Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Child development theories psychosocial
Child development theories psychosocial
Key Theories of Child Development
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Child development theories psychosocial
Introduction A debate between psychologist, scientists and philosopher thinkers on the spectrum of ‘nature vs. nurture’ arose concerning human development. In the nature versus nurture debate, the term "nature" refers to the genes we inherit while the term "nurture" refers to our outside environment (Nature vs. Nurture: Twin and Adoption Studies). This debate of ‘nature vs. nurture’ has existed for centuries and up to now it is still a topic of major discussion although at present time. Human development is the scientific study of age-related changes in behavior, thinking, emotions and personality (Boyd & Bee, 2005). In order to understand cognitive, emotional, physical, social and educational growth that everyone experiences from childhood until adulthood, we must first understand the influence and importance of child development. Different psychologists have different theories and concepts of child development. Grand theories often use a stage-by-stage approach while attempting to describe the areas of development. Mini-theories focus only on a fairly limited aspect of development, such as cognitive or social growth. (Cherry, Child Development Theories, 2011) Discussion John Locke, a famous philosopher once introduced the concept of tabula rasa that defines a child’s mind as a ‘blank slate’ which can be written on and moulded by the society and environment. He believes that what we are is determined by the experiences we face. Plato, the Greek philosopher suggests that certain things simply occur naturally regardless of any environmental influence. However, Jean Jacques Rousseau describes humans in their state of nature as noble savages living in peace and harmony but due to civilization and advancement in society, humans ... ... middle of paper ... ...0 © 1963). Childhood and Society. W.W Norton & Company, Inc. 5. King, A. L. (2008). The Science of Psychology: An Appreciative View. New York: McGraw-Hill . 6. Nature vs. Nurture: Twin and Adoption Studies. (n.d.). Retrieved December 5, 2011, from Nurture or Nature.com: http://www.nurture-or-nature.com/articles/twin-and-adoption-studies/index.php 7. Preaaley, M., & McCormick, C. (2007). Child and Adolescent Development for Educators. New York: The Guilford Publications. 8. Robert S. Feldman, P. (2006). Child Development, . University of Massachusetts,Amherst. 9. Smolako, l. (1993). Adult development. Adult Development . 10. Spaulding, K. (2009). Human Development Theory - Psychological Growth Over Time. Retrieved December 4, 2011, from Knol - a unit of knowledge: share what you know, publish your expertise.: http://knol.google.com/k/human-development-theory#
The World of Psychology. (2002). A Pearson Education Company. Boston, MA: Samuel Wood & Ellen Green Wood p. 593
In the well-received novel “Pudd’nhead Wilson,” Mark Twain skillfully addresses the ancient argument about the origin of one’s character and whether it’s derived from his nature or his surroundings. We can best see this battle between nature versus nurture by inspecting the plot lines that follow the characters Thomas a Becket Driscoll, Valet de Chambre, and Roxana the slave. Thomas was born into a wealthy white family while Roxy birthed Chambers into a life of slavery. It seemed as though each would have gone their separate ways into opposite walks of life, but Roxy secretly swapped the children, which destined each to their counterintuitive fates. Through their words and actions, Tom, Chambers, and Roxy have proven the idea that one’s behaviors and desires are a result of his upbringings and the environment he lives in rather than by his innate nature.
Meece L, D. D. (2008). Child and Adolescent Development for Educators. New York: Mc-Graw-Hill Companies.
The nature vs. nurture debate: the nature side, are those such as biologists, psychologists and others in the natural sciences, argue that behavioral traits can be explained by genetics. Those taking the nurture side are sociologists and others in the social sciences, they argue that human behavior is learned and shaped through social interaction. This argument should be dismissed because you don’t have to look far to see that both genetics and our environment, plays a role in who we are and our behaviors. (Glass). The point is there is a complex relationship between nature and nurture, either one alone is insufficient to explain what makes us human. (Colt). Our heredity gives us a basic potential,...
...s may never agree on a conclusive degree to which both nature and nurture play roles in human development, but over the years, more improved studies have shown that both are crucial aspects. With all the knowledge we are gaining from these studies, it would be quite limiting to believe that a criminal and his actions are the sole result of heredity. Even in people who do not commit crimes, genes themselves are affected by the prenatal environment. Undoubtedly, the fetus experiences changes in environment, forcing possible changes in heredity and reactionary response. We are likely to never find the answer to how much or how little either, nature or nurture, impacts our lives, but at least we can agree that they both do, in fact, have major roles. Our development is not the culmination of heredity alone, but of a tangled web of experiences and genetics entwined.
