learn more about cognitive structures and processes through their ongoing
research.
Another strength of the cognitive approach is that it fits well with the
current mood, or Zeitgeist, of psychology. The number of journal articles
and doctoral dissertations examining cognitive concepts has risen dramati-
cally over the past few decades. Researchers in other areas of psychology,
such as developmental and social psychologists, are working on related lines
of research that often complement and extend what is known from the cogni-tive personality perspective.
Related to the preceding point, cognitive approaches to psychotherapy have
become particularly popular in recent years. Even therapists who identify withother approaches to personality sometimes incorporate aspects of cognitive
therapy in their practice. A survey of practitioners in the Association for the
Advancement of Behavior Therapy, a group originally composed of behaviortherapists, found that 67% described their therapy orientation as “cognitive be-
havioral ”(Elliott et al., 1996). Nearly half said they occasionally use rational
emotive therapy with their clients.
Criticisms
A frequent criticism of the cognitive approach is that the concepts are some-times too abstract for empirical research. What exactly is a “personal con-
struct”or a“possible self ”? How do we know if a schema is being used?
How many schemas are there, and how are they related? More important,
how can we study their influence on behavior if we can ’t agree on clear oper-
ational definitions? Some of the answers may come with more research, but
the nature of cognitions probably renders them more nebulous than manyconstructs used by personality theorists.
A related question is whether we need to introduce these concepts to
account for individual differences in be havior. For example, strict behavior-
ists might argue that they can explain the same phenomena with fewer con-
structs. Introducing schemas or possible selves may be unnecessary and
perhaps even an obstacle to understanding personality. Applying the law ofparsimony, it is incumbent upon cognitive theorists to demonstrate how
their approach can explain personality better than other, less complicated
approaches.
Another source of concern about the cognitive approach to personality
is that there is no single model to organize and guide theory and research.Basic questions about how various cognitive structures relate to one another
and to other aspects of information processing, such as memory, remain
unanswered. A related problem concer ns the relationship between the vari-
ous cognitive structures different theorists have introduced. Is a personal
construct different from a schema? A comprehensive model would help re-
searchers understand precisely what these terms mean and how they are
related.432 CHAPTER 15 The Cognitive Approach