Contents
The self-actualizing individual is characterized as increasingly open to knowing and understanding self, including openness to emerging data and material previously denied to awareness. This article suggests that honoring the messages and meanings from one’s unconscious mind, idiosyncratically represented in dreams, is one way to enhance personal growth and development. It includes a survey of the literature on the person-centered approach and suggests how elements of the approach can be applied in dream work. Also indicated is how a humanistic approach to dream work is compatible with positions of several writers in the field of mental health counseling (i.e., Ginter, 1989; Hershenson, 1993; Ivey, 1989).
One of the rudimentary descriptors of self-actualizing individuals is that they are increasingly open to knowing and understanding themselves. They have an openness to emerging data and material about the self, including feelings and cognitions previously denied to awareness (Gladding, 1992). These persons “live in close and confident relationship to [their] own ongoing organismic processes, nonconscious as well as conscious” (Rogers, 1977, p. 248). Such individuals know themselves “inside out,” creating symbols for material that is both conscious and nonconscious, attempting to know all that can be known. Simply stated, the more that individuals know, experience, and understand the self, the greater the possibility for healthy growth and development (Gladding, 1992).
I contend that counseling, as a discipline, has generally concurred that a comprehensive knowledge of one’s self is not often readily available in conscious awareness. Frequently, individuals (including counselors) “block” aspects of the self from awareness. Many theorists (e.g., Ginter & Bonney, 1993) have held that an abundance of relevant material is contained in the mind, hidden from awareness, yet obtainable via various therapeutic strategies. I agree with Ginter and Bonney’s theoretical stance and believe that one way in which hidden or unknown material becomes consciously known is through one’s dreams. Classic therapeutic literature abounds with examples that support my position. Jung (1934/1978), for example, aligned himself with the aforementioned view (i.e., the importance of revealing what is hidden) and eloquently expressed this position in the following statement: “The dream is specifically the utterance of the unconscious. Just as the psyche has a diurnal side which we call consciousness, so also it has a nocturnal side: the unconscious psychic activity which we apprehend as dreamlike fantasy” (p. 56). Jung (1916/1978) further stated that “the dream is a spontaneous self-portrayal, in symbolic form, of the actual situation in the unconscious” (p. 57). Thus, according to Jung, it seems that focusing attention on a client’s dream(s) promises to offer a worthwhile path to achieve developmental growth.
Ivey (1989) argued that a commitment to developmental growth is what distinguishes mental health counseling from both psychology and social work. Furthermore, he called for the “integration of many differing types of helping tools, but with a new frame of reference” (p. 33). I believe that a humanistic (i.e., person-centered) perspective on, and approach to, dream exploration is congruent with the essential ingredients necessary to achieve what Ivey has outlined. Thus, if a client mentions a dream during a session, rather than dismiss the occurrence as relatively unimportant, a mental health counselor (MHC) should ascertain the real contextual meaning or significance of the reported dream. Simply stated, paying attention to clients’ dreams may provide one more way of enhancing their personal growth and development.
Individuals in all cultures have had an interest in dreams and the role that dreams play in their waking lives. The history of dreams and dream theory has been chronicled extensively over the last five decades (e.g. Born, 1948; Capuzzi & Black, 1986; DeBecker, 1968; Diamond 1978, Gollub, 1992; MacKenzie, 1965; McCurdy, 1946; Ullman & Zimmerman, 1979; Van de Castle, 1971; Van den Daele, 1992; Wolff, 1952; Woods, 1947). On the basis of the work by the aforementioned authors, it seems that individuals throughout recorded history have viewed dreams as significant. The significance that dreams have held for many is aptly depicted in the wide range of commonly held beliefs that have been documented. Interestingly, many of these beliefs foreshadowed the position taken by several dream theorists–that dreams “reveal a message.”
