A Johari window is a cognitive psychosomatic tool that is recurrently used to support people to comprehend their interpersonal communication and relationships. It is principally and extensively used in self help groups as well as communal settings as a heuristic exercise.
In performing this fundamental exercise the subject under argument is usually given a complete list fifty six adjectives and individuals may pick five or six adjectives that they strongly suppose describes their own character. In addition, peers of item under subject are also given the same list and once more they choose five or six adjectives that describe the subject. Altogether, these adjectives from both the subject and the peers of the subject are then mapped onto a grid. What follows is a series of self realization with respect to what others describe in addition to how well you usually see yourself. This doctrine can be simply described as watching oneself in a mirror.
According to Handy, This concept can be termed as the “Johari house with four rooms” (Handy, 2000, p.20). Each room represents a part of us and our lives too. Room one characterize that what we see and are conscious of and others do hold a similar opinion. In room two is that aspect that others see in us but we may not be aware of. In addition and contrary to the first two rooms, room three is the most mysterious room in that the cataleptic or subliminal part of us is seen by neither ourselves nor others. Lastly, room four includes our private space which we know but we do keep from others (p.21).
Of late, I performed a comparison outlook of myself and my best friends’ point of view of myself using the Johari’s window. I entirely prepared an absolute and comprehensive list of five adjectives that I really thought described me perfectly. in my opinion, I rated myself as a self conscious, giving and selfless, caring, nervous and dependable person. On the other hand, my own outlook and perspective of myself slightly contradicted and was different from the multifaceted list prepared by my friends. Lesley for instance described me as being bold, caring dependable, confident and brave.
With reference to my own rating, I am well versed that I have never been able to accomplish anything by my own. I was always depending on other people who usually acted as my stepping stone in anything that I decided to achieve. This stridently contrasted to my own ranking as a dependable person knowing quite well that I had never endowed any substantial support to anybody to warrant me the term dependable. Merely, the only thing that I am well aware of about myself is that I have always depended on other people but not other people depending on me. I can candidly say that I could not have expected to be rated dependable but otherwise dependent.
In addition, I did not expect to witness so much dissimilarity in what I see about myself from what other notice me to be. According to my friends rating, only to characters matched with my own rating. This implies that there exist subtle difference between my inner personality and my public outlook.
Reflected appraisal process may be well thought-out as the core influences on the advancement of self perception. This term refers to the process in which we envision how others people see us (Cherry, n.d, ¶1). I considered myself an edgy caring and selfless person mainly due to the intermittent remarks that my friends, my teachers as well as my parents usually made. For instance, I have the tradition of sharing to the last morsel of anything I own. I usually experience uneasiness and am intimidated by a large crowd of people which usually propagate my nervousness. Exams usually made me so nervous to the extent that during the entire exam I could end up not writing any thing on the exam paper. This raised distress with both my parents and the instructors as well.
Social comparison is a premise that explains how we as individuals usually assess our own attitude and desires by comparing ourselves to others. Comparing myself to other people especially my friends who are always mean, bold and inconsiderate, I can assertively say that I represent the marginal group of people who are shy, caring and selfless. I soon discovered that even friends knew about my weakness in light of denying them what I owned. To some point I thought they were misusing my hospitality and trust. The art of giving worked as an insight and as a motivation. These rare traits ensure that I get the same treatment that I accord to most of my friends. This flames the satisfaction that I need to maintain this trait (Suls & Wheeler, 2000, p.12).
In culmination, everyone has both the inner perspective of oneself and the greater public outlook that other see in us. Inner perspective of public outlook, the main point still persists as who we are. It doest matter what other perceive us to be but the most important thing is that we should not venture into third and fourth room of our personality as that completely changes who we are, to appreciate yourself for who you really are and for what other see in you.