...es that we are all unique in our own way and at some point will realize our potential and try to achieve more not that our genes made us act the way we do.
What makes us who we are? Does the answer lie in our genes, our environment, or in the way we are raised? For years, there has been an on-going debate between nature and nurture. T.H. White, author of The Once and Future King, explores the debate through many of the book’s characters. The issue clearly appears in the relationship of Queen Morgause and her sons, the Orkney brothers. The debate caused people to pick a side, to pick nature over nurture, or nurture over nature. However, it does not have to be one or the other. Nature and nurture work together to determine who we are.
For this first analytical essay, I have decided to have a go at analyzing the Nature Vs. Nurture using my own viewpoint as a sibling. No doubt this is a topic that has been debated to mental death already, but I think it is something I will benefit from thinking about. Also, at the end of my main topic, I will quickly address a topic brushed on in the book.
Berk, L. (2010). Development Through the Lifespan (5th ed.). (J. Mosher, Ed.) Boston, Massachusetts: Allyn & Bacon.
The quote from the famous psychologist John B. Watson essentially sums up behaviourism. Behaviourism refers to the school of psychology founded by Watson, established on the fact that behaviours can be measured and observed (Watson, 1993). In behaviourism, there is a strong emphasis that the acquisition of learning, or permanent change in behaviour, is by external manifestation. Thus, any individual differences in behaviours observed was more likely due to experiences, and not by the working of genes. As the quote suggest, any individuals can be potentially trained to perform any tasks through the right conditioning. There are two major types of conditioning, classical and operant conditioning (Cacioppo & Freberg, 2012).
Nurture is constituted by the influence of millions of complex environmental factors that form a child's character. Advocators of nature do not believe that character is predetermined by genes, but formed over time. Although often separated, nature and nurture work together in human development. The human conscience is neither innate from birth or entirely shaped through experience, instead, genetics and environmental influences combine to form human behavior, character, and personality traits that constantly change and develop throughout life. The debate on nature versus nurture has existed for thousands of years.
Undoubtedly, humans are unique and intricate creatures and their development is a complex process. It is this process that leads people to question, is a child’s development influenced by genetics or their environment? This long debate has been at the forefront of psychology for countless decades now and is better known as “Nature versus Nurture”. The continuous controversy over whether or not children develop their psychological attributes based on genetics (nature) or the way in which they have been raised (nurture) has occupied the minds of psychologists for years. Through thorough reading of experiments, studies, and discussions however, it is easy to be convinced that nurture does play a far more important in the development of a human than nature.
Child growth and development is a process that consists of some building blocks, which are components that combine in an infinite number of ways (Cherry, n.d.). As a result of the variations of building blocks in a child’s development, educators, psychologists, and philosophers have been constantly engaged in the debate of nature versus nurture debate. Many researchers agree that child development is a complex interaction between his/her genetic background (nature) and his/her environment (nurture). In essence, some developmental aspects are strongly affected by biology whereas other aspects are influenced by environmental factors. From the onset of an individu...
Genetic, mental and emotional changes that occur in human beings between birth and the end of adolescence are discussed in the development of a child. Genes are said to have a greater influence on a child’s development which creates the debate nature vs nurture. We all naturally inherit genes which influence who we are (how we look and our character). It is natural for us to perceive that those who are born will automatically learn to walk, understand the language, copy others and be able to use simple tools (i.e. spoons, forks, pencils crayons) and be able to interpret how others perceive the world around them.
In the study of child development, nature and nurture are two essential concepts that immensely influence future abilities and characteristics of developing children. Nature refers to the genetically obtained characteristics and abilities that influence development while nurture refers to the surrounding environmental conditions that influence development. Without one or the other, a child may not develop some important skills, such as communication and walking. The roles of physiological and psychological needs in a person’s life are also crucial for developing children. Humanistic psychologist, Abraham Maslow, suggested that humans don’t only aim towards survival, but also aim towards self-actualization (Rathus, P. 94).