Freud (Capuzzi & Black, 1986; Faraday, 1972) was the first to call the attention of therapists to the world of dreams in a manner that marked the advent of a new approach to mental illness and self-awareness. Jung (MacKenzie, 1965; Ullman & Zimmerman, 1979) was one of the first to differ with Freud’s position, contending that the dream is a vital aspect of the human psyche; rather than a symptom of illness, it is an integral part of the wholeness of the mind for all individuals, both for the normal person and for the person who is mentally disturbed. According to Greene (1979), dreams, for Jung, reflected psychic material in the unconscious mind, material perhaps denied to awareness. Jung believed that dream content represented a compensable process for facets of the dreamer’s personality that have been neglected in waking awareness and may therefore be guides for insight in waking life.
Since the contributions of Freud (1900/1953) and Jung (1934/1978), there has been a steady flow of dream theorists and practitioners. More recently, writers who have identified with Rogerian thought (Barrineau, 1989, 1992; Gendlin, 1986; Jennings, 1986) have articulated approaches to dream work that are consistent with the principles of the person-centered approach. There has been little disagreement among these recent theorists that dreams can be a valued part of individual organismic experience (all that is experienced by an individual, regardless of whether these experiences are consciously perceived) and may provide significant material and opportunity for personal growth.
Because my approach to dream work is intimately tied to the concept of self-actualization, a brief overview of this concept, and indication of how the concept might be linked to mental health counseling theory, are essential. Organismic theorist Goldstein (1939) introduced the term self-actualization as a modem concept in personality theory. Hall and Lindzey (1978) noted that whereas other theories argued that human beings are motivated by a number of drives, Goldstein (1939) insisted that individuals are motivated by “one sovereign drive” (p. 243). Goldstein called this motive self-actualization. The tendency for the organism to self-actualize is seen as the creative trend of human nature and is claimed to be universally present in individuals. It is the striving of individuals to realize their inherent potential.
Szent-Gyoergyi (1966), a biochemist, agreed with Goldstein (1939) and concluded that in all life forms there is the innate drive for self-perfection. Rogers’s (1942,1957,1959,1977,1980) theory of personality and counseling rested on the assumption of the “formative,” directional tendency of actualization. Similarly, Jung (1939/1959, 1950/1959) espoused a postulate of “individuation,” in which a developmental process is seen as directed toward achieving wholeness. For Jung, dreams contained unconscious material that, when understood by the individual, fueled the individuation process. Lecky (1961) saw this tendency (i.e., self-actualization) in terms of the need for self-consistency. Adler’s (1927,1935) concept of the individual’s “creative self,” with power to order and direct his or her life, reaffirmed the central position of this tendency in personality development.
Although many writers have included some notion of an actualizing tendency in their theory, it is Maslow (1954,1968) with whom mental health professionals most readily associate self-actualization theory (Hershenson, 1993). Maslow contended that there is in all humanity an active will to strive toward wholeness and realization of inherent potential, a movement that is both creative and positive. Welch, Tate, and Madeiros (1987) asserted that the self-actualization concept (as defined by Maslow) can be credited with four major accomplishments:
- Self-actualization as a theory and philosophy challenges and stands in opposition to “adjustment” as the major posture of mental health.
- It describes psychological health in terms that are universal and that transcend time and culture.
- It presents a new image of human beings that moves beyond determinism.
- Self-actualization theory provides the impetus for a different force–humanism–in counseling.
These four major accomplishments are consistent with Hershenson’s (1993) delineation of key components of the practice of mental health counseling and they seem to generally agree with Ginter’s (1989) position concerning the importance of “developmental growth movement.” Finally, the accomplishments form the foundation on which I use dream work in counseling sessions.
Rogers’s theory of personality and psychotherapy rests on the foundational principle of self-actualization. Essentially, this concept holds that every individual human being possesses the unique potential to develop and move in directions that are inherently healthy and positive. Rogers (1980) concluded as follows:
Organisms are always seeking, always initiating, always “up to something.” There is one central source of energy in the human organism. This source is a trustworthy function of the whole system rather than some portion of it; it is most simply conceptualized as a tendency toward fulfillment, toward actualization, involving not only the maintenance but also the enhancement of the organism. (p. 123)
Given the circumstances of their lives, and given the quality and quantity of data about self available to awareness, individuals are always actualizing, becoming their own best selves, growing and moving in ways that are positive and healthy. Rogers (1957), in his seminal article on the client-centered approach to therapy, asserted that when one individual (e.g., an MHC) provides the appropriate interpersonal climate for another individual (e.g., a client), the self-actualization potential will be fostered.
