with another focused on changing people through confronting your irrational beliefs and persuading them to adopt rational ideas. This role made Ellis feel more comfortable, since he could be more honest with himself. “When I became rational-emotive,” he once said, “my own personality processes truly began to vibrate.”

He published his first book in REBT (acronym in English for Rational Emotive Therapy ) “How to Live with a Neurotic” in 1957. Two years later he established the Institute for Rational Living, where training courses were given to teach his principles to other therapists . His first great literary success, The Art and Science of love (The Art and Science of Love), appeared in 1960 and has so far published 54 books and more than 600 articles on REBT, sex and marriage. He is currently the President of the New York Institute of Rational-Emotive Therapy, which offers a comprehensive training program and operates a large psychological clinic.

REBT (Rational Emotive Behavioral Therapy ) is defined by the ABC in English. The A is designated by the activation of experiences, such as family problems, job dissatisfaction, early childhood traumas and anything that we can frame as producing unhappiness. The B refers to beliefs (beliefs) or ideas, basically irrational and self-accusing that cause current feelings of unhappiness. And the C corresponds to the consequences or those neurotic symptoms and negative emotions such as depressive panic and anger, which arise from our beliefs.

Even though the activation of our experiences can be quite real and cause a great deal of pain, it is our beliefs that give it the label of long stay and maintaining long-term problems. Ellis adds a letter D and an E to ABC: The therapist must dispute (D) irrational beliefs so that the client can ultimately enjoy the positive psychological effects (E) of rational ideas.

For example, “a depressed person feels sad and lonely because he mistakenly thinks he is inadequate and abandoned.” Currently, a depressed person can function as well as a non-depressed person, so the therapist must demonstrate to the patient his successes and attack the belief of inadequacy rather than pounce on the symptom itself.

Although it is not important for therapy to locate the source of these irrational beliefs, it is understood that they are the result of “philosophical conditioning”, or habits not very different from that which makes us move to pick up the phone when it rings. Ellis would later say that these habits are biologically programmed to be susceptible to this type of conditioning.

These beliefs take the form of absolute statements. Instead of accepting them as desires or preferences, we make excessive demands on others, or convince ourselves that we have overwhelming needs. There are a wide variety of typical “thinking errors” that people get lost in, including…

• Ignore the positive
• Exaggerate the negative
• Generalize

It’s like denying the fact that I have a few friends or that I’ve had a few successes. I may elaborate or exaggerate the extent of the damage I have suffered. I can convince myself that no one loves me, or that I always screw up.

1. The idea that there is a tremendous need in adults to be loved by significant others in practically any activity; instead of focusing on their own personal respect, or seeking approval for practical purposes, and on loving instead of being loved.
2. The idea of certain acts are ugly or perverse, so others must reject to the people who commit them; rather than the idea that certain acts are self-defensive or antisocial, and that people who commit these acts are behaving stupidly, ignorantly, or neurotically, and would be better off getting help. Behaviors like these do not make the subjects who act corrupt.
3. The idea of It’s horrible when things are not as we would like that they were; Instead of considering the idea that things are very bad and therefore we should change or control adverse conditions so that they can become more satisfactory; and if this is not possible we will have to accept that some things are like that.
4. The idea of human misery is caused invariably for external factors and it is imposed on us by people and events strange to us; rather than the idea that neurosis is mostly caused by the point of view we take regarding unfortunate conditions.
5. The idea of if something is or could be dangerous or scary, we should be tremendously obsessed and outrageous with it; instead of the idea that we must face the dangerous directly and frankly; and if this is not possible, accept the inevitable.
6. The idea of It’s easier to avoid than to face life’s difficulties and personal responsibilities; rather than the idea that what we call “letting it be” or “letting it go” is usually much harder in the long run.
7. The idea of we absolutely need something bigger or stronger than us on which to lean; rather than the idea that it is better to take the risks involved in thinking and acting less dependently.
8. The idea of we must always be absolutely competent, intelligent and ambitious in all aspects; rather than the idea that we could have done better rather than needing to always do well and accept ourselves as quite imperfect creatures, who have human limitations and fallibilities.
9. The idea of if something affected us considerablywill continue to do so throughout our lives; rather than the idea that we can learn from our past experiences without being extremely tied down or worried about them.
10. The idea of we must have precise and perfect control over things; rather than the idea that the world is full of probabilities and changes, and that we should still enjoy life despite these “inconveniences.”
11. The idea of human happiness can be achieved through inertia and inactivity; rather than the idea that we tend to be happy when we are vitally immersed in activities aimed at creativity, or when we embark on projects beyond ourselves or give of ourselves to others.
12. The idea of we have no control over our emotions and that we cannot help but feel upset about the things of life; rather than the idea that we have real control over our destructive emotions if we choose to work against the masturbatory hypothesis, which we usually encourage.

