Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-11T00:32:33.218Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Relational developmental systems: A paradigm for developmental science in the postgenomic era

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2012

Willis F. Overton  and
Richard M. Lerner
Willis F. Overton
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA 19122-6085. Overton@temple.edu
Richard M. Lerner
Affiliation:
Eliot-Pearson Department of Child Development, Tufts University, Medford, MA 02155.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This commentary argues that the anomalies suffered by the population behavior genetics paradigm are more widespread than suggested by Charney, including many made in the field of developmental science. Further, it is argued that, according to the criteria established by Kuhn, there is and has been available an alternative scientific paradigm that provides the formative context for Charney's postgenomic view. This is the relational developmental systems paradigm.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 35 , Issue 5 , October 2012 , pp. 375 - 376
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Elder, G. H. Jr. (1998) The life course and human development. In: Handbook of child psychology, vol. 1: Theoretical models of human development, 5th ed., ed. Lerner, R. M. (vol. ed.) & Lerner, R. M. (series ed.), pp. 939–91. Wiley.Google Scholar
Gottlieb, G. (1997) Synthesizing nature-nurture: Prenatal roots of instinctive behavior. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Gottlieb, G. (2003) On making behavioral genetics truly developmental. Human Development 46:337–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gottlieb, G., Wahlsten, D. & Lickliter, R. (2006) The significance of biology for human development: A developmental psychobiological systems view. In: Handbook of child psychology, vol. 1: Theoretical models of human development, 6th ed., ed. Lerner, R. M. (vol. ed.) & Lerner, R. M. (series eds.), pp. 210–57. Wiley.Google Scholar
Greenberg, G. (2011) The failure of biogenetic analysis in psychology: Why psychology is not a biological science. Research in Human Development 8 (3–4):173–91.Google Scholar
Hirsch, J. (1967) Behavior-genetic analysis. McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Ho, M. W. (2010) Development and evolution revisited. In: Handbook of developmental science, behavior, and genetics, ed. Hood, K., Halpern, C. Tucker, Greenberg, G. & Lerner, R., pp. 61–109. Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ingold, T. (2000) Evolving skills. In: Alas, poor Darwin: Arguments against evolutionary psychology, ed. Rose, H. & Rose, S., pp. 273–97. Harmony Books.Google Scholar
Jablonka, E. & Lamb, M. J. (2005) Evolution in four dimensions: Genetic, epigenetic, behavioral, and symbolic variation in the history of life. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Joseph, J. (2010) Genetic research in psychiatry and psychology: A critical overview. In: Handbook of developmental science, behavior, and genetics, ed. Hood, K., Halpern, C. Tucker, Greenberg, G. & Lerner, R., pp. 557–625. Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Kamin, L. J. (1974) The science and politics of I.Q. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. (1970) The structure of scientific revolutions, 2nd ed. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lerner, R. M. (1978) Nature, nurture, and dynamic interactionism. Human Development 21:1–20.Google Scholar
Lerner, R. M. (2004) Genes and the promotion of positive human development: Hereditarian versus developmental systems perspectives. In: Nature and nurture: The complex interplay of genetic and environmental influences on human behavior and development, ed. Coll, C. Garcia, Bearer, E. & Lerner, R., pp. 1–34. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Lerner, R. M. (2006) Developmental science, developmental systems, and contemporary theories of human development. In: Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 1: Theoretical models of human development, 6th ed., ed. Lerner, R. M. (vol. ed.) & Lerner, R. M. (series eds.), pp. 1–17. Wiley.Google Scholar
Lerner, R. M. (2011) Structure and process in relational developmental systems theories: A commentary on contemporary changes in the understanding of developmental change across the life-span. Human Development 54:34–43.Google Scholar
Lerner, R. M. (2012) Developmental science and the role of genes in development. GeneWatch, 25(1–2). Available at: http://www.councilforresponsiblegenetics.org/genewatch/GeneWatchPage.aspx?pageId=413.Google Scholar
Lerner, R. M. & Overton, W. F. (2008) Exemplifying the integrations of the relational developmental system: Synthesizing theory, research, and application to promote positive development and social justice. Journal of Adolescent Research 23:245–55.Google Scholar
Lewontin, R. C. (1974) The analysis of variance and the analysis of causes. American Journal of Human Genetics 26:400–11.Google ScholarPubMed
Lewontin, R. C. (1991) Biology as ideology: The doctrine of DNA. Harper Perennial.Google Scholar
Lickliter, R. & Honeycutt, H. (2010) Rethinking epigenesis and evolution in light of developmental science. In: Oxford handbook of developmental behavioral neuroscience, ed. Blumberg, M. S., Freeman, J. H. & Robinson, S. R., pp. 30–47. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Meaney, M. J. (2010) Epigenetics and the biological definition of gene×environment interactions. Child Development 81:41–79.Google Scholar
Molenaar, P. C. M. (2007) On the implications of the classical ergodic theorems: Analysis of developmental processes has to focus on intra-individual variation. Developmental Psychobiology 50:60–69.Google Scholar
Moore, D. S. (2001) The dependent gene: The fallacy of “nature vs. nurture.” Henry Holt.Google Scholar
Overton, W. F. (1973) On the assumptive base of the nature-nurture controversy: Additive versus interactive conceptions. Human Development 16:74–89.Google Scholar
Overton, W. F. (2004) Embodied development: Ending the nativism-empiricism debate. In: Nature and nurture: The complex interplay of genetic and environmental influences on human behavior and development, ed. Coll, C. Garcia, Bearer, E. & Lerner, R., pp. 201–23. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Overton, W. F. (2006) Developmental psychology: Philosophy, concepts, and methodology. In: Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 1: Theoretical models of human development, 6th ed., ed. Lerner, R. M. (vol. ed.) & Lerner, R. M. (series eds.), pp. 18–88. Wiley.Google Scholar
Overton, W. F. (2010) Life-span development: Concepts and issues. In: Handbook of life-span development, vol. 1: Cognition, biology, and methods, ed. Overton, W. F., pp. 1–29. Wiley.Google Scholar
Overton, W. F. (2011) Relational developmental systems and quantitative behavior genetics: Alternative or parallel methodologies? Research in Human Development 8 (3–4):258–63.Google Scholar
Overton, W. F. (2012) Evolving scientific paradigms: Retrospective and prospective. In: The role of paradigms in theory construction, ed. L'Abate, L., pp. 31–65. Springer.Google Scholar
Partridge, T. (2005) Are genetically informed designs genetically informative? Developmental Psychology 41(6):985–88.Google Scholar
Wahlsten, D. (2012) The hunt for gene effects pertinent to behavioral traits and psychiatric disorders: from mouse to human. Developmental Psychobiology 54(5):475–92.Google Scholar