Maslow's Theory of Motivation and Hierarchy of Human Needs:, Exams of Human Development

Download Maslow's Theory of Motivation and Hierarchy of Human Needs: and more Exams Human Development in PDF only on Docsity! Human Needs 1 RUNNING HEAD: HUMAN NEEDS Maslow’s Theory of Motivation and Hierarchy of Human Needs: A Critical Analysis Allison Ruby Reid-Cunningham, MSW School of Social Welfare University of California – Berkeley Prepared under the supervision of Dr. William McKinley Runyan School of Social Welfare PhD Qualifying Examination December 3, 2008 Human Needs 2 Table of Contents Abstract …………………………………………………………………………………. 3 Conceptual Framework and Methods ………………………………………………... 4 Motivation Theory …………………...……………………………………………….... 5 • Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs o Physiological Needs o Safety Needs o Love Needs o Esteem Needs o Self-Actualization Needs Application of Motivation Theory to Abraham Maslow’s Life…………………….. 24 • Childhood o Physiological Needs o Safety Needs o Love Needs o Esteem Needs o Self-Actualization Needs • Adult Life o Deficiency Needs: Physiological, Safety, Love, Esteem o Growth Needs: Self-Actualization • Synthesis Empirical and Theoretical Criticism ...….……...……………………………..…….. 55 o Deprivation: The Chronically Hungry Person o Gratification: The Chronically Satiated Person o Cultural Relativity and Universalism o The Utility of the Original Five Categories of Needs o Ecological Model of Human Needs o Directions for Future Research Implications for Society and Social Welfare ..………………….…………………… 73 Figures …………………………………………………………………………………. 78 References ……………………………………………………………………………... 79 Human Needs 5 Conceptual Framework and Methodology Psychobiography can be defined as systematic investigation of a life history that employs an explicit theory (Runyan, 1982). This analysis seeks to present the life history of Abraham Maslow in the context of his theory of human motivation. Psychobiography is a method of interpretation and analysis that has been the subject of significant controversy among social science researchers, theorists, and scholars. Some espouse psychobiography’s unique contribution to the understanding of phenomenological experiences while others dismiss the study of individuals as not generalizable and thus not worthwhile. This work does not intend to settle this debate; rather it aims to apply Maslow’s (1943b, 1954) theory of human motivation to its creator to analyze the individual factors and particular life course trajectory that contributed to the underlying assumptions and explicit components of the theory. The use of Maslow’s own life history provides dual opportunities for productive scholarship: 1) present a case study that is particularly well-matched with the model, and 2) understand the development of motivation theory in the phenomenological context of its author. This work utilizes the case study method to reconstruct and interpret a synthesis of evidence about an individual’s life (Runyan, 1982). Maslow’s life history draws from various sources in an attempt to triangulate and synthesize information. The material is drawn primarily from Maslow’s personal journals (1959-1970), a comprehensive biography by Hoffman (1999), and selected published works (Maslow, 1943a, 1943b, 1954, 1970). Maslow’s case study is presented using a life course orientation, drawing from selected elements throughout his life span. The stages of Maslow’s life are framed by the need categories he proposed. His Human Needs 6 childhood and adulthood are explored with regard to physiological, safety, love and self- actualization needs. This analysis focuses on Maslow’s frustration in the four basic needs during his childhood, in contrast to his adult life when his needs seem to have been well satisfied. Maslow was able to engage in self-actualization goals and behaviors in adulthood because his basic needs had been satiated and were no longer the primary motivators for his behavior. This particular life course trajectory fits well with the model that Maslow proposed, which is clearly not coincidental: Maslow’s phenomenological experiences contributed to his theoretical creations, and his own theories have profound salience in the contextualization of Maslow’s personal development. Motivation Theory Maslow (1943a, 1943b, 1954, 19701) proposed a positive theory of human motivation that was based on his studies of successful people including his own mentors. Maslow criticized traditional psychological methods of developing theories based on studies of deviant or dysfunctional people, and he developed a theory of behavior motivation based on the concept of self-actualization. Prior to Maslow’s groundbreaking work in the area of motivation, social scientists generally focused on distinct factors as biology, achievement, or power to explain and attempt to predict human behavior and its underlying motivations (Huitt, 2001). Maslow stated that the most important component of his theory is that is supplements the “Freudian pessimism” and “neo-behaviorist relativism” with positive and empirically grounded theories of human behavior, motivation, and development (Maslow as quoted in Hoffman, 1988, p. 191). The other 1 Motivation and Personality (1954) was based on Maslow’s previous theories and a revision was published in 1970. The chapters on motivation and self-actualization draw from his 1943 papers, but this analysis cites the earlier papers because of the value placed on the original conception and the detail with which the topics are covered in the articles. Human Needs 7 approaches had ignored the highest achievements of humankind by focusing on problems and illnesses, studying “mainly crippled people and desperate rats” (Maslow as quoted in Hoffman, 1988, p. 191). Maslow’s positive theories of human behavior and motivation were pragmatic as well as hopeful: realistic optimism about human beings’ capacity to develop is necessary to address social problems and improve the human condition. There have been three waves of 20th century psychological thought: psychodynamic, behavioral, and humanistic philosophies of human nature have dominated the dialogue. As a theorist, Maslow is traditionally associated with humanist psychology, but the major theorists in all three areas influenced him, and he made significant contributions to each phase of the development of the field of psychology between 1930-1970. His contributions continue to inform, motivate, and challenge scholarship in the areas of human development, personality, and motivation. Maslow’s model of human needs and behavioral motivation is rooted in the social sciences and it rests upon the findings of several key thinkers. Grounded in the functionalist traditions of James (1936) and Dewey, Maslow (1943a, 1970) listed several other theorists as providing the background and foundation for the development of his theory of motivation, including Goldstein (1939), Freud (1920, 1923), Fromm (1941), and Horney (1937, 1939). Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and theory of motivation was widely used within the field of clinical psychology from the theory’s development in the early 1940s until it became utilized within the business sector in the 1960s (Steers and Porter, 1987). The theory of motivation that Maslow developed in the 1940s has become one of the most frequently cited theories of motivation in the management and organizational behavior Human Needs 10 behavior is not motivated at all. Because most behavior is motivated to a certain extent, motivation is a relevant area for scientific inquiry and clinical work. He asserted that most behavior is multi-motivated. In his Preface to Motivation Theory, Maslow argued that it is almost impossible to separate the drives because multiple overlapping motivations exist simultaneously (Maslow, 1943a). A person may eat because she is physically hungry, because she feels afraid, because she feels lonely or unloved, because she is seeking pleasure or self-esteem, or for all of those reasons at once. It is necessary to consider human needs and motivations for behavior in terms of the complete picture, replete with nuance and interrelationships between different needs, desires, and behaviors. An important activity is considered to interact in dynamic relationships with other elements of relevance in the person’s ecological environment (Maslow, 1943a). There are characteristics of human beings and the human experience that cannot be discovered through studying other animals, particularly rats. Maslow (1943a) was highly critical of scientific studies that developed theories about human behavior from the study of lesser animals. He lamented that too many research findings developed through animal models are valid for animals but have not been proven in human beings (Maslow, 1943a). Maslow argued that rats have few motivations beyond the physiological needs, so research attempting to generalize from rats to humans is bound to overestimate the importance of physiology and underestimate the higher needs such as esteem and self- actualization. Even if some higher need other than basic physiological survival motivates rat behavior, there is no way for human scientists to determine that accurately. This is particularly relevant in terms of investigating the inner motivations of behavior, because “one could not ask a white rat about his purposes” (Maslow, 1943a, p. 89). Human Needs 11 In his research with primates, Maslow found that the higher a species was on the phylogenic tree, the less important species-wide drives and instincts are to the determination of behavior (Maslow, 1943a, 1970). In other words, higher functioning animals have more variance in their behavior and the motivations for their behavior; lower animals are driven primarily by physiological needs while higher animals often engage in multi-motivated behavior. The receptivity of stimuli and responses to a particular drive become progressively more modifiable as we go up the evolutionary scale (Maslow, 1970). Instinct becomes less critical in the determination of behavior and other influences such as culture increase in salience when comparing rats to dogs to chimpanzees to humans. For this reason, lower animals should be considered unsuitable subjects for developing a theory of human motivation because these methods will likely minimize or exclude unique human features such as self-esteem, love, and self- actualization (Maslow, 1943a). Maslow argued that as higher primates or man himself are better subjects upon whom to build a sound theory of motivation. Strict behaviorism assumed that it was more scientific or objective to judge humans based on the findings of animal research, but Maslow argued this was naïve and impractical (Maslow, 1943a). Maslow noted that what we consider good for human beings “would be bad for mosquitoes, bears, or tigers” (Maslow, 1996, p. 31). Thus there are phenomenological differences between people and other animals, which complicate any attempt to decipher the meaning of the human experience through studies of other species. Despite his skepticism about the broad applicability of animal findings to human behavior, he always maintained a sense of connection to the biological aspects of the human experience. When asked by a colleague Human Needs 12 whether his early research with primates had made “any difference” in his current work, Maslow