DOCSLIB.ORG

Urie Bronfenbrenner's Theory of Human Development: Its Evolution

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Urie Bronfenbrenner's Theory of Human Development: Its Evolution EDINETE MARIA ROSA Federal University of Esp´ırito Santo, Brazil ∗ JONATHAN TUDGE University of North Carolina, Greensboro Urie Bronfenbrenner’s Theory of Human Development: Its Evolution From Ecology to Bioecology We describe the evolution, over three phases, of the time it was first proposed in the 1970s until Bronfenbrenner’s theory from an ecological to Bronfenbrenner’s death in 2005. It is therefore a bioecological theory. Phase 1 (1973–1979) unfortunate that too many scholars treat the the- culminated in the publication of The Ecol- ory as though it deals solely with the influence ogy of Human Development (1979). Phase 2 of context on children’s or adolescents’ devel- (1980–1993) saw almost immediate modifica- opment and take no account of what came to be tions to the theory, with more attention paid the central aspect of the theory, namely proxi- to the role of the individual and greater con- mal processes, and how person characteristics, cern with developmental processes. In Phase 3 context, and historical time mutually influence (1993–2006), proximal processes were defined those processes (see Tudge, Mokrova, Hatfield, and placed at the heart of bioecological theory, & Karnik, 2009). Moreover, although Bronfen- and from 1998, the Process-Person-Context- brenner described it as a theory of human devel- Time (PPCT) model was described as the opment, from the start the developing individual theory’s appropriate research design. Given the was consistently viewed as influencing, and extent of these changes, and to avoid theoretical being influenced by, the environment. The fam- incoherence, scholars should be cautious about ily thus plays a key role: it does so as a microsys- stating that their research is based on Bron- tem context in which development occurs; it fenbrenner’s theory without specifying which does so in terms of the personal characteristics version they are using. of all individuals in the family; and most impor- tant, it does so in terms of the interactions among family members as part of proximal processes. Urie Bronfenbrenner’s theory of human devel- It is also important to point out that although opment underwent considerable changes from Bronfenbrenner may be best known as the developer of the theory that we describe in this article, he was also intensely interested in the Postgraduate Program in Psychology, Federal University of family as an institution. During the years that he Esp´ırito Santo, Brazil ([email protected]). was developing his theory, he also wrote many ∗Department of Human Development and Family Studies, papers on such topics as social-class influences 155 Stone, University of North Carolina, Greensboro, NC on child rearing, the effects of maternal 27402 ([email protected]). employment on children’s development, the Key Words: bioecological theory, ecological theory, human problems associated with treating some families development, PPCT model, Urie Bronfenbrenner. as being at a ‘‘deficit,’’ and family policies that Journal of Family Theory & Review 5 (December 2013): 243–258 243 DOI:10.1111/jftr.12022 244 Journal of Family Theory & Review are needed for families to grow healthily (for a of the characteristics and influences of different review, see Tudge, 2013). Most relevant is the contexts (microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, fact that there was cross-fertilization between and macrosystem). According to Bronfenbren- his more family-oriented writings and those that ner and Evans, the following two phases each have a more theoretical focus. began with publications in the major handbooks The bioecological theory of human devel- of the day (Bronfenbrenner & Crouter, 1983; opment, initially termed an ecological model Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 1998). or approach, was originally proposed by Bron- Our dating of the phases is necessarily fenbrenner to explain how human development somewhat imprecise, as we rely on date of occurs, focusing largely on the impact of con- publication rather than the date of writing text. Nonetheless, as denoted by his use of the and submission for publication. We have, for word ecology, Bronfenbrenner clearly viewed example, identified 1993 as both ending the development as emerging from the interaction second phase and starting the third phase. It of individual and context. Subsequent refor- is quite clear, however, that whereas the ideas mulations of his original ideas resulted as he in Bronfenbrenner’s 1993 chapter fit with those came to stress the role played by the individual; expressed in his other publications from 1980 the impact of time; and