preview

Maslow Critic

Better Essays
Maslow revis(it)ed Paper 02 - 1 PAPER 02 Maslow revis(it)ed Bob Dick (2001) Maslow revis(it)ed: Maslow’s hierarchy of needs examined and reformulated. A discussion paper originally written in the 1980s, revised 1990, 1993. This version 2001. Contents Maslow’s hierarchy The nature of Maslow’s hierarchy From fact to logic Maslow’s hierarchy as a taxonomy The validation of a macro-theory Internal/external dimension Conditional vs unconditional dimension The hierarchy explored further The people vs events dimension Some further elements of similarity Two unresolved issues The overall model 2 5 5 10 14 14 15 16 19 20 22 23 Paper 02 - 2 Robust processes — papers Underlying almost all human behaviour is an attempt to satisfy some human…show more content…
One is the adequacy of the research itself. In view of the extent of the research, and the high proportion of negative findings, this seems unlikely to be fruitful. I will deal with it here cursorily. Another is the appropriateness of the research to the nature of the theory. In this respect I argue that it is the sort of theory which is not easily amenable to crucial test, as Wahba and Bridwell accept. This would usually be seen as a shortcoming. I here argue that, on the contrary, it is one of the qualities which gives the theory its power. The third ground is that the theory itself can be refined. A series of modifications are later proposed. The remainder of the paper works through a number of stages. The general nature of Maslow’s hierarchy is first examined. A the same time the adequacy of current research methods to test it is assessed. Then follows a more detailed analysis of the theory. As a consequence of this examination I propose a series of Maslow revis(it)ed Paper 02 - 5 modifications to the categories of needs, their relationship, and the underlying rationale for the hierarchy. Finally, I review the agreement between the theory and other general theories which address similar issues. The nature of Maslow’s hierarchy Before the research can be assessed or the theory reviewed it is necessary that I clarify the very nature of the theory. Briefly, I argue that it is essentially a taxonomy, with
Get Access