Introduction to Filipino Psychology PDF

Preview

Summary

FILIPINO PSYCHOLOGYSikolohiyang Pilipino (Filipino psychology) refers to the psychology born out of the experience, thought and orientation of the Filipinos, based on the full use of Filipino culture and language. The approach is one of ‘‘indigenization from within’’ whereby the theoretical framewor...

Description

FILIPINO PSYCHOLOGY Sikolohiyang Pilipino (Filipino psychology) refers to the psychology born out of the experience, thought and orientation of the Filipinos, based on the full use of Filipino culture and language. The approach is one of ‘‘indigenization from within’’ whereby the theoretical framework and methodology emerge from the experiences of the people from the indigenous culture. It is based on assessing historical and socio-cultural realities, understanding the local language, unraveling Filipino characteristics, and explaining them through the eyes of the native Filipino. Among the outcomes are: a body of knowledge including indigenous concepts, development of indigenous research methods and indigenous personality testing, new directions in teaching psychology, and an active participation in organizations among Filipino psychologists and social scientists, both in the Philippines and overseas.

The beginnin gs of Sikolohi yang Pilipino (Filipino psycholo gy) From the beginning of the periods when the Philippines was colonized by Spain, and then the USA, academic psychology, or the psychology taught in schools, was predominantly Western in theory and in methodology. Many Filipino intellectuals, notably the two Philippine heroes Jose Rizal and Apolinario Mabini, expressed dissatisfaction at the pejorative interpretations of Filipino behavior by Western observers. This disenchantment continued as Filipinos struggled to assert their national and cultural identity. In the 1960s, many Filipino intellectuals and scholars were already sensitive both to the inadequacy as well as the unfairness of the Western-oriented approaches to psychology. For instance, in the area of personality, the Western approach in research of not being enmeshed and bound by the culture being studied has resulted in a characterization of the Filipino from the ‘‘judgmental and

impressionistic point of view of the colonizers’’ (Enriquez, 1992, p. 57). For example, the predisposition to indirectness of Filipino communication was regarded as being dishonest and socially ingratiating and reflecting a deceptive verbal description of reality (Lawless, 1969, cited in Enriquez, 1992) rather than a concern for the feelings of others. It was in the early 1970s that this was initiated when Virgilio Gaspar Enriquez returned to the Philippines from Northwestern University, USA with a Ph.D. in Social Psychology and lost no time in introducing the concept of Sikolohiyang Pilipino (Filipino Psychology). Together with then-chairman of the Department of Psychology at the University of the Philippines (U.P.), Dr. Alfredo V. Lagmay, Enriquez embarked on a research into the historical and cultural roots of Philippine Psychology. From these researches, a two-volume bibliography on Filipino psychology and a locally developed personality test, Panukat ng Ugali at Pagkatao (Measure of Character and Personality), were produced. In 1975, Enriquez chaired the Unang Pambansang

Kumperensya sa Sikolohiyang Pilipino (First National Conference on Filipino Psychology) which was held at the Abelardo Auditorium at U.P. In this conference, the ideas, concepts, and formulations of Sikolohiyang Pilipino were formally articulated. What is Sikolohiyang Pilipino Sikolohiyang Pilipino is anchored on Filipino thought and experience as understood from a Filipino perspective (Enriquez, 1975). The most important aspect of this definition is the Filipino orientation. For centuries, Filipino behavior has been analyzed and interpreted in the light of Western theories. Since these theories are inevitably culturebound, the picture of the Filipino has been inaccurate, if not distorted. Enriquez (1985) later defined Sikolohiyang Pilipino as ‘‘the study of diwa (‘psyche’), which in Filipino directly refers to the wealth of ideas referred to by the philosophical concept of ‘essence’ and an entire range of psychological concepts from awareness to motives to behavior’’. It must be stressed at the outset though that developing a particularistic

psychology such as Filipino psychology is not anti-universal inasmuch as the ultimate aim of Sikolohiyang Pilipino is to contribute to universal psychology, which can be realized only if each group of people is adequately understood by themselves and from their own perspective. Sikolohiyang Pilipino is a step towards contributing to universal psychology. Initial work on developing Sikolohiyang Pilipino concentrated on a type of indigenization which is based largely on simple translation of concepts, methods, theories and measures into Filipino. For example, psychological tests were translated into the local language, modified in content, so that a Philippine-type version of the originally borrowed test was produced. On the other hand, another type of indigenization was given more emphasis after the translation attempts failed to capture or express a truly Filipino psychology. This is called indigenization from within (as against indigenization from without), which means looking for the indigenous psychology from within the culture itself and not just clothing a foreign body with a local dress.