responded, “Absolutely! Of course! They are the ground against which all my present work is figure. It is the foundation upon which everything rests. I am biologically rooted” (Maslow, 1979, p. 851). Although Maslow was considered a seminal researcher in animal behavior, he was concerned about scientists carrying “the rat-picture over to the human being” (Maslow, 1943a, p. 89). The possibility of overlooking important nuances of human thought, emotion, culture, and social relationships is inherent in applying animal research findings to human behavior. Maslow lamented that it is necessary to repeat the truism that “a white rat is not a human being” (Maslow, 1943a, p. 89). In order to counter these previous methods of developing theories about human behavior based on rats and monkeys, Maslow’s theory is grounded in the human experience. This fundamental belief in the value of anthropocentric research methods for developing a theory of human motivation was echoed in Maslow’s writings about the hierarchy of needs. Before publishing his new theory of motivation, Maslow released a Preface to Motivation Theory in which he outlined 12 foundational statements that form the framework for his hierarchy of needs. Maslow (1943a) asserted that the human being is a whole, integrated organism but social science research and theory has attempted to simplify the study of human beings by reducing them to a collection of separable and identifiable drives. Maslow cautioned against strategies modeling higher human needs (such as for self-esteem or love) on physiological drives. He specifically stated that hunger was not the ideal paradigm upon which to model a theory of human motivation from a practical or theoretical perspective (Maslow, 1943a). Hunger is more isolated, less Human Needs 15 man may willingly surrender his need for self-respect in order to stay alive; but once he can feed, shelter, and clothe himself, he becomes likely to seek higher needs” and will not trade his self-respect for food in the absence of extreme circumstances (Hoffman, 1988, p. 154). These four basic needs are considered to be deficiency needs: the individual feels nothing if they are met, but feels anxious if they are not met. When deficiency needs are met, Maslow proposed that they cease to motivate behavior. He offered the following example: “Suppose you like eating a good steak. You may relish the first one and even enjoy eating a second, but eventually you know that too much steak will make you nauseous” (Maslow, 1996, p. 93). Maslow believed that higher needs could be differentiated from deficiency needs because the higher needs continue to motivate behavior when they are satisfied. Self-actualization, the pinnacle of Maslow’s hierarchy, is considered to be a growth need, which continues to motivate behavior after it is satisfied. Self-actualization has been described as reaching one’s full potential, and it is self-perpetuating because it has no predetermined end point. Maslow quipped that people never get bored with growth; the thrill never wears off, and satisfaction of the growth needs leads to further pursuit of growth (Maslow, 1996). Maslow described the growth needs in his personal journal, nothing that the “process of growing is itself tasty, feels good” (Maslow, 1979, p. 1225, italics in original). The growth or “being” needs feed themselves, and partial satisfaction leads to continued efforts to self-actualize to an even greater extent. Maslow (1943a) described human beings as “a perpetually wanting animal” because as “one desire is satisfied, another one pops up to take its place” (p.88). When needs are not met, negative consequences can ensue. Threats to the satisfaction of needs Human Needs 16 can also be damaging to human beings. Maslow (1943a) asserted that thwarting or threatening these basic human goals or the defenses that protect them are perceived as a psychological threat that can harm the individual’s ability to function He differentiated between minor and serious threats to basic needs since frustration of unimportant desires does not usually produce psychopathology, while deprivation of basic needs may lead to psychological damage or the creation of compensatory defense mechanisms. Physiological Needs The most basic set of human needs are physiological: eating, drinking, breathing, and excretion (Maslow, 1943b). In Maslow’s hierarchy, the basic needs are the most prepotent and they completely dominate the organism when they are not met (Maslow, 1943b). Human beings strive to achieve a state of homeostasis, which consists of physiological stability and psychological consistency (Maslow, 1943b). Eating, drinking, sleeping, and other activities maintain physical homeostasis, and behaviors that seek satisfaction of physiological needs contribute to a sense of balance and predictability for human beings. In his unpublished papers, Maslow noted, “To urinate or defecate at the right time can be a great satisfaction, in the sense of culmination, total discharge, and finishing” (Maslow, 1996, p. 41). This is an example of a physiological urge that must be satisfied. Physiological survival is considered to be the most basic motivator of human behavior. These needs are not separated from the person: “the whole individual is motivated rather than just part of him… It is John Smith2 who wants food, not John 2 The modern audience must forgive Maslow’s use of terms like “mankind,” “John Smith,” and the “chronically hungry man”: references to “men” are present because significant gender bias in academic literature was normal in the mid-20th century. This contemporary analysis utilizes more inclusive terms, referring to “humankind,” “people” Human Needs 17 Smith’s stomach… Food satisfies John Smith’s hunger, not John Smith’s stomach’s hunger” (Maslow, 1943b). When physiological needs dominate the organism, behavior is fundamentally different than when other needs motivate behavior. When John Smith is hungry or exhausted, he will forsake activities that would otherwise be prioritized in order to seek food or sleep. If John Smith is struck with a sudden need to urinate, his behavior will be fully focused on that need, regardless of the relevance of other goals that become temporarily relegated to a secondary status. When physiological needs are unsatisfied, they preoccupy the organism: all of John Smith’s available capacities will be directed towards the most satisfying his physiological needs when they advance to prepotency (Maslow, 1970). Safety Needs When physiological needs are met, a new set of needs relating to safety emerges as the primary motivators of behavior (Maslow, 1943b). Physical safety, financial security, protection from harm, and obtaining adequate materials to sustain survival are considered to be safety needs within this framework. Safety needs involve the human yearning for a predictable, orderly world orderly world, in which unexpected and unfamiliar things are rare. Human beings tend to seek out consistency and prefer familiarity to novelty; there is a common preference for the known and a fear of the unknown, which relates to the basic human need for safety and predictability. When safety is threatened, a person becomes singularly focused on averting danger and quickly restoring security. When one is engaged in safety-motivated behavior, the singular focus of the organism is intense because everything else appears less important when confronted with a threat to physical or psychological safety. Even the and “persons” rather than gender-biased terminology, except when quoting. Human Needs 20 oneself are considered to be a higher level of human need than simple human contact. Self-esteem is the other important component of esteem needs. The need for self- esteem is not simply a desire to think well about oneself: it must be firmly based in order to fully satisfy the self-esteem needs. Firmly-based self esteem is grounded in the real capacity, achievements, and respect from others that an individual maintains (Maslow, 1943b). These needs have been described as a desire for self-respect based on accurate assessment by oneself and other trusted people. The development of self-esteem and ego strength leads to feelings of self-confidence, worth, strength, and capability; these emotions propel behavior toward the higher goals (Maslow, 1943b). People who have satisfied their esteem needs tend to be hugely productive and well adjusted. However, thwarting of self-esteem needs can produce psychopathology, especially insecurity, helplessness, and inferiority complexes. People who are frustrated in their esteem needs may cope with these difficult experiences by withdrawing and becoming discouraged or they may create psychological defense mechanisms such as self-aggrandizement to cope with the deprivation they experience in this area. Self-Actualization When physiological, safety, love, and esteem needs are fairly well satisfied; self- actualization needs emerge as primary motivators of behavior. Maslow began to become interested in self-actualization through his relationships with two extraordinary human beings: Max Wertheimer and Ruth Benedict. He reports that his early investigations on “self-actualization were not planned to be research and did not start out as research, [but] as the effort of a young intellectual to try to understand two of his teachers whom he loved, adored, and admired and who were very, very wonderful people” (Maslow as Human Needs 21 quoted in Hoffman, 1988, p. 150). The young Maslow wondered why these two mentors were so different from “run-of-the-mill people in the world” (Maslow as quoted in Hoffman, 1988, p. 150). Eventually, through his studies, Max Wertheimer & Ruth Benedict came to represent to Maslow a “composite of the self-actualized person rather than just individuals” and this was the beginning of his theorizing on the innate tendency of human beings to self-actualize unless thwarted by unsatisfied lower needs (Hoffman, 1988, p. 156). Maslow’s students also shaped his theory of self-actualization. He described one case, in which a former student who had graduated and was working to support her entire family during the Depression in a dull but stable job. Maslow reflected that “she was not using her intelligence” and “this might be a major reason for her boredom with … the normal pleasures of life” (Maslow as quoted in Hoffman, 1988, p. 145). He counseled her to enroll in graduate studies at night and she “became more alive, more happy and zestful, and most of her physical symptoms had disappeared” (Maslow as quoted in Hoffman, 1988, p. 145). This case and other similar stories left an impression on Maslow as he was thinking through the mechanisms through which self-actualization is enhanced or restricted. In 1950, Maslow published “Self-Actualizing People: A Study of Psychological Health” in Personality Symposia (Hoffman, 1988) In this important article, Maslow offered a positive view of human development, motivation, and personality by focusing on the lives of famous successful people such as Thomas Jefferson and Jane Addams, but also contemporaries such as his own mentors Ruth Benedict and Max Wertheimer. The psychological community met the article immediately with favorable reception. Carl Human Needs 22 Rogers and other budding humanists considered Maslow’s work on self-actualization to be “a conceptual breakthrough” (Hoffman, 1988, p. 