fei75766_ch19_610-639.indd 622  02/06/20 01:53 PM
Part VI    Learning-Cognitive Theories622
thedecision tobuyausedcar,theconstruct ofmaturity versus childishness pene -
trated independence versus dependence andadded anewflavor toit.Previously, the
twoconstructs hadbeen separated, andArlene’s notion ofindependence waslimited 
totheideaofdoing asshechose, whereas dependence wasassociated withparental 
domination. Now sheconstrued independence asmeaning mature responsibility and
dependence assignifying achildish leaning onparents. Insuchamanner, allpeople 
modulate oradjust theirpersonal constructs.
Incompatible Constructs
Although Kelly assumed anoverall stability orconsistency ofaperson’s construction 
system, hisfragmentation corollary allows fortheincompatibility ofspecific elements. 
“A person may successively employ a variety of constructive subsystems which are inferen -
tially incompatible with each other” (Kelly, 1955, p.83).
Atfirst,itmayseem asifpersonal constructs must becompatible, butifwe
looktoourownbehavior andthinking, wecaneasily seesome inconsistencies. In
Chapter 18,wepointed outthatWalter Mischel (astudent ofKelly) believed that
behavior isusually more inconsistent thantraittheorists would haveusbelieve. Chil-
drenareoften patient inonesituation yetimpatient inanother. Similarly, aperson 
maybebrave while confronting avicious dogbutcowardly when confronting aboss
orteacher. Although ourbehaviors often seem inconsistent, Kelly sawunderlying 
stability inmost ofouractions. Forexample, amanmight beprotective ofhiswife,yet
encourage hertobemore independent. Protection andindependence maybeincom -
patible witheachother ononelevel, butonalarger level, botharesubsumed under the
construct oflove.Thus, theman’s actions toprotect hiswifeandtoencourage herto
bemore independent areconsistent withalarger, superordinate construct.
Superordinate systems mayalsochange, butthose changes takeplace within a
stilllarger system. Intheprevious example oftheprotective husband, forinstance, 
theman’s loveforhiswifemaygradually shifttohatred, butthatchange remains 
within alarger construct ofself-interest .Theprevious loveforhiswifeandthepresent 
hatred arebothconsistent withhisviewofself-interest .Ifincompatible constructs 
could notcoexist, people would belocked intoafixed construct, which would make 
change nearly impossible.
Similarities Among People
Although Kelly’s second supporting corollary assumes thatpeople aredifferent from 
eachother, hiscommonality corollary assumes similarities among people. Hisslightly 
revised commonality corollary reads: “To the extent that one person employs a construc -
tion of experience which is similar to that employed by another, [that person’s] processes 
are psychologically similar to those of the other person” (Kelly, 1970, p.20).
Twopeople need notexperience thesame event orevensimilar events fortheir
processes tobepsychologically similar; theymust merely construe theirexperiences 
inasimilar fashion. Because people actively construe events byasking questions, 
forming hypotheses, drawing conclusions, andthenasking more questions, different 
people withwidely different experiences mayconstrue events inverysimilar ways. 
Forexample, twopeople might arrive atsimilar political views although theycome 
from disparate backgrounds. Onemayhavecome from awealthy family, having lived Final PDF to printer