1)Offers an in-depth perspective (i.e.

, transference, countertransference) that emphasizes exploring the

origins of psychopathology 2)The focus on developmental considerations 3)Most of the models address
sexuality (except self psychology, which sees sexuality as a drive derivative—secondary to narcissistic
concerns). 4)Freud brought gender issues to the fore with notion of "penis envy". 5) The notion of
"repetition compulsion" transcends theory, often drawn by several models as a central concept.
6)Gabbard—Many people do not respond to medications or brief therapy—Some people want to derive
deeper meaning about themselves beyond symptom reduction. 7) The notion of "unconscious" begins
to explain behavior that we are unaware of. 8) There is biological research that supports some of Freud's
claims ("divided brain" studies). 9)The focus on relationship (particularly by object relations) 10)Self
psychology understands psychopathology in terms of "dysregulation states", which has been confirmed
through neurobiological literature. 11)The universality of defense mechanisms and their use across
theories

1)Psychoanalytic jargon serves to confuse rather than clarify concepts. 2)Some of the ideas (penis envy,
Oedipus) are outdated in terms of our contemporary world, and it is questioned by some
theorists/practitioners whether these concepts are clinically useful. 3) The approach lacks a theory of
intervention—not enough focus on technique. 4)The exclusive focus on the past can lead to "analysis
paralysis" 5)The theory only provides a piece of the pie—often neglecting biological, cultural, and social
considerations 6)Too many patients (perhaps psychotic, borderline) are not considered appropriate for
psychoanalysis.

Strengths and weaknesses of the Theory Strengths Weaknesses 1. The theory provides a broad,
integrative framework within which to study the lifespan. 2. The theory provides insight into the
direction of a healthy life span. 3. The concept of psychosocial crisis, including its positive and negative
pole, offers a model for considering the individual differences, within the framework of normal
development. 4. Longitudinal studies support the general direction of development hypothesized by the
theory 1. Explanations of the mechanisms of crisis resolution and process of moving from one stage to
the next needs more explanation. 2. The idea of a specific number of stages of life and their link to a
genetic plan of development is disputed. 3. The theory has been dominated by a male, Eurocentric
perspective that gives too much emphasis on individuality and not enough attention to connection and
social relatedness. 4. The specific ways that culture encourages or inhibits development are not clearly
elaborated.
accompanying:

1. It looks at thought processes, which were ignored by other psychologists, especially behaviorists.
Processes such as memory, attention, and perception have been studied as they have an effect on our
behavior(Psuf3c, 2011).

2. The cognitive approach’s theories have been applied to cognitive therapies such as Rational Emotive
Therapy. This therapy has been successful in changing irrational thoughts into rational thoughts so that
behavior improves. Ellis found that Rational Emotive Therapy is successful 90% of the time. This shows
that it has been experimented and proved to be effective (Stacey, 2016).

Though the cognitive approach has very strong strengths it has some weaknesses too like:

1.The fact that the cognitive approach is that it is reductionist. An example of this is that it reduces
human behavior down to individual processes such as memory and attention. This is a weakness
because the human is a product of all the processes working together and not just individual parts
(Stacey, 2016).

2. The cognitive approach is too mechanical, it compares the human to computers in that they have
similar processes. This is a weakness as humans are more complex than computers, for example,
emotions can affect a humans’ output.

The behaviorist approach is quite different. Human behavior is learned, thus all behavior can be
unlearned and new behaviors learned in its place. Behaviorism is concerned primarily with the
observable and measurable aspects of human behavior(Psuf3c, 2011). Therefore when behaviors
become unacceptable, they can be unlearned. Behaviorism views development as a continuous process
in which children play a relatively passive role. It is also a general approach that is used in a variety of
settings including both clinical and educational (McLeod, 2017). This approach also comes with its
strengths and weaknesses.

1. One strength of the behaviorist approach is that it the behaviorist approach has had many successful
applications in the real world (particularly in the treatment of mental disorders). Pavlov’s work into
Classical condition has been applied to aversion therapy in order to help those with addictions. It has
also contributed to treatments that help people who suffer from phobias.
2. Another strength of the behaviorist approach is that it uses scientific methods of research. This is a
strength because the experiments are objective, measurable and observable. An example of this is
Bandura’s Bobo doll study of aggression (Stacey, 2016).

