Case Study of Personal Constructs Theory (PCT)

Case Study of Personal creates Theory (PCT)Title/AbstractIn this excogitate we aim to provide an compendium of a subjects problems victimisation the Personal inventions Theory (PCT) suggested by Kelly. The subject is a 35 year old female full time employee working(a) in the same comp almost(prenominal) as the investigator and has shown no barriers to construing. The subjects problems with her kins have been stopd using the repertoire footb all fieldiron inter soak up and we discuss results and provide an compendium of the findings quest the inter notion and data collection. The interview was d sensation to identify elements within the nodes traffichips and altogether interview limitations have been alloted for the arena. We provide an analysis of Personal Constructs Theory in normal giving a brief overview of its main premises and principles and then move on to its applications including the Grid interview proficiency on our node. We discuss the results and ana lyse the findings fit inly. footGeorge Kellys Personal Construct Theory (PCT) emphasises that the creation is coverd by a separate jibe to the meaning the mortal applies to it and the soul has the freedom to choose a meaning according to what he or she wants (Kelly, 1955). indeed a psyche has the freedom to choose a meaning in terms of which he discriminates the ball and can apply pick workions or meanings to his past, present and future events. consequently a person is non a victim of his events but can change state himself from unpleasant events by reinterpreting and redefining them. According to Kelly (1955) PCT attempts to explain why a universe does what he does and is a theory ab turn up how the hu part process flows, how it strives in new directions as well as in old, and how it whitethorn d ar for the first time to r separately(prenominal) into the depths of newly perceived dimensionsKelly states that a persons processes be mentally channelized by the m odes in which he anticipate the events(1955). Here, the subject is the process and the soulfulness is a behaving organism who whitethorn need an external force to drill an event. The processes include those of self-definition and births with others, and how we interpret events around us as well as the events we perceive and tasks at hand (Kelly 1955). Kelly based his theory of PCT on man as the scientist model and the basic points were as follows the various(prenominal) creates his or her own bearings of seeing the world and interprets events according to how he perceive them the unmarried builds percepts and gets these realises argon organized into systems, or group of gains which embody relationships devil or to a greater extent systems may contain the same events, yet the events ar separate from all of the systems any individuals systems have a definite foci The term construct is a concept that represents the view a person has constructed ab turn bulge the world as he experiences it. Constructs in any case represent the way a person is likely to construe the world and the construct system as a whole represents the history and predisposition to perceive the world in a particular way.Kelly too distinguished between companionable reality, individual reality and communality. Individuality denotes that every individual differ from individually other in how they construct or perceive the world, communality refers to the underlying uniformities or common elements in knowledge and how the construction of experience in iodine person is similar to that of another (Kelly, 1955). Social reality is percept of how one person construes the construction processes of another person and how they argon involved in a hearty role. Personal construct theory has been used in several sociological and scientific disciplines and it has been emphasised that social reality and communality should be guideed along with the individual or individualisedised r eality and both have to be considered together in developing an understanding of the psychological processes (Dalton, 1992).The theory of Personal Constructs, points turn out that it is our face-to-face psychological constructs that introduce the world predictable. We use construct systems to help in experience of the world and respond to all situations according to these wisdoms. Our construct systems help us to contrive good gumption of the world, to make it predictable, to draw conclusions about causes and effects and we learn from experiences and adjust our behaviour accordingly (Fransella, 1995). Kelly wrote that the construct systems influence our expectations and perceptions and reflect our past experiences according to which we rule our future expectations. For example since we known from our past experiences that winters are cold, we would take adequate measures of protection during winter because we expect winters to be cold.However according to Kelly, our construc t systems puzzle and change and are not static and are either confirmed or challenged when we are conscious. We adapt and immunise our constructs according to the situation and alter our feelings according to our experiences. We also tend to think and react according to our construct systems and slightly constructs represent values and key relationships which are difficult to change and fixed whereas any(prenominal) other constructs are less complex and more(prenominal) flexible and adaptive. The truth about the world as understood and experienced check intos the nature of the construct system. Construct systems are not globally judged according to any objective truth and depend on an individuals in the flesh(predicate) feelings, perceptions and choices (Dalton, 1992).One individuals construct system may be different from anothers and when in that location is a general disagreement in constructs, it is generally denoted by prejudice or preconception. Although conflicts and differences of opinions are unpleasant, these events help us to understand differences in hatful and help us to learn how other people perceive things (Stevens, 1996). However construct systems change and may not be altogether internally consistent. People may react or perceive things differently even in similar circumstances and this is normal as there is a received degree of internal inconsistency in perception of events. Distortions of judgement due to internal inconsistency of personal constructs can be harmful for a person as he may suffer from personal distress. The extent to which one person can appreciate and react to another persons constructs is a measure of empathy or how one perceives another (Banister, 1985). One persons construct system may be markedly different from another persons constructs yet one should be able to empathize the other persons construct in order to empathise and develop a sense of social oneness and responsibility. Kellys theory is one of the mo st effective theories in social research and helps to provide a psychological explanation of social similarities and differences.The applications of Kellys theory of Personal constructs are wide and varied as it helps to provide numeral representations of constructs systems. Construct systems are multidimensional mathematical models and a persons language is used to classify his or her experiences. Kelly developed a number of mathematical models and representations of construct systems and time- time-tested hypotheses that followed from basic personal construct theory (Fransella and Bannister, 1977). To understand peoples personal construct systems the repertory Grid Interview proficiency was developed, also known as the component part Construct repertoire Test. The repertoire of constructs that a person develops represents round make up of perception, judgement or evaluation and is always comparative. Thus judgement of anything