The models in this group range from theories that have organised decades of research to frameworks that have circulated for decades without evidence. The ledger files them together because both kinds shape how people understand themselves, and because the difference between them is one of the most useful things a reader can learn.
Theories with a research programme
The strongest models come from social psychology's mid-century experimental period. Festinger's Cognitive Dissonance explains why people change beliefs to fit what they have done, and Bem's Self-Perception Theory offers a rival account of the same results. Psychological Reactance explains why pressure produces resistance. Learned Helplessness became a model of depression, and was revised by its own authors in 2016, who concluded that passivity is the default response and that control has to be learned. Allport's Contact Hypothesis has strong meta-analytic support: contact between groups under the right conditions reduces prejudice.
The motivation models have similar standing. Self-Determination Theory identifies autonomy, competence and relatedness as needs whose satisfaction predicts wellbeing and sustained effort. Locus of Control and Conservation of Resources theory explain why some people persist and others give up under stress. Wegner's Ironic Process Theory explains why trying not to think of something keeps it in mind.
Theories of the crowd and of evil
A second cluster tries to explain how ordinary people do terrible things. Le Bon's Crowd Psychology and Deindividuation locate it in anonymity within a group. Arendt's Banality of Evil locates it in thoughtless compliance. Realistic Conflict Theory locates it in competition for scarce resources, and the Just-World Hypothesis explains why bystanders blame victims.
The older and the popular
The psychoanalytic entries, Projection, Reaction Formation and Rationalization, gave everyday speech its vocabulary for self-deception; the research supports rationalisation and social projection more than the defensive mechanisms Freud proposed. The popular frameworks are a separate group: Maslow's Hierarchy, the Kübler-Ross Change Curve, Myers-Briggs, transactional analysis's Life Scripts and neuro-linguistic programming. These are widely used in management training and self-help, and each carries a contested flag.
Where it applies
The research-backed models are practical. Reactance tells anyone trying to persuade that pressure can backfire. Self-determination theory is used in schools, clinics and workplaces to design environments that sustain motivation. The contact hypothesis underpins programmes that bring groups together under equal status and shared goals. Ironic process theory informs therapies for intrusive thoughts. The popular frameworks are used just as widely, which is why knowing their evidential standing matters.
Where it is argued over
The disputes follow the split described above. Several famous models have been challenged on their original studies: the Stanford Prison Experiment on its coaching of guards, the Robbers Cave study behind realistic conflict theory on its methods, and Stereotype Threat and Social Priming on failed replications. The Kübler-Ross stages were proposed as a description of dying patients, and grief researchers have not found them occurring as a fixed sequence. Personality researchers reject the Myers-Briggs types, and reviews of neuro-linguistic programming's core claims have not supported them.
Why it is worth knowing
People reach for psychological models whenever they try to explain a colleague, a partner or themselves, and they often reach for the most familiar rather than the best supported. This group puts both kinds side by side with their standing marked. That makes it possible to keep a useful vocabulary, such as projection or stages of grief, while knowing how much weight the underlying claim can bear.
The entries behind this essay: Model in Psychology & Behavior. Every subject has its essays on the essays page.