most important of all, onwards, his coauthored paper of the same proximal processes. date (Bronfenbrenner & Ceci, 1993) marked Bioecological theory in its current or mature a dramatic shift in thinking. form specifies that researchers should study Regardless of the precise timing of these the settings in which a developing individual phases, what is absolutely clear is that the spends time and the relations with others in theory underwent significant changes between the same settings, the personal characteristics of its inception and its final state. Unfortunately, the individual (and those with whom he or she as Tudge et al. (2009) pointed out, this fact has typically interacts), both development over time been ignored by many scholars. Tudge et al. and the historical time in which these individuals analyzed 25 studies published between 2001 live, and the mechanisms that drive development and 2008 (i.e., well after the beginning of the (proximal processes). final stage in the theory’s development), whose From a methodological point of view, authors stated that their research was based on bioecological theory privileges the study of Bronfenbrenner’s theory. Of those, only four proximal processes that are likely to lead to were based on the most recent form of the healthy development, with the developing theory, and most described the theory simply individuals of interest being distinguished in as one of contextual influences on development, at least one relevant individual characteristic completely ignoring the centerpiece of the theory and studied in more than a single context in its final incarnation: proximal processes. As (almost always the typical settings in which Tudge et al. argued, there is nothing wrong with the individuals are to be found). The theory deliberately basing one’s research on an earlier was formulated, as Bronfenbrenner expressed version of the theory or even on a subset of its it, to examine not ‘‘the forces that have shaped key concepts; however, for theoretical confusion human development in the past, but . those to be avoided, one should be explicit about the that may already be operating today to influence specific theoretical basis for the study. Equally what human beings may became tomorrow’’ important, scholars should pay greater attention (Bronfenbrenner & Evans, 2000, p. 117). to the fact that while theorists are still alive and Bronfenbrenner was a theorist who ques- publishing, their theories are likely to develop. tioned his own propositions, and he himself We believe that for our field to develop, drew attention to distinct phases in the develop- research should be theoretically driven, with ment of his theory. These phases, however, are studies explicitly designed to test theory, calling not quite the same as those that we have iden- into question its major concepts, supporting tified. Bronfenbrenner and Evans (2000) noted them, or expanding on them. But this can occur that the first theory-related publications were only if scholars base their work on an accurate published from 1970 to 1979, marking the first reading of the theory as it currently exists or if phase in the theory’s evolution. Bronfenbren- they have explicitly tried to test an earlier version ner and Evans wrote that in this first phase the of the theory. Supporting or attacking a reduced, theory concentrated primarily on a description old, or simply incorrect version of the theory The Evolution of Urie Bronfenbrenner’s Theory 245 is neither helpful nor appropriate. Therefore, (e.g., home, school, neighborhood) and with our goal here is to describe the three phases people with whom those children either live or in the development of Bronfenbrenner’s theory are familiar (1973, 1977c, 1979b). Lab-based as it matured into its final form, analyzing the research, by contrast, is typically conducted in principle characteristics and reformulations of an unfamiliar setting by a researcher unknown each phase. To attain this goal, we first identified to the child (1973, 1977a), something that all the published papers by Bronfenbrenner or Bronfenbrenner argued calls into question the with Bronfenbrenner as a first author that were validity of the results (1973, 1979b). Even related to the construction of his theory of human when research was conducted in the settings development. We were considerably aided in in which children are situated, Bronfenbrenner this task by the bibliographic chapter published noted that the researchers’ focus was far more by Luscher¨ and Jones (1995), which provides on the organism (the person) than on the setting a fairly complete and accurate listing of all (1975, 1977a, 1979b), the latter being described his scholarly work published until 1994. To in terms of a static environment unrelated to avoid continual repetition of Bronfenbrenner’s