Written by Danielle Fuller
April 2023
https://eupm.weebly.com/blog/archives/04-2023
​

Theoretical frameworks are rampant in psychology such as the Big Five Theory of Personality and Attachment Theory, each serving as a guide to understanding the individual differences and unconscious drivers that lead each of us to behave uniquely. None of these are perfect, and no one is suggesting there are strictly four types of people in the world categorised only by attachment. A framework is just that - a scaffolding that makes complex topics more accessible for consumption and discussion.

One psychodynamic framework, the Enneagram, deserves more attention in the realm of psychology. Despite its (unfitting) reputation as a trendy pseudoscience, the Enneagram predates modern psychology, with roots dating back over two thousand years in various religions and studies (e.g., Judaism, Islam, Christianity, philosophy, mathematics, and metaphysics). At its core lies the basic principle of psychodynamics: understanding the psychological roots of emotional suffering (Shedler, 2010). In a world where academia is often inaccessible to the layperson – the very individuals whose lives we as psychologists are focused on bettering – we should prioritise frameworks that can not only be studied in the lab but understood and utilised by society for healing and self-growth. The Enneagram has an accessible foundation in place, and further research has the potential to usher it in as the newest addition to the psychodynamic therapist’s toolbox.

What is the Enneagram?
Composed of nine Types represented as One through Nine, the Enneagram is an integrated framework of personality that accounts for situational aspects of being such as self-awareness, mental health, and reactionary nuance in periods of stress and growth. These Types are arranged in an interconnected circle, each representing a generalised understanding of the world that drives that Type's desires, fears, and motivations. Underpinning each is an internalised childhood message about how they are valued by others:

• Type One: You are only loved when you are perfect, just, right, and true.

• Type Two: You are only loved when you are of service to others.

• Type Three: You are only loved when you meet the expectations of others.

• Type Four: You are only loved when the deepest parts of you are seen and understood.

• Type Five: You are only loved if you don’t rely on others.

• Type Six: You are only loved if you are dependable and stable.

• Type Seven: You are only loved when you are happy, fun, and exciting.

• Type Eight: You are only loved when you are in full control of your life.

• Type Nine: You are only loved when you are agreeable.

Like psychodynamic theory, the individual is typically unaware of these unconscious motivations - in their eyes, this conceptualization of love is simply how the world works. These internalised messages may be formed through traumatic childhood events, sibling dynamics, social interactions, parental relations, or an infinite number of micro-experiences that mix with biology to formulate a customised worldview. Regardless of whether the internalised message was explicit or implicit, it’s often buried deep in the person’s psyche – manifesting itself in behaviours, beliefs, and reactions, and can only be fully acknowledged or understood with intentional introspection and/or therapy.

How is the Enneagram Different From Other Personality Models?
Unlike many personality frameworks focused on traits and situational behaviour (see: Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, or MBTI), the Enneagram is rooted in motivation. To demonstrate why trait models are problematic, let’s consider the MBTI question “You do not usually initiate conversations,” meant to determine if the person is an ‘I’ (introvert) or an ‘E’ (extrovert). Would this answer change in the context of family life, with friends, with classmates, or with co-workers? Does your answer differ at your dream job versus a job you hate; if you’re feeling ill or healthy; if you’re surrounded by social butterflies or wallflowers? For some, responses vary dramatically based on mindset or environment. So how dependable can a singular test result be? This is a key difference for the Enneagram: those who study it in depth abhor testing for Type and advocate endlessly for self-exploratory identification. Just as no psychodynamic therapists rely on testing to determine how a client’s paternal relationship has shaped them in adulthood, the Enneagram is ill-suited for the simplicity of a Likert scale measuring outward patterns. Someone’s core will drive behaviours, but behaviours alone do not define someone’s core. This psychoanalytic approach to human understanding not only makes it difficult to objectively assign a Type, it also makes qualitative research extremely difficult. How do we, as scientists, study an individual’s true self when only they hold the key and it’s buried in their core?