188). Maslow’s self-actualization research eventually formed “the basis for an entirely new vision of psychology, with the premise that each of us harbors an innate human nature of vast potential that usually becomes blocked or thwarted through the deprivation of lower needs” (Hoffman, 1988, p. 173). Threat to various needs can be considered an inhibiting factor for self-actualization, since it is the frustration of these needs that preoccupies the person and prevents the activities of self-actualization from occurring while the basic needs remain prepotent (Maslow, 1970). The term “self-actualization” was originally coined by Kurt Goldstein (1939) and Maslow further operationalized it (Maslow, 1943b, 1954, 1970, 1996). While Goldstein originally intended to refer to the innate drive of each organism to reach its biological destiny, Maslow applied the term to describe the process through which human beings embody their full potential. Maslow was insistent about the value and importance of self- actualization: “What a man can be, he must be” (Maslow, 1943b, italics in original, p. 10). Self-actualization has been likened to a seed from which a plant develops: the plant is not present inside the seed, but the potential is there. Hoffman (1988) described self- actualization by invoking this popular and appropriate metaphor: “In the core of our being we each carry the seed of our becoming, of our latent potential” (p. 254). Each individual will self-actualize in an endemic and idiosyncratic way that fits with his or her personality, circumstances, culture, and other factors. Maslow asserted that “a musician must make music, an artist must paint, a poet must write, if he is to be ultimately at peace with himself” (Maslow as quoted in Hoffman, 1988, p. 155). Unlike Human Needs 25 not only the content but also the development process of social science theories, because the unique perspective of the theory’s author can introduce bias, nuance, and confounding factors to the theory’s broad utility. This is particularly true of theories dealing specifically with human behavior, personality, and development, because of the bias introduced by personal experiences and unconscious assumptions about other human beings. It is easy to assume that others share one’s experience or perspective without even knowing that one is making an assumption. To highlight an example, Maslow’s theories are criticized for operating based on an American/Western perspective; they are framed in these terms because that is his cultural background and the unconscious assumptions of a Western person form the backdrop for his thoughts. Careful scholarship of Maslow’s life reflects many parallels between his own process of personal development and the theory he developed to describe the same process in others. Abraham Maslow was by all accounts an exceptional person, and his research was based on studying exceptional people. Some would describe Maslow as a profoundly self-actualizing person, but others would argue that he was insecure and did not exemplify his own definition of self-actualization. Since Maslow formulated the theory of motivation and creates this particular hierarchy of needs, his own life history will be presented following the framework of the five levels of human needs he proposed. This analysis will explore how Maslow’s development fits the theoretical model and whether he can be considered a self-actualizing person. Abraham Maslow spearheaded humanistic psychology, “as a bold psychological thinker, he was a genius; his ideas have exerted tremendous and still-growing influence throughout the social sciences, the business community, and the wider culture” (Hoffman, Human Needs 26 1988). Maslow’s IQ was measured at 195: he initially found the news of his superior intelligence disturbing, and he “went off dazed…for days trying to assimilate this” (Maslow as quoted in Hoffman, 1988, p. 74). Later he became more comfortable, even boastful about his high IQ (Hoffman, 1988, p. 74). He had a difficult time reconciling his intelligence and the value of his work, and others found his bragging unpleasant. However, Harry Harlow remarked, “To say that [Maslow] was ahead of his time is an understatement of magnificent magnitude” (Harlow as quoted in Hoffman, 1988, p. 62). Abraham Maslow had a long and distinguished career, managing to reinvent the field of psychology, to publish prolifically, and to influence how professionals in a variety of fields view human nature and motivated behavior. He received his BA in 1930, his MA in 1931 and his PhD in 1934 at the University of Wisconsin, where he conducted groundbreaking research with Harry Harlow in the field of primate behavior. He conducted research at Columbia University after finishing his PhD, and then from 1937- 1951 he was a faculty member at Brooklyn College. Maslow served as the chair of the Brandeis Psychology Department from 1951-1969. Maslow’s Toward a Psychology of Being was a collection of essays that became incredibly popular, selling over 200,000 copies before the trade edition was issued in 1968. During the 1950s and 1960s, humanistic psychology began to take root, spearheaded by Maslow, Rogers, and others who urged the field of psychology to examine humankind’s potential as well as its weaknesses. Maslow was considered was the most prominent leader and proponent of the humanistic psychology movement. He was the cofounding editor of the Journal of Humanistic Psychology and the American Humanist Association chose him “Humanist of the Year” in 1966. Humanism has been Human Needs 27 referred to as the “third force” in psychology—moving beyond Freud’s psychoanalysis and Skinner’s behaviorism to a new and more hopeful synthesis of human behavior. These professional accomplishments can be considered evidence of self-actualization and they reflect a deeper principle because of the content of Maslow’s contributions to the self-actualization of not only the field of psychology but also the larger society. On July 8, 1966, Maslow was elected president of the American Psychological Association. He was stunned because he had been such a vocal and active critic of the profession’s previously pessimistic stance and behavioral methods, and because many of his mentors whom he considered more appropriate for the job had not been chosen. His presidency of the APA validated the criticism that he had doled out over the years as exactly what he had intended it to be: a wake up call to the psychological profession to self-actualize itself and embrace more positive and helpful activities on behalf of humankind. The APA demonstrated their faith in the concepts that Maslow espoused such as self-actualization and their respect for Maslow as a person when they elected him to the Presidency. This provides support for the assertion that others viewed Maslow as self- actualizing, a leader to whom they could look for positive direction. After suffering his first heart attack in 1967, Maslow redoubled his efforts to publish and prepare his manuscripts. He mused, “by now, at the age of nearly 60, I know that if I begin to suffer from insomnia, digestive problems, glumness and grimness, it is actually a good sign. My wife will aptly comment: ‘Something good is cooking, isn’t it Abe?’” (Maslow, 1996, p. 89). Maslow’s extremely prolific work was hampered by his death from a massive heart attack on June 8, 1970 at the age of 62. However, colleagues released his unpublished manuscripts and journals posthumously, so Maslow’s work Human Needs 30 Maslow’s basic physiological needs may not have been sufficiently met, although his family enjoyed middle class status. Materially Maslow was not chronically deprived or physically starving, but realistically in terms of the family dynamics, he was regularly deprived of food, safety, love, and esteem during his childhood. These dynamics appear to have deeply influenced Maslow throughout his life. Early frustration combined with the later satisfaction of his own basic needs formed personal foundation of his theory the regarding satisfaction of needs leading to the appearance of higher needs, which reflected his personal experience. Safety Needs Although his family enjoyed middle-class status, Maslow’s safety needs were profoundly threatened early in his life: his family was an unsafe emotional climate, and he was confronted daily with real physical threats by violent youth in his neighborhood. Peers as well as teachers and administrators at school harassed him. Maslow recalled other disturbing experiences in his early childhood with anti-Semitic neighborhood gangs, and anti-Semitism unfortunately followed Maslow throughout his life. In an early attempt to seek safety, the adolescent Maslow briefly joined a Jewish gang in the neighborhood. He soon found that the activities of gang members (such as throwing rocks at girls or killing cats) were unacceptable to him. He was eventually excluded due to his reluctance to participate in these activities with his compatriots (Hoffman, 1988). Maslow’s early safety needs were not well met; so much of his youthful experiences could be described as safety-seeking. His attempt to seek safety in the Jewish gang is just one example; Maslow also buttressed himself in the library outside of school hours in order to protect himself from his dangerous world. In his discussion of safety Human Needs 31 needs within motivation theory, Maslow invokes the example of a child who is rejected and abused by his parents, but clings to the parents for protection rather than the expectation of love or affection (Bowlby, 1969, 1973, 1980, 1988). This child’s behavior is motivated by a need for safety, a lower need on the hierarchy, rather than seeking love from his parents, since basic safety is lacking. The example of this child echoes Maslow’s own situation as a youngster, as Maslow himself experienced the prepotency of safety needs in the face of rejecting parents. Love Needs Maslow’s earliest memories are decidedly unpleasant and upsetting: his mother was superstitious, strict, and punishing. Maslow characterized his mother as cruel, ignorant, and hostile: He described numerous incidents in which his mother behaved in a cruel way but one instance exemplifies the general tone of interactions between mother and con. Young Abe found two abandoned kittens and brought them home to care for them. When his mother discovered the kittens in the basement, drinking milk from a small dish, she became enraged that her son had “brought stray cats into her house and then used her dishes to feed them, she seized the kittens. Before his horrified eyes, Rose smashed each one’s head against the basement wall until it was dead” (Hoffman, 1988, p. 8). Maslow described the dilemma he faced when he was required to praise his parents at his Bar Mitzvah: he was supposed to turn to his mother and make obsequious statements about how much he owes her and loves her. But he could not do it. Instead he “burst into tears and fled, just ran away, because the whole thing was so hypocritical [he] couldn’t stand it” (Hoffman, 1988, p. 10). But the meaning was lost on his mother, who Human Needs 32 reportedly turned to “the assembled relatives and announced, ‘you see! He loves me so much he can’t even express the words!” (Hoffman, 1988, p. 203). This demonstrates the impact that the deprivation of love needs had on Maslow’s early life. Maslow’s love and