any system of values (1976). Bronfenbrenner name, we cite his single-authored papers here by stressed the necessity to take into account more publication date only. than two persons (the researcher and the subject) in the setting in which the child is situated and to focus on the developmental processes involved PHASE 1 (1973–1979) in attaining any developmental outcomes (1973, In Phase 1, Bronfenbrenner named his emerging 1974, 1976, 1977a, 1977c, 1978, 1979a, 1979b). theory either an ecological approach to human Finally, Bronfenbrenner argued that the absence development (1974, 1975, 1977a) or an ecolog- of appropriate research was due to the lack of a ical model of human development (1976, 1978, theory that took seriously the contexts in which 1979b), referring to it on occasion as a science human beings live (1979a).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Review of the Literature
    ABSTRACT Title of Document: BODY IMAGE AND SOCIAL ANXIETY: INTEGRATION, COMPARISON, AND EXTENSION OF BIOECOLOGICAL MODELS Elizabeth Ann Klingaman, Ph.D., 2012 Directed By: Mary Ann Hoffman, Ph.D. Counseling and Personnel Services Department Women entering their first year of college are at risk of developing both pathological body image and social anxiety. The bioecological framework of human development (Bronfenbrenner, 1977) was used to guide the selection and synthesis of three relevant models linking the following outcomes to various predictors relevant to first-year-to-college women: social physique anxiety as a subcomponent of body image concerns, and fear of negative evaluation as a subcomponent of social anxiety. While several differences were found between Asian, Black, and White racial groups, the new bioecological model fit well across all racial groups, explaining between 52% and 57% of the variance in social physique anxiety, and from 40% and 47% of the variance in fear of negative evaluation. For all racial groups, social physique anxiety mediated the relation between self-esteem and fear of negative evaluation. Self-esteem was not supported as a moderator of the relation between body mass index and social physique anxiety. Results suggest the importance of assessing social physique anxiety among college women, as well as studying the bioecological model longitudinally. Further results and implications are discussed for theory, research, and practice. BODY IMAGE AND SOCIAL ANXIETY: INTEGRATION, COMPARISON, AND EXTENSION OF BIOECOLOGICAL MODELS by Elizabeth Ann Klingaman Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Maryland, College Park in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2012 Advisory Committee: Professor Mary Ann Hoffman, Ph.D., Chair Professor Margaretha Lucas, Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Reframing Parkway Heights United Methodist Church for Strategic Adoption
    Please HONOR the copyright of these documents by not retransmitting or making any additional copies in any form (Except for private personal use). We appreciate your respectful cooperation. ___________________________ Theological Research Exchange Network (TREN) P.O. Box 30183 Portland, Oregon 97294 USA Website: www.tren.com E-mail: [email protected] Phone# 1-800-334-8736 ___________________________ ATTENTION CATALOGING LIBRARIANS TREN ID# Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) MARC Record # Digital Object Identification DOI # Ministry Focus Paper Approval Sheet This ministry focus paper entitled REFRAMING PARKWAY HEIGHTS UNITED METHODIST CHURCH FOR STRATEGIC ADOPTION Written by WES INGRAM and submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Ministry has been accepted by the Faculty of Fuller Theological Seminary upon the recommendation of the undersigned readers: _____________________________________ Chap Clark _____________________________________ Kurt Fredrickson Date Received: September 13, 2014 REFRAMING PARKWAY HEIGHTS UNITED METHODIST CHURCH FOR STRATEGIC ADOPTION A DOCTORAL PROJECT SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY FULLER THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE DOCTOR OF MINISTRY BY WES INGRAM JULY 2014 ABSTRACT Reframing Parkway Heights United Methodist Church for Strategic Adoption Thomas Wesley Ingram Doctor of Ministry School of Theology, Fuller Theological Seminary 2014 In order to move Parkway Heights United Methodist Church (hereafter, PHUMC) towards embracing a communal paradigm of youth ministry, the church’s mental model of youth ministry must be reframed. Therefore, the goal of this project is to launch Team 51 Ministry, including a training system for equipping adults that incorporates the most pertinent aspects of practical theology, psychosocial development of adolescents, and the ecology of adolescent development, as a framework for communal youth ministry.