The State of Research: A Mixed yet Nearly-Empty Bag
Enneagram research is limited and mixed yet has begun to grow in Western cultures. A systematic literature review by Hook et al. (2020) points out that factor analyses typically find fewer than nine types and cautions clinicians that scientific evidence is lacking. However, they also acknowledge its effectiveness for personal growth, which is backed by more recent research on the Enneagram’s psychodynamic utility for connecting the conscious and unconscious minds (Kam, 2022). Research also shows it to be an effective training tool for self-development in organisational settings (Sutton et al., 2013), teamwork and general learning in medical school cohorts (Blose, 2023), and the emotional intelligence of college student leaders (Weafer, 2021). Eastern cultures have found similarly promising findings, as a recent meta-analysis out of South Korea considered the effect Enneagram training had on parenting and found moderate-to-large effect sizes in all areas studied, the largest being 0.72 for coping with parental stress (Lee, 2023).

A recent study highlighted the complexity of scientific Enneagram research. The study’s analysis of both qualitative and quantitative data revealed two radically different stories: while the latter showed no significant results, the qualitative data was rife with evidence of significant personal growth (Weafer, 2021). Yes, the study was a student thesis, but the underlying question remains: how do we resolve contradicting findings of the Enneagram’s qualitative benefit and quantitative insignificance? Arguing that factor analysis doesn’t support the Enneagram as a psychological tool disregards qualitative analysis as a valid research methodology; there is clearly a beneficial nature at play with the Enneagram, and it deserves more exploratory research to pinpoint exactly what that is.

Enneagram: A Lexicon for Self-Expression
Sometimes the key to effective communication of one’s deepest self isn’t a lack of self-understanding but lack of the proper words or models to do so. Kanzi, the bonobo who dialogues with humans using lexicons, lacks the ability to vocally communicate, yet was given the ability to express inner wants, needs, feelings, and emotions when provided with a wall of icons and a patient teacher. While he cannot say, “I’m sad,” he’s able to communicate the sentiment by pointing to something that conveys the thought for which he lacks words. We humans aren’t so dissimilar from Kanzi. We are notoriously poor at identifying our inner thoughts and feelings – even to ourselves. The journey to self-understanding is tough, and sometimes, like with Kanzi, pre-existing schemas we can point to and say, “That, right there, reflects the part of me I couldn’t otherwise articulate,” make all the difference. The Enneagram has the ability to be just that, going past surface-level behaviours and exposing the nuances of how our core worldviews impact all aspects of existence. Whether used in companies to build teams, in clinical settings to help patients identify deep-seeded realities of themselves, or in research to explore further than behaviourism alone allows, the Enneagram’s proven potential for human betterment merits a spot at the psychological table.

References:
Blose, T. M., Yeates, A. C., Som, M, Murray, K. A., Vassar, M., & Stroup, J. (2023). The Enneagram and its application in medical education. Baylor University Medical Center Proceedings, 36(1), 54-58, https://doi.org/10.1080/08998280.2022.2132591

Hook, J. N., Hall, T. W., Davis, D. E., Van Tongeren, D. R., & Conner, M. K. (2021). The Enneagram: A systematic review of the literature and directions for future research. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 77(4), 865–883. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.23097

Kam, C. (2022). Enhancing Enneagram therapy with contemporary research on the conscious and unconscious mind. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-022-09685-5

Lee, N. (2023). A study on the effects of Enneagram parent education program through meta-analysis. Asia Couns. Coach, 5(1), 48-62. https://doi.org/10.47018/accr.2023.5.1.48

Shedler J. (2010). The efficacy of psychodynamic psychotherapy. The American Psychologist, 65(2), 98–109. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018378

Sutton, A., Allinson, C., & Williams, H. M. (2013). Personality type and work-related outcomes: An exploratory application of the Enneagram model. European Management Journal, 31(3), 234–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emj.2012.12.004

Weafer, D. (2021). Leadership, Emotional Intelligence, and the Enneagram: A Study of the Effects of Enneagram Training on College Student Leaders. TopSCHOLAR®.  https://digitalcommons.wku.edu/stu_hon_theses/943