belongingness needs were largely unmet as a child. He described having no friends and escaping into books, school, libraries, and his studies out of loneliness. The loving kindness of his maternal uncle, Sam Schilosky, “kept him from falling into madness as a child” (Hoffman, 1988, p. 8). His father was largely absent from Maslow’s early life, but they forged a close relationship later in life when the elder Maslow came to live with his son after losing his livelihood in the Depression (Hoffman, 1988, p. 8). However, Maslow never recovered from his feelings of hatred and hostility towards his mother, and they never achieved the slightest reconciliation (Hoffman, 1988). Esteem Needs Maslow’s esteem needs were painfully unmet during his childhood. Despite the fact that he was clearly a very intelligent child, he was abused and teased by peers and teachers at school. He believed himself to be ugly and inferior, unacceptable to others. He found it difficult to socialize and instead lost himself in books and experiments. During his early years, Maslow’s “fragile self-esteem was also affected by his family’s frequent moves; the situation made it doubly difficult for the shy youngster to form and maintain friendships” (Hoffman, 1988). His parents confirmed his worst fears about himself by insulting and nagging him about his appearance, his personality, his activities, and his interests. Maslow described, “My father misunderstood me, thought me an idiot and a fool. Probably, too, he was disappointed in me” (Maslow as quoted in Hoffman, 1988). Maslow’s cruel mother and Human Needs 35 with his wife Bertha, her insight led Maslow to write in his journal: “every baby and potentially every person, should be regarded as capable of self-actualization and of creativeness” (Maslow, 1979, p. 1200). He noted in his unpublished papers: “in American society today, babies have terribly unequal opportunities for personality growth” in terms of both the basic needs and the growth needs (Maslow, 1996, p. 98, italics in original). Because of Maslow’s difficult early life and his preoccupation with basic needs such as safety and belonging, he appears to have concentrated on self-actualization later in life, once his basic needs were more sufficiently met. Adulthood Deficiency Needs: Physiological, Safety, Love, Esteem During Maslow’s adult life, his basic needs were generally well-satisfied, allowing him to pursue goals related to self-actualization. His physiological and safety needs were well met, and he did not suffer from starvation or severe deprivation of material comforts during his adult life. During the Great Depression, there was certainly a general threat to financial security but Maslow may have been somewhat protected from the psychological impact because of his middle-class upbringing in which he had not regularly experienced extreme material deprivation. During the Depression, he was offered a “fat fellowship at Columbia with good possibilities of a job after that” (Maslow as quoted in Hoffman, 1988, p. 71). So even the greatest financial threat of his lifetime did not seem to mar him particularly. He enrolled in law school (under the pressure of his father to fulfill his father’s unrequited dream) and medical school, but did not finish either because the subjects did not interest him sufficiently to continue investing energy in these pursuits. He eventually Human Needs 36 discovered psychology and this career path was lucrative and relatively predictable in uncertain times. He had a solid career, generally uninterrupted by unemployment, and he owned his own home. Maslow bought a house in Newtonville, Massachusetts when his daughters were thirteen and eleven. Maslow’s brothers helped out with the purchase, since they were successful in their business by that time, and Maslow experienced a new level of satisfaction in his safety and security needs living in his own home. He no longer worried about anti-Semite gangs throwing rocks at him in his neighborhood as he had during childhood, and he generally enjoyed a sense of safety and predictability in life. What Maslow lacked in satisfaction of love and esteem needs in childhood, he more than made up for in his adult life. His best friend in early adulthood was his cousin Will, whom he trusted and loved unconditionally. Will and Abraham shared respect and love for one another, and Will seems to have been Abraham’s first real friend and confidante. His friendship with Will was profoundly healing and hopeful for both young men, which began to satisfy Maslow’s need to give and receive love. Friendship with Will gave Abraham a feeling of “belongingness” which helped him to partially satisfy his social needs. As he grew into an independent adult, Maslow became increasingly interested in the development of healthy, mutually fulfilling, realistic interpersonal relationships in the realms of friendship, love, and parenting. Like many young men, Maslow greatly desired to be “more promotable, more respectworthy, more lovable, more admired, [and] more attractive to females” (Maslow, 1979, p. 1226). During his early years, Maslow was painfully shy with women, partially based on his extreme physical attraction to them. He wrote in his journal years later, “I really like women. Therefore I like them as they are. I Human Needs 37 hate dyed hair, nose jobs, girdles—even brassieres, cosmetics, fashions of all kinds. I’d prefer them naked, natural, and untouched” (Maslow, 1979, p. 814). But he was limited by his fears stemming from abuse and rejection by his mother; frustration of his love needs during childhood led to withdrawal and diminished efforts to satiate his love needs as a young man despite his interest in women. A developing romance would help Maslow to meet his love needs in a new way: Abraham Maslow met his future wife Bertha Goodman when he was in high school. Bertha had recently emigrated from Russia, and Abraham became her friend and English tutor. Maslow would always recall his first romantic kiss with Bertha as “one of the greatest moments in his life, a true peak experience” (Hoffman, 1988, p. 26). Since Maslow was extremely timid, Bertha’s sister finally encouraged the couple by playfully grabbing Maslow and shoving him towards Bertha with the declaration, “kiss her, will ya?” (Hoffman, 1988, p. 26). The kiss had a profound impact on Maslow’s self-image as a developing adult; he felt worthy of romantic partnership and sexual love, which bolstered his confidence and self-esteem. Maslow would later recall, “I was accepted by a female. I was just deliriously happy with her” (Maslow as quoted in Hoffman, 1988, p. 26). Bertha’s love and acceptance began to remedy some of the previous damage to Maslow’s capacity for receiving love and trusting in relationships stemming from interactions with his mother and other family members. Their parents were against the courtship and marriage because Bertha was Abraham’s first cousin and she was a recent immigrant. Despite the family’s protests, the couple wed in an intimate ceremony on December 31, 1928 (Hoffman, 1988, p. 37). Marriage offered Maslow a sense of emotional safety and social satisfaction that he had Human Needs 40 complete with “craziness with pictures, dreams, yearning, impatience to get home, etc.” (Maslow, 1979, p. 1151-2). His stable relationship with his wife Bertha and his pride in his family propelled him to further develop his network of social relationships with increasing confidence. As his social needs became more fully satisfied through friendly contact with other young couples, through his academic relationships and close friendships, and most profoundly through his marriage to Bertha and role as a father, he seemed to be happier and more secure in his ability to excel academically. When he began his tenure at Brandeis, Maslow was socially happier than he had been at Brooklyn College, making close friends with a circle of men who shared his secular Jewish background and his predilection for stimulating intellectual discourse. These friends remained close for at least 15 years, providing Maslow with a community or support and ample opportunities to pursue social, esteem, and self-actualization goals. In Maslow’s adult life, his family and social relationships were quite fulfilling, and the satisfaction of his social needs led to the emergence of higher needs for esteem and self-respect. His self-esteem changed dramatically from the inferiority complex he carried as a child, and seems to have been closely tied with his professional identity and successes as a psychologist. Throughout his life, Maslow struggled to accurately evaluate his own competency, without minimizing or exaggerating his contributions. In his journal, Maslow wrote in a moment of self-criticism, “I guess I must have felt that the right to call myself a psychologist was also draining out of me, and in several kinds of situations I’ve felt inadequate, not sufficiently trained, etc” (Maslow, 1979, p. 730). But such comments became more rare as Maslow matured and his confidence grew in Human Needs 41 relation to his professional successes. The young adult Maslow emerged on the academic scene as an important thinker, and he remains there, bolstered by his own and his colleagues’ confidence in his work, well beyond the time of his death in 1970. In contrast to his high self-esteem in adulthood, Maslow experienced extremely low self-esteem as a child and adolescent. Maslow (1942) observed that a description of the possible reactions to the loss of self-esteem could be expanded almost infinitely because of the breadth of responses that feelings of worthlessness, inadequacy, and inferiority produce. Threats and damage to self-esteem may be considered threats to self- actualization because thwarting basic needs hinders the prepotency of higher-level goals. The older Maslow did not outwardly appear to suffer from a lack of self-esteem; quite the contrary he was known to brag about his high IQ and other aspects of his greatness, but this may have been a compensatory mechanism to cope with the low estimation he held of himself during his early life. For example, he may have felt compelled to announce that he is smart (worthy) to acquaintances partially to prove that he is not stupid or worthless the way he was treated as a child. Over the course of his lifetime, Maslow developed firmly based self-esteem, created through feedback from others and his own assessments of his intellectual and intrinsic value. His churlish egoism was displayed in interactions such as this with colleague Max Lerner: Upon discussing Maslow’s his new book, Lerner joked that “Plato had already written it” and Maslow replied, “Yes, Max, but I know more than Plato did” (Hoffman, 1988, p. 205-206). Before we begin to assign Maslow the character of an egomaniac or an Axis II disorder, Lerner was initially put off by the comment, but he later “realized that his colleague was correct” (Hoffman, 1988, p. 206). Maslow’s self- Human Needs 42 esteem in his later life was not based on grandiosity or false ideals; it was firmly-rooted in the well-deserved and ample praise that Maslow received about the quality and usefulness of his work and integrated into his sense of self. In his unpublished papers, Maslow mused about the difficulty of expressing to others one’s true estimation of one’s own intelligence of worth in a tactful way, likening behaviors that