The principal emphasis of Sikolohiyang Pilipino is to foster national identity and consciousness, social involvement, and psychology of language and culture. It is thus concerned with proper applications to health, agriculture, art, mass media, religion, and other spheres of people’s daily life. In his 1975 article on the bases of Sikolohiyang Pilipino on culture and history (Enriquez, 1975) and a 1976 article on perspectives and directions of Sikolohiyang Pilipino (Enriquez, 1976), he distinguished Sikolohiyang Pilipino (Filipino psychology) from Sikolohiya sa Pilipinas (psychology in the Philippines – the general form of psychology in the Philippine context) and Sikolohiya ng mga Pilipino (psychology of the Filipinos – theorizing about the psychological nature of the Filipinos, whether from a local or a foreign perspective). Enriquez searched the Filipino culture and history for the bases of Sikolohiyang Pilipino instead of tracing these back to Western theories. He came up with a definition of psychology that takes into account the study of emotions and experienced knowledge (kalooban and

kamalayan), awareness of one’s surroundings (ulirat), information and understanding (isip), habits and behavior (another meaning of diwa), and the soul (kaluluwa) which is the way to learning about people’s conscience. (Enriquez, 1976)

humanistic approaches  It also maintains mentalismbehaviorism approach  It is not inconsistent with a universal psychology

Sikolohiyang Pilipino is anchored on Filipino thought and experience as understood from a Filipino perspective (Enriquez, 1975). Sikolohiyang Pilipino is the scientific study of psychology derived from the experience, ideas, and cultural orientation of Filipinos.

Development of indigenous concepts and theories  There is a good deal of literature on the Filipino personality which has become available. The Filipino personality is a popular area of study of many foreign scholars who came to the Philippines.

Why Sikolohiyang Pilipino? “Application of concepts and measurements which are not appropriate in a particular culture (or context) may result to an incorrect interpretation of one’s behavior and thinking Major Characteristics of Sikolohiyang Pilipino  Identity and national consciousness  It’s against a psychology that perpetuates colonial status of the Filipino  Psychological practice in a Philippine context  It is concerned with both science and

Rethinking Filipino values  Enriquez was critical of this approach to the study of Filipino values. He encouraged Filipino scholars to take a second look at these values using a Filipino orientation.

VALUE/PAKIRA MDAM o (Shared Inner Percept ion) 3. LINKING SOCIOPERSONAL VALUE/KAGAND AHANG LOOB o (Shared Humani ty) 4. ACCOMODATIV E SURFACE VALUES o Hiya/ shame o Utang na loob/no rm of recipro city o Pakikis ama and pakikip agkapw a/smoot h internal relation ship (sir) 5. CONFRONTATIV E SURFACE VALUES

o Bahala na/fatal istic passive ness 6. SOCIETAL

THE CORE VALUES 1. CORE VALUE/KAPWA o (Shared Identity ) 2. PIVOTAL INTERPERSONA L

VALUES

o Karang alan/di gnity o Kataru ngan/ju stice

o Kalaya an/free dom KAPWA (SHARED IDENTITY) (Shared Inner Self, “The other person is also yourself”)  the core of Filipino psychology, it is humaneness at the highest level  implies unique moral obligation to treat one another as equal fellow human beings TWO CATEGORIES • IBANG TAO/OUTSIDE R • HINDI IBANG TAO/ONE-OFUS AMONG OUTSIDERS:  MakiTUNGO (courtesy/civilit y)  MakiSALAMU HA (mixing)  MakiLAHOK (joining)  MakiBAGAY (adapting)  MakiSAMA (getting along with/united) AMONG INSIDERS:  Maki PAGPALAGAY ANG-LOOB (Rapport/mutual trust)  Maki SANGKOT

(Involvement/joinin g others)  Maki ISA (Oneness, unity with) PAKIRAMDAM (Knowing Through Feeling or Tacit Knowing; Participatory Sensitivity)  A unique social skill inherent in Filipino personhood.  A request to feel or to be sensitive to  There is ‘‘hesitation to react, attention to subtle cues and non-verbal behavior in mental roleplaying KAGANDAHANG LOOB SHARED HUMANITY (Pagkamakatao)  genuine acts of generosity, kindness and caring Accommodative Surface Value: HIYA  Hiya - Sibley (1965), an American scholar, translated hiya as ‘‘shame’’.  Lynch (1961) saw hiya as ‘‘the uncomfortable feeling that accompanies awareness of being in a socially

unacceptable position, or performing a socially unacceptable action.’’  Andres (1994) described hiya as ‘‘an ingredient in why Filipinos overspend during fiestas in order to please their visitors, even to the extent of going into debt’’  Bonifacio (1976) alerted us to the different meanings of the word hiya depending on its form – nakakahiya (embarrassing), napahiya (placed in an awkward position), ikinahiya (be embarrassed with someone), etc.  With some affixes, it becomes negative, e.g., napahiya; with others, positive, e.g., mahiyain (shy); and in still other forms, it can either be positive or negative depending on the context, e.g., kahihiyan (sense of propriety, or embarrassment) .