Rogers (1961) also delineated a seven-stage process that tracked successive phases of effective functioning as he observed them in his work with clients. He described the stages as a continuum (”scale”) of developmental growth, noting that
It commences at one end with a rigid, static, differentiated, unfeeling, impersonal type of psychologic functioning. It evolves through various stages to, at the other end, a level of functioning marked by changingness, fluidity, richly differentiated reactions, by immediate experiencing of personal feelings, which are felt as deeply owned and accepted. (p. 33)
Rogers’s scale may be seen as a reflection of movement in the process of self-actualization, because the higher levels relate to more optimal counseling. Seeman (1984) defined the most primitive stage as being
marked by rigidity and remoteness of experiencing, a lack of communication with one’s inner experience and feelings. The successive stages were all in the direction of movement toward communication of self, capacity for immediacy of experience, and full living in the present. (pp. 133-134)
At higher levels “feelings which have previously been denied to awareness are now experienced with immediacy and acceptance … not something to be denied, feared, or struggled against” (Meador & Rogers, 1973, p. 146). Material that is unconscious is adequately symbolized in the awareness of individuals so that they experience it in the present moment. These data are potent for the individual and according to Meador and Rogers, “this experiencing is often vivid, dramatic, and releasing…. There is full acceptance now of experiencing as providing a clear and usable referent for getting at the implicit meanings of the individual’s encounter with … life” (p. 149). Rogerian theory has set the stage for why dreams may be important and also explained how an MHC might effectively work with a client to discover the “hidden message” of a dream.
Although there are few references to the concept of dream exploration in the client-centered and person-centered literature, there are references to a category of data “which have previously been denied to awareness [and which] are now experienced with immediacy and acceptance” by the self-actualizing individual (Meador & Rogers, 1973, p. 146). Furthermore, Rogers (1963) noted that the higher self-actualizing individual
is able to live fully in and with each and all his feelings and reactions. He is making use of all his organic equipment to sense, as accurately as possible, the existential situation within and without. He is using all the data his nervous system can thus supply, using it in awareness, but recognizing that his total organism may be, and often is, wiser than his awareness. (p. 21)
Thus, the self-actualizing tendency is enhanced by individuals’ experience of their full and complete selves, including conscious and nonconscious material.
I contend that dream material, once unsymbolized in awareness, can be known and understood by an individual, and that to pay attention to this richness of data is to promote or enhance self-understanding and, by extension, the developmental growth process (i.e., Ginter, 1989). Although the literature supports the notion of a self-actualization tendency, there is little to suggest how this positive, inherently healthy movement occurs. I assume the position that honoring the messages and meanings from one’s nonconscious mind, idiosyncratically represented in dreams, is one way to enhance an individual’s self-understanding.
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: USING DREAMS IN MENTAL HEALTH COUNSELING
In previous works (Barrineau, 1989, 1992) I have outlined an approach to dream exploration that honors the canon of person-centered thought and philosophy. This method represents one way in which dream work may be incorporated into mental health counseling. Verbatim excerpts of dream work using this model, including a client’s actual reported dream, are featured toward the end of this section. The client granted permission for this material to be used; names have been changed to guarantee anonymity.
Dream work, in this approach, is viewed as a process of open and shared inquiry into the dream world (messages and meaning) of the client. The client essentially says to the MHC: “Here is my dream. I don’t know what to make of it. Please help me explore it.”
The dream work process includes exploring the meaning of a client’s dream (past event) in waking life (present experience). An MHC typically encourages the process by employing different types of questions and responses. The two types of questions used most frequently are “clarification” and “exploratory.” The purpose of the clarification question is to illuminate the MHC’s understanding of the elements of the dream, as presented by the dreamer. This stance assumes that an empathic understanding of the client and his or her dream is not possible until the MHC’s own understanding is clear. The exploratory type of question is aimed at enhancing the client’s exploration of the waking-life meaning of the dream. I assume that dreams are symbolic portrayals of some reality in the inner world of the dreamer, so that the key to the dream’s meaning likely rests in the client’s translation of the symbolic language into his or her personal, waking awareness.
