This chapter presents Hsu’s Psychosocial Homeostasis (PSH) model as a comprehensive theoretical framework for understanding how psychological mechanisms are shaped by cultural and social structures. By dividing the human psyche into eight layers—from unconscious to outer cultural world—the PSH model redefines the relationship between affect, role, and interpersonal structure. It introduces the concept of the “human constant” (Jen) to replace the Western notion of personality, emphasizing the centrality of affective relationships in maintaining psychological equilibrium. The chapter compares the PSH model with Freud’s personality theory, highlighting their differences in assumptions, structure, and cultural applicability. It then applies the model to analyze how different civilizations—especially China and the United States—maintain psychosocial balance through distinct relational logics. Drawing from Confucianism, Indian metaphysics, and Japanese contextualism, the chapter demonstrates the PSH model’s cross-cultural validity. It concludes by affirming the model’s theoretical and empirical contributions to psychological anthropology and indigenous psychology, proposing it as a robust alternative to Western personality theories.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Theoretical Model of Psychosocial Homeostasis: Constructing Psychological Mechanisms from a Cultural Perspective

  • Kuo-Lung Yu

摘要

This chapter presents Hsu’s Psychosocial Homeostasis (PSH) model as a comprehensive theoretical framework for understanding how psychological mechanisms are shaped by cultural and social structures. By dividing the human psyche into eight layers—from unconscious to outer cultural world—the PSH model redefines the relationship between affect, role, and interpersonal structure. It introduces the concept of the “human constant” (Jen) to replace the Western notion of personality, emphasizing the centrality of affective relationships in maintaining psychological equilibrium. The chapter compares the PSH model with Freud’s personality theory, highlighting their differences in assumptions, structure, and cultural applicability. It then applies the model to analyze how different civilizations—especially China and the United States—maintain psychosocial balance through distinct relational logics. Drawing from Confucianism, Indian metaphysics, and Japanese contextualism, the chapter demonstrates the PSH model’s cross-cultural validity. It concludes by affirming the model’s theoretical and empirical contributions to psychological anthropology and indigenous psychology, proposing it as a robust alternative to Western personality theories.