good is in comparison with the concept of bad.Th us in using a Grid interview three elements are considered and then twain are paired in contrast with a third. The theory of personal constructs can be applied to personal experiences and relationships and so parents, relations, friends, boyfriends and the individual are largely responsible for the instituteation of constructs (Smith et al, 1995 Kalekin-Fishman et al, 1996). Kelly fire a patients constructs, rated the different elements on the constructs and used the resultant grid to point out to the invitee what his primary problems or concerns were. This helped to decide which therapy would be important and helped to particularise the progress and effectiveness of therapy. For example one could find the two elements in a personal relationship of a patient and his mother and use this technique to find out differences between a patients perception of himself and what his mother would like him to be. The patient would then be encouraged to provide a self definition and work t hrough means of making his relationship with his mother more pleasant and productive. If there are paranoid elements recognised in a patients perception of himself or his relationships, appropriate therapeutic interventions are suggested. The Repertory Grid interviewing technique was developed by Kelly to overcome some of the methodological limitations of the interview method. The main go of the Grid technique include 1. Selecting a cast of elements this could be anything from relationships to issues and the elements could be people involved in these relationships with the lymph gland. 2. The elements are interpreted in groups of three and the client is asked to pair two of them separating the third according to a special characteristic (Adams-Webber, 1983). Thus here the differentiation is done according to constructs setd by the client and is done on a bipolar scale with the interviewer great dealting up the question but the client determining the content (Anderson, 1987) .The constructs are examined in some detail and after the interview the constructs are made into scales of 1-5 and the interviewee is expected to rate every element for every construct on this scale. The result is a hyaloplasm and this is then analysed statistically to show the client his problems and how they can be tackled. The statistical analysis helps to give measurements of individual people characteristics and compares peoples perceptions before and after the interview. The Grid is olibanum a statistical, and content free process and although the interviewer novitiates its functions, it is the patient who drives it allowing him to come out with his own perceptions gum olibanum giving the process a freedom from any interviewer deviate and allows complete transparency(Anderson, 1987). Since it is also a standardised interviewing technique any interviewer can read the interview and understand its implications.Russell and Cox (2003) and Morrison (1991) have stressed on the splendor of repertory grid in the analysis of individual perceptions. Considering Kellys constructivist alternativism, we can assume that all our present perceptions of the world could be subject to changes and revisions and accordingly our perceptions of people and later on our interpersonal relationships could also be changed according to this principle. Method A 35 year old female coadjutor, Marie Oliver was selected for the interview process. The client was having some relationship problems, particularly with her work colleagues and has been showing maladjustment along with problems of anxiety, depression and lack of productivity at work. The participant was apprised of the purpose of the interviewing and was asked to participate suggesting that participation in the interview would help her in overcoming her personal problems. A Repertory Grid Interview was done and the first step was identifying elements or grid components. For this all the come-at-able elements including p eople in relationships were identify. Thus elements are work colleagues known to the participant and to the researcher, and the participant used triad method with the elements to create constructs around any one elect upshot. Elements were then compared by asking participant to take 3 elements and as sure where 2 are similar and 1 is different, and the participant was encouraged to continue until all likely combinations were fatigue of 3 elements from the set of 10. The instruction apt(p) in this case was , choose any three of these known people and group two of them together separating a possible third to show why two of them are similar and how they differ from the third person.This process was used to identify similarities and differences of individuals until the participant ran out of constructs. some(prenominal) mini-grids were developed in advance to ensure that the participant was comfortable with the process of grid construction. Then the Participant followed the proc ess, generated the first grid, to ascertain whether from each one element is more like the similarity pole or difference pole by marking with x or o respectively. The participant then generated a arcminute grid to rate each element on each of the 10 constructs using 1-5 point scale, but presented the grid to experimenter without ratings, experimenter then created the final grid as the participant.The main aim and purpose of the interview was agreed with the participant and views about other work colleagues were thus taken. The participant was fully informed from outset regarding the disaster that the revelations from the Grid Interview could be unsettling for her.However for these purposes, participants consent form was also signed in advance and the constructs were then set up on the grid allowing to be revealed. In the process of the interview, the researcher made notes on participant behaviour and perceptions as verbally revealed.In this case, the participant Marie was asked t o identify the elements in her study that could be considered in her relationships with colleagues. Marie identify 10 colleagues at her body of work and separated two of them as distinct from a third. The common points and the differences were noted. Each of the 10 constructs chosen were rated on a 1-5 scale and the grids were created with similarity and difference poles marked by x or an o. This was done in case of determining constructs and relationships with work colleagues. later on the formation of a grid, an analysis was drawn up. Findings/AnalysisThe two assumptions of the Grid Interview by Kelly were as follows1. If we can identify an individuals construct map there is a strong porta we can predict that individuals behaviour. 2. We may be able to modify an individuals map, and therefore behaviour, by some form of training. The two aspects of the Repertory Grid are1. Elements which are the objects of an individuals thinking and to which they relate their concepts or value s. These elements may be people with qualities like effective, unprofessional, etc or they may be objects or abstract, cover concepts like the interview or a test2. Constructs are the qualities used to describe the elements in our personal, individual relationships thus a person is effective because he has a pleasant relationship with his staff which reflects personal construct as applied to the element of an effective individualThe main elements in an analysis when a grid is applied to an individual are1. The results relate to that individual alone 2. Only one grid has to be analysed for an individuals report. 