The MHC should view the clarification and exploratory questions as invitations for the dreamer to explore further; the questions spring from the MHC’s knowledge of the process of dream work and from his or her intuitive, therapeutic skills. Occasionally an MHC is, as Rogers (1980) asserted, “a step ahead [of the client] when I see more clearly the path we are on” (p. 25). As an MHC attempts to understand a client’s dream, the use of a series of questions helps to achieve immersion into both the dream and the client’s present experience of it.
Although the directive nature of the use of questions would seem to be contradictory to the person-centered approach, because of the traditional insistence on client locus of control, I have contended (Barrineau, 1989, 1992) that this tension is resolved by the assumption that when there is an explicit consensus between the MHC and the client to do dream work, the client has invited the MHC to enter the dream and to become, with the dreamer, a coinquirer of its meaning. Furthermore, the MHC, as dream work facilitator, possesses expertise about the process of dream exploration, whereas the client retains the expertise about the content.
In addition to clarification and exploratory questions, certain types of responses are employed by the MHC to encourage the exploration of a dream. One of these response types is “reflective” of what is presented by the dreamer and is perhaps most similar to the traditional reflective response associated with Rogerian counseling.
Another type of response is the “idiosyncratic” statement (Barrineau, 1989, 1992), in which MHCs communicate their own individual feelings about, and understanding of, the dream and the dream work process itself.
Idiosyncratic statements are seen as a function of (a) an empathic understanding of the dreamer-dream and (b) therapist genuineness. Often MHCs are not aware of the origin of these types of statements, only that they exist in their intuitive interaction with the client. Purton (1989) asserted that an MHC’s intuition is “largely a matter of perceiving the pattern and significance of things, and is not essentially mysterious” (p. 414). I view dream work as a natural addition to the MHC’s repertoire of intuitive skills.
As Jennings (1986) suggested, dream work commonly proceeds through the elements of a dream chronologically, because the dream is considered as a story told to the MHC. The client-dreamer, as “playwright,” has scripted the chronology of the dream; one assumes, therefore, that the dream is best understood just as it is told to the MHC. Esentially, MHCs immerse themselves in the dream, exploring, inquiring, and verifying their understanding along the way. From a person-centered perspective, this process demands discipline on the part of the MHC who is, presumably, committed to honoring the dream as presented by the client.
The elements of a dream should be examined in detail for two reasons. First, the dream, as noted earlier, is a symbolic depiction of something in the client’s inner world. Although dreams do not have a plot in the conventional literary sense, they have their own logic and order. Dreams do not have to make sense to the dreamer; most often, it seems, they do not. Though the client may not understand the dream initially, the exploration process is designed to find waking-life meanings for dream symbols and events, however bizarre or unlikely.
The second reason for exploration is that the dreamer often does not remember all of a dream’s elements at its first telling; often it is only as the discovery proceeds that the dreamer remembers them.
During a dream work session, when a potential interpretation begins to emerge, either for the client or the MHC, the test of its validity rests with the dreamer alone. Thus, consistent with person-centered thought, the dreamer is viewed as his or her own best expert and retains the locus of control.
The following dream was presented by a client (C) for exploration. The dream included a character, “Mary,” whom the client later determined represented “Linda,” the former girlfriend of her fiance, “John.”