minimize one’s intelligence in the company of other people to “a chameleon-like cloak of false modesty” (Maslow, 1996, p. 49). Since it is not generally accepted for extremely intelligent people to say, “I am a very smart person,” this creates tension and social stress for intelligent people who must somehow navigate social interactions between the extremes of hiding their true skills to be more acceptable to their peers and bragging about their superior aptitude (Maslow, 1996). Maslow noted that honest expressions of a high estimation of self “generally arouses counterreactions, hostility, and even attacks” (Maslow, 1996, p. 49). Even his own wife appeared to view him as boastful, since Maslow complained in his personal journal: “Bertha says I’m arrogant and grandiose like Freud. I’d say it’s different” (Maslow, 1979, p. 746-7, italics in original). Maslow resisted a view of himself as egotistical, and he launched a tirade in his personal journal, drawing distinctions between his own confidence and Freud’s noted arrogance. “The self-confidant, stubborn, creative arrogance which is necessary for any big job and for real independence and courage is quite different” from the narcissism and egotism that Freud and other theorists displayed in Maslow’s opinion (Maslow, 1979, p. 746-7). This section of the journal seems to be Maslow’s somewhat ill conceived and unsuccessful effort to convince himself that he was not offensive and grandiose like Freud. Human Needs 45 several hours with impassioned focus (Hoffman, 1988, p. 260). His wife suggested that he share his personal experience with his academic colleagues, and Maslow carefully considered exposing his own peak experiences. Upon gazing at the audience, Maslow decided he did not feel comfortable sharing his personal experiences in this venue, and he presented his official paper. Afterwards, he questioned his decision, and it seemed to bring up issues for Maslow about how much of his personal life to share with colleagues. Key thinkers in the field of psychology influenced Maslow’s thinking about human needs, whose contributions to Maslow’s theories of motivation and self- actualization have been profound. This analysis traces Maslow’s intellectual development by highlighting the scholars and mentors who influenced Maslow in his own process of self-actualization as he created the theory. Titchener. Titchener was one of Maslow’s first psychology professors, and the structuralism that Titchener espoused initially discouraged Maslow from the field that would later become his life’s work. Titchener’s approach to psychology “could not have been further removed from Maslow’s impassioned social goals” and he found structuralism to have “nothing to do with people” (Maslow as quoted in Hoffman, 1988). Initially put off by his initiation into the field of psychology, Maslow studied medicine, anthropology, and other fields before discovering more activist branches of psychology. Sumner. Maslow’s work was strongly influenced by Sumner’s Folkways, which Maslow read in the 1920s. Folkways “struck Maslow with the force of revelation: Sumner was not simply describing the archaic past, but Maslow’s own life as well” (Hoffman, 1988, p. 31). Sumner’s work inspired Maslow to employ his “intellect for creating a better world,” to overcome the pain and hatred in his past (“exemplified by his Human Needs 46 mother and the boys who had thrown rocks at him”) and to make improving the state of humanity his life’s mission (Hoffman, 1988, p. 31). Friends and colleagues have commented that the one character flaw that Maslow displayed was “a messiah complex”: His personal mission to “change the human condition” consumed him (Hoffman, 1988, p. 211). Maslow himself agreed, in light of his heart attack, that he had worked too hard and that he viewed his work with a “kind of messianic quality, as if only I were available to bring the message” (Maslow as quoted in Hoffman, 1988, p. 309). In his journals, Maslow makes it clear that he views himself as a kind of Bodhisattva (an enlightened being who chooses to delay entering nirvana out of compassion for other human beings still suffering). He described the path this way: “We want to help and need in order to grow and as an expression of being grown; but the best helper is the best person, so the best way to become a better helper is via becoming a better person” (Maslow, 1979, p. 974). Much of this orientation toward life (minus the Buddhist concepts) can be drawn to Maslow’s early reading of Sumner, which inspired the budding academic throughout his career. Watson and Pavlov. Behaviorism had its origins in animal science, descended from Ivan Pavlov’s famous experiments where dogs were conditioned to salivate to the sound of a bell. Watson had drawn from the animal work of early behaviorism and applied the principles to human beings with astounding results. He proposed in The Psychologies of 1925 (1927) that behavioral techniques could be used to target change in social behavior including “racial prejudice, ethnic snobbery, and the use of physical punishment in child-rearing and education” (Hoffman, 1988, p. 34). Watson’s The Psychologies of 1925 hit Maslow “with the force of a bombshell,” Human Needs 47 promising a new science of psychology which excited Maslow to a point of euphoria and intoxication (Hoffman, 1988, p. 33). He later described dancing “down Fifth Avenue, jumping and shouting and gesturing, trying to explain to [Bertha] what it meant” (Maslow as quoted in Hoffman, 1988, p. 33). For Maslow, Watson provided a “clear alternative to the moral vacuum of Titchener’s scientific approach” (Hoffman, 1988, p. 33). Upon discovering Watson’s work, Maslow’s vision of his life’s path became further solidified as he determined psychology to be his career of choice. The training that Maslow received early in his career was decidedly experimentalist-behaviorist, and he focused his studies on biological sciences, chemistry, zoology, physics, and animal behavior (Hoffman, 1988). Harlow. Maslow was Harry Harlow’s first doctoral student and research assistant; they coauthored a series of articles in the Journal of Comparative Psychology in the early 1930s, reporting their findings on delayed reactions and memory tasks in various primates. Maslow published several other articles based on his primate research including several papers derived from his doctoral work and his research on sexual dominance in monkeys. Harlow became the leading primate researcher in the United States, and at the apex of his dominance in the field, he remarked that Maslow’s doctoral work had “stood as definitive in the field for approximately thirty years” (Hoffman, 1988, p. 62; see also Harlow 1955, 1974). In his primate work, Maslow was hesitant to draw analogies between animal behavior and human life. Freud. Maslow became acquainted with Sigmund Freud’s work in the early 1930s, when he read The Interpretation of Dreams and experienced another round of revelations. He later recalled, “The reason I was so impressed with [Freud’s work] was Human Needs 50 other well” (Hoffman, 1988, p. 101). In addition to Maslow attending Fromm’s lectures, they socialized outside of the classroom and developed a friendship that cooled when Maslow started behaving more like an intellectual equal than a fawning student. Fromm’s “passionate concern for social justice and world betterment” and his “humanitarian outlook” inspired Maslow in his quest to improve the human condition (Hoffman, 1988, p. 101). Although their friendship was reduced to occasional professional meetings later in life, the impact of the friendship while it lasted was deeply important for Maslow, because it affirmed the values of social justice and social change at a time in his early career when he was quite impressionable. In late 1941, when Pearl Harbor was attacked, Maslow found himself crying while watching a “poor, pathetic parade” and in that moment he had “a vision of a peace table, with people sitting around it, talking about human nature and hatred and peace and brotherhood… I realized that the rest of my life must be devoted to developing a psychology for the peace table” (Hoffman, 1988, p. 148). Maslow reflected that what he witnessed and felt that night changed his life, and in this way it can be considered a peak experience. Goldstein. Kurt Goldstein was a seminal figure in the field of neuropsychiatry as well as a friend and colleague of Maslow (Hoffman, 1988, p. 106). Goldstein’s (1939) The Organism excited Maslow because of its “broad philosophical stance, one based on biology’s solid ground” (Hoffman, 1988, p. 109). Maslow first cited Goldstein in 1941 and afterwards he cited Goldstein in numerous publications, including the theory of motivation (Maslow 1941, 1943a, 1943b, 1970). Virtually no other theorist at the time of Goldstein’s writing was rooted in organismic functioning: Maslow was fascinated because he was interested in cultural and social issues, but he has never lost his respect Human Needs 51 for scientific research and he had struggled himself to balance his orientation toward both (Hoffman, 1988, p. 109). In Goldstein’s work, Maslow saw a model that could encompass complimentary biological, psychological, cultural, and social factors. Goldstein also influenced Maslow to view human beings holistically, rather than reducing people to a “bag of symptoms” (Goldstein as quoted in Hoffman, 1988, p. 109). Maslow considered Goldstein to be a mentor and a model of self-actualization; when Maslow was chairman of the psychology department in the 1950s, Maslow hired Goldstein to join the faculty. Goldstein disapproved of what was probably his single greatest contribution to Maslow’s work: Goldstein originally coined the term “self-actualization” (Hoffman, 1988, p. 109). Goldstein’s original definition was vague and philosophical, describing the “innate desire or predilection of every organism, including the human being, to achieve its potential” (Hoffman, 1988, p. 109). Goldstein basically used the term to mean what every living thing does: to try to grow, to become more, and to ultimately fulfill its biological destiny. Maslow constricted the term to refer to a specialized set of behaviors and needs that (a select few) human beings engage in: he used the term quite specifically, changing its connotation. Maslow “synthesized his own theory of human motivation and personality” using a more concrete definition of self-actualization as a natural drive that is predicated upon other basic needs being partially fulfilled (Hoffman, 1988, p. 110). Maslow himself described an experience in which his self-actualization needs were frustrated by a certain faculty position. Maslow lamented in his journal: “I feel ineffective, not well used, not using my full power…. This is a job in which I cannot grow, or enjoy myself, or be fully functioning” (Maslow, 1979, p. 935, italics in original). Human Needs 52 He was profoundly unhappy until he found different employment that allowed him to pursue more satisfying self-actualization goals. In November of 1963, President John F. Kennedy was assassinated, and most people who were alive at that time can tell you where they were when it happened and their responses to the tragedy. That day, Maslow recorded in his journal: “News of Kennedy shooting. My reaction to these things has been sadness and depression, then anger about the gun laws, then