    [Show full text]
  • E. Mark Cummings, Ph.D William J
    December 15, 2020 E. Mark Cummings, Ph.D William J. Shaw Family Professor of Psychology [email protected] WORK ADDRESS HOME ADDRESS PHONE 204 Brownson Hall 51121 Quail Hollow Court Work: (574) 631-4947 Department of Psychology Granger, IN 46530 Home: (574) 273-8612 University of Notre Dame FAX: (574) 631-1825 Notre Dame, In 46556 Cell: (574) 850-2643 EDUCATION Ph.D. University of California, Los Angeles (1977) Major: Developmental Psychology Minors: Experimental Psychopathology, Measurement. M. A. University of California, Los Angeles (1973) Major: Psychology B. A. Johns Hopkins University (1972) Major: Social and Behavioral Sciences PROFESSIONAL POSITIONS 2017-present William J. Shaw Family Professor of Psychology, Department of Psychology, University of Notre Dame 2001-2017 Professor and Notre Dame Endowed Chair in Psychology, Department of Psychology, University of Notre Dame 2007 Visiting Scholar, Department of Psychology, University of Virginia 1996-2001 Professor, Department of Psychology, University of Notre Dame 1990-1996 Professor, Department of Psychology, West Virginia University 1986-1990 Associate Professor, Department of Psychology, West Virginia University 1985-1986 Assistant Professor, Department of Psychology, West Virginia University 1979-1985 Staff Fellow and Senior Staff Fellow, Laboratory of Developmental Psychology, National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, MD 1977-1979 Lecturer, Department of Psychology, University of California, Los Angeles AWARDS AND HONORS Urie Bronfenbrenner Award for Lifetime Contribution to Developmental Psychology in the Service of Science and Society, American Psychological Association. Mentoring Award in Developmental Psychology, American Psychological Association 1- EMC December 15, 2020 Reuben Hill Research and Theory Award, National Council on Family Relations James A. Burns, C.S.C., Graduate School Award for Excellence in Graduate Education, University of Notre Dame Research Achievement Award, University of Notre Dame William J.
    [Show full text]
  • The Development and Meaning of Psychological Distance
    THE DEVELOPMENT AND MEANING OF PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTANCE Edited by Rodney R. Cocking National Institute of Mental Health K. Ann Renninger Swarthmore College LAWRENCE ERLBAUM ASSOCIATES, PUBLISHERS 1993 Hillsdale, New Jersey Hove and London Contents Preface ix Acknowledgments xii Foreword xiii William Damon List of Contributors xvii PART I. Psychological Distance and Developmental Theory 1. Psychological Distance as a Unifying Theory of Development 3 Rodney R. Cocking and K. Ann Renninger 2. Psychological Distance and Behavioral Paradigms 19 K. Ann Renninger and Rodney R. Cocking 3. The Encoding of Distance: The Concept of the Zone of Proximal Development and Its Interpretations 35 Joan Voisiner and René van der Veer 4. Distancing Theory From a Distance 63 Lfrie Bronfenbrenner PART II. Psychological Distance as a Cognitive Demand 5. Temperamental Contributions to Styles of Reactivity to Discrepancy 81 Jerome Kagan and Nancy Snidman Viii CONTENTS 6 Distancing and Dual Representation 91 Judy S. DeLoache 7. Psychological Distance in Self-imposed Delay of Gratification 109 Walter Mische! and Monica L. Rodriguez 8. Structural Changes in Children's Understanding of Family Roles and Divorce 123 Malcolm W. Watson and Kurt W. Fischer 9. The Centrality of a Distancing Model for the Development of Representational Competence 141 Irving E. Sigel PART III. Psychological Distance as an Ecological Demand 10. Representational Competence in Shared Symbol Systems: Electronic Media From Radio to Video Games 161 Patricia Marks Greenfield 11. Children's Conflicts: Representations and Lessons Learned 185 Carolyn U. Shantz 12. The Social Origins of Individual Mental Functioning: Alternatives and Perspectives 203 James V. Wertsch and Jennifer A.
