A few years back my high school had its 10 year reunion for the graduating class of 2014. I was travelling at the time so couldn’t attend. Speaking to friends who did go, one comment really stuck with me; they observed that people who attended the event were largely the same as they were 10 years ago, which then led into the statement that “how you start is how you finish”.
Naturally, I thought that statement was complete bullshit. I pushed back hard, arguing that people absolutely do change. This led to an intense discussion that landed with them conceding, yes maybe people do change – but only within a box. According to them, people can grow or develop, but only marginally throughout their entire life – there’s a ceiling to how much they can change, and they certainly aren’t going to jump from one version of themselves to a completely different one. In other words, they aren’t going to move from one box to the next.
Physically, yes I do believe that there are limits as to how much one can change, I won’t be an Olympic sprinter despite being a frequent runner, neither would I have a high chance of playing in the NBA. However, the implication here was that box theory applies to who you are as a person – your personality, your skills, your character – which I believe is preposterous and, to be honest, insulting to anyone who ever wants to grow in life.
But as I spoke to more and more people about their belief around change, I would repeatedly run into those who agreed with the box theory, or held similar sentiments that “people don’t change”. As someone who wholeheartedly disagrees, I wanted to explore why the box theory is bullshit and why people might buy into it.
The logical problems
At any stage in your life you will meet people for the first time who have no idea who you really are. You could be 22 and meeting friends from a social soccer team, or 30 and meeting people at a new job for the first time.
According to box theory, even if I do change, I am only able to move within the limited confines of a box. But if I am at one part of the box at age 22, and then I am at another part of the box at age 30 (let’s say I’m further forward in my life), then the reference point for whoever meets me at age 30 is already different.
Here lies the problem: if both groups believe in box theory, they’ll each think I can only grow within a box from the point where they met me. The person who meets me at 22 thinks I can only progress a little from there. But the person who meets me at 30 sees me as already further along – so THEIR “box limit” for me is much further forward. By box theory’s own logic, I’ve now surpassed what the first person thought was my ceiling.
It makes absolutely no sense.
To someone who values self-improvement, box theory is just a pointed reminder that no, you can’t actually change – you’re always going to be the same. Yet anyone who’s put in effort to improve in any area of their life would disagree. In much the same way that people can go to university and learn an entirely new area of expertise, we can reshape our personalities, our habits, and our character through deliberate effort.
A common retort is that you stop developing after a certain age – typically your mid-20s. But this claim is completely unfounded. If neuroplasticity allows us to learn new complex skills throughout life1, why would our capacity for personal growth suddenly stop?
The idea of self-growth has been around since ancient philosophy. The Greek philosopher Heraclitus argued that change isn’t just part of life – it is life itself. He captured this with his famous statement that “you cannot step into the same river twice”. Both you and the river are constantly changing. To resist change, according to Heraclitus is to resist the fundamental nature of reality. In this way box theory asks us to deny a basic truth about existence.
Why people buy into box theory
To understand why so many people buy into box theory its important to look at what role you might play in someone’s life. Generally speaking I’ve found that people who buy into box theory are themselves threatened by change in the people around them. Perhaps having familiarity in their surroundings is paramount to their identity. Or maybe they choose to see the people around them as unchanging as it makes them comfortable.
Psychologist Carol Dweck’s research found that people can hold two different beliefs about their own personalities: fixed or malleable. Those with fixed personalities are more likely to choose options in social settings that validate themselves and are lower risk, compared to those with a malleable personality2. Its not a far stretch to suggest that those who believe in box theory hold a fixed view of personality themselves and are projecting that belief onto you.
Research on relationships shows a similar pattern. People with fixed personalities are more likely to have ‘destiny beliefs’ – the idea that relationships are either meant to be or not3. Those with destiny beliefs (the relationship equivalent of a fixed personality) are more likely to test potential partners quickly, make their judgement and move on, and tend to distance themselves or withdraw from the relationship when things go wrong. This is box theory in action: deciding quickly who someone is and giving up when they don’t fit in the box, rather than believing someone has the capacity to grow.
By contrast if you believe that you have the ability to grow and develop as a person then you fall into the category of a malleable personality. You’re more likely to take opportunities for growth, and, in intimate relationships believe that people do change and tend to stick around longer.
The bottom line
The irony of box theory is that it reveals exactly what it claims to observe – but in reverse. When someone insists people can’t change, they’re not describing you. They’re describing their own relationship with change: their need for stability, their fear of the unfamiliar, their preference for a predictable world over a dynamic one. But here’s the real danger: if you believe them, you deny yourself the possibility of becoming someone different from who you are today. Box theory isn’t a comfortable place; it’s a cage dressed up as protection.
References
- Draganski, B., Gaser, C., Busch, V., Schuierer, G., Bogdahn, U., & May, A. (2004). Neuroplasticity: Changes in grey matter induced by training. Nature, 427(6972), 311–312. https://doi.org/10.1038/427311a
- Dweck, C. S. (2000). Believing in fixed social traits: Impact on social coping. In Self-theories: Their role in motivation, personality, and development (pp. 64-72). Psychology Press
- Knee, C. R. (1998). Implicit theories of relationships: Assessment and prediction of romantic relationship initiation, coping, and longevity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(2), 360-370. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.2.36