3. A grid make headway form is used to perform the analysisThe Findings and Analysis help us to probe the pursuit questionsTo what extent was the study helpful in understanding the participants view of the melodic theme of examination?Identification and justification of apparent areas of understanding and lack of understandingIs a pattern of understanding evident?How does the analysis link with the notes made forward(prenominal) to completing grids on expected areas of degree of understanding?What is the meaning revealed by the participants choice of elements and constructs?Do the elements and constructs reveal a similar or different view of the topic of analysis chosen?What does the degree of the match imply?Was the study any more helpful when conversation elaboration was also used as an extended method?Is some analysis of new understandings reached during feedback conversation helpful for the process?What do the notes and quotes as revealed by the client suggest?The findings are precondition as followsDegree of similarity Elements(Mostly worked together with these individuals) Close agreement on 4, 5, 6 elements Less agreement on 9 element(Mostly worked separately with these individuals) weensy agreement on 1,2,3,7,8,10- elements with different disconfirming personal experiences working with E7 and E8 on particular projects.Degree of simi larity ConstructsClose agreement on 6 constructs (professional conduct). Upon discussion, views were similar regarding the meaning of professional conduct and who could be trusted. Less agreement on 1,3,4,5,7,9 constructs. Upon discussion, researcher and client shared similar/same definitions of each construct. Differences in definitions regarding Constructs diminished agreement on 2,8,10 constructs. Upon discussion, our definitions were different, hence our measurement of each element came from a different understanding of constructs.The elements identified by Marie were individuals at the workplace and Marie revealed that she worked closely with elements 4, 5 and 6 although had less agreement with element or colleague 9. Marie revealed that she has worked separately and had negative personal experiences with colleagues identified as elements 1, 2, 3, 7, 8 and 10 although she say she was working on the same project with two of these negatively perceived colleagues 7 and 8. Mar i suggested a close agreement with 6 on professional conduct and state that her views with 6 were similar regarding professional conduct, friendships and trust issues as to who in the office should or should not be trusted. Marie suggested that her constructs were either in contrast to or were not compatible with those of 1, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 9 elements or colleagues identified. Marie and the researcher had some discussions on the nature and definition of particular perceptions and constructs and the general definition of these identified by the researcher were similar to that of the subject. The subjects perceptions, feedback and opinions on the constructs were noted separately.Marie identified that two of the colleagues were friendly and amicable and compared with the other person who in contrast has been described as unfriendly and not easy to get along with.The Repertory Grid Scoring sheet is drawn as followsPairs similarities 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 empathy Work socialisation atti tude friendliness knowledgeable Team orientedness Good style appearance attractionship kindlinessThe process of producing the Repertory Grid can be broken down into the following travelStep One The participant Marie identifies ten colleagues whom she knows well. Among these ten colleagues Marie should go along well with at least(prenominal) two of them ideally.Step Two Marie is given six pieces of card or paper on which she is asked to write the name calling of the people she has identified. These are the elements described. A number can also be added to the card/paper to signify translation and added at the head of column on the leveling sheet. Alternatively, the name itself of the element identified can be entered on the scoring sheet as well.Step Three Three cards are selected, for example 1, 2 and 3, and Marie is asked to identify some aspect related to these colleagues behaviour which makes two of the three people selected different from the third.The construct word or artistic style is written in the top left side of the vertical columns. In the top right side of the vertical columns is written the description of the person one who is different from the other two.This process of obtaining constructs from the three people is continued until no further constructs or perceived characteristics could be evoked from the participant.Step Four once the constructs have been completely elicited and entered on the mark offsheet, the cards are returned.Each element person is then given a grudge on a scale of 1 to 5. A score of 1 or 2 is allocated to those who are suited to the description in the left-hand column, the column with the description of the pair. tons of 5 or 4 are allocated to those who match with the description in the right-hand column, the description of the odd person outStep Five A different set of three cards is then selected, cards 4, 5 and 6 and the process in steps 3 and 4 is repeated, ensuring that the description of pairs is e nter in the left-hand column and a score of 1 or 2 relates to the pairs similarity and score points of 4 and 5 relate to the description of the wizard person. A score of 3 is average score. A score of at least one 1 and one 5 is helpful when allocated usually from the set of three people for whom the constructs are being elicited.Step Six Step five is repeated and the various combinations of the elements are aimed to be covered until the participants run out of perceived characteristics or constructs that could be entered on the card. later the grid consideration, the grid scoring sheet is used to record the views of the participant for each element against each construct which has been offered. The data collected is then subject to analysis. A manual analysis can generate and extract considerable information from the grid and all the constructs are related to the personal characteristics of each work colleague considered in the study by Marie.Step Seven In this case study we consi der the behavioral aspects of work colleagues of Marie which is related to their overall friendliness, therefore at the end of the grid Marie is asked to rate the elements in a individual(a), given construct over a scale of friendly to unfriendly.The scoring for friendliness is then compared with other individual aspects to highlight differences and to provide indicators for friendliness. Step Eight The scores for each construct are obtained by marking the difference for each element against the general friendliness figure. Step Nine In this phase, we analyse the various constructs on the basis that if the score is low the aspect measured is significant in the ranking for friendlinessIt is the duty of interviewer to remain without any incline and to refrain from giving any hint to the participant on what constructs should be drawn. Forming the constructs is entirely dependent on the participant and the researcher has no role in its formation. They must be according to the though ts and perceptions of the individual who is being interviewed in this case, Marie although the constructs must be clear, meaningful. Here the analyst has helped her in one or two cases when she couldnt describe the construct and sought help of the analyst to come out with the right word. After the constructs are listed against the elements, the grid results are scored and are ready to be used for analysis.From the example used in this study -the aspects which go towards the behavioural skills of colleague at work, are identified as followsHas empathy with other colleagues Has a proper work conclusion and attitude Has an ethical codeal codeal sense Is friendly and amicable Is knowledgeable and professional Always has a good style and appearance Is a