    [Show full text]
  • Bioecological Factors of Chronic Absenteeism
    Running head: BIOECOLOGICAL FACTORS OF CHRONIC ABSENTEEISM Published in Teachers College Record (TCR) Gottfried, M. A., Gee, K. A. (2017). Identifying the Determinants of Chronic Absenteeism: A Bioecological Systems Approach. Teachers College Record. 119(7). https://www.tcrecord.org/Content.asp?ContentId=21802 Identifying the Determinants of Chronic Absenteeism: A Bioecological Systems Approach Authors: Michael A. Gottfried, PhDa Gervitz Graduate School of Education University of California, Santa Barbara Santa Barbara, CA 93106 Email: [email protected] Phone: (323) 387-8039 Kevin A. Gee, EdD School of Education University of California, Davis One Shields Ave. Davis, CA 95616 Email: [email protected] Phone: (530) 752-9334 ACKNOWLEDGMENT The authors of this study received funding from the Spencer Foundation. This article reflects the work of the authors and not of the granting agency. a. corresponding author © 2017, Michael A. Gottfried and Kevin A. Gee. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ BIOECOLOGICAL FACTORS OF CHRONIC ABSENTEEISM 2 Abstract Background/Context: Chronic school absenteeism is a pervasive problem across the U.S.; in early education, it is most rampant in kindergarten and its consequences are particularly detrimental, often leading to poorer academic, behavioral and developmental outcomes later in life. Though prior empirical research has identified a broad range of determinates of chronic absenteeism, there lacks a single, unified theoretically-driven investigation examining how such factors concurrently explain the incidence of chronic absenteeism among our nation’s youngest schoolchildren. Purpose/Research Questions: Our study filled this critical void—we investigated the multiple determinants of chronic absenteeism that were grounded, theoretically and empirically, in Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model of development.
    [Show full text]
  • Using an Ecological Perspective
    Using an ecological perspective Also inside: n Transitioning successfully into retirement n Reflecting “as if” with diverse populations n Drawing clients out of avoidant behaviors n Counseling students after sexual assault CT0213_CT0213 11/29/12 4:30 PM Page 1 Counseling Today Alleged unprofessional conduct and inappropriate treatment – lead to a malpractice suit. The client, a 51-year-old woman uses her email correspondence with the counselor to mount a formidable legal case, suing for $500,000 in damages. Read the details of this case study and how coverage through HPSO responded to protect our insured counselor at www.hpso.com/ct2 This program is underwritten by American Casualty Company of Reading, Pennsylvania, a CNA company, and is offered through the Healthcare Providers Service Organization Purchasing Group. Coverages, rates and limits may differ or may not be available in all states. All products and services are subject to change without notice. This material is for illustrative purposes only and is not a contract. It is intended to provide a general overview of the products and services offered. Only the policy can provide the actual terms, coverages, amounts, conditions and exclusions. CNA is a registered trademark of CNA Financial Corporation. Copyright © 2013 CNA. All rights reserved. Healthcare Providers Service Organization is a registered trade name of Affinity Insurance Services, Inc.; (AR 244489); in CA, MN & OK, AIS Affinity Insurance Agency, Inc. (CA 0795465); in CA, Aon Affinity Insurance Services, Inc., (0G94493), Aon Direct Insurance Administrator and Berkely Insurance Agency and in NY and NH, AIS Affinity Insurance Agency. © 2013 Affinity Insurance Services, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • December 15, 2008 Perspectives in Theory
    December 15, 2008 Perspectives in Theory: Anthology of Theorists affecting the Educational World Editors: Misty M. Bicking, Brian Collins, Laura Fernett, Barbara Taylor, Kathleen Sutton Shepherd University Table Of Contents Abstract_______________________________________________________________________4 Alfred Adler ___________________________________________________________________5 Melissa Bartlett Mary Ainsworth _______________________________________________________________17 Misty Bicking Alois Alzheimer _______________________________________________________________30 Maura Bird Albert Bandura ________________________________________________________________45 Lauren Boyer James A. Banks________________________________________________________________59 