Alcala 1958

par ticu laremp irical con cepts that are part of the theory of pers onality emp loy ed by the obse rver . The sev era l theo rist sare pre­ sen ted ma kin g thei r div erse assump tion s abou t beh avio r, foc usi ng upon dif fer ing empir ica l prob lems and us ing div ers ifie d res ear ch tech niques . Th e ensu ingwelter of con tradict ory ide as is exp ose d by cri tic al evalua tion s. Th e auth ors fee l that the stud ent should be fam ilia rwith the wid e varie ty of the ori es an d should compar e them one to the oth er be for eembra cingan y par ticu lar one. Th e par ticular theo ries were sel ect ed on the basi s of the auth ors' judgme nt of the ir pres ent- da y imp orta nce and dis tin ctiv eness. Th e l r i i l li l ed . l ists - i g tions t r, ing ing i ical l sified ch i ues. i dictory d i l tions. l il r w variety of ies e e cing ti l . ti theories e on the basi ' t t nce ctivenes . ti

as Jean Ke rr's Please Don't Eat the Da isi es. Th e Kerr book ha s str ong app eal for the lad y ofthe sub urb anhouse , wher eas Smi th' s effort de fin ite lyap pe alsto the mod ern lord- and -ma ster 'sme mo rie sof boyhood days. Sm ith do es not ha ve the enga gin gvariety of Mrs . Ke rr. Hi s rem ini sce nce s,tho ugh oft tim esqu ite com ic, ar e too elonga ted . It is int ere sti ng to no te, how eve r, that the dev il-m ay- car eamuseme nts that abs orb ed the youn gst ersof hi s nei ghb orhood could be almost ex ac tly tho se of a rev iewer, tho ugh the home towns are thousands of mi les apa rt. Of cou rse , the theme of thi s slen der vol umeis tha t thech ild renof today, des pite the heap s of toy s in their clo set s and the ex ce ssi veorg an ize drec reatio nsin the ir be­ ha lf, do not have the fun of the lad s of yes ter yea r.On th is top icSm ith pro ves him­ self a laud at ortempo risac ti, and ther e is alw ays a rebu ttal fo r su ch mou rner s. Ma ny of hi s an ecd ote s are lau ghab le; some are not in th e bes t tas te; and som e are lik e an ov erdose of jelly beans, gum- drops an d undr ied cor nsi lk tobacc o. Per­ hap s he sho uld ha ve eat en a few da isies. — L. F . L . P ER SONA LITY ha s apop ularity and fas cin ation fo r the gen era l publi c sha red by few other are as in psy­ cholo gy . Th er e are so ma ny def i­ ni tio nsof the term tha t itis almost all thi ngs to all me n an d the div ers ity of pop ular usa ge is ex cee de don ly by the var iety of me an ings endowe dit by psy cho log ists .Cer­ tai nly, the ore tica lexpo sit ionand cla rifi ca­ tion in thi s are a are a de fin ite nee d. The aut hor s of Th eo rie sof Pe rso na lity 4 attempt to fill thi s nee d. Th e int ent of the vol ume is to acq uai nt the rea de r with the genera l fie ld of per­ son ali ty as it really ex ist s. Th e aut hor s submi t tha t per son ali ty is de fin ed by the 4 Calv in S. Hall and Gardne r Lindze y (New Yor k: Wil ey, 19 57 ). isies. l f an h , hereas Smith's r i itely als ster's ries i gi g . r. s i i cence , t ti es it ic, ted. sting t , r, ay-care a ents e gsters rho d tly i r, to ns ds l t. s , e e re , s s s s ive o ized r ti ns - lf, t year. i i him- ator poris ti, s l . otes able; t ; ns, ie l o. - s l i i . -L.F.L. P LITY i ation l lic s - l gy. e i- i ns it ity e ed l i ings ed logi ts. - l , tical ition i c - ite . s e ries f ersonality 4 . e t r l field of per- sonality as it really exi ts. Th s it s ality e 4 in : , ). '

IE

.

DR. GUNDERSON & FRIEND sel ect ion and poi nts of emphasi scould be cri tic ize d,but so cou ld any oth er select ion tha t mig ht be 'mad e. Th e the orie s cov ere d inc lud e: Fre ud 's psy cho ana lyt icthe ory ; Jun g's an aly tic the­ i t i ti ized, other selection · e. i s d l e: 's analytic ; ' l tic e-

119