team oriented person Is a attractor in the group Comes out with flip new ideas Is helpful and cooperativeDiscussionIn this study we selected Marie Oliver, a 35 year old colleague who was suffering from some initial maladjust ment in the workplace. Marie was asked to participate in the Repertory Grid Interview process to identify the reasons of her problems, categorise them and come out with possible winds. The approach taken was qualitative analysis by using the Personal Constructs theory developed by Kelly and a final analysis using scoring sheet and identifying elements through the Repertory Grid Interview technique. Marie was asked to select characteristics and constructs of persons in her workplace. She identified the most desirable and friendly characteristics in her colleagues against the least desirable ones. The notes taken during conversation with Marie reveal that Marie felt she got along only with a few colleagues only three as mentioned.There were basic differences in professional ethic and conduct with at least two colleagues she was working in collaboration with. The behavioural skills Marie identified as important in defining her good relationship with the colleagues are empathic charact eristics in others any concept of an ideal colleague is also associated with being able to follow a proper work culture and having a proper attitude. Having an ethical sense, a sense of justice and being knowledgeable, professional with a good sense of humour are also identified as important characteristics in a proper friendly colleague. Marie indicated that being friendly, amicable and with good style and appearance has been noted in at least two of her colleagues and this is stark contrast to a third colleague she identified and with whom she doesnt seem to get along. If we consider Kellys perspective of constructive alternativism, it is possible to have pick perceptions as our perceptions of the world depend completely on our personal constructs.Marie also identified leadership skills, kindliness and cooperativeness, being able to come out with impertinent ideas and following a proper work culture as important aspects of professional behaviour and gave high scores on these asp ects to at least two of her colleagues. Overall, a Repertory Grid Interview on Marie showed that she has good and easygoing relations with two of her colleagues but doesnt seem to go well with many of them. The negative implications of the findings which suggest why Marie did not get along with most of her colleagues and seem to show anxiety and depression symptoms as well as dissatisfaction with her workplace were revealed in her perception of constructs on most of her colleagues. Marie suggested that some of her colleagues were low on cooperativeness and helpfulness, friendliness and proper professional attitude making the atmosphere competitive and hostile.The kinetics of Maries actual relations with her colleagues were thus revealed using this Grid interviewing procedure and Maries own perception of her work situation, perception of her situation and role in the office, and perception of her relations with her colleagues and her job were also revealed through this study. As Mor rison (1991) used the repertory grid technique to understand nurses perception of care and their evaluation of caring attitudes in nursing, Maries perception of her work culture could easily reveal her ideal understanding of a workplace and what she sought in her colleagues. Her inner constructs, precepts and how she saw the world as an individual were revealed and so were her expectations in the future. Considering Maries perceptions, some psychological counselling to improve her working and professional relationships was recommended. LimitationsThe methodological limitations and concerns of interview as a means of knowing peoples construct system were many, as noted by Kelly. These are1. Interview Bias sometimes the interviewer and the school he belongs to whether behaviourist or psychoanalytic could determine the way the session goes and this undermines the objectivity and validity of the study 2. Dependence on the interviewer the role of the therapist should be minimal and th e therapist should just be a shaft of light to facilitate self perception according to Kelly. Most individuals have the capacity to understand his or her problems and any overdependence on the researcher should be avoided. 3. There may be problems with measuring and predicting individual or group characteristics. Although psychology seeks to understand laws of human behaviour, large scale studies showing correlations of different behaviour may not be helpful for study of personal constructs which is based on the understanding of individuals or a small group of people.These methodological limitations have been kept in mind while conducting the interview and interviewer bias and any dependence on the interviewer has been kept to a minimum. Interviewer intervention has also been minimal.ConclusionIn this discussion, we set out with an overview of the Personal Constructs Theory proposed by Kelly (1955). We discussed the different tenets of the constructs theory, the inconsistency of p ersonal constructs and how constructs tend to vary in different people or in same people in different situations. Thus situational factors seem important in constructs and perceptions on other people. Individual constructs form the construct systems and Kelly established the grid method to determine the different elements in a social situation that can be considered as responsible for an individuals disturbed social relationships. In our study of Marie Oliver, a 35 year old employee, her social relationships and possible disturbances were studied using the Repertory Grid Interview technique and her analysis of good and bad characteristics of ten of her colleagues were indicated on the card given to her. The scores were drawn up and according to the analysis the desirable characteristics that Marie perceived in some of her workmates and not in others, were found out. Maries behavioural problems and her unique relationships with her colleagues are then analysed suggesting whether Mari e needed any further psychological help for her anxiety, depression and other work related maladjustments. BibliographyKelly, George Alexander The psychology of personal constructs / George A. Kelly. London Routledge in association with Centre for Personal Construct Psychology,London, 1991, c1955.Dalton, Peggy. A psychology for living personal construct theory for professionals and clients / Peggy Dalton and Gavin Dunnett. Chichester J. Wiley Sons, 1992.University of London. An application of personal construct theory (Kelly) to schizoid thinking. University of London, 1959.Fransella, Fay. George Kelly / Fay Fransella. London Sage, 1995.Anderson, N. Personality assessment in the graduate milkround interview A personal construct psychology perspective and study using repertory grid technique. Birmingham University of Aston Management Centre, 1987.Fransella. F, Bannister. D. 1977. A Manual for Repertory grid technique. Academic Press. London.Bannister, P et al. (1994) Quali tative Methods in Psychology Buckingham Open University Press.Bannister, D. (1985) (Ed) Issues and approaches in personal construct theory London Academic Press, 1985Stevens, R (1996) Understanding the Self London Open University Sage.Kalekin-Fishman, Devorah. and Walker, Beverley. (1996) The Construction of Group Realities culture, society and personal construct theory. Malabar Krieger.Bannister, D. Mair, J. (1968) The rating of Personal Constructs London Academic PressSmith JA, Harre R, Van Langenhove (1995) Rethinking Methods in Psychology London Sage.Jack Adams-Webber (Editor) (1983) Applications of Personal Construct Theory Academic Press.The process of new intentions in