C: It started out, I was at my grandparents’ house. It was really funny, my brother and his girlfriend and John and my parents and my grandparents and my sorority sisters were all staying at my grandparents’ house. And, uh, it was like early in the morning and we were all sitting and watching TV and lazing around, and I realized that I had to go to work and it was my job that I had in Germany, and I had thought I had the day off but didn’t. And it’s about six o’clock at night by this time, and that’s what time the store closes, and so I called in and said–I talked to this girl that was at the main switchboard. She doesn’t usually work at the switchboard; she works down on a register or something. And I talked to her and she was like, “Oh, no one missed you today. Don’t worry about it.” And she put my call through, down on the floor where I worked, and this guy that I worked with that I was really good friends with said, “Oh, we’re training people to take your place anyway, since you’re leaving. So don’t worry. You didn’t miss anything.” So I said, “Well, where’s Mary?” because she was my supervisor. And Mary was asleep! [laughs] Which makes no sense whatsoever, but Mary was asleep. But she hadn’t noticed I wasn’t there. Mary’s kind of a stickler, and I was worried that she would notice. So I felt great about that. And then it was back at my grandparent’s house and that was the end of the dream.
Neither the MHC nor the client had any sense, at the beginning of the session, that Mary represented a waking-life character. In the following excerpt, near the beginning of the session, the client talked with the MHC about Mary.
C: The guy that answered the phone was a really close friend of mine. Everybody that was in [the dream] was a really close friend of mine. There was nobody in there that I didn’t like. And the person I was scared of was Mary. And she was asleep.
MHC: Could you talk about Mary? (exploratory question)
C: She was my supervisor. She was like, she was real laid back but she was a stickler at the same time. And she put a lot of responsibility on me, in my department, because everybody else I worked with, besides this other guy, uh, were pretty irresponsible. And so, I, a lot of times I felt pressure from her.
MHC: So, how would you characterize your relationship with her? (clarification question)
C: We had a pretty good relationship. She depended a lot on me. Sometimes her dependence would pressure me, or would put a lot of stress on me, so I would feel like I had to do everything just perfect just to make sure she, that I didn’t let her down.
MHC: What was it like for you to feel that way? (exploratory question)
C: It got old! [laughs] I mean, it wasn’t bad, I didn’t mind, but after a while I felt like I was having to do everything.
MHC: It was stressful for you. (reflective response)
C: After a while, yeah.
MHC: So, in your dream, the one who’s the source of all this stress is asleep. That’s interesting that you did that, that you put her to sleep. When you were working there, were there times when you would just as soon she was asleep? (exploratory question)
C: There was a lot of time when she wasn’t around. She was in the hospital for a month one time. And everything ran much better while she was gone.
MHC: So, in your dream you worked things out the way it would have been nice in waking life. (reflective response)
C: Uh-huh, uh-huh. That’s exactly right.
The following excerpt, taken from near the end of the session, occurred after the client realized that Mary, in the dream, represented Linda, the former girlfriend of her fiance, John. Linda, it turned out, had been around a few days before the client’s dream and was still, in the client’s judgment, interfering with her relationship with John.
MHC: Our time is nearly gone. Do you have any better feel than at the beginning about what the dream is about for you? (exploratory question)
C: I think probably the reason why John is at my grandparents’ house is because things are really comfortable between us right now.
MHC: So, in the dream you put yourself in a comfortable place. (reflective response)
C: Exactly! Even though last week there was a little bit of tension, with Linda, and things were going on and I think, after this weekend, you know, everything is real even and real comfortable. I made it comfortable this weekend.
MHC: Last week had been real stressful for you. (reflective response)
C: Yeah. Real vulnerable or something.
MHC: Did something specific happen that caused you to feel vulnerable? (clarification question)
C: Well, we had a long talk on the phone the other night late, all about [Linda] and, you know, I just wanted to say how I felt about her and how she was sticking her nose in where she didn’t belong.
MHC: This was last week? (clarification question)
C: Yeah.
MHC: In your relationship with John, you’d say that Linda was a source of stress? (clarification question)
C: Yeah, but I don’t think it was stress between us, I think a lot of it was on me.
MHC: An outside influence. (reflective response)
C: Yeah.
MHC: That really didn’t have to do with you and John except for their history. (reflective response)
C: Right.
MHC: So, it’s interesting that in the dream you put Mary to sleep. (idiosyncratic response)
C: [chuckles] Yeah.
MHC: And as you describe Linda … (reflective response)
C: I put her to sleep, too! [long pause]
MHC: That seems like it’s something you hadn’t thought of until now. (reflective response)
C: Yeah. You’re right.