UTANG NA LOOB  Utang na loob was translated by Kaut (1961) as ‘‘debt of gratitude’’.  Andres (1994, pp. 190–191) defined it, fïllowinf Kaut’s logiã, as ‘‘the principle of recipòocity incurred when an individual helpr another.  Hollnsteiner (1961) tooi(this interpretation further by chaiíing that tle recipient of the favor is forced ‘‘to show hys (sic) gratitude propårly by returning$the favor with in| erest. ﾤDooking at uuang na loob mose closely in the context ïf Filipino culture, it0actually means ‘‘gratituee/solid arity’’.  It is nnt neCessarily a burden as the Word ‘‘debt’“ cfnnotes, because in the Filapino pattern of interpersonal relations.  It is a beautiful element of Filipino interpersonal relationships that binds a person to his or her home

community or home country. PAKIKISAMA  Pakikisama was identified by Lynch (1961, 1973) as a Filipino value, giving it the English translation of maintaining ‘‘smooth interpersonal relations’’ by going along with the group or the majority decision, i.e., conformity. Confrontative Surface Value BAHALA NA  Has no exact English translation  Bostrom (1968) was the first psychologist to analyze this value by comparing it with American fatalism  Thomas Andres defines bahala na as ‘‘the Filipino attitude that makes him accept sufferings and problems, leaving everything to God. ‘Bahala na ang Diyos (God will take care of us)’ . . .  Lagmay (1977) explained that bahala na is not ‘‘fatalism’’ but ‘‘determination

and risktaking’’.  Rather, they are telling themselves that they are ready to face the difficult situation before them, and will do their best to achieve their objectives Internality and Externality Components of Filipino Personality  Puri or Dangal  Puri refers to honor which is physica l, such as that bestow ed through compli ments or applaus es for a good perform ance, thus external  Dangal is honor from within – knowle dge of one’s true worth, charact er, achieve ment

and success.  Other examples of internalityexternality includes saya and ligaya for the English word ‘‘happiness’’; pigil and timpi for ‘‘control’’; and dama and damdam for ‘‘feel’’. The Sikolohiyang Pilipino perspective on the Filipino behaviour patterns and value structure  as colonial/accom modative surface values  hiya(‘‘p ropriet y/ dignity’ ’)  utang na loob (‘‘gratit ude/soli darity’’ ) and  pakikis ama (‘‘comp anionsh ip/estee m’’); and  as confrontative surface values. He emphasized  bahala na (‘‘deter minatio n’’),  sama/la kas ng loob (‘‘resen tment/g









uts’’) and  pakikib aka (‘‘resist ance’’) as core value  kapwa (‘‘share d identity ’’) as pivotal interpersonal value  Pakikiramd am (‘‘share d inner percepti on’’) as linking socio-personal value  kagand ahangloob (‘‘share d humani ty’’) as societal values  karang alan (‘‘digni ty’’),  katarun gan (‘‘justic e’’), and  kalayaa n (‘‘freed om’’)

Development of indigenous personality measures  In the area of Filipino Personality, Enriquez, together with





PPRH, developed the Panukat ng Ugali at Pagkatao (PUP) (Measure of Character and Personality) in 1975 which utilized dimensions of personality that are relevant to Filipinos. While psychological testing is of Western origin, the substance of the PUP originated from an understanding of the Filipinos. The test administration procedures were also adapted to Filipino ways (Enriquez & Guanzon, 1985). Cipres-Ortega and GuanzonLapen˜a (1997) documented and organized the information on both published and unpublished work in the area of psychological measurement, and saw a recent upsurge in the development of indigenous psychological measures. Interest has grown by leaps and bounds



from the handful of tests in educational psychology which were locally developed in the 1950s, to the interest in personality testing of the projective type in the 1960s. They further noted that ‘‘the 1970s saw tests developed in creativity, selfperception, personality and vocational testing, and the 1980s an increased interest in personality testing, with a number of researchers doing studies on the Filipino child and the Filipino adolescent. And in the 1990s, tests were developed to measure a wide variety of Filipino characteristics – katalinuhan [intelligence], pagkarelihiyoso [religiosity], kaasalang sekswal [sexual behavior], kakayahang magdala ng tensyon [ability to handle stress], pagkamabahala [anxiety], kahustuhang