subjective experience A social/personal constructionist and relational understanding Journal of Vocational Behavior, Volume 64, Issue 3, June 2004, Pages 485-498 Mary serve RichardsonPerCase Study of Personal Constructs Theory (PCT)Case Study of Personal Constructs Theory (PCT)Title/AbstractIn thi s study we aim to provide an analysis of a subjects problems using the Personal Constructs Theory (PCT) suggested by Kelly. The subject is a 35 year old female full time employee working in the same company as the researcher and has shown no barriers to construing. The subjects problems with her relationships have been determined using the Repertory grid interview and we discuss results and provide an analysis of the findings following the interview and data collection. The interview was done to identify elements within the clients relationships and all interview limitations have been considered for the study. We provide an analysis of Personal Constructs Theory in general giving a brief overview of its main premises and principles and then move on to its applications including the Grid interview technique on our client. We discuss the results and analyse the findings accordingly. enteringGeorge Kellys Personal Construct Theory (PCT) emphasises that the world is perceived by a perso n according to the meaning the person applies to it and the person has the freedom to choose a meaning according to what he or she wants (Kelly, 1955). Thus a person has the freedom to choose a meaning in terms of which he perceives the world and can apply alternative constructions or meanings to his past, present and future events. Thus a person is not a victim of his events but can disengage himself from unpleasant events by reinterpreting and redefining them. According to Kelly (1955) PCT attempts to explain why a man does what he does and is a theory about how the human process flows, how it strives in new directions as well as in old, and how it may dare for the first time to reach into the depths of newly perceived dimensionsKelly states that a persons processes are psychologically channelized by the ways in which he anticipate the events(1955). Here, the subject is the process and the individual is a behaving organism who may need an external force to initiate an event. The processes include those of self-definition and relationships with others, and how we interpret events around us as well as the events we perceive and tasks at hand (Kelly 1955). Kelly based his theory of PCT on man as the scientist model and the basic points were as follows the individual creates his or her own ways of seeing the world and interprets events according to how he perceive them the individual builds percepts and constructs these constructs are organized into systems, or group of constructs which embody relationships two or more systems may contain the same events, yet the events are separate from any of the systems any individuals systems have a definite foci The term construct is a concept that represents the view a person has constructed about the world as he experiences it. Constructs also represent the way a person is likely to construe the world and the construct system as a whole represents the history and predisposition to perceive the world in a particular way.Kelly also distinguished between social reality, individual reality and communality. Individuality denotes that every individual differ from each other in how they construct or perceive the world, communality refers to the underlying similarities or common elements in perception and how the construction of experience in one person is similar to that of another (Kelly, 1955). Social reality is perception of how one person construes the construction processes of another person and how they are involved in a social role. Personal construct theory has been used in several sociological and scientific disciplines and it has been emphasised that social reality and communality should be considered along with the individual or personal reality and both have to be considered together in developing an understanding of the psychological processes (Dalton, 1992).The theory of Personal Constructs, points out that it is our personal psychological constructs that make the world predictable. We use construct systems to help in perception of the world and respond to all situations according to these perceptions. Our construct systems help us to make sense of the world, to make it predictable, to draw conclusions about causes and effects and we learn from experiences and adjust our behaviour accordingly (Fransella, 1995). Kelly wrote that the construct systems influence our expectations and perceptions and reflect our past experiences according to which we require our future expectations. For example since we known from our past experiences that winters are cold, we would take adequate measures of protection during winter because we expect winters to be cold.However according to Kelly, our construct systems bend and change and are not static and are either confirmed or challenged when we are conscious. We adapt and immunise our constructs according to the situation and alter our feelings according to our experiences. We also tend to think and react according to our construc t systems and some constructs represent values and key relationships which are difficult to change and fixed whereas some other constructs are less complex and more flexible and adaptive. The truth about the world as understood and experienced determines the nature of the construct system. Construct systems are not generally judged according to any objective truth and depend on an individuals personal feelings, perceptions and choices (Dalton, 1992).One individuals construct system may be different from anothers and when there is a general disagreement in constructs, it is generally denoted by prejudice or preconception. Although conflicts and differences of opinions are unpleasant, these events help us to understand differences in people and help us to learn how other people perceive things (Stevens, 1996). However construct systems change and may not be altogether internally consistent. People may react or perceive things differently even in similar circumstances and this is norma l as there is a certain degree of internal inconsistency in perception of events. Distortions of judgement due to internal inconsistency of personal constructs can be harmful for a person as he may suffer from personal distress. The extent to which one person can appreciate and react to another persons constructs is a measure of empathy or how one perceives another (Banister, 1985). One persons construct system may be markedly different from another persons constructs yet one should be able to deduce the other persons construct in order to empathise and develop a sense of social oneness and responsibility. Kellys theory is one of the most effective theories in social research and helps to provide a psychological explanation of social similarities and differences.The applications of Kellys theory of Personal constructs are wide and varied as it helps to provide mathematical representations of constructs systems. Construct systems are multidimensional mathematical models and a person s language is used to classify his or her experiences. Kelly developed a number of mathematical models and representations of construct systems and tested hypotheses that followed from basic personal construct theory (Fransella and Bannister, 1977). To understand peoples personal construct systems the repertory Grid Interview technique was developed, also known as the type Construct Repertory Test. The repertoire of constructs that a person develops represents some form of perception, judgement or evaluation and is always comparative. Thus judgement of anything good is in comparison with the concept of