MHC: Are they alike in some way? (exploratory question)
C: Yeah, a little bit.
MHC: That’s intriguing, isn’t it? (idiosyncratic response)
C: Yeah! It is. And especially if you think about Linda and her pressure on me.
MHC: You worked this out with John and now you’ve sort of reached a new point. (reflective response)
C: Yeah. I put her to sleep!
MHC: Linda is gone and the pressure is off and you can go back to John and get comfortable. (reflective response)
C: Yeah. That’s wild. That’s really wild.
Even though various theories hold in common the importance of the individual’s openness to new experiences and data that become available to awareness, the role of dreams in relation to developmental growth is too often ignored in the literature. (For example, in Welch et al.’s [1987] comprehensive review of the literature there is no mention of dreams and their place in the process of self-actualization.) Still, there is agreement among various practitioners, researchers, and theorists that dreams can represent a valid and valuable part of an individual’s experience and may provide significant material for personal change via counseling (Anderson, 1974; Barrineau, 1989, 1992; Boss, 1958; Capuzzi & Black, 1986; Foulkes, 1978; Gendlin, 1986; Hall & Nordby, 1972; Jennings, 1986; Purton, 1989; Van de Castle, 1971).
I believe it is time to reexamine the role that therapeutic dream work can play in the developmental growth process. In fact, some writers (Jennings, 1986; Purton, 1989) have called counselors’ attention to the notion that dream work within certain theoretical frameworks (e.g., person-centered) is not only possible, but may enrich our therapeutic effectiveness with clients. I have concurred (Barrineau, 1989, 1992) with these writers and believe that paying attention to dream material, to the extent that such material is viewed as one more piece of the therapeutic puzzle, can enhance the process and the outcome of mental health counseling.
Adler, A. (1927). The practice and theory of individual psychology. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.
Adler, A. (1935). The fundamental views of individual psychology. International Journal of Individual Psychology, 1, 5-8.
Anderson, W. (1974). Personal growth and client-centered therapy: An information-processing view. In D. Wexler & L. Rice (Eds.), Innovations in client-centered therapy (pp. 21-48). New York: Wiley.
Barrineau, P. (1989). Person-centered dream exploration as an enhancer of self-understanding. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, Athens.
Barrinenu, P. (1992). Person-centered dream work. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 32(1), 90-105.
Born, W. (1948). A history of dream interpretation. Ciba Symposium, 10, 926-939.
Boss, M. (1958). The analysis of dreams. London, England: Rider.
Capuzzi, D., & Black, D. (1986). The history of dream analysis and the helping relationship: A synopsis for practitioners. Journal of Humanistic Education and Development, 24(3), 82-96.
DeBecker, R. (1968). The understanding of dreams and their influence on the history of man. New York: Hawthorne.
Diamond, E. (1978). The science of dreams. New York: Doubleday.
Faraday, A. (1972). Dream power. New York: Berkley Books.
Foulkes, D. (1978). A grammar of dreams. New York: Basic Books.
Freud, S. (1953). The interpretation of dreams. In J. Strachey (Ed. and Trans.), The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 4 & 5). London, England: Hogarth Press. (Original work published 1900)
Gendlin, E. (1986). Let your body interpret your dreams. Wilmette, IL: Chiron Publications.
Ginter, E. (1989). If you meet Moses/Jesus/Mohammed/Buddha (or associate editors of theory) on the road, kill them! Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 11, 335-344.
Ginter, E., & Bonney, W. (1993) Freud, ESP, and interpersonal relationships: Projective identification and the Mobius interaction. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 15, 150-169.
Gladding, S. (1992). Counseling: A comprehensive profession (2nd ed.). New York: Merrill.
Goldstein, K. (1939). The organism. New York: American Book Company.
Gollub, D. (1992). A new approach to dream interpretation. Psychology: A Journal of Human Behavior, 29(2), 39-43.
