Agency/communion as figure/ground rather than polarity¶

Theory · All theories
Evidence · no claims cited

Description¶

The paper's central organizing framework reconceives Bakan's agency/communion polarity. Rather than treating agency (self-directed, agentic action) and communion (other-directed, communal mutuality) as opposite and opposing forces in the personality, the authors synthesize attachment theory and women's psychology to argue they form "a complex figure/ground, or an oscillation" in which each defines and contains the other, serving development best when operating together.

Design Implications¶

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Both tendencies must be recognized as connected and mutually defining rather than ranked as masculine versus feminine opposites

Constraints¶

• The authors present this as a synthesis of varied theoretical perspectives, offered as work in progress rather than a tested model

Target Learners¶

• developing children and adolescents

Target Learning Objectives¶

• personality development
• self-development in relationship

Claims¶

Related Theories¶

• Interpersonal theory: Agency and Communion dimensions and the principle of complementarity
• Self-in-relation: development as growth within relationship rather than toward individuation

Examples¶

-

Key Sources¶

• Sheldon-Keller, Adrienne & West, Malcolm. (1995). Attachment within the Agency/Communion Paradigm. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED395227