emosyonal [emotional stability], kakayahang berbal sa Filipino [verbal ability in Filipino], Filipino management style, dementia screening, empathy, and trustworthiness, to name a few’’ (Cipres-Ortega & GuanzonLapen˜a, 1997) Development of indigenous research methods  The impact of Sikolohiyang Pilipino was greatly felt in the area of social research methods. In 1975, Carmen Santiago, a postgraduate student of psychology at U.P., did a study on pagkalalaki (no equivalent in English, but approximately, it means ‘‘masculinity’’, ‘‘maleness’’, ‘‘manhood’’, or all of these) for a class under Enriquez.  This study was to be the turning point in Philippine social research for it was in her articles (Santiago, 1975, 1977)



that the pakapa-kapa (‘‘groping’’) approach was first introduced. In searching for appropriate research methods that are indigenous to Filipino experience, Filipino scholars have learned to assume the pakapa-kapa perspective, ‘‘a suppositionless approach to social scientific investigations. As implied by the term itself, pakapa-kapa is an approach characterized by groping, searching and probing into an unsystematized mass of social and cultural data to obtain order, meaning and directions for research’’ (Torres, 1982, p. 171).

There are at least five basic guiding principles relevant to the use of indigenous perspective in general, and indigenous research methods in particular. 1. The level of interaction or relationship that exists between the researcher and the researched significantly

determines the quality of the data obtained in the research process  The levels of interaction are the same ones as the kapwa classificatio ns – IbangTao (‘‘Outsider’ ’) and HindiIbang- Tao (‘‘One-ofus’’).  It is recommend ed that the first level under HindiIbang-Tao, which is pakikipagp alagayangloob (level of mutual trust, understandi ng, rapport) should be reached, at the minimum, in order to be assured of good quality data. 2. Research participants should always be treated by researchers as equal, if not superior – a fellow human being and not like a ‘‘guinea pig’’

3. The welfare of the research participants take precedence over the data obtained from them. 4. The method to be used in a research should be chosen on the basis of appropriateness to the population (and not sophistication of the method) and it should be made to adapt to existing cultural norms. 5. The language of the people should be the language of research at all times. Areas of Applications of Sikolohiyang Pilipino 1. Early work was focused on the use of the local language in teaching, research and in the conduct of various conferences and symposia in Psychology 2. The work of Bulatao in appropriate techniques in therapy suited to the Filipino personality 3. Providing psychological help to children in especially difficult circumstance 4. Feminist psychology social and clinical psychologists have helped battered women understand their problems in the light of the different

socio-cultural conditions affecting women in Philippine society. 5. In industry particularly in the marketing of specific products and understanding consumer behavior. Towards Universal Psychology through Indigenization  We put forward now that what is generally considered as ‘‘universal’’ psychology is based on the psychology of industrialized and developed countries of the West. This psychology aims to be a science comparable to that of the natural sciences, thus approximating the laws of universality. Two Types of Indigenization 1. Indigenization from without – transporting psychological theories, concepts, and methods, and modifying them to fit to local cultural context. 2. Indigenization from within – culture as source of knowledge to come up with

cross-cultural knowledge.

Katutubong Pamamaraan ng Pananaliksik (KPP)

Bunga ng karanasan sa loob ng SP, ang katutubong pamamaraang pananliksik (KPP) ay mga pamamaraan sa pananaliksik na may pagkiling sa pangangailangang sensitibo sa mga Pilipino. Ito naglalayong pangalagaan tunguhan

ay ang ng

mananaliksik at kalahok na hindi isinasaalangalang ang kapakanan ng kalahok at ang datos sa ngalan ng agham Mga Pinapalagay ng KPP

1. Itinatakda ng

2.

3.

4.

5.

antas ng interaksyon o ugnayan sa pagitan ng mananaliksik at kalahok ang bisa at husay ng mga datos na makukuha sa pananaliksik Mahalagang pantay ang paturing ng mananaliksik sa kalahok—isang kapwa tao at hindi “guinea pig” na ang tanging papel ay ang pagbibigay ng datos. Inuuna ang kapakanan ng mga kalahok kaysa sa datos na makukuha mula sa kanila. Kailangang piliin ang metodo ng pananaliksik batay sa kaangkupan nito sa mga tao at konteksto, at kailangang iangkop ito sa kultura at kaugalian. Kailangang ang wika ng taumbayan ang maging wika ng pananaliksik.

2 Modelo ng Pananaliksik 1. Iskala ng Mananaliksik Metodong ginagamit ng isang mananaliksik sa sikolohiya sa pagtatarok ng diwa ng Kalahok

2. Iskala ng Patutunguhan ng Mananaliksik at Kalahok Mga metodong ginagamit ng isang mananaliksik sa kanyang pagaaral ng diwang Pilipino sa pamamagitan ng mga kalahok.

Indigenous Research Methods 1. PAKAPAKAPA ...