a determination to get to work, to my job of understanding individual and social illness, violence, malice, and stupidity” (Maslow, 1979, p. 1044, italics in original). Maslow’s initial response to the nation’s loss was to redouble his efforts to address social problems and attempt to describe a society that would more adequately provide for not only the basic security needs of the population, but would also facilitate their process of self-actualization. In Maslow’s view, culture and society could be molded to influence human beings to avoid what Maslow described as social illness, violence, malice, and stupidity. Maslow had his own close encounter with death when he suffered a heart attack in late 1967. He survived due to exemplary medical care, and his near-death experience had a profound impact on his orientation toward life and self-actualization. In his journal, Maslow wrote that this recent experience had made everything “more intense, beautiful, precious, poignant, etc.” (Maslow, 1979, p. 997). Waxing philosophical, Maslow continued: “If you are reprieved from death, not only can you thereafter be comfortable with it, but also changes life itself” (Maslow, 1979, p. 997). He told friends about how happy he had been, recovering in the hospital from his heart attack, because he had finished his “mission” with the metamotivation paper, so he felt profoundly satisfied with Human Needs 55 only of his phenomenological experience it contextualizes the development of his theories, and it also offers unique insights into human motivation and personality. While case studies may not be broadly generalizable, Maslow’s life story provides a human context to explore the theoretical concepts of self-esteem, deprivation, and self- actualization. Maslow’s experiences with early deprivation of social needs in his early childhood coupled with his bonding with an adult partner with whom he created his own family suggests that individuals who have experienced early trauma may be able to overcome the limitations of their childhood deprivation to lead socially fulfilled and balanced lives. The path that Maslow took on his life’s journey from a childhood characterized by emotional deprivation to become a celebrated humanist offers an example of an individual who overcame chronic deficits in the satisfaction their basic needs to strive toward improvement and self-actualization. Empirical and Theoretical Criticism of Motivation Theory Maslow’s model has held up to criticism by social scientists, clinical practitioners, and armchair philosophers alike. Reviewers have discovered some flaws, exceptions, and counterevidence for the theory as originally proposed but the hierarchy of human needs remains popular despite substantial critique. This analysis presents four main criticisms of Maslow’s (1943b, 1970) theory of motivation with specific reference to the hierarchy of human needs. First, the implications of the directionality of needs prepotencies in Maslow’s model are explored in light of empirical findings regarding deprivation and gratification. Then, the failure of the model to accommodate the role of culture and the dismissal of cultural relativity inherent in the framework Maslow proposed will be addressed. Third, conflicting results support and refute Maslow’s original categories of Human Needs 56 needs so there is no consensus regarding the relative accuracy of Maslow’s categories in the absence of rigorous scientific investigation. Finally, Maslow’s theory is difficult to test because of the nature of the subject matter, the difficulty with defining the concepts and the high degree of overlap, for example between love and esteem, or physical and safety needs. Current research has been conducted based on divergent operationalizations of Maslow’s concepts: more carefully planned and coordinated studies are needed to clearly identify, observe, operationalize, assess, and analyze the role of various needs in determining human behavior. Deprivation: The Chronically Hungry Person Maslow (1943b) argues that a person who is lacking in all of the basic needs including physiological, safety, love, and esteem would likely crave food above all else. In the Maslow invoked the example of a chronically hungry person for whom no other interests exist beyond food: “he dreams food, he remembers food, he thinks about food, he emotes only about food, he perceives only food and he wants only food” (Maslow, 1943b, p. 374). The chronically hungry person’s behavior is assumed to be entirely motivated towards the goal of obtaining food, rather than seeking love, self-esteem, self- actualization or any of the higher needs according to Maslow’s theory of motivation Maslow (1943b) asserts that the chronically and dangerously hungry man may be described as living on bread alone—when there is no bread. While he is actively hungry, values such as freedom, love, and community may be “waved aside as fripperies which are useless since they fail to fill the stomach” and utopia is envisioned as a place with plenty of food (Maslow, 1943b, p. 374). This simplified explanation of the motivation of chronically deprived people does not a comprehensive depiction of the experiences of Human Needs 57 chronically hungry people and it fails to take into account a variety of interactive factors at different levels of the social ecology that impact the motivation and behavior of people under extreme physiological stress. Maslow argued that a starving person would “willingly surrender his need for self-respect in order to stay alive,” but as soon as he is able to provide for his physiological needs, he will no longer trade his self-respect for food (Hoffman, 1988, p. 154). Maslow also argued that people who have been accustomed to prolonged starvation are partially enabled thereby to withstand deprivation (Maslow, 1943b). However, the opposite is also true: deprivation often leads to increased susceptibility to risk factors: chronically starving people are physiologically more vulnerable. The paradigm that considers traumas to be some type of inoculation against future vulnerability must tread cautiously and employ ecological person-centered models that can accommodate the influence of multiple factors interfacing simultaneously on various levels. Maslow (1943b) later asserted that chronic deprivation can lead to increased psychological vulnerability, and in his 1970 version of the theory he made an extremely strong case for the impact of frustration of basic needs particularly during the early years. Maslow (1943b) acknowledged that the behavior and motivation of individuals with a severe and pervasive psychological disorders may not be well explained by this theory. Maslow proposed that people who experienced extreme emotional and/or physical deprivation early in life may be permanently damaged in terms of the social, esteem, and self-actualization needs. Individuals develop coping mechanisms in the face of ongoing stressors: in the context of chronic deprivation of basic needs, the person may disconnect from the higher needs, since they may seem hopelessly out of reach. Adults who were Human Needs 60 Gratification: The Chronically Satiated Person According to Maslow’s model, once a particular need is satisfied, other needs emerge: while food-seeking primarily motivated the chronically hungry man, the chronically gratified man is not motivated by basic needs. Empirical studies show scant support for the concept of gratification as a direct motivator for human behavior (Hall and Nougaim, 1968; Lawler and Suttle, 1972; Trexler and Schuh, 1964; Wofford, 1971). Maslow’s theory has only been partially borne out by empirical studies: gratification was supported as an important concept in the motivation of human behavior, but there was no clear hierarchy or order in which needs appear to become predominant. Two longitudinal studies provided the most appropriate methodology and the strongest overarching framework to analyze the dynamic and multilayered subject of human motivation and needs (Hall and Nougaim, 1968; Lawler and Suttle; 1972). These studies indicate no support for the gratification mechanism for the emergence of higher-level needs. Two additional studies found evidence to contradict Maslow’s proposition that gratification leads to the prepotency of higher-level needs (Trexler and Schuh, 1964; Wofford, 1971). The role of gratification in the emergence of higher needs appears to be the weakest conceptual link in Maslow’s theory, because it is easily refutable by simple observation of behavior. Need or satisfaction seeking does not motivate a significant proportion of human behavior. Maslow offered the example of a person who has finished dinner: he is no longer hungry “nevertheless ice cream is gladly eaten where bread or soup or potatoes may be entirely refused” (as quoted in Hoffman, 1988, p. 56). Similar phenomena are noted in primates who beg for treats but not for normal foods once their physical hunger is sated. Human Needs 61 Similarly, physiological needs may be ignored or relegated in favor of higher needs, such as social acceptance: when teenager is hungry but her friends are not, so she may delay eating. A hungry factory worker may wait for the proper lunch break rather than risk the financial or social consequences of ceasing work to eat based solely on her physiological urges. A satiated person purchases groceries, showing that the sated hunger drive is still an active determinant of behavior even while the need is supposedly not dominating the organism’s behavior. This logic may be applied to other needs beyond physical hunger: for example people who make new friends even though they already have a strong social network that satisfies social needs. When a need is chronically satiated, it may be taken for granted (Maslow, 1943b). Children who grow up surrounded by great wealth may easily take it for granted, children who are well-loved may undervalue their family, and children who are never in danger forget how it feels to be threatened. In this way, people whose needs have been well satiated may not fit the model extremely well, but Maslow added a second way in which chronically gratified people may not fit the model. People who have been satisfied in their needs, particularly early in life, seem to “develop exceptional power to withstand present or future thwarting of these needs simply because they have strong, healthy character structure as a result of basic satisfaction… It is just the ones who have loved and been well loved, and who have had many deep friendships who can hold out against hatred, rejection or persecution” (Maslow, 1943b). However, this can be paradoxical: people whose needs have been consistently satisfied can be extremely shocked in an emergency situation in which basic needs are suddenly deprived and may display more distress than their more “hardy” counterparts who have more experience coping with Human Needs 62 adversity. Because of the paradoxes inherent in human nature, a directional model based on a predetermined hierarchy is not adequate as a theory for motivation. The complex interrelationships between psychological development, personal and situational factors, social networks, the historical context, and the ecological environment must be integrated to create a broad and flexible model of human needs that is responsive to all of the factors that impact motivation of