Greene, T. A. (1979). C. G. R. Jung’s theory of dreams. In B. Wolman (Ed.), Handbook of dreams (pp. 299-318). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
Hall, C., & Lindzey, G. (1978). Theories of personality (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.
Hall, C., & Nordby, V. (1972). The individual and his dreams. New York: New American Library.
Hershenson, D. (1993). Healthy development as the basis for mental health counseling theory. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 15(4), 430-437.
Ivey, A. (1989). Mental health counseling: A developmental process and profession. Journal of Mental Health Counseling, 11(1), 26-35.
Jennings, J. (1986). The dream is the dream is the dream: A person-centered approach to dream analysis. Person-Centered Review, 10), 310-333.
Jung, C. (1959). Conscious, unconscious, and individuation. In Collected works (Vol. 9, Part I, pp. 275-289). Princeton, NJ: University Press. (Original work published 1939)
Jung, C. (1959). A study in the process of individuation. In Collected works (Vol. 9, Part I, pp. 290-354). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. (Original work published 1950)
Jung, C. (1978). General aspects of dream psychology. In J. Jacobi, & R. Hull (Eds.), C. G. Jung psychological reflections: A new anthology of his writings (pp. 53-77). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. (Original works published 1916 and 1934)
Lecky, P. (1961). Self-consistency: A theory of personality. Hamden, CT: Shoe String Press.
MacKenzie, N. (1965). Dreams and dreaming. New York: Vanguard Press.
Maslow, A. (1954). Motivation and personality. New York: Harper.
Maslow, A. (1968). Toward a psychology of being. New York: Harper & Row.
McCurdy, H. G. (1946). The history of dream theory. Psychological Review, 53, 225-233.
Meador, B., & Rogers, C. (1973). Client-centered therapy. In R. Corsini (Ed.), Current psychotherapies (pp. 119-165). Itasca, IL: Peacock.
Purton, C. (1989). The person-centered Jungian. Person-Centered Review, 1(2), 172-184.
Rogers, C. (1942). Counseling and psychotherapy. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Rogers, C. (1957). The necessary and sufficient conditions of therapeutic personality change. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 21, 95-103.
Rogers, C. (1959). A theory of therapy, personality, and interpersonal relationships, as developed in the client-centered framework. In S. Koch (Ed.), Psychology: A study of science, Vol III. Formulation of the person and the social context (pp. 184-256). New York: McGraw-Hill.
Rogers, C. (1961). The process equation of psychotherapy. American Journal of Psychotherapy, 15(1), 27-45.
Rogers, C. (1963). The concept of the fully functioning person. Psychotherapy: Theory, research, and practice, 1(1), 17-26.
Rogers, C. (1977). On personal power. New York: Delacorte.
Rogers, C. (1980). A way of being. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Seeman, J. (1984). The fully functioning person: Theory and research. In R. Levant & J. Schlien (Eds.), Client-centered therapy and the person-centered approach (pp. 131-152). New York: Praeger.
Szent-Gyoergyi, A. (1966). The drive in living matter to perfect itself. Journal of Individual Psychology, 22, 153-162.
Ullman, M., & Zimmerman, N. (1979). Working with dreams. New York: Delacorte Press/Eleanor Friede.
Van de Castle, R. (1971). The psychology of dreaming. New York: General Learning Press.
Van den Daele, L. (1992). Direct interpretation of dreams: Some basic principles and technical rules. American Journal of Psychoanalysis, 52(2), 99-118.
Welch, D., Tate, G., & Madeiros, D. (1987). Self-actualization: An annotated bibliography of theory and research. New York: Garland Publishing.
Wolff, W. (1952). The dream-mirror of conscience. New York: Grime & Stratton.
Woods, R. (Ed.). (1947). The world of dreams. New York: Random House.
~~~~~~~~
By Phil Barrineau
Phil Barrineau is the director of Career Services at St. Andrews Presbyterian College, Laurinburg, North Carolina. He is a national certified counselor and a North Carolina licensed practicing counselor. Correspondence regarding this article should be sent to Phil Barrineau, St. Andrews Presbyterian College, Laurinburg, NC 28352.
Recent Comments