Chapter 3 – Major Theories For Understanding Human Development (Continued) Theories

Front 1

Object Relations Theory

Back 1

less emphasis on drives, more emphasis on human relationships being the primary motivational force in life (love).
An “object” is the target of relational needs in human development, both libidinal and aggressive.
Humans have a basic need for connection, contact, and satisfying interpersonal relationships

Front 2

Analytic Psychology:

Back 2

Carl Jung, the basic motivational forces of man are governed by internalized accumulative, collective phenomenology around the significance of dreams, folklore, and mythology.

Front 3

Cognitive Developmental Theory

Cognition:

Back 3

the process of organizing stimuli, developing associations, and subsequently making meaning of experience.

Front 4

Piaget's
Equilibrium
Disequilibrium
Adaptation
Assimilation
Accommodation

Back 4

Equilibrium: a balance of organized structures, whether motor, sensory, or cognitive – all individuals strive for this. Equilibrium provides effective ways of interacting with the environment.

Disequilibrium: occurs when there are changes in the organism or environment that require a revision of basic structures.
Equilibrium is achieved through the formation of schemes (the structure or organization of action in thought) and operations (the mental manipulation of schemes and concepts) that form logical structures for understanding experience.

Adaptation: the means through which equilibrium is reached, a process of gradually modifying existing schemes and operations in order to take into account changes or discrepancies between what is known and what is being experienced. There are two components of adaptation

Assimilation: the tendency to interpret new experiences in terms of an existing scheme – contributes to the continuity of knowing.

Accommodation: the tendency to modify familiar schemes in order to account for new dimensions of the object or event that are revealed through experience.

Front 5

Piaget’s 4 Developmental Stages:

Back 5

Sensorimotor intelligence: (birth to 18 months) characterized by the formation of increasingly complex sensory and motor schemes that allow infants to organize and exercise some control over their environment.
Preoperational thought: (18 months – 5/6 years of age) children develop tools for representing schemes symbolically through language, imitation, imagery, symbolic play and drawing. Their knowledge is still very much tied to their own perceptions (includes egocentric thought and egocentric language).
Concrete operational thought: (age 6/7 to 11/12 years) children appreciate logical reasoning and causal relationships. They can manipulate categories, classification systems, and hierarchies in groups. More successful at solving problems that are clearly tied to physical reality. Cannot think hypothetically nor understand abstract concepts.
Decentering refers to the ability to consider multiple aspects of a situation. Develops in concrete operational stage, where a child age 7-12 shows increased use of logic. One of the logical processes that develops is that of Decentering. For example, when asked to choose between two lollipops, a child might choose based on how one flavor is better than the other even though the other is the same size and color. (is there more water in the tall or wide glass?)
Formal operational thought: (adolescense to adulthood) person can conceptualize about many simultaenously interacting variables. Reflects the quality of intellgence science and philosophy are built on. This stage also encompasses the development of moral judgment.
Egocentrism: at the start of each new stage, the child develops a new limitation in point of view. With experience, they gain new objectivity about their perspective and are able to analyze experiences and modify thought more flexibly.
Metacognition: “knowing about knowing,” refers to one’s knowledge concerning one’s own cognitive processes or anything related to them, e.g., the learning-relevant properties of information or data. For example, I am engaging in metacognition if I notice that I am having more trouble learning A than B; if it strikes me that I should double check C before accepting it as fact.