human behavior. The hypothesis that gratification is the means through which higher needs emerge has been contested in the social science literature, but further research is needed to address the true mechanisms of need prepotency (Hall and Nougaim, 1968; Lawler and Suttle, 1972; Trexler and Schuh, 1964; Wofford, 1971). Cultural Relativity and Universalism In his early years, Maslow espoused a certain cultural relativism, believing that people were fundamentally shaped by their cultures and must be viewed within a social context. His anthropological fieldwork with Blackfoot Indians changed his opinion on the subject, and he emerged as a proponent of universalism that is exemplified by his construction of human needs. Maslow (1943b) proclaimed that anthropological evidence indicates the fundamental desires of all human beings do not differ as much as their everyday conscious desires, which are more overtly shaped by culture and circumstance. However, Maslow (1943) was conscious that his theory was not completely generalizable to every culture, every person, or every circumstance: “no claim is made that it is ultimate or universal for all cultures” (Maslow, 1943b, p. 15). He insisted that his aim was not to create an ultimate list of desires for all cultures which he acknowledged may be neither possible nor productive ”(Maslow, 1943b). Human Needs 65 1943b). The integration of an ecological framing for Maslow’s hierarchy of needs could bolster the cultural responsiveness and allow for flexibility in the construction of locally relevant models of human needs. Categories of Needs There is very little evidence to support the five distinct categories that Maslow proposed (Centers, 1948; Friedlander, 1963; Shafer, 1953; Wahba and Bridwell, 1987). Some studies indicated empirical support for certain need categories but not the overall collection of categories constructed by Maslow. Alderfer’s (1966, 1969) empirical studies showed limited support for certain needs and reconstructions of Maslow’s categories. However, the research did support a more broadly defined categorization of human needs: lower needs including physiological and basic safety, and higher needs including socialization, identity, cognitive development, self-actualization, and growth (Alderfer, 1966, 1969, Centers, 1948; Friedlander, 1963; Shafer, 1953). There was no consistent support across studies for the overall needs classification that Maslow described in his theory of motivation; however self-actualization emerged as an independent factor in some studies (Alderfer, 1966, 1969; Centers, 1948; Friedlander, 1963; Shafer, 1953). There was some indication that loosely differentiated higher-level and lower-level categories of needs may exist, but in some studies high- and low-level needs clustered together independently from the needs categories that Maslow proposed (Alderfer, 1966, 1969; Centers, 1948; Friedlander, 1963; Shafer, 1953; Wahba and Bridwell, 1987). Three studies did not impose a theoretical framework in their statistical analysis and allowed their models to be shaped by factor analysis (Centers, 1948; Friedlander, Human Needs 66 1963; Shafer, 1953). The categories of needs and the significant factors did not reconstruct Maslow’s needs hierarchy or any of the categories he outlined. Many of the studies found self-actualization to be a documented and independent human need. This appears to be the most salient positive research finding from Wahba and Bridwell’s (1987) meta-analysis: even when Maslow’s other needs did not emerge through factor analysis, a type of need related to actualizing one’s potential did emerge consistently across the research studies. The lack of consistency in outcomes between the various studies is likely due to the dramatically divergent interpretations of Maslow’s theory, as well as the diverse contexts, aims, and methods of these studies. Empirical evaluation of this theory is confounded by the challenge of operationalization since its concepts are not well-defined and the terminology has been swept so far from its original meaning and intentions by the momentum of popular psychology and the business sector. Rigorous scientific investigation is needed to elucidate the relationship between types of human needs, since the current literature is insufficient to determine whether Maslow’s categories are invalid or whether the methods of inquiry merely have not been robust enough to sufficiently measure and evaluate the validity of Maslow’s categories. Further studies with the explicit aim of operationalizing, understanding, and contextualizing human needs in the context of well-being must be undertaken. Human Needs 67 Methodological Limitations There significant conceptual, methodological, and measurement problems with the existing research on motivation theory (Adler, 1977; Beer, 1966; Graham and Balloun, 1973; Heylighenl, 1998; Wahba and Bridwell, 1987). Each study reviewed in this analysis defined and operationalized Maslow’s terms differently, used different instruments, and had significant methodological limitations. One of the problems was that Maslow’s theory was clinically derived using the individual as a unit of analysis, but most of the studies aggregated to the group level, using the group as its unit of analysis. Additionally, Maslow’s theory is based on causal logic: the satisfaction of lower needs cause the emergence of higher needs. Because most of the studies were correlational in design, it is not possible to investigate causal relationships through these methods and any claims drawn from these research findings should be subject to heavy skepticism. Most studies were conducted within the business sector with managers focused on their satisfaction with their current job. These types of situation-specific analyses do not provide a representational sample from which to make broad claims about the validity of the theory of motivation (Trexler and Schuh, 1969). None of the studies included observable behavior, and most studies used self- report to collect their data. Self-reporting is known to be a questionable method for behavior analysis, especially relevant to the study of human needs, because motivation may occur at the subconscious level, and it would be difficult to accurately report motivations about which one is consciously unaware. Some conscious wishes or goals are in conflict with unconscious desires, and it is not uncommon for desires and behaviors to deviate dramatically from one another. Maslow noted that the relationship between the Human Needs 70 1. Operationalization and common conceptualization of the terms and key components of motivation theory, including gratification, deprivation, human needs, and specific categories. 2. Investigate and identify new and emerging areas of human needs which can be compared to Maslow’s categories 3. Investigate the mechanisms and consequences of gratification on human psychology and behavior 4. Investigate the mechanisms and consequences of deprivation on human psychology and behavior 5. Studies that feature an ecological framework in which needs interact in a dynamic constellation with the person and the environment 6. Cross-cultural studies to investigate human needs in a variety of contexts, especially with people who experience a disproportionate degree of deprivation (such as refugees, trauma survivors, or people living in poverty). Maslow hoped that future researchers would investigate the validity of his theory through research and practice. Maslow did not intend to write the ultimate theory on motivation at the time of its original publication in 1943; he intended to continue working on it, and he hoped others would further test and develop his ideas. To provide directions for future research, Maslow concluded his article with a set of parameters and relationships that were not addressed in the current article. He hoped to inspire others to investigate and elucidate some of the relationships he did not have the space to address in this theory proposal. Maslow identified the problem of values in any definitive motivation theory and the redefinition of motivational concepts (such as drive, desire, wish, goal, etc). He questioned the relationship between appetites, desires, needs, and what is generally good for the organism (for example, why do people eat candy when they are not even hungry and it is bad for the organism?), and he brought up the implications of motivation theory for hedonistic and selfishness theories. He later worried that his theory would be used to justify individualistic pleasure-seeking behaviors, which it was, and he spent much of his Human Needs 71 later career trying to convince people that his theory did not promote selfishness or hedonistic pleasures. Maslow stressed the need for more research into the implications of this theory for psychotherapy, interpersonal relations, the connection between needs and cultural patterns, and theories of society. He also brought up the principles of success and failure in need-satisfaction-seeking behavior, aspiration level, and the role of uncompleted (contemplated) acts in the development of motivated behavior. Finally, Maslow noted the role of association, habit, and conditioning in the motivation of human behavior and directed future studies to examine the relationship of motivation theory to Alport’s theory of functional autonomy, which distinguishes between drives and motives. Unfortunately most of these areas remain unstudied: social science has largely failed to test Maslow’s hierarchy of human needs or the theory of motivation he proposed. Two theorists have proposed alternate theories of motivation based on the concept of need. Manfred Max Neef (1991) argued that fundamental human needs are non- hierarchical, and are ontologically universal and invariant in nature. Clayton Alderfer (1966, 1969) based his theory on Maslow’s original work, but he conducted empirical research to smooth out some of the rough edges in Maslow’s theory. Manfred Max-Neef (1991) developed a theory of motivation with a different framework of needs than Maslow included. His model takes into account multiple dimensions of need, satisfiers, and action categories. The nine “axiological” needs Max- Neef identified are: subsistence, protection, affection, understanding, participation, identity, idleness, creation, and freedom. These needs are organized according to four “existential;” categories: being, doing, having, and interacting. According to this theory, Human Needs 72 five different kinds of satisfiers are arranged in a matrix within a particular group, according to the relative success in satisfying their related needs. The “satisfiers” that Max-Neef proposed are destroyers or violators which fail to completely satisfy needs, pseudo-satisfiers which generate a false sense of satisfaction, inhibiting satisfiers which satisfy one need while inhibiting the satisfaction of other needs, singular satisfiers which satisfy one need without influencing the others, and synergistic satisfiers which satisfy several needs at once. Clayton Alderfer proposed a modified theory of motivation based on a smaller set of categories similar to Maslow’s: existence needs, relatedness needs, and growth needs (Steers and Porter, 1987). This has been dubbed the “ERG” model, and it has gained popularity in the literature, in research, policy, and practice. On the surface, it appears