Adel D. Broadwater Vladimir Bekhterev_____________________________________________________________72 Thomas Cochrane Benjamin Bloom_______________________________________________________________86 Brian Collins John Bowlby and Attachment Theory ______________________________________________98 Colin Curry Louis Braille: Research_________________________________________________________111 Justin Everhart Urie Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model___________________________________________124 Kristin Ezzell Jerome Bruner________________________________________________________________138 Laura Beth Fernett Noam Chomsky Stubborn Without________________________________________________149 Jamin Gibson Auguste Comte _______________________________________________________________162 Heather Manning
    [Show full text]
  • Session: 7 Introduction to Life Span Psychology
    Session: 7 Introduction to Life Span Psychology Programme : B. A Subject : Psychology Semester : 3 University : University of Mysore Ecological Systems Theory Urie Bronfenbrenner Ecological system theory Urie bronfenbrenner was a Russian born American developmental psychologist who most is known for his ecological systems theory of child development. Ecological theory is socio-Cultural view of Development. It consists of five environmental systems ranging from the fine grained inputs of direct interactions with social agents to the broad- based inputs of culture. The theory was published in 1979, this theory states that there are many different levels of environmental influences that can affect a child’s development, starting from people and institutions immediately surrounding the individual to nation-wide cultural forces. Urie bronfenbrenner eventually renamed his theory the bio ecological model in order to recognize the importance of biological processes in development, The theory helps us to understand why we act the way we do in different circumstances or environments. Ecological systems theory views the person as developing within a complex system of relationships affected by multiple levels of the surrounding environment. Since the child's biological dispositions join with environmental forces to mold development, Bronfenbrenner recently characterized his perspective as, bioecological model. Bronfenbrenner envisions the environment as a series of nested structures that includes but extends beyond the home, school, neighborhood, and workplace settings in Session: 7 Introduction to Life Span Psychology which people spend their everyday lives. Each layer of the environment is viewed as having a powerful impact on development. A) The Microsystem. The innermost level of the environment is the microsystem, which consists of activities and interaction patterns in the person's immediate surroundings.
    [Show full text]
  • Theoretical Models of Learning and Human Development Assignment 50 Points New Due Date: February 27 Directions: Using the List
    Theoretical Models of Learning and Human Development Assignment 50 Points New due date: February 27 Directions: Using the list below, each member of your group will select one learning theorist and one human development theorist. This means that each member will have a different theorist from the other members in the group. You will research the ways the theorists’ ideas impacted education, and contributed to learning theory and/or human development in connection to pedagogical practices and developmentally appropriate instructional strategies. From your research, create a graphic organizer using a tool from uateach.com that you will use to teach your group members about your findings. The graphic organizer should be completely filled with useful information. Please do not have sentence frames or places to write down information as you would if you used the graphic organizer as an instructional tool – you are summarizing the key information for your group members to assist them during a jigsaw activity. On the due date, you will meet with your PLC members to discuss the different theorist, their contributions to the field of education, and the influence that the theorist have had on pedagogical practices for your content area. Please use at least one resource for each of your assigned theorists and cite the source(s) at the bottom of each graphic organizer. Learning Theorist Human Development Theorist Lev Vygotsky Jean Piaget Jerome Bruner Erik Erikson Jean Lave Lawrence Kohlberg B.F. Skinner Sigmund Freud Albert Bandura Urie Bronfenbrenner .