bad.Thus in using a Grid interview three elements are considered and then two are paired in contrast with a third. The theory of personal constructs can be applied to personal experiences and relationships and so parents, relations, friends, colleagues and the individual are largely responsible for the formation of constructs (Smith et al, 1995 Kalekin-Fishman et al, 1996). Kelly eli cited a patients constructs, rated the different elements on the constructs and used the resultant grid to point out to the client what his primary problems or concerns were. This helped to decide which therapy would be important and helped to determine the progress and effectiveness of therapy. For example one could find the two elements in a personal relationship of a patient and his mother and use this technique to find out differences between a patients perception of himself and what his mother would like him to be. The patient would then be encouraged to provide a self description and work through means of making his relationship with his mother more pleasant and productive. If there are paranoid elements recognised in a patients perception of himself or his relationships, appropriate therapeutic interventions are suggested. The Repertory Grid interviewing technique was developed by Kelly to overcome some of the methodological limitations of the interview method. The main steps of the Grid technique include 1. Selecting a set of elements this could be anything from relationships to issues and the elements could be people involved in these relationships with the client. 2. The elements are taken in groups of three and the client is asked to pair two of them separating the third according to a special characteristic (Adams-Webber, 1983). Thus here the differentiation is done according to constructs determined by the client and is done on a bipolar scale with the interviewer setting up the question but the client determining the content (Anderson, 1987).The constructs are examined in some detail and after the interview the constructs are made into scales of 1-5 and the interviewee is expected to rate every element for every construct on this scale. The result is a intercellular substance and this is then analysed statistically to show the client his problems and how they can be tackled. The statistical analysis helps to give measurements of individual peo ple characteristics and compares peoples perceptions before and after the interview. The Grid is thus a statistical, and content free process and although the interviewer initiates its functions, it is the patient who drives it allowing him to come out with his own perceptions thus giving the process a freedom from any interviewer bias and allows complete transparency(Anderson, 1987). Since it is also a standardised interviewing technique any interviewer can read the interview and understand its implications.Russell and Cox (2003) and Morrison (1991) have stressed on the grandeur of repertory grid in the analysis of individual perceptions. Considering Kellys constructivist alternativism, we can assume that all our present perceptions of the world could be subject to changes and revisions and accordingly our perceptions of people and later on our interpersonal relationships could also be changed according to this principle. Method A 35 year old female colleague, Marie Oliver was se lected for the interview process. The client was having some relationship problems, especially with her work colleagues and has been showing maladjustment along with problems of anxiety, depression and lack of productivity at work. The participant was apprised of the purpose of the interviewing and was asked to participate suggesting that participation in the interview would help her in overcoming her personal problems. A Repertory Grid Interview was done and the first step was identifying elements or grid components. For this all the possible elements including people in relationships were identified. Thus elements are work colleagues known to the participant and to the researcher, and the participant used triad method with the elements to create constructs around any one chosen topic. Elements were then compared by asking participant to take 3 elements and ascertain where 2 are similar and 1 is different, and the participant was encouraged to continue until all possible combinatio ns were weary of 3 elements from the set of 10. The instruction given in this case was , choose any three of these known people and group two of them together separating a possible third to show why two of them are similar and how they differ from the third person.This process was used to identify similarities and differences of individuals until the participant ran out of constructs. several(prenominal) mini-grids were developed in advance to ensure that the participant was comfortable with the process of grid construction. Then the Participant followed the process, generated the first grid, to ascertain whether each element is more like the similarity pole or difference pole by marking with x or o respectively. The participant then generated a succor grid to rate each element on each of the 10 constructs using 1-5 point scale, but presented the grid to experimenter without ratings, experimenter then created the final grid as the participant.The main aim and purpose of the interv iew was agreed with the participant and views about other work colleagues were thus taken. The participant was fully informed from outset regarding the possibility that the revelations from the Grid Interview could be unsettling for her.However for these purposes, participants consent form was also signed in advance and the constructs were then set up on the grid allowing to be revealed. In the process of the interview, the researcher made notes on participant behaviour and perceptions as verbally revealed.In this case, the participant Marie was asked to identify the elements in her workplace that could be considered in her relationships with colleagues. Marie identified 10 colleagues at her workplace and separated two of them as distinct from a third. The common points and the differences were noted. Each of the 10 constructs chosen were rated on a 1-5 scale and the grids were created with similarity and difference poles marked by x or an o. This was done in case of determining con structs and relationships with work colleagues. After the formation of a grid, an analysis was drawn up. Findings/AnalysisThe two assumptions of the Grid Interview by Kelly were as follows1. If we can identify an individuals construct map there is a strong possibility we can predict that individuals behaviour. 2. We may be able to modify an individuals map, and therefore behaviour, by some form of training. The two aspects of the Repertory Grid are1. Elements which are the objects of an individuals thinking and to which they relate their concepts or values. These elements may be people with qualities like effective, unprofessional, etc or they may be objects or abstract, concrete concepts like the interview or a test2. Constructs are the qualities used to describe the elements in our personal, individual relationships thus a person is effective because he has a pleasant relationship with his staff which reflects personal construct as applied to the element of an effective individual The main elements in an analysis when a grid is applied to an individual are1. The results relate to that individual alone 2. Only one grid has to be analysed for an individuals report. 