that Alderfer simply combined the physiological and safety needs into the existence needs, and collapsed the love and esteem needs into the new relatedness category. However, Alderfer also proposed that gratification and frustration of needs leads to changes in the motivation of behavior. Alderfer proposed that people who experienced extreme frustration in the higher needs may display a “frustration-regression” reaction that would cause the lower needs to reemerge as prepotent motivators of behavior. However, none of these models explain how and why people whose basic needs are chronically deprived self-actualize in spite of their other needs being extremely unsatisfied. The hierarchical approach to human motivation has drawn criticism because it seems to imply that self-actualization is not possible within a context of chronic deprivation, such as in populations living in impoverished countries. Maslow stated, “We should never have the desire to compose music or create mathematical systems, or to Human Needs 75 with remedying the fallout from this misguided application of his principles. Despite the changing political climates in which Maslow worked over nearly forty years, he always maintained the vision that his theories would be used to improve the human condition. During World War II, Maslow began to apply his theory of self-actualization to the task of improving conditions in the world. Although Maslow “very much wanted to see his psychological work put to larger, humanitarian ends, the mood of the early-to-mid-1950s conspired against it” (Hoffman, 1988, p. 227). McCarthyism “frightened most American scholars” and restricted the study of anything that might be construed as socialist or communist in nature, including projects aimed to improve social welfare and the general human condition. In 1954 the Senate censured McCarthy and his influence waned: Maslow was once again free to advocate openly for the role of psychology in the betterment of the human species. His work during the late 1950s and 1960s profoundly influenced the structure of the workplace (the main arena of social interaction in American society), but the impact Maslow hoped to have on society’s self-actualization process has yet to be completely fulfilled. Maslow mused in his unpublished writings about the “good society,” asking himself: “How do we move forward toward the good society? What is the good society?” (Maslow, 1996, p. 72). Maslow speculated that the ideal society was one that enabled each member to achieve his or her full potential, and he started thinking about what kind of society would allow for that type of development. Maslow was preoccupied with developing a blueprint for a society that would propel its members to self-actualize. Answering his own questions, Maslow explained that the good society in his view “can Human Needs 76 be defined in terms of its ability to provide basic-need gratifications for its members….. defining the good society as that which makes possible self-actualization for its members” (Maslow, 1996, p. 84-85, italics in original). Motivation theory suggests that when basic needs are met, higher needs emerge as prepotent. As individuals satisfy the lower needs for physiological homeostasis and physical safety, they begin to pursue higher goals related to socializing, developing a positive identity, and attaining their ultimate potentials. Maslow noted in his unpublished works that “any social system, however good or noble its set of laws, ultimately must rest on good people” (Maslow, 1996, p. 151, italics in original). If people were not preoccupied with securing food and shelter, or seeking safety in a dangerous neighborhood, they could be more focused on developing prosocial relationships, self- esteem and skills development, and processes of self-actualization. Maslow coined a set of terms relating to the idealized society he imagined, calling it “Eupsychia.” The most specific definition of Eupsychia is the culture that would be produced by 1,000 self-actualizing people living together on an isolated island, but it can also indicate more simply a society that satisfies basic needs and “presents the possibility for self-actualization in all of its members” (Maslow, 1996, p. 205). Maslow also wrote about “Eupsychian” actions that move toward psychological health and improvement; these actions are undertaken in the service of creating the conditions for Eupsychia. Maslow posited that if a society were to take individual and idiosyncratic differences among human beings seriously, then society must be pluralistic in nature, “a smorgasbord of many kinds of life from which to choose in accordance with one’s own bent and taste” (Maslow, 1979, p. 1248). This type of society would be flexible enough Human Needs 77 to provide for the needs of diverse individuals, families, and sub-communities within it. Maslow mused in his unpublished papers that “art as a path to self-actualization would not work for everyone” because it would “leave some persons cold,” but art could be a powerful tool for those members of society who are aesthetically inclined (Maslow, 1996, p. 125). The same argument follows for any other human interest, such as music, dance, sports, politics, academics, design, and fields. Given the diversity of needs and personalities in a given community, Maslow noted that “individual’s interests and those of his or her team or organization, cultures or society may be at odds” (Maslow, 1996, p. 32). In light of this difficult and nuanced reality, Maslow pondered in his private journal: “How to maximize personal self- actualization while minimizing social costs?” (Maslow, 1979, p. 1248, italics in original). He also wondered about how much responsibility the self-actualizing person in society should take for those members of society who are struggling with the basic needs (Maslow, 1996, p. 31). The phrase “Welfare State” has been treated since the Reagan years like a four- letter word, but it is certainly not deserving of this connotation. Welfare states support the basic needs of all members by providing a safety net for those who need it, and by establishing a basic level of material subsistence beneath which members of society are not permitted to fall. The level of commitment to basic welfare (or wellbeing) of community members marks more advanced societies: unfortunately the proliferation of wealth in the modern world has not been followed by the development of social structures to protect the most vulnerable members of society from exploitation and poverty. True welfare states consider extreme poverty and deprivation to be violations of Human Needs 80 References Adler, S. (1977). Maslow’s need hierarchy and the adjustment of immigrants. International Migration Review, 11(4), 444-451. Alderfer, C.P. (1969). An empirical test of a new theory of human needs. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 4, 142-175. Alderfer, C.P. (1972). Existence, Relatedness, and Growth. New York: Free Press. Berkowitz, L. (1969). Social motivation. In G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (eds.), Handbook of social psychology, 2nd ed., vol 3. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base: Parent-child attachment and healthy human development: New York: Basic Books. Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and Loss: Attachment (Vol. I). New York: Basic Books. Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and Loss. Separation: Anxiety and Anger (Vol. II). New York: Basic Books. Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and Loss: Sadness and Depression (Vol. III). New York: Basic Books. Cofer, C.N. and Appley, M.H. (1964). Motivation: Theory and research. New York: Wiley. Dachler, H.P., and Hulin, C.L. (1969). A reconsideration of the relationship between satisfaction and judged importance of environmental and job characteristics. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 4, 252-266. Deci, E.L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum Press. Frankl, V. (1963). From death camp to existentialism. [Later retitled: Man’s search for meaning]. Boston: Beacon. Freud, S. (1920). Beyond the Pleasure Principle. In S. Freud, The Standard Edition of the Human Needs 81 Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, Volume XVIII (pp. 1-64). Freud, S. (1923). The Ego and the Id. New York: W.W. Norton. Friedlander, F. (1965). Comparative work value systems. Personnel Psychology, 18, 1-20. Fromm, E. (1941). Escape from Freedom. New York: Farrar. Hall, D.T., and Nougain, K.E. An examination of Maslow's need hierarchy in an organizational setting. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 3, 12-35. Harlow, H. (1953). Motivation as a factor in the acquisition of new responses, in R.M. Jones (ed), Current theory and research in motivation. Lincoln, NE: University of Nebraska Press. Harlow, H.F. & Zimmerman, R.R. (1959). Affectional bonds in the infant monkey. Science, 130, 421–32. Harlow, H. (1974). Learning to love. New York: Aronson. Heylighenl, F. (1998). A cognitive-systemic restructuring of Maslow’s theory of self- actualization. Hoffman, E. (1988). The right to be human: A biography of Abraham Maslow. Los Angeles: Jeremy B. Tarcher, Inc. Horney, K. (1967). Feminine psychology. New York: Norton. Horney, K. (1939). New ways in psychoanalysis. New York: W.W. Norton. Huitt, W. (2001). Motivation to learn: An overview. Educational Psychology Interactive. Retrieved May 23, 2008, from http://chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/motivation/motivate.html. Huizinka, G. (1970). Maslow’s needs hierarchy in the work situation. The Netherlands: Wolters- Noordhoff nv Groningen. Lawler, E.E. & Suttle J.L. (1972). A causal correlational test of the need hierarchy concept. Human Needs 82 Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 7, 265-287. Locke, E.A. (1961). Importance and satisfaction in several job areas. Paper delivered at the American Psychological Association convention. Lowry, R (ed). (1979). The Journals of Abraham Maslow, Volumes I & II. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. Maslow, A. H. (1942). The Dynamics of Psychological Security-Insecurity. Character and Personality, 10, 331-344. Maslow, A. H. (1943a). A Preface to Motivation Theory. Psychosomatic Medicine, 5, 85-92. Maslow, A. H. (1943b). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50, 370-396. Maslow, A.H. (1954, 1970). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper & Row. Maslow, A.H. (1965). Eupsychian management. Homewood, IL: Irwin-Dorsey. Maslow, A.H. (1976). Self-actualization psychology. Personality and Personal Growth. New York: Harper Collins. Maslow, A. H. (1996). Future visions: The unpublished papers of Abraham Maslow. Ed. Edward Hoffman. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications Inc. Runyan, W.M. (1982). Life histories and psychobiography: Explorations in theory and method.New York: Oxford University Press. Steers, R. M. and L. W. Porter (1987). Motivation and Work Behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company. Trexler, J.T. and Schuh, A.J. (1969). Longitudinal verification of Maslow’s motivation hierarchy in a military environment. Experimental Publication System. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, Manuscript no. 020A. Wahba, M. A. and L. G. Bridwell (1987). Maslow Reconsidered: A Review of Research on the