For simplicity, Ellis also mentions the three main irrational beliefs:

• “I have to be incredibly competent, or else I’m worthless.”
• “The others must consider me; or they are absolutely stupid.”
• “The world must always provide me with happiness, or I will die.”

The therapist uses his expertise to argue against these irrational ideas in therapy or, even better, leads his patient to make these arguments himself. For example, the therapist might ask…

• Is there any evidence to support these beliefs?
• What is the evidence to confront this belief?
• What is the worst that can happen to you if you abandon this belief?
• And what’s the best that can happen to you?

In addition to argumentation, the REBT therapist uses any other technique that helps the patient change their beliefs. Group therapy could be used, unconditional positive reinforcement, provision of risk-reward activities, assertiveness training, empathy training, perhaps using role-playing techniques to achieve this, boosting self-control through behavior modification techniques , systematic desensitization and so on.

Ellis has been heading to increasingly reinforce the importance of what he calls “unconditional self-acceptance” He says that in REBT, no one is rejected, no matter how disastrous their actions are, and we must accept ourselves for who we are rather than what we have done.

One of the ways he mentions to achieve this is convince the patient of its intrinsic value as a human being. The mere fact of being alive already provides value in itself.

Ellis observes that most theories place great emphasis on self-esteem and ego strength and similar concepts. We naturally evaluate creatures, and there is nothing wrong with this, but from the evaluation we make of our traits and actions, we come to evaluate that vague holistic entity called “self.” How can we do this?; And what good does it do? Ellis believes it only causes harm.

Therein lies, precisely, the legitimate reasons for promote one’s own self or ego: We want to stay alive and be healthy, we want to enjoy life and so on. But there are many other ways to promote the ego or self that is harmful, as explained through the following examples:

• I’m special or I’m obnoxious.
• I must be loved or cared for.
• I must be immortal.
• I am either good or bad.
• I must prove myself.
• I must have everything I want.

Ellis firmly believes that self-evaluation leads to depression and repression, as well as avoidance of change. The best thing for human health is that we should stop and evaluate each other!

But perhaps this idea about the ego or the self is overrated. Ellis is especially skeptical about the existence of a “true” self, like Horney or Rogers. He particularly dislikes the idea that there is a conflict between a self promoted by actualization versus one promoted by society. In fact, he says, nature itself and society itself rather support each other, rather than being antagonistic concepts.

really he he perceives no evidence of the existence of a transpersonal self or soul Buddhism, for example, does well without taking this into account. And Ellis is quite skeptical of the altered states of consciousness of mystical traditions and the recommendations of transpersonal psychology. In fact,considers these states more unreal than transcendent !.

On the other hand, Ellis considers that his approach arises from the ancient Stoic tradition, supported by philosophers such as Spinoza. He also considers that there are similarities with existentialism and existentialist psychology. Any approach that places responsibility on the shoulders of the individual for his or her beliefs will have commonalities with Ellis’ REBT.

This article is merely informative, at PsychologyFor we do not have the power to make a diagnosis or recommend a treatment. We invite you to go to a psychologist to treat your particular case.

If you want to read more articles similar to Personality Theories in Psychology: Albert Ellis we recommend that you enter our Personality category.