3. A grid scoring form is used to perform the analysisThe Findings and Analysis help us to probe the following questionsTo what extent was the study helpful in understanding the participants view of the topic of examination?Identification and justification of apparent areas of understanding and lack of understandingIs a pattern of understanding evident?How does the analysis link with the notes made prior to completing grids on expected areas of degree of understanding?What is the meaning revealed by the participants choice of elements and constructs?Do the elements and constructs reveal a similar or different view of the topic of analysis chosen?What does the degree of the match imply?Was the study any more helpful when conversation elaboration was also used as an extended method?Is some analysis of new understandings reached during feedback conversation helpful for the process?What do the notes and quotes as revealed by the client suggest?The findings are given as followsDegree of similarity Elements(Mostly worked together with these individuals) Close agreement on 4, 5, 6 elements Less agreement on 9 element(Mostly worked separately with these individuals) detailed agreement on 1,2,3,7,8,10- elements with different negative personal experiences working with E7 and E8 on particular projects.Degree of similarity ConstructsClose agreement on 6 constructs (professional conduct). Upon discussion, views were similar regarding the meaning of professional conduct and who could be trusted. Less agreement on 1,3,4,5,7,9 constructs. Upon discussion, researcher and client shared similar/same definitions of each construct. Differences in definitions regarding Constructs diminished agreement on 2,8,10 constructs. Upon discussion, our definitions were different, hence our measuremen t of each element came from a different understanding of constructs.The elements identified by Marie were individuals at the workplace and Marie revealed that she worked closely with elements 4, 5 and 6 although had less agreement with element or colleague 9. Marie revealed that she has worked separately and had negative personal experiences with colleagues identified as elements 1, 2, 3, 7, 8 and 10 although she said she was working on the same project with two of these negatively perceived colleagues 7 and 8. Mari suggested a close agreement with 6 on professional conduct and said that her views with 6 were similar regarding professional conduct, friendships and trust issues as to who in the office should or should not be trusted. Marie suggested that her constructs were either in contrast to or were not compatible with those of 1, 3, 4, 5, 7 and 9 elements or colleagues identified. Marie and the researcher had some discussions on the nature and definition of particular perception s and constructs and the general definition of these identified by the researcher were similar to that of the subject. The subjects perceptions, feedback and opinions on the constructs were noted separately.Marie identified that two of the colleagues were friendly and amicable and compared with the other person who in contrast has been described as unfriendly and not easy to get along with.The Repertory Grid Scoring sheet is drawn as followsPairs similarities 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 empathy Work culture attitude friendliness knowledgeable Team orientedness Good style appearance leadership helpfulnessThe process of producing the Repertory Grid can be broken down into the following stepsStep One The participant Marie identifies ten colleagues whom she knows well. Among these ten colleagues Marie should go along well with at least two of them ideally.Step Two Marie is given six pieces of card or paper on which she is asked to write the name calling of the people she has identified . These are the elements described. A number can also be added to the card/paper to signify description and added at the head of column on the scoring sheet. Alternatively, the name itself of the element identified can be entered on the scoring sheet as well.Step Three Three cards are selected, for example 1, 2 and 3, and Marie is asked to identify some aspect related to these colleagues behaviour which makes two of the three people selected different from the third.The construct word or develop is written in the top left side of the vertical columns. In the top right side of the vertical columns is written the description of the person one who is different from the other two.This process of obtaining constructs from the three people is continued until no further constructs or perceived characteristics could be elicited from the participant.Step Four at a time the constructs have been completely elicited and entered on the scoresheet, the cards are returned.Each element person is then given a score on a scale of 1 to 5. A score of 1 or 2 is allocated to those who are suited to the description in the left-hand column, the column with the description of the pair. oodles of 5 or 4 are allocated to those who match with the description in the right-hand column, the description of the odd person outStep Five A different set of three cards is then selected, cards 4, 5 and 6 and the process in steps 3 and 4 is repeated, ensuring that the description of pairs is enter in the left-hand column and a score of 1 or 2 relates to the pairs similarity and score points of 4 and 5 relate to the description of the single person. A score of 3 is average score. A score of at least one 1 and one 5 is helpful when allocated usually from the set of three people for whom the constructs are being elicited.Step Six Step five is repeated and the various combinations of the elements are aimed to be covered until the participants run out of perceived characteristics or constructs that could be entered on the card.After the grid consideration, the grid scoring sheet is used to record the views of the participant for each element against each construct which has been offered. The data collected is then subject to analysis. A manual analysis can generate and extract considerable information from the grid and all the constructs are related to the personal characteristics of each work colleague considered in the study by Marie.Step Seven In this case study we consider the behavioural aspects of work colleagues of Marie which is related to their overall friendliness, therefore at the end of the grid Marie is asked to rate the elements in a single, given construct over a scale of friendly to unfriendly.The scoring for friendliness is then compared with other individual aspects to highlight differences and to provide indicators for friendliness. Step Eight The scores for each construct are obtained by marking the difference for each element against the general friendline ss figure. Step Nine In this phase, we analyse the various constructs on the basis that if the score is low the aspect measured is significant in the ranking for friendlinessIt is the duty of interviewer to remain without any bias and to refrain from giving any suggestion to the participant on what constructs should be drawn. Forming the constructs is entirely dependent on the participant and the researcher has no role in its formation. They must be according to the thoughts and perceptions of the individual who is being interviewed in this case, Marie although the constructs must be clear, meaningful. Here the analyst has helped her in one or two cases when she couldnt describe the construct and sought help of the analyst to come out with the right word. After the constructs are listed against the elements, the grid results are scored and are ready to be used for analysis.From the example used in this study -the aspects which go towards the behavioural skills of colleague at work, are identified as followsHas empathy with other colleagues Has a proper work culture and attitude Has an ethical sense Is friendly and amicable Is knowledgeable and professional Always has a good style and appearance Is a team oriented person Is a leader in the group Comes out with fresh new ideas Is helpful and cooperativeDiscussionIn this study we selected Marie Oliver, a 35 year old colleague who