    [Show full text]
  • Early Childhood Transitions Research: a Review of Concepts, Theory, and Practice
    48 WORKING PAPERS IN Early Childhood Development Early childhood transitions research: A review of concepts, theory, and practice By Pia Vogler, Gina Crivello and Martin Woodhead Cover: Little girl from the El Coro district in San Salvador, El Salvador. Photo: Jon Spaull Design: Valetti, vormgeving en communicatie, The Hague, The Netherlands Editing and proofreading: Green Ink (www.greenink.co.uk) 48 WORKING PAPERS IN Early Childhood Development Early childhood transitions research: A review of concepts, theory, and practice By Pia Vogler, Gina Crivello and Martin Woodhead May 2008 Copyright © 2008 by the Bernard van Leer Foundation, The Netherlands. The Bernard van Leer Foundation encourages fair use of this material. Proper citation is requested. This publication may not be resold for profit. About the authors Pia Vogler is a research assistant for ‘Young Lives’ and a DPhil candidate in the Department of International Development (QEH), University of Oxford. She has been a consultant for UNHCR and is currently carrying out doctoral research on the daily, seasonal and life course transitions of Karen children in Thailand. Gina Crivello is an anthropologist and Child Research Coordinator for ‘Young Lives’, based at the Department of International Development (QEH), University of Oxford. Her research interests include the gender and inter-generational dynamics of child migration and youth transitions in developing-country contexts. Martin Woodhead is Professor of Childhood Studies at The Open University and Child Research Director for ‘Young Lives’. His research and publications include early childhood development, education and care, children’s rights and child labour. He is co-editor of the journal Children & Society, a member of the editorial board for Childhood and advisory board for Journal of Early Childhood Research.
    [Show full text]
  • Developmental Psychology
    Developmental psychology Psychology History · Subfields Basic science Abnormal · Biological Cognitive · Comparative Cultural · Developmental Evolutionary · Experimental Mathematical · Personality Positive · Social Applied science Clinical · Consumer Educational · Health Industrial and organizational Law · Military Occupational health · Political Religion · School · Sport Lists Disciplines · Organizations Outline · Psychologists Psychotherapies · Publications Research methods · Theories Timeline · Topics Portal v · d · e Developmental psychology, also known as human development, is the scientific study of systematic psychological changes that occur in human beings over the course of their life span. Originally concerned with infants and children, the field has expanded to include adolescence, adult development, aging, and the entire life span. This field examines change across a broad range of topics including motor skills and other psycho-physiological processes; cognitive development involving areas such as problem solving, moral understanding, and conceptual understanding; language acquisition; social, personality, and emotional development; and self-concept and identity formation. Developmental psychology includes issues such as the extent to which development occurs through the gradual accumulation of knowledge versus stage-like development, or the extent to which children are born with innate mental structures versus learning through experience. Many researchers are interested in the interaction between personal characteristics, the
    [Show full text]
  • SRCD Oral History Interview
    Urie Bronfenbrennner Born 4/29/1917 in Moscow, Russia; Died 9/25/2005 in Ithaca, NY Spouse – Liese Bronfenbrenner Ph.D. from University of Michigan (1942); Ed.M. from Harvard University (1940); A.B. from Cornell University (1938) Major Employment: U.S. Army/Air Force - 1942-1946, Psychologist University of Michigan –1946-1948, Psychology Cornell University –1948-2005, Psychology Major Areas of Work: Human Ecology, Ecological Systems Theory, Head Start Program Co-Founder SRCD Affiliation: Governing Council Member (1959-1965) SRCD Oral History Interview Urie Bronfenbrenner Interviewed by Glen Elder October 25, 1998 Elder: Urie, you were born in Moscow, and I wonder if you would tell briefly about your parents, your mother and your father and the people around you at that time. And then talk about the transition to the United States. Bronfenbrenner: I take it you mean not just the time that I was born, but the period before we left for the United States. Elder: Before you left, that’s right. Bronfenbrenner: Well, let me begin with a lovely comment my father made. He said (this was later, of course, when I was a Cornell student already)--he said, “You know the most important decision you ever make in your life is choosing the right parents, and you did reasonably well.” I think that nothing is more important than that fact. I was very, very lucky in that choice. One of its most important consequences, which I never realized really until I ended up back in the Soviet Union to be an exchange scientist there, is that the effect of that was to give me two cultures.
    [Show full text]