Question

Study the cases given below and answer the following questions.

Case A	Case B	Case C
Mala is in early childhood.  Her mother does not encourage her to perform her daily activities. She also selects Mala’s clothes and toys. Mala feels inadequate.	Paul joins a college after a secure school life. He finds himself out of place as he is unable to make friends. Although his parents try to understand him, he still feels lonely.	Hanif was given a warm farewell at his retirement. He feels a sense of fulfilment at the end of his career. After his retirement, he starts involving himself more in community activities.

1. With reference to Erik Erikson’s theory of personality, identify the phases depicted in Cases A, B and C. (3)
2. Briefly explain the dimensions of the crises as depicted in Cases A, B and C. (3)
3. Highlight any one reason for the criticism of Erik Erikson’s theory of personality. (1)

Answer 1

i.

• Case A: Autonomy vs. Shame and Doubt (Early Childhood, ages 1 - 3).
• Case B: Intimacy vs. Isolation (Young Adulthood, ages 19 - 40).
• Case C: Ego Integrity vs. Despair (Late Adulthood/Maturity, age 65+).

ii. Dimensions of the Crises

• Case A (Autonomy vs. Shame and Doubt): The crisis stems from the child’s need to gain personal control over physical abilities and independence. Mala’s mother exerts too much control over her decisions, she lacks autonomy and instead feels humiliation and inadequacy.
• Case B (Intimacy vs. Isolation): The goal is to develop intimate, loving relationships with others. Paul is struggling to make these relationships in college, which contributes to the “negative” aspects of this stage, social isolation and loneliness.
• Case C (Ego Integrity vs. Despair): This stage entails reflecting on one’s life. Hanif feels fulfilled and satisfied with his profession and continues to contribute to society, exemplifying Ego Integrity the effective resolve of looking back on life without big regrets.

iii. The theory is sometimes criticised for being very vague about the exact causes of development. It accurately explains the stages and crises, but it does not explain the exact kind of experiences or biological mechanisms required to properly resolve a conflict and go to the next stage.