was suffering from some initial maladjustment in the workplace. Marie was asked to participate in the Repertory Grid Interview process to identify the reasons of her problems, categorise them and come out with possible suggestions. The approach taken was qualitative analysis by using the Personal Constructs theory developed by Kelly and a final analysis using scoring sheet and identifying elements through the Repertory Grid Interview technique. Marie was asked to select characteristics and constructs of persons in her workplace. She identified the most desirable and friendly cha racteristics in her colleagues against the least desirable ones. The notes taken during conversation with Marie reveal that Marie felt she got along only with a few colleagues only three as mentioned.There were basic differences in professional ethic and conduct with at least two colleagues she was working in collaboration with. The behavioural skills Marie identified as important in defining her good relationship with the colleagues are empathic characteristics in others any concept of an ideal colleague is also associated with being able to follow a proper work culture and having a proper attitude. Having an ethical sense, a sense of justice and being knowledgeable, professional with a good sense of humour are also identified as important characteristics in a proper friendly colleague. Marie indicated that being friendly, amicable and with good style and appearance has been noted in at least two of her colleagues and this is stark contrast to a third colleague she identified and w ith whom she doesnt seem to get along. If we consider Kellys perspective of constructive alternativism, it is possible to have alternative perceptions as our perceptions of the world depend completely on our personal constructs.Marie also identified leadership skills, helpfulness and cooperativeness, being able to come out with fresh ideas and following a proper work culture as important aspects of professional behaviour and gave high scores on these aspects to at least two of her colleagues. Overall, a Repertory Grid Interview on Marie showed that she has good and easygoing relations with two of her colleagues but doesnt seem to go well with many of them. The negative implications of the findings which suggest why Marie did not get along with most of her colleagues and seem to show anxiety and depression symptoms as well as dissatisfaction with her workplace were revealed in her perception of constructs on most of her colleagues. Marie suggested that some of her colleagues were low on cooperativeness and helpfulness, friendliness and proper professional attitude making the atmosphere competitive and hostile.The dynamics of Maries actual relations with her colleagues were thus revealed using this Grid interviewing procedure and Maries own perception of her work situation, perception of her situation and role in the office, and perception of her relations with her colleagues and her job were also revealed through this study. As Morrison (1991) used the repertory grid technique to understand nurses perception of care and their evaluation of caring attitudes in nursing, Maries perception of her work culture could easily reveal her ideal understanding of a workplace and what she sought in her colleagues. Her inner constructs, precepts and how she saw the world as an individual were revealed and so were her expectations in the future. Considering Maries perceptions, some psychological counselling to improve her working and professional relationships was recommended . LimitationsThe methodological limitations and concerns of interview as a means of knowing peoples construct system were many, as noted by Kelly. These are1. Interview Bias sometimes the interviewer and the school he belongs to whether behaviourist or psychoanalytic could determine the way the session goes and this undermines the objectivity and validity of the study 2. Dependence on the interviewer the role of the therapist should be minimal and the therapist should just be a woodpecker to facilitate self perception according to Kelly. Most individuals have the capacity to understand his or her problems and any overdependence on the researcher should be avoided. 3. There may be problems with measuring and predicting individual or group characteristics. Although psychology seeks to understand laws of human behaviour, large scale studies showing correlations of different behaviour may not be helpful for study of personal constructs which is based on the understanding of individ uals or a small group of people.These methodological limitations have been kept in mind while conducting the interview and interviewer bias and any dependence on the interviewer has been kept to a minimum. Interviewer intervention has also been minimal.ConclusionIn this discussion, we set out with an overview of the Personal Constructs Theory proposed by Kelly (1955). We discussed the different tenets of the constructs theory, the inconsistency of personal constructs and how constructs tend to vary in different people or in same people in different situations. Thus situational factors seem important in constructs and perceptions on other people. Individual constructs form the construct systems and Kelly established the grid method to determine the different elements in a social situation that can be considered as responsible for an individuals disturbed social relationships. In our study of Marie Oliver, a 35 year old employee, her social relationships and possible disturbances were studied using the Repertory Grid Interview technique and her analysis of good and bad characteristics of ten of her colleagues were indicated on the card given to her. The scores were drawn up and according to the analysis the desirable characteristics that Marie perceived in some of her workmates and not in others, were found out. Maries behavioural problems and her unique relationships with her colleagues are then analysed suggesting whether Marie needed any further psychological help for her anxiety, depression and other work related maladjustments. BibliographyKelly, George Alexander The psychology of personal constructs / George A. Kelly. London Routledge in association with Centre for Personal Construct Psychology,London, 1991, c1955.Dalton, Peggy. A psychology for living personal construct theory for professionals and clients / Peggy Dalton and Gavin Dunnett. Chichester J. Wiley Sons, 1992.University of London. An application of personal construct theory (Kelly) to schiz oid thinking. University of London, 1959.Fransella, Fay. George Kelly / Fay Fransella. London Sage, 1995.Anderson, N. Personality assessment in the graduate milkround interview A personal construct psychology perspective and study using repertory grid technique. Birmingham University of Aston Management Centre, 1987.Fransella. F, Bannister. D. 1977. A Manual for Repertory grid technique. Academic Press. London.Bannister, P et al. (1994) Qualitative Methods in Psychology Buckingham Open University Press.Bannister, D. (1985) (Ed) Issues and approaches in personal construct theory London Academic Press, 1985Stevens, R (1996) Understanding the Self London Open University Sage.Kalekin-Fishman, Devorah. and Walker, Beverley. (1996) The Construction of Group Realities culture, society and personal construct theory. Malabar Krieger.Bannister, D. Mair, J. (1968) The paygrade of Personal Constructs London Academic PressSmith JA, Harre R, Van Langenhove (1995) Rethinking Metho ds in Psychology London Sage.Jack Adams-Webber (Editor) (1983) Applications of Personal Construct Theory Academic Press.The exit of new intentions in subjective experience A social/personal constructionist and relational understanding Journal of Vocational Behavior, Volume 64, Issue 3, June 2004, Pages 485-498 Mary work on RichardsonPer