Psychology and the Denial of Personal Responsibility

It's time to reinvigorate belief in personal agency and let victimhood go.

By Rebekah Wanic

The shift toward victimhood and diminished personal responsibility is accosting us from all sides. Even outcomes that are uncontroversially connected to at least some aspects of individual behavior, such as obesity, are being touted as “not the result of individual responsibility” and doctors are now recommending surgery and drugs for obese children. Such is the current culture that elevates victimhood by denying personal responsibility and promotes a damaging shift toward an external locus of control. While it is important to adopt a nuanced understanding of outcomes that includes environmental and systemic variables, it is equally, if not more, important to include and prioritize individual agency as part of any discussion. Without personal responsibility and associated consequences for individual behavior, unhealthy, undesirable and socially damaging actions abound.

This is not a new concept. It is the basic tenet of a long understood learning theory in psychology: operant conditioning. Consequences operate on behavior to control their likelihood, such that behaviors which are reinforced increase while those that are punished decrease. For years, this straightforward concept was clearly understood and is still the basis for behavioral change in many arenas. Consider how treats and affection are often used as reinforcers in animal training as pets are shaped to perform desirable behaviors. Over years of research with various species, operant conditioning has been demonstrated to be an effective tool for moderating behavior, both directly through reinforcement and punishment given to the individual and indirectly through vicarious reinforcement and punishment, that is, witnessing others obtain desired or undesired consequences for their actions.

None of this is surprising, yet true understanding of reinforcement and punishment seems to be lost on many as explanations for every form of undesirable or damaging behavior eschew personal responsibility and displace consequences. Some discomfort with operant principles is perhaps related to the actions of its own developers. Like many ideas in psychology, proponents of operant conditioning extended it too far. For example, John B. Watson famously claimed that by controlling an environment he could turn any child into anything he desired, simply by controlling reinforcers and punishers. Similarly, research demonstrating the negative consequences of overusing punishment (particularly physical forms) along with fears that evil individuals might use their knowledge of operant principles to control others without their knowledge led to ethical concerns about its use in therapy and beyond. Additionally, many cognitive mechanisms and situational complexity (for example the presence of simultaneous reinforcers and punishers) play a role in influencing the overall effectiveness of operant strategies in human behavior. However, none of this invalidates its core tenets.

Analysis of the discipline suggests that many subfields in psychology share blame for our shift away from personal responsibility. For the sake of space, here just a few will be highlighted: clinical, social and cognitive psychology.

Clinical Psychology

Clinical psychologists seek to understand, explain and ultimately treat or prevent psychologically undesirable and promote psychologically desirable outcomes related to mental health and wellbeing. The clinical perspective makes personal experience paramount, asking clients to consider and discuss current, past and future feelings and events, with differential emphasis depending on a practitioner's training and theoretical background. Despite the existence of therapeutic techniques, such as CBT (cognitive-behavioral therapy) which challenge clients to recognize unhelpful thought patterns and adjust them while using behavioral evidence as feedback, much clinical practice focuses on factors deemed to act upon, rather than in concert with, the individual. Thus, clinical psychology prioritizes individual experience while often disempowering personal agency, tiptoeing around any mention of the ways individuals might contribute to their outcomes, lest one be accused of victim blaming or lack of compassion. 

Additionally, the shift toward a medical model of mental illness, viewing pathology as a result of biological factors such as neurochemical “imbalances,” led to the development of medications that can and do provide help to many. However, reliance on medical cures has also moved us away from focus on the hard work required to adjust one’s thoughts, adjust one’s behaviors, and adjust one’s environment - all things that require acknowledgement of personal responsibility and allow individuals to develop effective agency and exert control over their environment. When we focus instead on factors outside of personal control, such as chemical imbalances, traumatic childhoods, traumatic stressors experienced by one's parents, systemic “isms,” climate change and the like, it becomes impossible for a client to take ownership of their outcomes because many of these causes lie outside of personal control. This is not to argue that such factors do not impact mental wellbeing, however, the focus away from, rather than toward, personal responsibility is unhelpful and damaging. Reinforcing personal agency and acknowledging the consequences that follow from behavioral choices empowers clients to promote change. Paradoxically, the very subfield that originated to assist individuals in moving past trauma and struggle has adopted a focus that often keeps them mired in the struggle.

