Internalization: The third type of influence is even more complex than identification. We internalize a specific set of behaviors or set of decisions being made by another person or cluster of people (group).  While internalization relates to Bandura’s (1997) description of self-efficacy, this process is most closely identified with psychoanalytic theory and specifically with the object relations branch of psychoanalysis, internalization concerns the introjection of objects (people, groups, cultures) that are prized (and perhaps also feared) in our world. While most of the internalization occurs in early life (the child introjecting many aspects of the strong parenting figures in the child’s world), this internalization process can take place at any point in our life. There can be spiritual alignment (even conversion) at any point in our life, especially if we have lived what William James (1982/1900) has described as a “twice-born” life in which we are open to significant transformations in our way of seeing and being in the world.

The important point to make is that this process of internalization (as the name implies) involves an internal locus of control. The source of true, sustaining hope resides in this internal locus. When we have internalized a set of behaviors or decisions, then this set becomes our own and we operate with apparent autonomy in engaging these behaviors and decisions. The world outside may change, but we remain true to our internalizations. Our commitments become steadfast, and our vision of the future is sustained despite failings in our own life or the life of the community in which we live and work.

Examples of secular internalization abound. Most of us as adults are aligned with a particular political party or at least a specific political or socio-economic ideology. Typically, this alignment can be attributed to the alignment of our own parents or at least the social system in which we grew up. Even if we shift our alignment, the realignment is usually associated with the perspectives of one or more mentors or our immersion in a particular culture.  We are attracted to a particular person or group and this attraction turns into the internalization of their values, perspectives, and behavior patterns.

According to Erik Erikson (1980) and other developmental theories, our identity is forged during our late adolescence and early adulthood and this identity formation is closely associated with the internalization of various behaviors and decisions. We strive to be independent as a young adult and to “individuate” (from our parents, community norms, etc.) – and we do so by internalizing external norms and making them our own. We live with the partial fiction that we are “our own man/woman” but can usually account for the forging of our personal identity by borrowing from and internalizing objects (people, groups) from the outside.

The Influence Sequence: A key question concerns how internalization takes place at a spiritual level and how this internalization sustains Hope. We propose that internalization often builds on the processes of coercion and identification. It is critical that we first discern the ways in which we are being influenced. We must confront the ways in which these influences can create conflict, dissonance, and inconsistencies inside ourselves—much as Saul did on his New Testament journey to Jerusalem. We must then select ways in which to move external influences toward internal guiding principles that are transcendent and spiritual in nature.  We will turn briefly to a description of the influence sequence and the ways in which we can address the challenges inherent in this sequence.

There are several keys that operate this sequence of moves from coercion to identification and imitation, and then on to internalization. These keys first relate to the amount of observation and the amount of coercion. If the person being influenced observes other people acting in the desired manner and being rewarded (or at least not punished) for this action, then the influence has taken place–via identification. If the person or group of people being observed is admired, is powerful, or in some other way is compelling, then the observed behavior (or endorsement) is even more likely to be embraced by the person whom we wish to influence. This is a secular mode of influence.