Lifespan Theories Intro


I. What is a theory?

Hempel (1966) defined a theory as

a coherent, integrated set of statements containing: (1) internal principles, (2) bridge principles, and (3) an identifiable body of phenomena to be explained


parts of a theory:

assumptions: general ideas that guide the overall theory (e.g., Piaget’s assumption that thinking is organized; assumptions about a newborn’s capabilities)

internal principles: primary abstract concepts or fundamental hypothetical constructs; core explanatory ideas (mechanisms or processes that are accepted without being tested - e.g., in Freud’s theory Id, Ego, and Superego); these are irreducible principles, general laws, and functions - unobservable, but refer to ideas that can be observed

bridge principles: secondary concepts that describe how internal principles translate into the phenomena to be explained; rules that “show” how (e.g., defense mechanisms in Freud’s theory)

phenomena to be explained: may be very specific (slips of the tongue, play) or very general (personality, cognitive development, etc.)

a quick note on the importance of jargon  ­ allows more efficient communication, reduces ambiguity, increases clarity

Five key characteristics of theories (or why do we study theories?):

1. Theories tell us how to organize facts and interpret their meaning.

2. Theories represent public knowledge.
3. Theories are, at least in principle, testable.
4. Theories are less complex than people.
5. Theories are generalizable.

limitations of theories:
based on incomplete data
based on distorted data and distort the data, as well
are influenced by personal choice

overall, theories are often less objective (scientific) than they appear
 

II. The relationship between theories and data

data are the facts ­ theories are the explanations

theories generate the questions, suggest where one should look for more facts or data, and provide the methodology for doing so

types of theory/data relationships


1. the Model - provide analogies and do not have the structure and testability of deductive theories; “they function by example rather than by explanation”

2. the Deductive Theory ­ the “grand” theory

3. the Functional Theory ­ more informal and modest than deductive theories; highly modifiable; the hallmark of the current theory construction in psychology

4. the Inductive Theory ­ merely functions to summarize the data

some additional considerations about theory/data relationships:


-> the greater the distance, the more difficult it is to test the theory
-> the greater the distance, the greater the number of theories that can be produced to explain the same phenomena


III. Developmental theories & paradigms

besides these characteristics of theories in general, developmental theories, are concerned with describing CHANGE

in particular developmental theories must have three other components -

1. must describe changes over time in one or more areas of development
2. describe the relationship among behaviors in one or more areas of development

3. describe the change mechanisms to produce development

A Paradigm defines a family of theories (Kuhn, 1962):
a collection of beliefs shared by scientists and
a set of agreements about how problems are to be investigated

Paradigms in developmental psychology have been organized around the question: what is the basic source of our knowledge about the world?


Descartes (1596-1650) & the endogenous paradigm - in sum: the senses impose limitations on what is “real;” therefore knowledge must have an internal, innate origin

Locke (1632-1704), Hume (1711-1776), & the exogenous paradigm ­ in sum: experience (sensation) is the source of knowledge; complex ideas come from the association of simpler ideas through similarity (resemblance), contiguity, and cause-effect

the nature-nurture controversy (in brief)


Kant (1724-1804) & the constructivist paradigm ­ in sum: neither sensation nor thought can be derived from each other; we construct knowledge from sensation, but this knowledge is more (more abstract, more complex, etc.) than the experience itself