Furthermore, we have previously argued that the increased focus on mental health above all else (e.g., physical health when we must avoid telling obese people they are unhealthy to protect their self-esteem or long term gain, when we encourage risk avoidance rather than teaching individuals to use failure or hardship or unpleasantness as a sign that growth is possible) has taught many patterns of thought and behavior that are damaging to the development of resilience. Feeling bad is sometimes useful and good for personal development and not teaching people how to deal with this, in part by taking personal responsibility for their actions and responses, is disempowering to their personal short-term well-being and long-term growth.

Social Psychology

The subfield of social psychology has also contributed to a shift away from personal responsibility by placing the focus on how situations control and affect behavior. In this vein, situational variables over which individuals may have little control become paramount as the factors driving personal outcomes. Again, this is not to deny that situational influences can alter behavior. It would be a sign of pathology if one was unable to adjust themselves and their behavior to a particular situation. However, the fact that situations can influence us does not entail that people are not also in part individually responsible for their behavior. Human behavior is multiply determined. Over and above that, most research in psychology reports group values, outcomes averaged across individuals and not individualized responses. Analysis of most data will demonstrate a clear range of responses that occur within any given situation. Therefore, although situations can push people, such that certain behavioral responses become more likely, they are typically not so strong as to make everyone act in the same manner. And, research that takes individual differences into account often demonstrates that different individuals with different characteristics are differentially affected by situational variables.  

If, however, we ignore this and take away from social psychology that situations are paramount, we end up again disempowering agency and avoiding personal responsibility. If it is, for example, systemic racism rather than personal choices that cause crime, underperformance in school or any other number of unwanted outcomes, individuals become powerless to create change: it is not up to the individual to adjust their mindset and behavior, but rather for the system and context - controlled by nebulous others - to be adjusted by the powers that be. Nor is it then up to the individual to bear the responsibility for the consequences of their choices. Society must bear the burden when we fail to reinforce ownership of consequences for choice. Consider for example skyrocketing levels of crime in those cities which choose not to prosecute or the calls to eliminate student debt. It is law-abiding citizens and tax-payers who must bear the cost of others' choices. 

Cognitive Psychology

Extending the divestation of personal control further, research from cognitive psychology then combines with social psychology to offer evidence that our thoughts and behavior are not under personal control. For example, it may be the case that much of our decision-making is non-conscious, and Kahneman’s publication of Thinking, Fast and Slow led to a large lay audience being exposed to the idea of automaticity in information processing and its potential effects on our behavior. However, without a keen understanding of the specific studies summarized, including power, replicability, internal and external validity, it is easy to assume that research “proves'' something that it does not. While it may be the case that much processing takes place without conscious awareness, it does not follow that we are no longer responsible for our behavior or that none of our actions are the result of conscious, deliberative choice. 

Additionally, the concept of “nudging,” which has its roots in social cognition, a marriage of the two aforementioned subfields, has become popularized as a way to promote desirable behavioral outcomes. However, it has been argued that nudging takes responsibility away from the individual and places it on the nudger for providing the cues, creating increased dependence and decreased agency. 

Keep the Person Paramount

Exploration in psychology has sought to describe, explain and change human behavior. Researchers have demonstrated the powerful role that both individual experience and situational variables can have on influencing the probability that certain outcomes will occur. But, the shift away emphasis from the individual toward the external has worked to undermine the importance of personal agency, disempower individuals and potentially destabilize society. Highlighting the role of situations, circumstance, genetics, systemic “isms” and the like may provide insight and suggest alternative avenues to foment change, but we must not do so at the expense of recognizing the importance of personal agency.

Current trends in many of psychology’s subfields have moved us away from acknowledging, appreciating and cultivating personal responsibility. We are drowning in messages that suggest we do not have power to control our outcomes. This discussion is not exhaustive and there are of course extra-personal variables which create pressure or bias us to behave in a particular ways. To ignore that behavior is a combination of the individual and the environment would be foolish. However, it is also foolish to deprioritize personal responsibility and a recognition that behavior is and can be controlled by its consequences. 

There is an odd hypocrisy in the current victimhood narrative which argues that systemic and situational variables control behavior, yet seems to deny that behavior can be controlled by immediate experience. This systemic victimhood culture cultivates a damaging mindset that we must all, through our personal agency, work to overcome. We can do this by promoting personal responsibility, recognizing and accepting the consequences of individual behavior, reminding individuals that they have more power and control than they realize, and encouraging them to rely on this knowledge to navigate the challenges they face now so they will be better prepared to deal with the unknown challenges they will face in the future. In so doing, we can work together as agents of change to promote positive social progress and foment the individual and collective outcomes we desire.