The downsides to the behaviorist approach follow:

1. This approach is more relevant to animals being used in experiments. This is because animals can not
consent to take part and are unable to withdraw. An example of a behaviorist animal study is Pavlov’s
dogs which led to classical conditioning principles being developed (McLeod, 2017).

2. It is deterministic, meaning that this approach does not allow us to determine our own behaviors
(Davies-Brown, 2012).

3. Many critics argue that behaviorism is a one-dimensional approach to understanding human behavior
and that behavioral theories do not account for free will and internal influences such as moods,
thoughts, and feelings. “As my professor told us, behaviorism tends to be ‘superficial’ or shallow in
explaining behavior and learning”. It only considers what is observable and measurable, well, in fact,
there are various unseen aspects of an individual that are very vital in his or her personalities and
learning capabilities(Flores, 2013).

COGNITIVE APPROACH STRENGTHS

The cognitive approach comes with a lot of strengths, which is why it has gained a lot of followers over
the years and has become the preferred method of treatment by many psychologists. Some of its
strengths include the following:

1. It highlights people’s thought processes.

Unlike the behavioral approach (which focuses only on outward actions), the cognitive approach tries to
look inward and find out how the brain interprets stimuli. It highlights how cognition greatly affects
behavior and why it’s important for people to understand how their brain works. This is greatly helpful
for those who want to “cheat” their brain and change their behavior for the better.

2. It can be combined with other approaches.

The cognitive approach isn’t just useful for learning more about the thought process; it’s also greatly
useful in helping people improve their behavior. The best thing about it is that it can easily work
together with other approaches to create a therapy that will bring about positive results. Cognitive-
behavioral therapy, for example, is a combination of the cognitive approach and the behavioral
approach and strives to correct wrong cognitive processes to produce more favorable actions. It’s been
proven to be helpful to those have phobias, anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and post-
traumatic stress disorder.

COGNITIVE APPROACH WEAKNESSES

The cognitive approach may be a favorite among psychologists, but this doesn’t mean that it’s perfect. It
also has its own weakness, such as:

1. It dismisses important factors in human behavior.

Those who believe in the cognitive approach think that everything boils down to one thing: cognitive
processes. It doesn’t take into account other factors that may affect behavior, such as genes, individual
experiences, biological structures, and even chemical imbalances. This can lead to the generalization of
human behavior, which doesn’t sit well with many people who think that each individual is different. It
can also be defeating for people who have different thought processes and behaviors than normal
because of one or more of the factors listed above.

2. It’s based on controlled experiments.

One of the reasons why psychologists prefer the cognitive approach is that it’s founded on experiments
that are regarded to be scientifically sound because it uses the scientific method. However, many people
point out that these experiments may not be as valid as they look. By observing people in a controlled
environment, psychologists only get responses that are closely tied to the stimuli that their subjects are
exposed to. They don’t get to observe how their subjects act in the real world, where they’re exposed to
several stimuli at once and have to react based on this mixture of information.

Just like anything else, the cognitive approach has its own strengths and weaknesses. It’s up to
psychologists and ordinary people to decide if this approach is the right choice for them and to find a
balance between its benefits and drawbacks.
The strength of Kohlberg’s theory on moral development lies in its advancement of Piaget’s cognitive
development theory. Moral reasoning is inherently intellectual. How humans think tend to relate into
action. Kohlberg codified the development of moral reasoning into sequential and invariant stages much
like Piaget did with general cognitive development.

A weakness of Kohlberg’s theory on moral development lies in his small sampling pool. Through a course
of study called longitudinal, Kohlberg focused on 98 males over the course of thirty years. It could be a
weakness that Kohlberg relied solely on males. Furthermore, it could be an even further weakness that
only 98 subjects were interviewed. While still a valid working theory, it would have been prudent to take
the time to study both male and females as well as follow a greater number of students over the course
of a longitudinal study.

In studying his subjects’ moral reasoning over time, Kohlberg identified the varying difference that
perspective contributes to the question of moral development. Is one’s perspective focused on the self?
Is one’s perspective focused on others? Is one’s perspective focused on a general principle of human
communal coexistence? It is the perspective on perspectives that Kohlberg identified within human
development that contributes so significantly to the advancement of moral reasoning.