Week Two - Theoretical Perspectives

Nature and Nurture:
- Are we shaped by genetic inheritance (nature) or our experiences (nurture)?
- It is a false dichotomy: development is a result of both genetic and environmental factors.
- Example: Epigenetics show how gene expression can be influenced by experiences.
Activity and Passivity:
- To what extent do we actively shape our environments, and how much are we shaped by influences beyond our control?
- Concepts: Self-efficacy reflects our belief in influencing outcomes in our lives.
Continuity and Discontinuity:
- Is development a gradual process (continuity) or does it involve distinct stages (discontinuity)?
- Quantitative change involves measurable differences, while qualitative change involves fundamental transformations (e.g., tadpole to frog).
Universality and Context Specificity:
- Is human development generally similar across different cultures, or does it significantly vary based on social contexts?
Domain Specificity and Domain Generality:
- Do we have specialized cognitive systems for different domains (like language, emotions) or general systems that work across various domains?

Human behavior is driven by unconscious motives and emotional conflicts.
- Components of Personality:
- Id: Impulsive and irrational aspects.
- Ego: Rational aspect that attempts to balance demands.
- Superego: Ethical standards and morals.
Psychosexual Stages: Development occurs through stages (oral, anal, phallic, latent, genital).
Defense Mechanisms: Coping strategies to manage anxiety (e.g., fixation, regression).
Strengths: Highlights unconscious processes and early experiences; critiques emotional development.
Limitations: Theoretical vagueness and overemphasis on sexuality.

Extended Freud’s theories with a focus on social influences and development throughout life stages.
- Emphasizes a positive view of human development and less on unconscious drives.
Strengths/Limitations: Accounts for nature and nurture; however, also criticized for being overly vague.

Learning through associations:
- Example: Little Albert experiment demonstrates conditioned fears.
Unconditioned and conditioned responses are central concepts.

Behavior is shaped by reinforcement (strengthens behavior) or punishment (weakens behavior).
The approach prompted discussions about language acquisition in the cognitive revolution.

Highlights the role of observational learning and imitation in development; promotes self-efficacy.
Strengths/Limitations: Testable and applicable; often lacks depth in explaining developmental changes.

Focus on the inherent goodness of individuals and the concept of self-actualization—achieving full potential.
Hierarchy of Needs: Framework for understanding human motivation and personal growth, proposed by Abraham Maslow.
Strengths/Limitations: Emphasizes psychological wellness but faces challenges in measurement and universality of concepts.

Development consists of stages (sensorimotor, preoperational, concrete operational, formal operational).
- Constructivist Approach: Children actively construct knowledge through experiences; emphasizes qualitative changes.

Stresses socio-cultural influences on cognitive development through interaction with more skilled individuals.
- Disagrees with rigid stages proposed by Piaget.

Compares human thought processes to computer operations focusing on improvement in capacity and speed.
Emphasizes mechanics of attention, memory, and decision-making.

Development is viewed as a dynamic interplay between individual and environment.
Epigenetic Psychobiological Systems Perspective: Explores how biological and environmental influences shape human development, emphasizing cultural evolution.

Examines behavioral and developmental similarities across species and cultures.
Capitalizes on findings from animals to understand our own species better, highlighting the importance of cultural context.
Research examples include inequity aversion in capuchin monkeys, suggesting a baseline of fairness perceptions.

Each theoretical perspective offers unique insights with strengths and weaknesses in addressing big questions in developmental psychology.